Re : Potentially Decent Harp Amp?

["" <party_man1@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Tim Sheehan Sez :

Excerpt 

> am primarily a bassist, but I do play some harp as
>well. I was thumbing through the latest Carvin
>catalog and saw the Vintage 16 amp.

=========================================================================

Hurricane Sez :

My first harp amp was a brute of a 50 Watt Marshall with twin 12" Celestion spkrs . It was a living breathing nightmare to load and unload , to make it easier on my back I added casters ( wheels ) to it and that helped .

I used to travel between  San Diego and Palm Springs California and took the back roads because it was a shorter route . In Escondido California , Carvin had its main service center ( now it is in Downtown San Diego ) , after hearing great things from guitar players who used Carvin Tube amps I thought I would check out the service center that Carvin had in Escondido on my way back from San Diego . While there as I checked out what they had to offer in tube amps I asked the manager if I could bring in my Marshall  amp to do a side by side " audition " of their amps and my Marshall . The manager said 
" sure  bring it on " . I liked his attitude . A month later on my return trip I was at their door with my Marshall ready to do it to it .

It took me a couple of hours check one against the other . My final conclusion was that Carvin makes a great sounding tube amp for the harp . The Carvin tube amp I ended up with is similar to this one :

< http://carvin.com/products/single.php?ItemNumber=112NOMAD&CID=GA >

Mine is actually one of the first in this series , just older and not as "classic " looking like this one , aside from that they are pretty much the same . Mine is the X-60 , and puts out a 60 watt kick vs 50 watts that this new one is listed , but I would assume it kicks 60 watts just like mine as most Carvin amps are under rated . I have used my Carvin now since 1992 it hasn't give me any problems other than some one asking me to turn the gain down a tad :) . The other significant difference is that my Marshall had twin 12" spkrs and my X-60 only uses one , what that spells out in difference is that you get more of a physical pop from the Marshall's twin 12"'Celestions compared to the single 12" British Blaster 100 watt rated spkr . Note that its only the physical pop not the over all volume that is noticeable to me . To me the trade off of not getting a back ache from toting that Marshall was worth the small difference in that " nuance " of the physical pop . the Carvin c!
omes with a really wet as can be Fender  type spring reverb , the Marshall had no effects at all . The Carvin also had " loop in and out return effects inputs and outputs " .

All in all considering the prices charged for these amps Carvin makes and the great sound they have and reliability they build into them I would highly recommend this product as I have had great times playing through mine , and as an investment , it paid for its self in 4 gigs , and I have played hundreds of gigs since then and only replaced the tubes twice since I got it .

My next project is to build two single 12" spkr cabinets and getting two Celestions because even though I like my Carvin as is , I do miss that " pop " the Celestions give , they make the subtle chug a tad brighter and more dominant  when I do a country western song .  Other than that I love my Carvin . I want single cabinets because it easier on the back to lift  them one at a time vs. picking up the load all at once . 

I am in no way associated with Carvin other than a user of their product .

HR

Aka :

Party_Man1@xxxxxxxxxx

  

  

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!