Carvin vs. Rickenbacker Basses

philco · Post by **philco** » Sat Jul 05, 2003 6:47 am

After listening to "Hell Freezes Over" by the Eagles and "The Ballad of Bering Strait" by Bering Strait, I have been taken by the sound of Carvin basses. Timothy B. Schmidt is a longtime Rickenbacker bass owner that also plays Carvin, even having a Carvin signature model named after him. A reading of reviews on Harmony Central led to the discovery that former or present Rickenbacker bass owners tended to like the Carvin sound and they listed several similarities such as long piano-like sustain and treble punch while maintaining adequate low end.

At the used prices they go for on eBay, it seems like a Carvin bass would complement a Rickenbacker bass very well. It's also something to play while waiting OVER A YEAR for your Rickenbacker bass to arrive and as a nice economical backup bass after it FINALLY arrives.

What about it Don, any experience with current production Carvin basses? I want a modern 24-fret one with active and passive pickup option (HB2 pickup at bridge). When the battery dies in an active Carvin bass, you just pull the volume knob and continue on as a passive bass. Neat configuration. Your choice of mode.

ricnvolved · Post by **ricnvolved** » Sat Jul 05, 2003 8:22 am

I seriously considered purchasing a fretless Carvin LB20 model about 5 years ago but decided against it when I discovered the fretboard is available *only* in a 15 inch radius. Some players don't care about fretboard radius, and some prefer a really flat one. However, I strongly dislike anything higher than a 12 inch radius, and actually prefer a 10 or 9.

I called Carvin to ask if I could get the LB20 with a 10 inch radius, or even a 12 inch. The representative said no, and that was the end of my quest for a Carvin bass. Pretty strange to me that they have a "custom shop" but won't deviate from the 15 inch radius for basses.

dave4004 · Post by **dave4004** » Sat Jul 05, 2003 10:49 am

The old Carvins were boat anchors, and unbalanced ones at that. The 90s-to-present ones are quite nice, but not for me. I've played a couple of used ones and like Jeffery, I found the neck radius too flat, and the neck was too thin front to back for me. My left hand gets fatigued on flat necks. Both the ones I tried were the passive LB20 (one was fretless), nice but generic Jazz-type tone, well balanced, well made, moderate weight. Nothing distinctive about the looks, but not bad either.

philco · Post by **philco** » Sat Jul 05, 2003 12:14 pm

The new Carvin basses have graphite reinforced necks, which I wish my 4004L had. My 4004L also has a thin neck, but I like the feel OK. I hear RIC also thinned down the necks on the 650 series guitars, so my new '0? 650C will have a thinner neck than my '02 650D. The weight of the Carvins is almost identical to my 4004L. Balance should be similar. Getting the HB2 option will eliminate the generic Jazz tone and give it more of a MusicMan tone with extra versatility due to the neck pickup. I may or may not warm up to a flat neck. If I buy one used at the right price, it shouldn't cost me much to find out. I want to get a cheap 4-string bass and string it up BEAD so I can get the low end of a 5-string without having to put up with the extra neck width and weight. That also leaves me with an extra G string to replace the one that goes dead first on my standard 4-string bass. Boy, I'm cheap!

wwittman · Post by **wwittman** » Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:24 pm

They are relatively inexpensive and fairly well made. But they have little to nothing in common with Rickenbackers...
There's nothing wrong with them, but I personally see no reason why a Rickenbacker owner would lean toward a Carvin as a second bass guitar any more or less than just about ANY other instrument.
Nothing sounds or feels like a Rickenbacker. The reaosn to own another bass is to own ANOTHER bass.

philco · Post by **philco** » Sun Jul 06, 2003 6:46 am

Well, my 4004L doesn't sound exactly like earlier Rickenbackers. I'm sure it feels a bit different as well. It probably sounds no more different from an LB70 than it does a 4001. The neck pickup is quite a bit hotter than the bridge pickup, even though the bridge pickup is positioned considerably closer to the strings and is set fairly far from the bridge. The 4004L thus has a lot of bottom if the neck pickup is selected, which is most of the time for me. There is no blend control, just a shared volume and shared tone knob. The Carvin LB70 has more control knobs and also pickup options, tonewood options, and active/passive electronic options. Yes, it would be ANOTHER bass. I want to COMPLEMENT my 4004L tone, not emulate it. I'm looking for a pleasant alternative to the 4004L.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Jul 06, 2003 7:09 am

Philip: Have you considered the Rickenbacker 4005 bass?

philco · Post by **philco** » Sun Jul 06, 2003 7:46 am

Yes, but they are not exactly hanging on dealer walls around here. Never even saw one in the flesh. Rickenbackers are VERY hard to come by around here, and generally high priced when you find them. eBay is my best alternative, and the 4005 rarely comes up, just as the 4004L rarely comes up for sale.

Also, I don't want to pay the cost of a Rickenbacker just yet and file the nut to accept BEAD stringing which would reduce the resale value. Better to try that mod on a cheaper instrument first.

wwittman · Post by **wwittman** » Tue Jul 08, 2003 7:21 am

Well, Philip, the thing is, how can anyone else predict what you might find a "pleasant alternative"? <g>

Even assuming that a 4004 sounds little like a 4001, that doesn;t make it sound anything like a Carvin either. Or a Fender, Or a Gibson, Or anything else (again).

