Carvin SB5000 / SB4000 Roll Call...Part 7!

[Jarrett]

Would much rather have something just under 9, than just over 10 hanging from this 40+ frame.

You and me both

My SB5000 is 9.5lbs and my SB5001 is 8.5lbs. I find I like picking up the latter much better

 

[Vic]

Not really sure when they started offering it. The salesman who helped me configure the bass over the phone had to put me on hold for a while to ask someone in the shop which option to select on his computer to make it happen. You can see the option when you "build a bass." I really wanted as light a bass as possible - and even put on Hipshot Ultralites afterwards (which didn't really make much of a difference, as the existing tuners were pretty light).

Yeah, I saw it in the configurator after you posted, because I wanted to see if it was in there yet and where it showed up. When did you order your bass? Sounds like from their comments, it was pretty much being introduced at that time.

We're gonna' go to the Carvin booth as we do every year at NAMM, so I can also check there... it's cool because Carvin has kind of an "issue" keeping the weight down on these with solid bodies because of the body design and I guess also the wood they have available.

Right now, at least Ash is in abundance due to preemptive logging due to the Ash bore (grrrr!! ), but light weight ash is already starting to get hard to find, and there'll be a sharp drop off either this year or fairly soon as stock piles start to deplete and new trees aren't really there to eventually replenish.

I'm assuming there'll be a gap of at least a few years in the next 5-10 years where Ash will be an expensive premium wood, and light weight ash will be plain rare or even unavailable for new builds... meaning Carvin's ability to chamber without having to push people to an upgraded top... in other words, just mainly for weight reduction... is a good thing for their sales.

Just my current gut feeling on it all.

 

[Vic]

So the question has always sort of lingered out there, does the V/V really sound different than the V/B?

Yes. V/V is superior... especially in passive mode... BUT...

IME, the difference between V/V and V/B varies with pickup and pot values, is usually very mild, and not enough for me to give up the convenience of the master volume, which I like a lot... especially when playing worship gigs, because then I can fade in/out without having to bring a volume pedal or worry about re-tweaking my blend all the time.

So IMHO/IME, yes, and it is noticeable, but it's not a big deal.

The short tech on it is you're adding a third pot to the circuit, and the pickups "load against each other" a bit more.

Just be aware this is HIGHLY subjective regarding how big of a deal it is to people. There are folks out there who are very much die-hard V/V puritans... I'm just not one of them.

 

[Handyman]

Just to add a bit more to the pan pot thing:

The change in loading from V/V to V/P depends on the values of the pot used. Swapping a volume pot with a pan pot adds an extra load to the circuit, but doesn't necessarily load the pickups any more than a V/V a configuration.

For example, if you take a standard Jazz bass, which has 250k volume pots and put in a 500k pan pot, the loading will be unchanged. Using a 250k pan pot, obviously, would add more loading, and slightly cut the output volume and treble.

 

[Bassnkeys]

"Yeah, I saw it in the configurator after you posted, because I wanted to see if it was in there yet and where it showed up. When did you order your bass? Sounds like from their comments, it was pretty much being introduced at that time."

Hey Vic, I ordered around the beginning of July '12.

 

[Vic]

Just to add a bit more to the pan pot thing:

The change in loading from V/V to V/P depends on the values of the pot used. Swapping a volume pot with a pan pot adds an extra load to the circuit, but doesn't necessarily load the pickups any more than a V/V a configuration.

For example, if you take a standard Jazz bass, which has 250k volume pots and put in a 500k pan pot, the loading will be unchanged. Using a 250k pan pot, obviously, would add more loading, and slightly cut the output volume and treble.

I don't think this is correct, but it's been a while since I did the circuit analysis, and I don't feel like doing it again now, so I guess FWIW. However, I can tell you at least from subjective personal experience, I've done this, and it did affect tone in a noticeably (tho again very mild) way.

 

[Jarrett]

Hey Vic, I ordered around the beginning of July '12.

I remember someone pointing it out a while back. I don't think it was many months after the 5001 was available that they added the chambered option to the 5000. Just slipped it in as an option.

 

[Handyman]

I don't think this is correct, but it's been a while since I did the circuit analysis, and I don't feel like doing it again now, so I guess FWIW. However, I can tell you at least from subjective personal experience, I've done this, and it did affect tone in a noticeably (tho again very mild) way.

You're simply replacing a 250k pot with two 500k pots in parallel, which results in a 250k load.

Basically, when the volume is full on and a pickups is fully selected, it sees the two 500k pan pot elements, the volume pot, and the tone control all in parallel.

And yes, IAAEE, for what its worth.

 

[Vic]

You're simply replacing a 250k pot with two 500k pots in parallel, which results in a 250k load.

Basically, when the volume is full on and a pickups is fully selected, it sees the two 500k pan pot elements, the volume pot, and the tone control all in parallel.

And yes, IAAEE, for what its worth.

Right, so for the special cases where you're full on and fully blended or fully solo'd, agreed. It gets interesting when you start doing blending and non-max volume. I think that's where they start to separate from each other more.

 

[WoodyG3]

He also said there are no adjustments to be made to any pots, as someone had suggested here ...

No, not to the volume or balance pots. But yes, there is a trim pot for preamp volume. This was in reference to the question of equalizing volume between passive and active mode. If you want to match the volume of the passive mode with the active mode, see this thread on the Carvin forum which explains where the trim pot is.

Invalid Link Removed

 

[micgtr71]

It took me a couple of times rereading this, but I think its a question.

On the SB series basses, Carvin offers a few electronics configuration options. One is a choice between the old school Jazz bass knob selection of front pickup volume, rear pickup volume, tone (V/V) OR the option to have a master volume, pickup blend knob, tone (V/B).

