• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Chef's Carvin B1500...

First note:
She did not overheat and let all the magic smoke out :beer:
Good on Carvin for getting me one that does fire up and run this time-thanks lots!
Second pre-game note: she's in a GenzBenz 4 space rack (thanks Quad!) with a Korg DTR2000 tuner. Not too big and bulky, but not a real small package either. carried easily enough tho.

OK, so...
Spent about an hour mucking about with it before taking ti to the job. It seems to be much more sensitive about what bass I use that the rest of my stuff...
In other words, the TFB and WT800b don't seem to require much eq shift from this bass to that bass. As I was dialing junk in before the job last night, this seemed not to be the case with this amp. Pretty big shifts seemed to be required to go from P bass to Reverend to 55-02, etc. Not sure what to make of that yet.
What I took to work:
B1500, Schro 410, 1972 DarkStar'd Tele-smooth, big and phat, 1982 G&L SB2 (which is kinda Jazz like, cept the pups are dual coil and a lot hotter), big hot and nasty. Figured a P and a J would kinda cover a lot of testing ground.
The club is a "shotgun," narrow and long, with a big hardwood dance floor/stage at the back, bar and pool tables etc at the other end. Long hard walls.
I typically use the TFB and Henry 8x8 here. The 8x8 seems to do the best job of maintianing a good combination of punch and clarity without getting muddy. No PA support here.
To start with I used the DS Tele. Schro horn at 60% on. EQ on the B1500 flat, drive at 9 oclock, volume at 9 oclock.
The DarkStar is a pup with amazing sonic range, from huge full lows to clear sparkly highs. Very dynamic and really responds to right hand technique-the more you dig, the more it gives.
So, this sounded great on stage. As I said earlier, this was the MO Blues Association monthly jam. One of my bass player friends that came to sit in said it was a bit big down low, and not enough cut in the middle. So, I cut the sub bass a couple clicks, boosted the "mid-mids and high mids" and couple clicks, and he said that tightened everything up nicely in the back of the room.
When I switched to the G&L, I left the eq where it was. The G&L really is nasty. It barks and cuts and slices. Less inherent low end than the DS Tele, it's a meat grinder. It'll play nice if you move your right hand up to the neck, and pup the pup selector in the middle. But solo either pickup and move your right hand to the middle or back to the bridge and it just gets mean. The carvin seemed to like this. I did crank up the drive a little with this bass for a minute, and found the resulting gain in harmonic structure almost made it sound like feedback at points. Pulled it back to about 9 o'clock and left it.
Other bassist brought: early 70's Rick, early 80's Fender Japan Squier P (really nice btw) and an early 80's Ibanez with one big pup in the middle.
They all liked the head well enough; they all would have prefered the 8x8 for that room. None of them messed with the eq other than the Squier P player, who moved sub bass from two clicks of cut to flat.

I'm not gonna go all judgemental on her til I run a few more gigs thru her...but I'm not sure the Carvin and I will be fast friends. This is not really any fault of the amps. I like the amp itself, and it's tone well enough.

Here's what's bothering me at this point:
1) I really don't need all that power. The Carvin does a nice job of letting you know all that power is there by bringing that "solidity and heft" to every note, even at low volume, that only big iron can. That's fine and enjoyable, but, there's a price to be paid for that in therms of weight and size that maybe I don't want. Espcially in the large 4 space rack.

2) The wt800b does that pretty well too. And is a lot easier to manage in it's three space gator soft rack, tuner included.

3) The Navigator/QSC-PLX 1602 does that pretty well, and is a lot lighter.

The other thing these other three have that the Carvin doesn't is parametric eq. The Mesa Walkabout has it as well, and even tho it "only has 300 watts," for most venues I play at, any of these will be enough with the right cab...Para eq has grown to be a must have feature for me since I starting doubling. I just gotta be able to dial the one or two problem frequencies to clean it up and make it clear in the room, or kill that one pesky feedback frequency.

The verdict from one gig, with one cab, in one room:
Nice enough amp, but not sure we'll be long term working parnters.
 
Nice review, and your comments make total sense to me.

I found the Carvin actually quite transparent with the drive off versus the Eden and even the TF tone, so it doesn't surprise me that it reacted more 'differently' to different inputs.

+1 also to the 'heft' in the notes... similar to the Glock HR... there's just something about a big, heavy transformer that seems to come through, even at volume levels where you wouldn't think it would matter.

