Carvin or SWR

ouch. i dunno. probably the swr....

 

The SWR, by a long-shot. Much higher quality, better resale value.

 

I have a LA12 and it is very nice, i like the way it sounds, the Carvin is probably very good though...

 

another vote for SWR. ive owned two SWR's and absolutely loved both of them.

 

Bear in mind, if you go with the SWR you're buying the bottom of their product line. Translation -- you're paying for the name.

I don't have this factually, but it's even money they contract the manufacture of those out and use lower-grade components.

 

Neither!Get out and try the Ampeg BA-115.IT SMOKES EM BOTH!!!!

 

Haven't tried the "small" Carvins (am much more familiar with their larger heads) but I tried the SWR LAs and didn't like them at all. I'm by no means an Ampeg nut, but I did try the BA115 Bernie mentions and thought it was way better than the SWR LA.

 

A friend A/B'ed the Workingman's and LA series and came to the same conclusion. He paid the bit extra for a WM and is very happy with it.

 

I'll second that

 

i just got to check out a carvin pro-bass 100. didn't get to play with it, but i heard it. volume-wise, it's great for a 100W combo. it has more features than the SWR (compressor, noise gate). even has an extension speaker jack. tone wise it's fine...like i said, i didn't get to play with it, but just heard someone else playing it. i'd like it if it had a tweeter...but that's just me. the swr is tweeterless also.

i agree that by buying the swr la series, you're paying for the name...i briefly played an la-12 awhile back, and wasn't too impressed. i think the resale would be better on the swr (name), but you're probably getting more amp with the carvin pro-bass 100.

the carvin was loud enuf to hang with a drummer and guitar player (1x12 combo amp) with the volume set on 3.5 - pretty impressive.

 

The SWR does have a tweeter, but it's the cheap kind. I tried the LA amps recently, and while I didn't like the 8" or 12" versions, the 15" was decent IMO, and very portable. (Didn't try it out for volume though) The Carvin may be better though, I haven't tried it.

Edit: I read some unfavorable reviews on the SWR LA amps, and many favorable reviews on the Carvin, and decided the Carvin will be better. Get the Carvin.

 

oh sorry - i didn't realize the swr la-15 had a tweeter.

 

I have a SWR Triad I. Sounds good, but the workmanship could be better.

And since the Euro is so weak against the Dollar, my next gear will be something else...(Glockenklang rules!!! )

 

When I was auditioning a Jazz 5 last week, I was trying out a couple of those LA series SWR amps. I could not get it to do what I liked. The B was useless.

I did like the PB100-15 that I was trying out. The only reason I did not buy that was that the volume was not sufficient for my needs.

Tack on another $100 and you can find a used Cyclops. I bought my Cyclops for $425. That's 600w into a 15, 2 8s, + a tweeter. That will kill any amp mentioned so far volumewise. Tone can be argued wither way since that is a subjective subject I think Rickbass1 recently got rid of his cyclops because he was not satisfied with it's reproduction of the B also. But I would imagine it should be better than the two practice amps you are looking at. If you can find the Carvin RC210 at this price I would nab it. But, most people seem to not sell these ...

Another $100 and you could grab a used Ampeg B2. This is an amp that I never got try, but it looked really cool. Good features and of course the Ampeg name would indicate that to some degree you will get the Ampeg sound... if that's what you like. This one is a 200w 15" combo amp. But if you tack on another 8 ohm cab it goes up to 350w. It is also smaller than the Cyclops (one of the reasons I wanted it) and the RC210. I don't know volumewise how it would do against the two afformentioned Carvins, but I imagine it should be respectable to say the least.

At this point I am naming amps that go for at least $500 and at that range the possibilities are opening for many different amps... I just threw in the ones I liked while I was shopping.

 

I'm impartial in the question asked by the poster.
However, I don't think resale value should be considered when buying something.

If you buy something and are already considering selling it, don't bother buying it.


$.02

 

the LA series have almost no resale value, they suck the big one. too much hiss, at half volume?!?!? the 15 was cheesy and the tweeter just made it worse. bad combo, bad bad bad. its like buying a 1996 Hyundai and expecting to sell for more than you bought it. PLEASE!!! YOUVE GOT TO ME KIDDIN ME!! THIS REALLY SUCKS, GO LOOK AT SUMTHING ELSE!!!

 

Kids kid around. Kids type in alternating caps... Kids bring irrelevant things, like cars into conversations regarding basses... I'll cut to the chase once I wake up tommorrow, perhaps.

 

Kids also have bad grammar, think they're better than they are, and call other kids "kids" to show some superficial superiority. Yet, these kids STILL don't help to further the initial cause, making their post irrelevant to the original question, hence making those kids hypocrites.

Just help the guy!

I would go SWR.

 

I think that if you're buying a combo amp like the SWR LA15, it is important to think about resale value. I think that most people would want to upgrade their rig from a 15" combo amp eventually, so whats wrong with thinking about selling something in the future when you buy it? I just got a Trace Elliot Commando 15 for $300 and I plan on selling it within a year on eBay.