I guess I don’t get it . . . Carvin Content

[Lujon]

Alder body, neck through construction, unlined fretless ebony fingerboard with passive j pickups, 7.5lbs, made in the USA. On paper it sounds pretty spicy, and yet I got it from GC for less than a used Squier fretless they also have listed!

I keep thinking I'm missing something here. I gather from reading past threads there's some hate for Carvin but frankly this sounds and feels better than the US made Fender fretless basses I've played so I guess I don't get it, but I like it!

 

[Moving Pictures]

Nothing to get. If you like it, you like it.

Nice bass.

 

[StevieMac]

Nice find, congrats

 

[GM60466]

I too purchased a fretless Carvin from my local GC. I was very inexpensive. I couldn't get the cash out of wallet quick enough. The salesmen explained to me that in the used market, Carvins have very little re-sale value.

 

[Dr Zee]

For some unknown reason Carvin Basses sell for way below there value.
Go for it, I doubt you'll be sorry.

 

[Lujon]

View attachment 4635005 For some unknown reason Carvin Basses sell for way below there value.
Go for it, I doubt you'll be sorry.

Ooh thas hottt! And I already got it!

 

[Mudder]

I've not owned a bass but have had several Carvin guitars. Tremendous gear but they have brutal resale, it's always been this way. Probably why Kiesel rebranded them.

 

[musicman556]

I've always wanted to like a Carvin. I used to drool over their little catalogs and dream of all the ways I'd order one. No telling how many math classes I wasted thumbing through those pages.

I had one acquaintance with a Carvin PJ that was an incredible bass. Felt great, played smoothly, sounded mighty! The two used Carvins I've seen at the Nashville GC were absolute dogs. Just dead and lifeless. Not simply old strings... just like.... thumpy boat anchors. Both were beautiful multi-laminate neck-throughs, and they sucked royally.

I hate that, because I really wanted to love this one particular walnut and maple 5 string, but it was so unsatisfying to play that I couldn't put it back on the wall fast enough. Didn't even plug it in. It was one of the most dull, lifeless instruments I ever held.

I still get excited every time I see a Carvin for sale. One day I hope I get a player.

 

[sonojono]

That's an amazing find OP

 

[Dominic D]

I've not owned a bass but have had several Carvin guitars. Tremendous gear but they have brutal resale, it's always been this way. Probably why Kiesel rebranded them.

They changed name because the guitar division split off into its own company. The pro-audio division still owns the "Carvin" name.

 

[JimmyM]

Carvin and Kiesel have made some very good basses. The reason they can sell them cheaper than Fender is that they don't have to deal with middleman. But if you want them to build you a super Duper $3000 bass, I'm sure they would. I believe they have a custom shop like most major manufacturers.

 

[shade_1313]

Low resale value is a boon to those of us who buy them used (although my first Carvin was bought new). Both of my used Carvin fret less basses were good scores.

 

[spatters]

Somehow Carvin managed to exist for decades without ever acquiring any mystique or exclusivity about any of their products. No one pines over old Carvins the way they do every other obscure instrument and amplifier from the 80s and before, despite the fact that some of them are very good. None of them have any resale value whatsoever.

Anyone in the marketing field would do well to study Carvin, its history, and its advertising, to figure out how they managed to avoid creating brand value for so many decades. It's truly uncanny!

 

[Lujon]

Somehow Carvin managed to exist for decades without ever acquiring any mystique or exclusivity about any of their products. No one pines over old Carvins the way they do every other obscure instrument and amplifier from the 80s and before, despite the fact that some of them are very good. None of them have any resale value whatsoever.

Anyone in the marketing field would do well to study Carvin, its history, and its advertising, to figure out how they managed to avoid creating brand value for so many decades. It's truly uncanny!

Yes, it is uncanny! Was it a lack of distinctive features, not enough high-profile endorsements or were they just missing an elite line of instruments hand hewn by pandas in the remote Carvin mountains?

 

[JimmyM]

Yes, it is uncanny! Was it a lack of distinctive features, not enough high-profile endorsements or were they just missing an elite line of instruments hand hewn by pandas in the remote Carvin mountains?

I would say it's a combination of all three. Carvin made their bones from making unspectacular but very usable gear that's affordable.

 

[Fender_Bender]

No personal experience with them but have heard the truss rods are marginal/prone to failure.

 

[Ewo]

Yeah, it's amazing how inexpensive a used Carvin can be.

I played an SB-5000 for a while, and it was a good instrument, if a bit heavy. I was going through a lot of basses at the time and sold it--but it made it into the permanent stable of a good buddy.

 

[Kawai2g4b]

Now, I have owned 3 Carvin Guitars in the past and all of them sounded great and played wonderfully, if a little mid and treble-forward.

The basses, on the other hand, have usually adopted a flatter radius fingerboard and thin necks. It works for some people but not everyone, which I think also influence their resale. I will cramp out on a thin/flat neck after a while. The pickups are good enough in most cases, though. If it weren't for the necks, I would probably have a couple.

 

[Dluxe]

Love the old Carvin basses.

 

[Jefus]

Recently posted this old live shot of me and my LB76F in another thread. I was previously a primarily fretless player, and this thing was with me every step of the way. I also have a MIG Warwick fretless, but this one gets played more.

My biggest complaint about the instrument was the pickups/electronics, which were lifeless. Once they got swapped out this thing came to life!