Regarding the semi-parametric, I actually prefer the wider Q's of the multiple fixed mid controls of the Glock and Carvin, and the center freq's pretty much cover the sweet spots for me. However, for DB that would be a different issue.

The three space thing is kind of cumbersome, but the very thin depth of the Carvin would make it a pretty easy schlep in a thin, lightweight three space rack. However, any time you go from two spaced to three spaces, it just feels bigger and different. I too would take my Glock to many more gigs if it was smaller and lighter.

Finally, I found the drive control be be useful between 'off and 9 o'clock', similar to you... any more than that added too much mid-muck and harmonic complexity for me... again, totally personal taste there.

Anyway, at least you have one that is working now. Let us know if it 'grows on you' over a few gigs.

K
 
I guess if I took it out of the four banger hard rack, and into a three space bag, it'd be better. But I really like having a racked tuner. Visible at all times, and the battery don't never die.
I would not want to trust B1500/tuner weight in a 4 space soft bag...
 
Nice review, and your comments make total sense to me.

I found the Carvin actually quite transparent with the drive off versus the Eden and even the TF tone, so it doesn't surprise me that it reacted more 'differently' to different inputs.

+1 also to the 'heft' in the notes... similar to the Glock HR... there's just something about a big, heavy transformer that seems to come through, even at volume levels where you wouldn't think it would matter.

Regarding the semi-parametric, I actually prefer the wider Q's of the multiple fixed mid controls of the Glock and Carvin, and the center freq's pretty much cover the sweet spots for me. However, for DB that would be a different issue.

The three space thing is kind of cumbersome, but the very thin depth of the Carvin would make it a pretty easy schlep in a thin, lightweight three space rack. However, any time you go from two spaced to three spaces, it just feels bigger and different. I too would take my Glock to many more gigs if it was smaller and lighter.

Finally, I found the drive control be be useful between 'off and 9 o'clock', similar to you... any more than that added too much mid-muck and harmonic complexity for me... again, totally personal taste there.

Anyway, at least you have one that is working now. Let us know if it 'grows on you' over a few gigs.

K
My experience is similar. There is indeed that "big iron" feel to the B1500, which I haven't encountered with any of the numerous Edens I've played. And I'd agree that the basic sound of the B1500 is more flat and transparent than any Eden I've run across (of course, that's not always what every player wants).

I don't push the drive up past 10 o'clock either, and more often it's closer to 9 or even off.

I've got my B1500 in a 4-space soft rack right now, and it seems OK that way. But it's never gonna be as portable as a WT800, that's for sure.

Regarding the EQ, I thought I would miss the fancy stuff more than I actually do. The B1500's EQ has been fine for me in all applications so far. I can see why Chef would want a para for DB, though. But I wouldn't think it would be hard to find a decent outboard unit that would work for that, maybe even as part of whatever preamp is being used to amplify the DB.

I must admit, though, that the bulk of the amp can be an issue on occasion. There are times when I just don't feel like lugging the B1500 down that stairs. (That's where the EA iAmp 500 comes in.) But shoot, anybody who's willing to lug a big old 8 X 8 shouldn't worry too much about a 35 lb head, right?;)
 
The Henry 8x8 really isn't that big...smaller than a 610 or 810...and the tiltback design makes it fairly manueverable. Heck, it's lighter than Carvin's 410 for the B1500 I think!

I'm old, I don't do big heavey gear real well!
 
Here's what's bothering me at this point:
1) I really don't need all that power. The Carvin does a nice job of letting you know all that power is there by bringing that "solidity and heft" to every note, even at low volume, that only big iron can. That's fine and enjoyable, but, there's a price to be paid for that in therms of weight and size that maybe I don't want. Espcially in the large 4 space rack.

Interesting. My B800 did just fine thru an 8 ohm 2x10 (300W) at a loud rehearsal. I'm going to gig it tomorrow night thru a 4 ohm 4x10 (500W) and see how it does: fairly big room, I'll get no PA support.

Not that the B800 would be better for you: it's not rackable, and apparently out of production anyway.

I'm still considering the B1500 as a big rig solution. Thanks for the nice review.
 
Actually, I think that the B800 is a very good suggestion. Note, I have not tried the B1500, but if you don't need all the power, and don't want all the weight, the B800 seems like a reasonable option. Especially at the current price.

Tom.
 
Actually, I think that the B800 is a very good suggestion. Note, I have not tried the B1500, but if you don't need all the power, and don't want all the weight, the B800 seems like a reasonable option. Especially at the current price.

