From detritu–(at)–x.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 09:24:54 CST 1997
Article: 35902 of alt.guitar.amps
From: detritu–(at)–x.netcom.com(Lord Valve)
Subject: Re: Carvin Amps As Good As Guitars?
Date: 26 Jan 1997 06:40:13 GMT
References: <854120580.1552--(at)--ejanews.com> <32E8FA7A.718--(at)--s.umass.edu> <5cavnd$gr--(at)--fw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com> <5cdc90$n2--(at)--ews.usaor.net>
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat Jan 25 10:40:13 PM PST 1997
Xref: geraldo.cc.utexas.edu rec.music.makers.bass:50801 alt.guitar.amps:35902 alt.guitar.bass:32233
In <5cdc90$n2--(at)--ews.usaor.net> ksmit–(at)–saor.net writes:
>detritu–(at)–x.netcom.com(Lord Valve) wrote:
>>>Interestingly, I have received no reviews (out of 163) for the
>>>Archive on Carvin amps, cabs, or combos. Anyone ?
>>Lord Valve Revieweth:
>Dear Lord Valve (or whatever the heck your real name is),
> Why do I get so angry when I read posts such as the one you
>above? I think I might have a few ideas.
> 1. A one-word review does not really explain *why* you feel
>is crap. If you have a beef (or two, or three….), then why not
>share it with us?
OK, it’s really, REALLY crap.
> 2. Is it necessarily a crime to build a mid-level amp which is
>toward the vast majority of guitarists who:
> a) Could not give a fuck about point-to-point construction.
> b) Aren’t impressed by snobbish, trendy botique
> c) CAN’T AFFORD a vintage Vox AC-30, plexi Marshall, or
>or tweed Fender.
> d) Actually uses printed circuit boards
> 3. No matter which amp is in question, you seem to have nothing
>derrogatory things to say. I’m not condoning the current practice
>(which is championed by our esteemed guitar rags) of only showcasing
>the good points…while overlooking any gripes. But to blanketly
>lable an amp as CRAP, w/o contrasting it with any good points shows a
>pre-disposed negative bias. IMO, this is just as bad as what’s going
>on with the guitar rags.
> I’ll readily admit that Carvin amps *probably* won’t enjoy the
>longevity, and have the best absolute pure tone of most of the botique
>amps. However, they seemed to be marketed toward the mid-level market
>(not the entry level)…hence the word *crap* needn’t apply here.
Lord Valve Speaketh:
I take guitar amps apart for a living. I’m good at it. Every Carvin
amp I’ve ever opened, without exception, has looked like holy hell on
the inside. I challenge any other tech on this NG to say differently.
These amps are not reliable, and they’re full of cheap parts. Lead
dress is non-existant. Hardware is laughable. Cheap pots. Not built
with servicing in mind, either, as anyone who’s ever tried to get one
of the damn things apart will tell you. If you order parts from
Carvin, you’ll pay retail PLUS, and a hefty shipping charge on top.
Example: a type 8 (shorty) reverb tank for one of their ‘acoustic
guitar’ amplifiers cost me FORTY BUCKS, plus $7.50 shipping and
handling. A type 8 tank costs $18 from New Sensor. (NS was out of
stock on the correct impedance, and the customer was in a hurry.) How
Carvin gear sounds is up to you…if you can live with it, be my guest.
I’m not a tone snob…but I’ve been in this game for over 30 years,
and I’ve taken apart and serviced damn near every amp ever built on
this planet. Some of ’em look great inside, and some of ’em don’t.
There is a reason why top players use certain amps…SRV coulda had a
TRUCKLOAD of Crate, Carvin, Roland, Peavey, etc. amps delivered FREE
anytime he wanted, just by picking up the phone. Anyone care to
speculate as to why he didn’t do it? Bottom line: Buy all the Carvin
stuff you want. Remember, though, that there’s no such thing as a
Carvin authorized warranty station. If it bites the dust, you’ll do
without it while it travels back and forth to the Carvin factory. Ask
em for a loaner. 🙂