Another Carvin model bites the dust.

[buldog5151bass]

The whole point of Carvin was that it was less expensive, because they had no middleman/distributor, and no big marketing - you are paying for the instrument, not the image. So they SHOULD be cheaper than an equivalent Fender/Gibson.

 

[Zooberwerx]

Every Carvin I've ever played has been used. I didn't realize they actually built anything new.

Riis

 

[Tanner5382]

Glad I got my LB20 before they become a bit more scarce.

 

[jamro217]

I bought a blue '92 LB70 in 1996. I'm not really a pointy headstock, active electronics kind of guy, but after seeing the quality of this instrument firsthand, for the price ($475.) I had to buy it. 20 years later it has lived most of its life safely tucked away in its case, with only a few gigs and battery changes to break the monotony. The 24 fret neck really has put me into a state of confusion when I play it. Instead of the regular 20 frets right where they should be, there's this extra inch or two of neck to deal with. I don't usually look at fingerboard when playing, just the occasional glance, but when you don't see what you expect to, it screws up your mind.

 

[mrufino1]

Good news and bad news for everyone.

Bad news: carvin (kiesel) has just finished their contract with the public that stipulated that they must do whatever you want them to do for almost no money.

Good news: Congress just changed the law that previously required everyone who plays bass on any level to buy a carvin (kiesel) and love it.

Loophole of course: if you've been playing less than 3 years or are in a band with fewer than 3.5 members (and no, the extra percussionist/backing vocalist doesn't count towards that total), kiesel can still, at their discretion, force you to buy the model of their choosing.

So, as long as the criteria is met, it appears you have choices.

As an eye into the future, I hear, through an insider, that slap bass is becoming illegal in every state but Alaska and Nebraska, and all YouTube and Namm demos are to consist of only whole notes for at least 75% of the presentation.

These new laws are going to work well I tell ya!

 

[yodedude2]

The whole point of Carvin was that it was less expensive, because they had no middleman/distributor, and no big marketing - you are paying for the instrument, not the image. So they SHOULD be cheaper than an equivalent Fender/Gibson.

i've wondered about this; makes sense, but...you lose out on the advantage of the economies of scale via mass production. seems like a bit of a push to me.

 

[yodedude2]

i dinna know much, but i can tell you this: the best price/build quality ratio i ever got on a bass i purchased was a used carvin passive bolt model. runner up: usa stingray sub.

 

[buldog5151bass]

i've wondered about this; makes sense, but...you lose out on the advantage of the economies of scale via mass production. seems like a bit of a push to me.

I don't think on this, where you have so much semi-skilled work. There is some, but it's not 1:1. Should still be cheaper.

 

[Liam Wald]

As others have said, it is really about business and how the company positions itself strategically.
I would think that it makes perfect sense for them to position their market in the top end rather than slugging it out in the trenches for the bottom market in which places like Indonesia have a clear advantage.
I have owned a couple of Carvins over the years (always the high end models) and have respect for them.
Their quality is very good.

 

[Jazz Ad]

Carvin LBs are good basses but they look very dated, they are shaped and built like 80s basses.
Some change can't hurt

 

[Clef_de_fa]

True about the pretty wood, but look at it this way, for the price of a new set of pickups you can have both a beautiful bass and one that sounds good, or for the same amount you can buy another name brand bass that sounds good and looks plain. Personally I find playability and comfort more important than the sound of the electronics in a prospective bass. With all of the affordable options out there, changing pickups isn't a big deal. This doesn't include the acoustical properties of the bass (i.e. sustain, dead spots, uneven string volume, etc.), just the sound quality of the electronics. I wouldn't buy a dog just because it was visually attractive. Too expensive to hang one on the wall, besides, that's what art is for.

Look plain is up to you. But when you spend near 2000$ usd you expect the thing to sound nice, have some personality, not having to buy a set of pickup and maybe a preamp for it ...

My last Carvin was a deception for me in all aspect so yeah, I'm not inclined to give them another chance

 

[Handyman]

Now that I look at it, it also appears that they've discontinued the plain Icon model. You can only get it in the flamed maple top now. I suspect the OP is right; Kiesel's business plan may indeed be to transition to a higher-end market, perhaps to disassociate themselves from a perception of Carvins as "cheap" basses.

Last I heard you can still get the Icon without the fancy top, they just don't advertise it.

This has been the case on and off since its introduction.

Unless they recently changed his, but I've not heard anything about it.

 

[Dark Horse]

What I'm saying is that makes sense. Their quality rivals the American big boys (Fender and MM). Can you buy a USA P bass for under a grand? Can you buy a Stingray for under a grand? Why should Carvin be cheaper?

Carvins whole business philosophy was "sell direct to the musician", thus cutting out dealer markups. That's how the company was built, in a time long before the internet. They were straight "mail order", and they advertised that you could get a better, American made, custom instrument from them for cheaper than the competition because of this.