Tom.

Has anyone tried the BX1200 head? A little more power than the 800 and a little lighter than the 1500.
 
Smash and all;
Yeah, I have a wiiiide range of instruments. Overall, and prolly like most of you, I have "a sound that's me." For me, this is a low and mid thick R&B fingerstyle, with enough clarity on top that it cuts on thru a dense live mix, and the few times when I snap a string you can really hear it. The majority of my basses support this sound by their nature. Think your standar P, J, G&L L2000 kinda deals. Any of these, even with (stainless) flats on there are gonna bull their way thru a mix. Like Smash, I prefer not to eq on the fly. With the majority of my toolkit, I don't need to make much if any change, and I pretty well know what each bass needs in terms of tweaks from "Chef's flat starting point."
But then there are basses that are part of a tool box for "this band or that session or this artist." Or, just because;)Some of the axes in this part of the toolkit have always required a little more of a tweak from my personal starting point.
Take for instance the 1972 Telecaster. Looove the way it feels, but the only time it ever really sounded good to me was thru a B-Max preamp...which I hated;) This ultimately ended up causing me to DarkStar the Tele. Now it works well everywhere-nice;)
During my pre-show testing with the Carvin, I was finding that more basses than normal required moving fairly far away from flat with the Carvin. In fact, I ran thru several of my standard workhorses that I had hoped to take to work that night that I was unable to quickly get a tone I liked. Neither of my Reverend 5L's sounded good, the Brad Houser didn't, the Rumblefish didn't; along with some others. All of these guys just sounded too dark and thick and lacking in definition.
Now, I will admit the BH5 has flustered me like this from the beginning...but seriously, there's no way a 5L or Rumblefish is a too dark by nature bass. Not sure what's going on there.
The BH5 has (watch this Ken!) fresh stainless rounds on it, the Rumblefish has fresh stainless flats on it...everything else is wearing my standard DA XL170 nickels. I do it this way across all 20-something of my basses to keep the variables down. I want the basses particular personality to be the variable, not string choice or other wierdness. I want the amps and cabs I use "to represent what the bass and I are throwing down," and prefer those not be a variable either.
I presume that this is correctable given enough time messing with things. But:
1) I don't feel like I ought to have to work that hard since all the axes seem to work fine with my other amplification tools, and
2) I'm lucky enough to just be real dang busy right now. I just signed on with one band that had 120 dates last year. Pile that on the three other bands I'm in that work regular, a couple other projects, and a day job...
Sometimes I even sleep...!

I hope the Carvin and I get to be friends. A lot of you guys I interact with, who even tho you don't have similar sonic goals and come from different backrounds than me, at least see things the same most of the time, reviewed the B1500 as a solid bit in your toolbox. Maybe it'll be one for me.

If not, no worries, I have a pretty dang nice toolbox right now, and one of youse guys can have it next if I don't dig it.

One thing's fer-sure...this one's a runner. No smoke here;)
She's got big power, and knows how to flex her muscles. Just not sure if she helps me achieve my own personal sonic goals. One other thing is fer-sure; she ain't gonna work for me with DB. That right there may be enough to show her the door.
 
No sir, for DB, you just gotta have parametric eq. Or at least I do. You get "that one frequency" you need to change to get it to quit feeding back in this room, or with that cab. Or one frequency you need to be able to find to get clarity or mid definition on this crappy stage.
Maybe I'm too dense to figure out how to do that with the Carvin. But with the TFB, Eden, or Mesa, I can go right to 600 hz, or 120 hz or whatever. Or just spin the para frequency finder til I locate it, then dial it in or out.

Make sense?
 
Chef's experience with the tone of the B1500 actually does not suprise me, given the instruments that he is using. For example, when my buddy Matrok comes over with his Reverend with roundwound strings, it sounds GREAT through my more mid voiced and warm sounding rigs like my Thunderfunk, his Hartke3500, the Schroeder cabs and even the Epi410UL. However, through my more 'hi fi' sounding rigs like the Bergantino's, the Walter Woods, etc., it's not such a good thing.. clacky and harsh.

