# Is Carvin really better than Gibson?



## indieguitarist (Jul 2, 2010)

Hey guys I've tried some gibson les pauls and sg's and they are awesome. But recently I've been hearing that Carvin guitars are twice as good and are lower priced. I've looked at the carvin website and their guitars are very beautiful. But thats just looks and I was wondering if they sound and feel is good as gibson. 

Thanks,


----------



## Isan (Jul 2, 2010)

yes .... yes they are


----------



## Esp Griffyn (Jul 2, 2010)

Without a doubt, Carvin are better. Better value for money, choice of specs, better sounding.

The pickups in Carvins aren't amazing, but then neither are Gibson pickups. I'd have a Carvin in an instant if the mark-up for the UK market was not so steep, but then most Gibsons are very expensive here too, but you couldn't pay me to be seen playing a Gibson.


----------



## ralphy1976 (Jul 2, 2010)

however it is fair to say that -for the moment it seems that - quality control is degrading sligthly with Cravin. (only saying what many have shared here)

However, right now in 2010 i think quite a few brands are better than Gibson $ for $


----------



## Empryrean (Jul 2, 2010)

was Gibson really ever that great?


----------



## Esp Griffyn (Jul 2, 2010)

ralphy1976 said:


> however it is fair to say that -for the moment it seems that - quality control is degrading sligthly with Cravin. (only saying what many have shared here)
> 
> However, right now in 2010 i think quite a few brands are better than Gibson $ for $



Slightly declining perhaps, but then compared to Gibson's ever-shoddy quality control Carvin's will always look amazing.


----------



## SnowfaLL (Jul 2, 2010)

Just play a Carvin next to a Gibson.. and you will never play a Gibson again


----------



## Origin (Jul 2, 2010)

Gibson as far as I know has gone pretty downhill, which I can vouch for having tried out many models in stores near me...they just didn't feel like the price they were. NOT BAD by any means! But not semi-boutique as people treat them. I'm aware the setup is part to blame for that but...there was more to it than that.  The old ones I've tried are fantastic  Carvins always look great to me, and if I get a pending 727 I'll let you know.


----------



## troyguitar (Jul 2, 2010)

A good Gibson is just as good as a good Carvin. Carvin, however, is more consistent and offers way more options in addition to being way cheaper.


----------



## wannabguitarist (Jul 2, 2010)

It honestly depends on what you want . There seems to be so much unnecessary Gibson hate on here. Yes their quality control isn't too great, and yes they're expensive, but a great Gibson is a great guitar. Just play a couple and find one you really click with.

Carvin does give you more options though


----------



## drenzium (Jul 2, 2010)

Apples and Oranges, man.


----------



## Homebrew1709 (Jul 2, 2010)

And ever since Carvin introduced its CS single-cut models, it has a bona fide Les Paul competitor. The Gibson Les Paul is certainly an iconic guitar, but Carvin offers so many pro features on their instruments that it's virtually impossible to not be able to customize one to your personal needs.


----------



## blister7321 (Jul 2, 2010)

carvins are way better, in price and playability wise
and theyre custom shop so you can get any thing you want if they make it 
i would love to see this in a 7


----------



## Razzy (Jul 2, 2010)

Origin said:


> Gibson as far as I know has gone pretty downhill, which I can vouch for having tried out many models in stores near me...they just didn't feel like the price they were. NOT BAD by any means! But not semi-boutique as people treat them. I'm aware the setup is part to blame for that but...there was more to it than that.  The old ones I've tried are fantastic  Carvins always look great to me, and if I get a pending 727 I'll let you know.



I went up to the Gibson wall at my local GC last week, and over half of the guitars had fucking HORRIBLE fretwork. That's BAD. It's sad when a $400 Korean made guitar (Agile) puts out better quality than a $2000 American guitar. Gibson needs to just close shop before the completely ruin their name, IMO.


----------



## scottro202 (Jul 2, 2010)

Razzy said:


> Gibson needs to just close shop before the completely ruin their name, IMO.



As long as "the greats", along with everybody and their mother play them, I don't think their name is in trouble. 

Remember, Gibson has still managed to keep a 50 year old guitar as one of their top sellers. I don't think they're going anywhere


----------



## loktide (Jul 2, 2010)

here we go again with all the random gibson bashing 

imo, the answer is: no. carvin is not 'better' than gibson. carvin is definitely cheaper and offers semi-custom models, but both companies offer completely different guitar models with little in common. with gibson, it can be tough to find a guitar without any flaws that also sounds great. personally, i think my '07 LP standard is one my best guitars, and one of the nicest i've played. too bad the variation among gibsons is simply ridiculous.