So really it just comes down to what other bass guitars you like.
My main bass guitar is a Status Graphite and i switch to the Rickenbacker when i want that flat wound McCartney sound... they're completely unrelated.
But they are also both basses that i love playing.. that's the only common denominator. (well and they both have 4 strings.. the way bass guitars SHOULD! <g>)

philco · Post by **philco** » Tue Jul 08, 2003 4:04 pm

William, I also prefer the 4-string for the narrower neck and easier playing. If John Entwistle could live with only 4 strings, it would probably suffice for me also. I would like to try a Status Graphite bass, but they are rare around here and a bit out of my price range and talent range right now, but maybe some day............

It would be nice to have a graphite bass, or at least a graphite reinforced neck, that keeps me from having to tweek the neck every couple of months. So far the 4004L neck responds quite a bit to humidity changes, but it came from a very dry climate to east Texas. Maybe it will settle down soon.

toneman · Post by **toneman** » Wed Jul 09, 2003 7:04 am

My only experience with Carvin's was with my friend, the late Allen Woody. On a whim one day about `92-`93 Woody(as we all referred to him) and I were walking around what was known as "Guitar Row" in Hollywood. (There use to be about 6-7 guitar/ music shops all around one block on Sunset where Guitar Center is.) and Woody said "Hey, let's go into Carvin and see if they'll give me a free bass". About 20 minutes later we left with a brand new six string fretless and a small 50 watt combo amp! The deal was though that Carvin would come to the show the next night in San Diego and take pictures of Woody with the bass for use in their catalouge.
Other than that I have no experiences with their stuff. I'm sure it's fine but has never been to my tastes. The only basses I own are a Hofner 500/1 and an old Framus Star Bass like Bill Wyman used in the early sixties with The Stones.

philco · Post by **philco** » Wed Jul 09, 2003 4:18 pm

I have read the Status bass reviews, and people seem to really rave about them. The Buzzard 2 would be my preferred model if going by looks, but it seems to have been dropped from production. The Buzzard 1 is far too expensive and really does resemble a buzzard in a grotesque way. Really doesn't matter right now, as they seem rather pricey and about as rare as unobtanium around here. Maybe if I ever take a trip to England and run into a shop that has several used ones....... who knows?

The UPS notice on my door tells me my OLP MusicMan copy has arrived. It may be good enough to use while I torque around with my 4004L neck for a while. Excuse me, I meant "train" my 4004L neck in proper posture. Anybody know where to get a good neck jig for heat forming the neck?

philco · Post by **philco** » Thu Jul 10, 2003 3:30 pm

Well, the OLP MM2 arrived, and all I can say for the price is..........WOW!!! This rig is definitely better than my old Fender '75 P-bass. The lightweight basswood body feels great when hanging from a strap. The metallic pearl blue finish looks really good. It came with rather bright sounding Ernie Ball Slinky roundwound strings. Came with truss rod adjustment tool which requires NO cover removal and an allen key for string height adjustment. The 8' guitar cable with 90 degree plug was a nice touch as well, even if cheap. I tuned the strings and adjusted the truss rod; then next came some intonation adjustment using my Peterson VS-1. All the screws were snug except for the strap lug screw on the upper horn, which I quickly fixed. The satin finished neck is smooth and fast......and quite straight. I have an action height equal to the width of the E string on the E string at the 12th fret. It allows fairly aggressive playing without buzzing. The tone is way beyond what I would expect for $230, and the sustain is good as well. Pickup pole pieces are directly under each string. The fret ends were as smooth as can be and needed no touchup whatsoever, unlike my 650D and 4004L. The neck width, taper, thickness, and string spacing are almost identical to my 4004L. Hallelujah!!!! The tuning keys work smoothly and hold a tune. The nut is well cut. Pots are smooth and no scratchiness. The metal control knobs look nicer than the plastic junk seen on most basses in this low price range.

The down side? The bass needed a setup when I received it (no surprise), and there is no manual included (who needs it?). The pickup is about 6dB quieter than a 4004L, but still fairly loud. The nut material doesn't feel very hard. The white pickguard looks a bit dorky and is rather soft. Chrome steel would have looked better by far, or even a black pickguard. No position markers on the control knobs. The soft basswood body will probably dent easily.

It's a fun bass, and it would make a great starter bass for a youngster or a backup for when you don't want to risk your RIC bass at a rough gig or to play when your RIC needs work. I'm glad I got it, and I doubt a Carvin would be a whole lot better. Especially considering the price.

Oh yeah, the SKB Freedom bass case I got for it fits it very well. ROCK ON!!!

philco · Post by **philco** » Sat Jul 12, 2003 1:52 pm

ALSO......I took a closer look and listen at that Bering Strait video that had such good bass tone on the Wolf Trap concert track. It seems that Spooky Olkovsky wasn't playing a Carvin after all. It was..........a PEAVEY CIRRUS!!! And he can really play that 5-string bass. On my blurry TV screen image I mistook the Cirrus logo for Carvin. I have to admit having prejudice against Peavey because of the old 70's folded horn cabinet from Peavey that I once owned. They have obviously improved their bass tone since then. I played the video through high end audiophile gear, and when I say the tone is killer, it's KILLER. I went and read Harmony Central reviews, and the Cirrus owners seemed to have nothing but praise for the sound. The only problem is that the pickups are active mode only. When the battery dies, the sound dies. No passive option like Carvin, but the fretboard radius is a more comfortable 12". I never thought I would say it, but I'm definitely going to start checking out the better Peavey basses. The Peavey Grind BXP NTB basses also look very promising at less than a third the cost of the Cirrus. They are passive and Asian. I never would have thought Peavey would put out such a nice bass as the Cirrus.

But it's NOT cheap!