That is why Carvin should be cheaper.

And realistically, they are....if you were to price a similar custom optioned Fender, for instance, you would likely spend thousands more.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

I like Carvin / Kiesel guitars more than I like their basses. The basses always felt like Schecter basses to me and that's not a good thing. Their JB has me most interested if they would have a better looking headstock. I can't get past the wooden shoe look. Good to see that they're doing well and expanding. I would guess that they sell 7+ guitars for every bass sold. Of course they're going to focus on the guitars.

 

[G On Bass]

... went to the factory showroom, played a few and was impressed as heck. ...

The thing that was the beginning of the end for me with Carvin was when they shut down the Hollywood Store. In addition to being able to demo everything from basses to amps to mics to PA and parts/accessories, the staff was awesome. Without a doubt I spent probably $5K over a few years period going in for strings and walking out with an amp or bass. Or at least a plan to get one soon. It was easy to go in and see what the new stuff was all about and report back. The main thing was that there were some neck profiles that fit me better than others, and I could try it out and know. Now, with all the new models, there's no telling what they feel like and the only way to know is either do a ~325 mile round trip, or to buy one, wait, try it then return it. .

Still love my B25 fretless! As I've said before, it's my only remaining Carvin, but it's still great. No plans or interest to buy anything else from them in the future. But then again, my Wilkins RoadTested basses totally shut off my GAS valve a few years back and they cost less than most Kiesels, even with Sadowsky or Aguilar preamps, Nordstrand or hand-wound pickups, chambered or roasted wood and name-brand hardware.....

I know closing the stores were a cost cutting measure, as well a way to facilitate the future break-up of the company into the guitar business and the 'everything else' business. But it was such a sweet deal when those stores were around. But more power to them with whatever they wanna do. They still make great $1,000 - $1200 basses.

 

[Halegroove]

I love Carvin bolt on basses and have bought them new and used. Where I have noticed a big difference in Carvin and Fender is resale value. If you hold onto it forever then it's not an issue. However, you decide to sell or trade it, you could take a pretty good hit. Great for a buyer, bad for the seller.
If I'm going to shell out $1800-$2400 on a J style 5, I'm more likely to find a Sadowsky that will hold more value and still sound amazing. Perhaps I should be more loyal to a US manufacturer like Carvin. I will certainly try if possible.

 

[kosmicwizard]

It's business; I guess Carvin does not make enough on those models to keep them in their lineup.

Maybe the profit margin is there, but the volume to make that meaningful isn't?

 

[Mike Sorr]

Carving has had to do a lot of shifting lately. They are an American made product competing with Asian made markets. Would you rather they go ahead and price their stuff like any other American made company? If so, their simplest designs would be over a grand.

Honestly, I'm surprised they were able to hold out this long. It wouldn't surprise me to learn they weren't making a dime off the lower end ones.

I think this is a mistake. People look to Carvin exactly for the reason that they can get an Americsn made product for less money than the big name brands...and I still know players that look down their nose at Carvin. I mean, I'm sure they sell what they need to in order to be profitable, but have you ever tried to sell a used Carvin? Sure, it will sell, but they don't exactly retain their value. They should be offering MORE lower cost products, not less. Cancelling the B40/B50 line was a huge blunder in my opinion. Lastly, if the company is going in a more high end direction, they need to get a handle on the weight of their basses. Lots high end basses are also lighter than cheaper versions. Example: I have a Spector Euro that weighs just over 7 pounds, and a Rebop 5 that weighs in at 8.2. My Legend 5 is just over 10 pounds. Other than their new Vader line, Carvin basses are crazy heavy. Just have a look at their in stock page. The weights are all in the 9 to 12 pound range and heavier. That is the main reason I never became friends with any of the Carvins I've owned.

 

[jamro217]

Look plain is up to you. But when you spend near 2000$ usd you expect the thing to sound nice, have some personality, not having to buy a set of pickup and maybe a preamp for it ...

My last Carvin was a deception for me in all aspect so yeah, I'm not inclined to give them another chance

I'm sorry to hear that you were unhappy with your purchase. What I was getting at is that with items such as musical instruments which are meant to perform at least two functions (look good and sound good) you sometimes have to choose which function is the priority. Obviously sound is important, but unless used only in the studio, most basses will serve some role as eye candy. It is much easier to tweak the sound of a beautiful instrument than it is to upgrade the appearance of a killer bass. Covering one with stickers or adding a tort guard doesn't count, I mean snazzy woodgrain.

 

[Liam Wald]

Carvin LBs are good basses but they look very dated, they are shaped and built like 80s basses.
Some change can't hurt

Yes, they look very dated, unlike Fender for instance.