----------



## pink freud (Jul 2, 2010)

Carvin is definitely better than Gibson.

But, if you want a "traditional" guitar of that style I'd say check out Heritage. Ex-Gibson Michigan-based people building Gibson-style guitars at a higher level of average quality.


----------



## Razzy (Jul 2, 2010)

loktide said:


> here we go again with all the random gibson bashing
> 
> imo, the answer is: no. carvin is not 'better' than gibson. carvin is definitely cheaper and offers semi-custom models, but both companies offer completely different guitar models with little in common. with gibson, it can be tough to find a guitar without any flaws that also sounds great. personally, i think my '07 LP standard is one my best guitars, and one of the nicest i've played. too bad the variation among gibsons is simply ridiculous.



I'm not saying Gibson doesn't make good guitars. I'm sure a few slip through, but they REALLY need to step up quality control. I got a Gibson email awhile back that was a promo for a new model (I don't remember which one.) and even the giant res pictures of the PROMO model in the email, had awful fretwork. Sharp frets that could gut a fish. It's like they just do not care anymore.


----------



## Razzy (Jul 2, 2010)

pink freud said:


> Carvin is definitely better than Gibson.
> 
> But, if you want a "traditional" guitar of that style I'd say check out Heritage. Ex-Gibson Michigan-based people building Gibson-style guitars at a higher level of average quality.



+1

Heritage guitars are fantastic. They used to carry them at a local music store in Amarillo, and I liked them a lot.


----------



## ncbrock (Jul 2, 2010)

gibson people will be gibson people. Uptight pricks who think they are better than anyone else because they have "the best guitar ever"... Well thats the way it is around here. I hate people with gibsons that i know, there are WAY better guitars. I played this kids SG special, and my old $300 epiphone played better, and felt better. I dont think they feel any better or play better than any guitar. If I had $2000 to blow on a guitar it WOULDNT be a gibson, Id rather have buy 6-7 $300 guitars instead that feel and sound and play just as nice.
*flamesheild*


----------



## Groove (Jul 2, 2010)

loktide said:


> here we go again with all the random gibson bashing
> 
> imo, the answer is: no. carvin is not 'better' than gibson. carvin is definitely cheaper and offers semi-custom models, but both companies offer completely different guitar models with little in common. with gibson, it can be tough to find a guitar without any flaws that also sounds great. personally, i think my '07 LP standard is one my best guitars, and one of the nicest i've played. too bad the variation among gibsons is simply ridiculous.



I'm sorry but Gibson deserve all the bashing they get with the absolutely terrible quality control they have. My dad spent £1200 on one of there models (it was a while ago i can't remember the model) and I could have done a better job on it. The fret wire was hanging over the edge of the fretboard. There were knocks in the fretboard all the way up it and the neck joint was almost coming loose. A company of their stature should be able to produce good quality guitars nearly all the time with a few exceptions here and there, not the other way around.

Carvin on the other hand have had excellent quality control, until this year it seems. There have been a few threads here about some recent Carvin guitars that have been a bit iffy on their quality but overall they seem fine. I Bought a CT6M and I will never buy another 6 string again. I can't imagine what else I would want, except maybe a pickup change, but even at that i'm in no rush to do so.


----------



## mrp5150 (Jul 2, 2010)

People on this forum really hate Gibsons, but I think they make the best sounding guitars out there. Especially for heavy music. Saying they're "better" or "worse" than Carvins is pointless. It's going to vary for every player. I've owned a few Carvins and thought they were real nice and I also love Gibsons. Totally different guitars though.


----------



## AVWIII (Jul 2, 2010)

I heard gibson players sneak into town every night to snatch the youngest children for a blood sacrifice in their blasphemous dark ceremonies!



> gibson people will be gibson people. Uptight pricks who think they are better than anyone else because they have "the best guitar ever"


Those guys are actually from a group of people known as "assholes". These "Assholes" are allowed to buy guitars and have opinions just like regular folks. The kicker is when it comes to sharing their opinions. For example, they use generalizations and broad sweeping statements to attack anything they dislike.