The B1500 actually has, to my ear, a somewhat 'transparant' voicing when set flat... more similar to the iAmp than to the Thunderfunk or Eden IME. This voicing seems to work wonderfully with modern sounding, 'clean', 'ultra articulate' basses like active J's, MTD's, etc., etc., but can sound a little too sterile and 'empty' with more aggressively voiced 'rock' type basses (for lack of a better term) like the Reverends, etc. Regardless of string choice with the Reverend type basses, IME they need a little bit of mid warmth and growl to really work, and they sure sound good when you have a rig that can do that (like the TF/Schroeder rig that Chef loves). I feel that tone is actually in the B1500, and the combination of the drive control and varying the ratio of low bass to low mid can make that amp quite 'punchy, growly, and somewhat 'retro' sounding. But... I did have to work a bit to get it there. The inherent nature of that amp is 'wide and clean' to my ear.

So, it makes sense that Chef might be having some issues dialing in the tone versus the warmer, punchier inherent 'flat' tone of the Schroeder and iAmp. IMO, this has less to do with the semi-parametrics than the inherent voicing of the amp itself.

IMO and IME!
 
I have no gigs this coming weekend, so some "big science" is in the works.
Right now, my favorite big venue rig has been TFB/Walkabout/WT800b paired with the Henry 8x8.
The 8x8 has more lows than any 8" based cab out to...much like the LDS 8" based cabs. It's lows are deep and clean, the mids are fast and punchy, and tho I *hate* the LeSon piezo tweet, as long as it's about 80% off, there's plenty of presence.
I have yet to try the Carvin with that box.
The same heads with Schro 210 and LDS 2x8+5 are my fave small venue cabs...but I find myself using the Walkabout Scout on an equal basis as I can get what I like out of it just as well, and it's one piece.
And, beleive it or not, the MusicMan HD150 and LDS 2x8+5 is really great too!
 
Hey guys,

one thing to remember are the center frequencies on the EQ here - which can attribute to the un- plug and play if you don't dig the super clean Class-A discreet preamp thing right out of the box

Sub Bass - 30hz,

Bass is at 100hz

Low Mid - 300hz

Mids - 1Khz

High Mids - 3Khz

Treble - 10Khz

That is a REALLY WIDE tone stack when you compare it to something like a thunderfunk which has about the same amount of controls (Bass and treble and timbre plus the Parametric)

You almost have to think of the High mids as a treble control and the Treble as a presence control.
 
Hey guys,

one thing to remember are the center frequencies on the EQ here - which can attribute to the un- plug and play if you don't dig the super clean Class-A discreet preamp thing right out of the box

Sub Bass - 30hz,

Bass is at 100hz

Low Mid - 300hz

Mids - 1Khz

High Mids - 3Khz

Treble - 10Khz

That is a REALLY WIDE tone stack when you compare it to something like a thunderfunk which has about the same amount of controls (Bass and treble and timbre plus the Parametric)

You almost have to think of the High mids as a treble control and the Treble as a presence control.


That's a good point. However, the other way to look at it is that the 'middle four' tone controls line up pretty well with the typical pre front end bass/low mid/hi mid/treble... even though the 'labels' on the Carvin are different. These four bands are pretty nicely and traditionally voiced.

Then, you have the deep bass and super high treble controls that almost act like hi and lo pass filters in a way.... pretty much just impacting 'rumble and sizzle'.

This is very similar to the Glock front end layout, and that relationship between the deep bass and bass and the treble and high treble can really result in some strong tone shaping capability.

However.... +1... these controls are more 'tweeks' versus the pretty full revoicing of the amp that is allowed with the TF's ridiculously powerful tone controls (switch, timbre, enhance, shelving bass and treble, four band semi-parametric... holy moly!).

K
 
Typically, the problem freq for DB lays around 600-750 hz, which this misses...

DB's a totally different animal, I'm sure. All my comments on this thread are specific to EB's. I'm clueless about DB amplification. Most of the DBers I know use very small cabs with relatively 'flat' heads like the AI and WW stuff. I know that the AI heads have a very narrow 'notch Q' semiparametric tone control to deal with DB feedback issues, which is a pretty cool idea.

I would think the relatively wide Q semi-parametric mids on the TF wouldn't be optimal for controlling DB feeback and wolf-tones or whatever they are called without changing the tone a lot... but again.... out of my area of expertise there!
 
TFB and DB:
I run enhance all the way on, which cuts most of the troublesome mid feedback range while providing beef and clarity. The TFB enahnce is a lot different then SWR and Eden that way. I run the rest of the amp flat, except for about 8db of cut at 600-750 depending on cab, room, and proximity of bass to cab. That completely eliminates any feedback problems I've ever had. Then, timbre one click right.