Henriksen vs Evans

**RyanM** · 06-25-2009, 04:22 PM

What are the differences, and which is the better amp?

**Sphereacidburn** · 06-25-2009, 07:19 PM

Why just those two brands they are pretty expensive why not look at the Roland Cube 80X that is a really really good amp, really good, it is reliable unlike some amps, the evans sometimes break down, you can rely on the Roland, but if you have the money to buy a 1,200 dollar amp go ahead, but the Henriksen and the Evans do sounds very very nice, but look at your other options, Roland,Fender,Peavy,Boogie these may sound like rock amps but they have lots of head room and a nice full tone for the exception of the Boogie depending on which model you get, these may be tubes they are heavy but if you have the money to spend why not get a Fender, but those amps you listed are very good just expand your options play a wide variety of amplifiers do not limit yourself to just 2 kinds of amplifiers

**Jazzaluk** · 06-25-2009, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by RyanM

What are the differences, and which is the better amp?

Both great amps for archtops and clean tones. I tried them both and found the Evans to have more tonal range and control. So I bought the JE200 hybrid and it totally satisfies my needs and desires. I think dollar for dollar the Hendricks is probably better value and easier to use. The Evans is pricey and has a unique tone shaping strategy (which i have come to like).

**RyanM** · 06-25-2009, 11:00 PM

Originally Posted by Sphereacidburn

Why just those two brands they are pretty expensive why not look at the Roland Cube 80X that is a really really good amp, really good, it is reliable unlike some amps, the evans sometimes break down, you can rely on the Roland, but if you have the money to buy a 1,200 dollar amp go ahead, but the Henriksen and the Evans do sounds very very nice, but look at your other options, Roland,Fender,Peavy,Boogie these may sound like rock amps but they have lots of head room and a nice full tone for the exception of the Boogie depending on which model you get, these may be tubes they are heavy but if you have the money to spend why not get a Fender, but those amps you listed are very good just expand your options play a wide variety of amplifiers do not limit yourself to just 2 kinds of amplifiers

I was looking for info on these two specifically; I've never been able to play either and I don't know a lot about them so I'm asking because they are supposed to have good clean tones and I know that a lot of jazz musicians use these.

**NSJ** · 06-25-2009, 11:08 PM

I have a Henriksen Convertible, got it used of CL. As expensive as it is, it's LESS than an Evans, which I have only heard about. Where the hell do they sell them??

The Henriksen works wonders with a nice laminate, a carved hardwood not so much. Don't know why that is, just is.

**riovine** · 06-25-2009, 11:58 PM

Originally Posted by RyanM

I was looking for info on these two specifically; I've never been able to play either and I don't know a lot about them so I'm asking because they are supposed to have good clean tones and I know that a lot of jazz musicians use these.

I have an evans re200 hybrid. I love it, small, light, great sound. It's the 3rd evans I've had, and definitly the best. I've tried a few of the henriksons, there is a guy in my area that is a distributor, they sounded nice, but I preferred the sound of the evans.

**ES350** · 06-26-2009, 10:24 PM

For a SS, it's hard to beat the Evans IMHO. They've been making them for steel players since the 70's and you should try one of the old ones sometime; hybrid tube/SS. Really nice tone and very flexible...

**lkyguy** · 08-21-2009, 09:53 AM

Man oh day what a comparison. The Henriksen 112 is the way to go... by far. If ya want to add a touch of reverb etc, get a decent pedal. But on superb songs like "The Nearness Of You", that require very very clean output sounds, you need nothing more than this one. Evans are decent, but overpriced, and you need to fiddle with them way too much on stage, which is NOT the way to go for me.

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 08-21-2009, 09:57 AM

I'm just glad we're spoiled for the choice! If you're in the $ range of the Evans you should also check out Acoustic Image heads + Raezor's Edge cabs -- that's another popular choice. And the larger Phil Jones guitar amp, the AG-300, seems interesting, too:

**Tom Karol** · 08-21-2009, 10:14 AM

Evans JE200: $1369;
Henriksen JazzAmp 112R: $899;
Roland Cube 80X: $399.
Hmm?!

Hey, what about a Roland Cube 100 Bass Amp - has anyone tried one of those for Jazz guitar?

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 08-21-2009, 10:20 AM

Yes, the Cubes are cheaper, but these other amps are in whole 'nother league. It's like going from a $10 bottle of wine to a $50 bottle of wine. You could argue that it doesn't taste 5 times better, but if you appreciate the difference and have the money...

(Actually, I'm drinking the cheap wine to save for an amp!)

**lkyguy** · 08-21-2009, 10:45 AM

You lose a ton of richness with Brutes, Cubes, and even some Polys. Jazzcats are U G L Y, in my opinion. If you've not tried a 112 Henriksen, you've just got to before ya croak. Man they are the real deal.