I have no problem with Gibsons... used... when their prices become a little more rational. Just like everybody else, I've played a lot of good ones, and a lot of bad ones. If you want something like a gibson, but for less coin and more consistency, check out "Orville, by Gibson". Japanese crafted, nitro finished, gibson copies made for the Japanese market when Gibsons were rare. I've got an Orville Les Paul standard, and I think it's great.
I've never played a carvin, but it seems to be rare to hear a bad thing about them.


----------



## pink freud (Jul 2, 2010)

mrp5150 said:


> I've owned a few Carvins and thought they were real nice and I also love Gibsons. Totally different guitars though.



There isn't much of a feature difference between a Carvin CS4 and a Gibson Les Paul.


----------



## Razzy (Jul 2, 2010)

pink freud said:


> There isn't much of a feature difference between a Carvin CS4 and a Gibson Les Paul.



1.) The Carvin's frets won't cut your hand in half.

2.)The Carvin doesn't say Gibson on the headstock.

That's two differences right there, off the top of my head, and I wasn't even trying.


----------



## Duraesu (Jul 2, 2010)

this kind of threads are completely useless and bashing starters. My 600euro gibson flying v is better than my friend's 2000+ euro PRS Custom24. Why? because it feels better to ME, to MY hands, sounds better to MY ears, get it? Some people that bash gibson never really played one...


----------



## pink freud (Jul 2, 2010)

Razzy said:


> 1.) The Carvin's frets won't cut your hand in half.
> 
> 2.)The Carvin doesn't say Gibson on the headstock.
> 
> That's two differences right there, off the top of my head, and I wasn't even trying.



Well, Carvin _does_ allow personalized truss-rod covers...


----------



## Razzy (Jul 2, 2010)

_velkan said:


> this kind of threads are completely useless and bashing starters. My 600euro gibson flying v is better than my friend's 2000+ euro PRS Custom24. Why? because it feels better to ME, to MY hands, sounds better to MY ears, get it? Some people that bash gibson never really played one...



And some people bash their friend's PRS because they have PRS envy 

In all seriousness though,

I'm not bashing Gibson as seriously as it might seem. I have played some awesome Gibsons that I really enjoyed. But the fact remains, that nowadays, MOST of the ones I see hanging around music stores are bad news. They really need to step up their quality control for the players, but they don't care, because they still make money, because their guitars say Gibson on the headstock.

Also, they need to stop making stupid designs every week, and calling them "limited edition models." Did you see the reverse V? That thing was a total failure in every way.


----------



## Cancer (Jul 2, 2010)

Having played both, owned both, and sold Gibsons, I have to side with Carvin on this one. To Gibson's credit, they are more likely to innovate in the guitar space, and the 490T is a kickass pickup, but you won't catch me buying a Gibson anytime soon.


----------



## Disco Volante (Jul 2, 2010)

I live right down the road from the Gibson factory. I am constantly disappointed by what I play in their showcase in Nashville. As far as I'm concerned, they are the absolute most over-hyped major guitar brand out there.

Occasionally they do make an absolutely superb instrument, but from my personal experiences this is rare. I'd have to say they are insanely overpriced for what you get in almost every tier of instrument they make. 

You'd be better off worry about the name on the headstock less and going with what your ears and hands tell you first. There are a number of exceptional companies out there who make a consistent quality axe at a reasonable price. Carvin is just one of many who fall into this category.


----------



## Cancer (Jul 2, 2010)

Disco Volante said:


> You'd be better off worry about the name on the headstock less and going with what your ears and hands tell you first. There are a number of exceptional companies out there who make a consistent quality axe at a reasonable price. Carvin is just one of many who fall into this category.




You know something is up when other companies copy your designs, then proceed to make better copies then you do.


----------



## Steve08 (Jul 2, 2010)

Mr X. Interview | Dinosaur Rock Guitar

Read this. NOBODY should play Gibson anymore.


----------



## auxioluck (Jul 2, 2010)

I had infinitely more fun playing a Carvin than a Gibson. That's all I can really say.


----------



## SnowfaLL (Jul 2, 2010)

the thing with Gibson, is you are paying for the name on the headstock. Thats the issue, they are "ok" guitars but they dont match up with how "godly" people think they are. People act like they are the best guitar on the planet, and that nothing else is close.. but thats just far from the truth. They need to try the new Carvin singlecut.

If I was going for that vintage LP style, I'd much sooner get a Heritage or Tokai over a Gibson.. least you know you'd be getting a good guitar.


