Carvin PB5 or Fender Precision V?

[Joebone]

I think P basses in general tend to have a weak B string. My theory is that the pole pieces allow the slowly oscillating, greater amplitude, lower tension B string be picked up less closer to the neck than other strings. When you have the pickup moved further to the bridge, like a MusicMan, it pickups up all of the wave of the B string. Additionally it has a single large pole piece.

There likely is something to this. I have some experience with Sadowsky P/J, and found the B string tightened up when dialing some of the J pickup into the blend. Still not a good as the Sadowsky "Modern," which places two soapbars down towards the bridge, sort of like the G&L L-2000. Wondering if the "bar" magnet in the Carvin split-coil might also improve on the single pole-piece Fender original.

 

[Doug Parent]

There likely is something to this. I have some experience with Sadowsky P/J, and found the B string tightened up when dialing some of the J pickup into the blend. Still not a good as the Sadowsky "Modern," which places two soapbars down towards the bridge, sort of like the G&L L-2000. Wondering if the "bar" magnet in the Carvin split-coil might also improve on the single pole-piece Fender original.

I have a Warmoth PJ5 with a Bart pickup. The Bart is a blade design (same as) the Carvin vs the Fender pole piece design. My Warmoth B string is strong and focused and blends with the other strings as well as the Carvin P5 did that I tried in the store. The Carvin pickup "snarls" much more than the Bart, which is irrelevant, but to the point, sounded more even to me. That my take on the blade vs pole piece design.

No question that a bass with two pickups is going to produce a more coherent signal especially on the B string, and the closer to the bridge you get, the more focused it is.

 

[Doug Parent]

The poll is irrelevant to someone like me because I would never buy or build a bass with 1.75" nut width like the Carvin has. If the Carvin had a 1.81 or slightly wider nut width, I'd buy that over the Fender hands down.

 

[Joebone]

The poll is irrelevant to someone like me because I would never buy or build a bass with 1.75" nut width like the Carvin has. If the Carvin had a 1.81 or slightly wider nut width, I'd buy that over the Fender hands down.

Ergonomics are a subjective but important factor. I'm putting my $$ where my mouth is, having just bought (and now waiting for) a used PB5. The 1.75 nut, 19mm bridge spacing and 14" radius (compared to 9.5" for the Fender P5) were big factors for me…but you might dig something totally different!

 

[Doug Parent]

Ergonomics are a subjective but important factor. I'm putting my $$ where my mouth is, having just bought (and now waiting for) a used PB5. The 1.75 nut, 19mm bridge spacing and 14" radius (compared to 9.5" for the Fender P5) were big factors for me…but you might dig something totally different!

Point well taken, however and not to be contrary, but the specs are certainly measurable. 1.75 vs 1.875......18mm vs 19mm. Carvin will capture a portion of the market AS THEY SHOULD with 1.75" / 19mm. But I continue to shake my head in wonderment at Carvin how they make strides in several respects, but stick to old practices in others. They have NEVER produced a single 5 string bass with a nut width more than 1.75". I suspect (I have no verification) thats it's just indicative of one's persons preference in the design phase, but it's not indicative of consensus in the market place. I give that nod to Fender. Playability, feel, ergonomics, all of these specs make sense at the cash register. A lot of players who are ignorant of the specs buy a bass based on how it sounds, or (gasp) how it looks. But they sell it down the road after they realize the string spacing or scale length just "didn't work out for them". Roger Sadowsky makes 5 string basses that feel right to players and all his necks have the same spacing unless it's a special order or Signature model. (Will Lee) It's SO easy to figure this stuff. Fender could have gone with 1.75/17mm like Ibanez does, or go with 19mm like many boutique builders do, they chose the middle ground. They may have spotty QC, but they get the design and specs right IMHO.

 

[Tunaman]

Tone wise comparisons for those that own both?

 

[Doug Parent]

Tone wise comparisons for those that own both?

Tuna, I don't own the Carvin but I've played it at Carvin FWIW. The Carvin is more modern and in your face sounding. Kinda like your first impressions when you install EMG's on your bass. The Fender is "softer" a little more "round" and more classic P Bass tone wise. Carvins pickup is a different animule altogether.

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

I have never played a fender 5 that I liked - and I've played plenty of 4's that I did.
HOWEVER
You buy that fender (used, ideally) and it will hold its value. Even new, it will hold more value than a Carvin. I'm quite sure that the Carvin will be a nicer bass in every way, but it won't hold its value.

 

[Tunaman]

Tuna, I don't own the Carvin but I've played it at Carvin FWIW. The Carvin is more modern and in your face sounding. Kinda like your first impressions when you install EMG's on your bass. The Fender is "softer" a little more "round" and more classic P Bass tone wise. Carvins pickup is a different animule altogether.

I just sold a Fender J 2014 that was AWESOME in fit and finish, sounded great but NOT aggressive for punk, alternative which is what I use my 4s for. My Carvin PJ is due Monday & I'm going to make sure to test it with that genre in particular to make sure it stays.

 

[Joebone]

Point well taken, however and not to be contrary, but the specs are certainly measurable. 1.75 vs 1.875......18mm vs 19mm. Carvin will capture a portion of the market AS THEY SHOULD with 1.75" / 19mm. But I continue to shake my head in wonderment at Carvin how they make strides in several respects, but stick to old practices in others. They have NEVER produced a single 5 string bass with a nut width more than 1.75". I suspect (I have no verification) thats it's just indicative of one's persons preference in the design phase, but it's not indicative of consensus in the market place. I give that nod to Fender. Playability, feel, ergonomics, all of these specs make sense at the cash register. A lot of players who are ignorant of the specs buy a bass based on how it sounds, or (gasp) how it looks. But they sell it down the road after they realize the string spacing or scale length just "didn't work out for them". Roger Sadowsky makes 5 string basses that feel right to players and all his necks have the same spacing unless it's a special order or Signature model. (Will Lee) It's SO easy to figure this stuff. Fender could have gone with 1.75/17mm like Ibanez does, or go with 19mm like many boutique builders do, they chose the middle ground. They may have spotty QC, but they get the design and specs right IMHO.

Over the last few years Sadowsky has been releasing 5-strings with 1.75" and 1.87" necks; the 1.75" is not just a Will Lee thing. No sense of which predominates, guessing that about 30% of the non-WL fivers are 1.75."

 

[Doug Parent]

I just sold a Fender J 2014 that was AWESOME in fit and finish, sounded great but NOT aggressive for punk, alternative which is what I use my 4s for. My Carvin PJ is due Monday & I'm going to make sure to test it with that genre in particular to make sure it stays.

I hope you like it. Did you order the soap bar or single coil J in the bridge position?

 

[Tunaman]

J

I hope you like it. Did you order the soap bar or single coil J in the bridge position?

 

[plong123]

What did the OP eventually get? The thread is curious.

My money is on neither.

 

[Cajuare]

I have both Fender and Carvin P5. Carvin sounds amazing!!!!