**mr. beaumont** · 08-21-2009, 10:59 AM

brutes and polys are the same thing, no?

i don't lose any richness with one of those (my MB III) but maye that's becasue I'm playing a solid body...some of those jazz amps are more voiced for an archtop--for example, my tele thru the heinreksen= cardboard.

then, there's my "subway rig" i'm gonna try out again soon--zt lunchbox (250 bucks) and a redstone audio RS8 cab (300 bucks used, 17 lbs.)

i'm starting to think that if all you want is clean (like me) the amp could be almost anything with some decent headroom that doesn't color the sound too much, and the speaker is the most important element. maybe i'm going crazy.

**lkyguy** · 08-21-2009, 11:07 AM

Ooops. What my thoughts were on Brutes were Roland Jazz Chorus's, Twins, and the things I can no longer carry. ha The beauty of these newer units is the portability for old geezers like myself.

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 08-21-2009, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by lkyguy

Jazzcats are U G L Y, in my opinion.

Some people have a thing for ugly amps. Especially in tweed:

**msr13** · 08-21-2009, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles

I'm just glad we're spoiled for the choice! If you're in the $ range of the Evans you should also check out Acoustic Image heads + Raezor's Edge cabs -- that's another popular choice. And the larger Phil Jones guitar amp, the AG-300, seems interesting, too:

I agree with Big Daddy Love Handles. The AI is great and I have fallen madly in love with my AG-300. It is really a wonderful, toneful little guy.

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 08-22-2009, 12:41 AM

Originally Posted by msr13

I agree with Big Daddy Love Handles. The AI is great and I have fallen madly in love with my AG-300. It is really a wonderful, toneful little guy.

I want one in red:

**msr13** · 08-22-2009, 05:50 AM

Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles

I want one in red

Oh well, I guess I need to run 'em in stereo.

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 08-22-2009, 12:10 PM

I still stand in awe of the Phil Jones Bass stack:

It can take 3200 watts, which, coincidentally is the wattage of their biggest bass amp head. I read a review on Harmony Central where the reviewer basically shook his entire house and cracked a wall!

edit: that reminds me of a funny comment in another review. The reviewer was trying to show how smaller speakers can be better that bigger ones. That may well be, but his argument was about surface area. He said you could take the 15"x15" space that could hold one 15' speaker and replace it with nine 5" speakers and they would have a larger total surface area. Ahem, would anyone like to do the math?

Now, I don't know what happens if you pack the speakers in like cells in a honeycomb, but Phil doesn't do that.

**Drifter** · 08-22-2009, 12:18 PM

I thought this was about Henriksen vs Evans...

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 08-23-2009, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by Jazzarian

Somehow I figured you to be more of a tube guy?

I guess I am old school... Still waiting for someone to go on and on about 1950's Gibson amps...

**gary mitchell** · 09-01-2009, 09:06 PM

Ive seen a few jazz players around here use steel guitar player amps like peavey with the 15in black widows and such and they sound cool, but what amps were we talking about. I use a JC 120

**BigDaddyLoveHandles** · 09-01-2009, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by gary mitchell

Ive seen a few jazz players around here use steel guitar player amps like peavey with the 15in black widows and such and they sound cool, but what amps were we talking about. I use a JC 120

The Nashville 1000? 300 watts of giddyup!

**FlatNine** · 09-23-2014, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles

I still stand in awe of the Phil Jones Bass stack:

It can take 3200 watts, which, coincidentally is the wattage of their biggest bass amp head. I read a review on Harmony Central where the reviewer basically shook his entire house and cracked a wall!

edit: that reminds me of a funny comment in another review. The reviewer was trying to show how smaller speakers can be better that bigger ones. That may well be, but his argument was about surface area. He said you could take the 15"x15" space that could hold one 15' speaker and replace it with nine 5" speakers and they would have a larger total surface area. Ahem, would anyone like to do the math?

Now, I don't know what happens if you pack the speakers in like cells in a honeycomb, but Phil doesn't do that.

Ok, this is an ancient thread, but I just thought the argument above was indeed funny, and "I'm in the mood for math, simply because it's near me...". Sorry about that!

Anyway - 9 5" speakers have a surface area of 176.625 square inches, while a single 15" speaker has a surface area of 176.625 square inches. Now *that's* the funny part! The surface area is exactly the same!

A circle's area = PI * radius^2.

5" speaker = ((2.5^2) * 3.14) * 9 speakers = 176.625
15" speaker = 7.5^2 * 3.14 = 176.625

So, the surface area argument in favor of 9 5" speakers is mathematically incorrect!