----------



## mrp5150 (Jul 2, 2010)

This thread is hilarious. I've owned 10+ Gibsons and never experienced any quality control issues. I bought them all online without playing them first as well. I do agree that their new guitars are overpriced, but the same can be said for pretty much every company. Carvin's stuff is incredibly expensive in relation to what the resale value is on used ones. I've said it a million times before and I'll say it again, for heavy music, nothing beats the tone of a Gibson Explorer IMO.


----------



## ncbrock (Jul 2, 2010)

Disco Volante said:


> As far as I'm concerned, they are the absolute most over-hyped major guitar brand out there.
> 
> insanely overpriced
> 
> You'd be better off worry about the name on the headstock less and going with what your ears and hands tell you first.



that sums it up right there. Pretty much paying for the name on the headstock. I bet if someone gave you two identical les pauls (one gibson, one another brand) and you shaved the gibson logo off one, you couldnt tell a difference. I sure cant, they feel the same quality to me.

I actually think its a virus Once you get a gibson you have the "gibson stereo type attitude" Thankfully I know better and havnt attained one of these money wasters, i mean gibson.


----------



## pink freud (Jul 2, 2010)

ncbrock said:


> that sums it up right there. Pretty much paying for the name on the headstock. I bet if someone gave you two identical les pauls (one gibson, one another brand) and you shaved the gibson logo off one, you couldnt tell a difference. I sure cant, they feel the same quality to me.
> 
> I actually think its a virus Once you get a gibson you have the "gibson stereo type attitude" Thankfully I know better and havnt attained one of these money wasters, i mean gibson.



You're not far off. People have actually told me that Gibsons are better because they have _history._ Like the logo on the headstock is made from magic fairy semen or something


----------



## dis89 (Jul 2, 2010)

Empryrean said:


> was Gibson really ever that great?


According to their 70s axes I believe they fuckin were


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Jul 2, 2010)

I owned a gibson for 10 years and have played litterally a few hundred and havnt experienced any of the quality control issues that you guys are talking about.

I love gibsons. Are they over priced? Sure, but so are prs's, esp's, alot of ibanezes, ect...


----------



## budda (Jul 2, 2010)

indieguitarist said:


> Hey guys I've tried some gibson les pauls and sg's and they are awesome. But recently I've been hearing that Carvin guitars are twice as good and are lower priced. I've looked at the carvin website and their guitars are very beautiful. But thats just looks and I was wondering if they sound and feel is good as gibson.
> 
> Thanks,



1. Carvin is not better than Gibson. They both build good and great guitars.
2. Carvins specs are not the same as Gibson specs, so don't expect the guitars to play, sound or feel the same.


----------



## xtrustisyoursx (Jul 2, 2010)

this thread sucks. sorry guys, but for all the really great posts on this board, it's one like this that brings it all down.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 2, 2010)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> I owned a gibson for 10 years and have played litterally a few hundred and havnt experienced any of the quality control issues that you guys are talking about.
> 
> I love gibsons. Are they over priced? Sure, but so are prs's, esp's, alot of ibanezes, ect...





I've owned a handful of Les Pauls, a few SGs, a couple of Explorers made between the late 80's and early 00's and NONE of their headstocks miraculously broke, nor were there any glaring issues with fretwork or construction. My dad has owned over twenty Les Pauls and SGs from 60's to 00's, and beside a couple not so shining stars they're all pretty much great instruments. Wish I could say that of all the Schecters, Agiles, LTDs, etc. I've owned. 

Of the two Carvin basses I owned, one had a stripped out truss rod nut from factory, and the other had a few paint defects at the neck heel and headstock. The DC125 I had briefly needed to have it's nut sanded down and a fret lowered.  Not glaring issues, but certainly nothing to scoff at on $2000+ instruments.

Few forums hate on Gibson more than this one, so most of the silly responses in this thread are expected. 

Are their lemons out there? Damn right there are, but it's not the "garbage guitar roulette" that many on here would make it seem. 

Let your own experience dictate which is "best" to you.

Also, if you're anything like me (and 90% of the gear whores on here) if you ever want to sell off your gear to "upgrade" or more in a different direction, enjoy selling your Carvin for pittance. Of all the American Made guitars out there, they have some of THE WORST resale value. Get ready to take a 50% bath on what ever you get, even on a decked out DC400 or Cali. The worst I ever lost out selling off a Gibby was roughly 20%, even on trade in you typically get FAR more.


----------



## budda (Jul 2, 2010)

I will be buying another les paul. One of them will say "gibson", others will say Agile, AJC, others will simply be singlecuts.

I will not buy a brand new Gibson, unless a) it floors me and b) I can afford it.