I have always used a master volume/blend (V/B) type setups on my other basses, but the first SB5000 I played at a guitar show had the volume/volume (V/V) setup on it. When I called to order my SB5000 and spoke with the salesguy, I told him I wanted it to sound exactly like the one I played, then asked for the V/B option.

He told me that if I wanted it to sound exactly like the one I played with the V/V option, I should also get that option because there is a bit of a sonic difference between the V/V and V/B options. He went on to say that Seiku wanted to make sure the V/V was the standard electronics option on the bass because he felt like that got the sound he wanted out of it. So despite being used to and liking the V/B control layout, I went with V/V because I wanted my bass to sound exactly like the one I played at the guitar show. And it did.

So the question has always sort of lingered out there, does the V/V really sound different than the V/B? I thought we might have had some evidence with David's post but the chambered SB5000 was also in the mix in that scenario. I personally think that chambering an SB takes a little bit of the fundamental punch away from the bass. Nothing dramatic, but slightly different when comparing a solid body SB to a chambered body SB.

I have a solid body, fretted SB5000 and a chambered, fretless SB5001 and the SB5001 has a little less punch, but I don't mind as its a fretless and I like it having a little smoother sound than the other.

Thank you. That makes total sense now. I think that when I am ready I am going to go with one of solids. I currently play an MIA jazz and was looking for a good Fretless Jazz-style bass. Now I am thinking 5 possibly. I like the blend idea because I use the bridge pickup but like a little neck in there as well. The blend may be the way to go here. I think I am leaning toward solid. I like the idea of chambered (I own a 5lb chambered hardtail strat), but I like the punch of the solid. I appreciate your detailed answer.

 

[Vic]

FYI, on the whole blend vs vol-vol topic, our own SGD Lutherie does a great job of really explaining it all in this thread...

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f38/blend-pot-250k-vs-500k-issue-731261/index3.html

A good read, and only 3 pages.

 

[Ewo]

Love my 5000 and been thinking about ordering a 5001. I've been wondering if the chambering--well, the associated body weight reduction--affects the balance on a strap.

Anybody able to compare?

 

[Jarrett]

Love my 5000 and been thinking about ordering a 5001. I've been wondering if the chambering--well, the associated body weight reduction--affects the balance on a strap.

Anybody able to compare?

I don't notice any difference between my 5000 and 5001 when they are hanging on me. The only time the weight plays a factor is when I pick them up off the stand and the next morning in my low back

 

[micgtr71]

FYI, on the whole blend vs vol-vol topic, our own SGD Lutherie does a great job of really explaining it all in this thread...

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f38/blend-pot-250k-vs-500k-issue-731261/index3.html

A good read, and only 3 pages.

Thanks for this. This is something that I had toyed with doing to my jazz bass because I thought that I could get a better balance than with the two stock volume pots. After reading this, coupled with the comments here, I am going to keep it the way that it is.

I was looking at the website for Carvin and I noticed that the 4 was available passive, but the 5 is not. I am going to see if I can get the 5 without the active. Come summer, I think this is the way I am going to go.

Thank you and Jarrett for your info.

 

[dgce]

Well, there's always the B50. Same neck as the SB5000 but with tradish P-body. And you can get it with passive electronics.

 

[Bassorama57]

I was looking at the website for Carvin and I noticed that the 4 was available passive, but the 5 is not.

I know- bummer. Very confusing as tthe 4000/5000 aren't "the same thing with one more string"

Order a SB5000:
If you want it chambered like the 5001:

CMB - Chambered Body (Alder/Ash Only) 150.00

Make sure you DO NOT order:
MBS - Stacked Mid Sweep Replaces Tone Control (Must Order AC)

(It'll still have the preamp but as Christopher Walken says, "you're gonna want that cowbell" I find myself using the active rather often)

It is odd that they don't offer the passive as the default for the 50000 - like it is for the 4000.

 

[Jarrett]

I think you can get a passive SB5000 by talking to a salesperson, but its hard to talk them into it. At least you used to be able to. I think they offer no returns when you go passive on that model due to the lack of interest in a passive 5 apparently.

 

[JoeVictim]

I remember someone pointing it out a while back. I don't think it was many months after the 5001 was available that they added the chambered option to the 5000. Just slipped it in as an option.

I ordered my chambered SB4000 in like April I remember seeing it in the newest catalogue as an option. I called up the salesman and had to hold his hand through the process. (even after telling him I was a first time customer, I was expecting someone to really tell me about all the details and benefits of one option vs another...nope)

 

[gerrywarwick]

Thought I would check back in after the first gig with the new SB5000. Straight into my SABDDI to the Hellborg rig was really nice for the reggae situation I was in last night. I was the only one not going into the pa because the sound guy said it wouldn't make sense. Fat, warm and really clear would describe it. My only regret is that I could not let the true voice of the bass come through.....and it's so beautiful! I'm not joking. It's the best jazz type bass for my tastes. This was the first gig in years that I wasn't asked to "go get my real bass!"...whatever that means. It balances and behaves wonderfully around my neck. I have no complaints about this bass. I'm even still using the batteries it came with and it was a 4 hour gig, weeks after I got it. I can see how some people would want the mid control, depending on the style of music or personal taste but I find the natural mid voicing to be more than sufficient and pleasant to listen to when playing through a rig that offers power and clarity. I've always felt this way about jazz style basses, then add the J99 brightness and I can't see myself gassing for another jazz bass anytime soon. VERY happy.
They are looking at it this way because it's their first time hearing it through my rig