There's many reasons why Les Pauls and SG's still sell well


----------



## Murmel (Jul 2, 2010)

I don't think it's fair to rape Gibson like it was the hottest Asian chick ever. We should bash them more gently.
But, they are ovepriced yes, and their quality control has gone down.
I'm gonna share my views on Gibson.

As mentioned, they are ridiculously overpriced and honestly, I don't see why people rather not have a completely custom made guitar than a high-end Gibson. I guess people just want that 'Gibson' logo on the top.. Or maybe they get this feel in your gut when you're really in love when they play them... 

A well made Gibson is a GREAT guitar, there is no doubt about it. Would I ever buy one? No, all the 1000&#8364; models I've tried have not been that great, and I can't see myself spending even more money on a Gibson when there are other guitars I'd rather have.
I do love the Les Paul shape though, but I can't play it for shit.. I guess it might be Gibsons strange fingerboards that I have troubles with on the higher frets.
Don't ask me why, a Fender is fine, and other guitars too but it's something about them Gibson fingerboards.. Might be the radius or something....


----------



## SnowfaLL (Jul 2, 2010)

The reason Carvin's resale value is so low is because their price in general is so low. Why would you buy a used carvin for $800 when you can spend $200 more and get your exact specs? Thats the only reason, its not that they are not worth more, its just people realize you can get a brand new one for so cheap, theres no point buying someones used seconds for a bit lower than that..

And Carvin is a semi-custom shop, you order the specs you want, so theoretically you should plan on keeping it for a long time instead of planning on selling it afew months after.. Sure, you can go spend $2 grand on a basic gibson that looks like everyone elses, or you can spend that money on a Carvin that is YOUR guitar; Everything you want.

Resale value is such a stupid excuse for not getting a Carvin.. unless you know you will be selling it in 2 months anyways.. But eh, if thats the only knock people can come up with for Carvin because they are so damn amazing playing and sound wise, I guess thats better than other things.

(for relation to the thread, people like Max who said they've played tons of gibsons with no issues and only 2 carvins with issues.. I can say the exact opposite; Ive tried at least 40+ gibsons in random stores and from the "gibson fanboys" who even had like some rare 70's Les Pauls and stuff, and ive never been impressed with hardly any of them. Some had some major quality issues like frets sticking out the sides, binding cracking, etc etc. As for Carvin, My DC727 that came from JJ/Ibzorange/etc, even having its neck cracked and a huge crack going thru to the control cavity (due to previous owner abusing it), its stayed in tune for MONTHS with a floyd. Its unreal.)


----------



## budda (Jul 2, 2010)

Everyone will have their stories 

Gibson is no more overpriced then PRS and Ibanez. Carvin cut out the middle man, so you save a few hundred. If Carvin operated differently, they'd be $3K too . "Ridiculously overpriced" can be said about SO many products ranging from guitars to cars to washers and dryers, people. There's people that need to get paid. That and there is an upcharge for a recognizeable name - why do you think Hyundais cost less then comparable Hondas?

I would take a custom made guitar with Gibson specs over a CS Gibson or Supreme model. I would also spend $2000 on a les paul custom because it's been my dream guitar for the last 4 years.. I'm privileged to be playing one these days.

For some people, Gibson just works. I'm one of those people. Give me 3 LP studios and I'm a happy camper. Or give me a custom hand-built singlecut with Gibson styling, and I'm a little happier


----------



## Murmel (Jul 2, 2010)

budda said:


> I would also spend $2000 on a les paul custom because it's been my dream guitar for the last 4 years.. I'm privileged to be playing one these days.


I'm so with you on this point, that's the only Gibson I could see myself owning, a black Gibson LP Custom with gold hardware. I almost came when I first saw one.


----------



## budda (Jul 2, 2010)

I'll buy one. Used. In fact, I will be.

But I want the guy who built tweaked LP to build me another, this time I'm choosing the top. It's a PRS/Gibson/ESP blend, and it kicked ass.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 2, 2010)

NickCormier said:


> The reason Carvin's resale value is so low is because their price in general is so low. Why would you buy a used carvin for $800 when you can spend $200 more and get your exact specs? Thats the only reason, its not that they are not worth more, its just people realize you can get a brand new one for so cheap, theres no point buying someones used seconds for a bit lower than that..
> 
> And Carvin is a semi-custom shop, you order the specs you want, so theoretically you should plan on keeping it for a long time instead of planning on selling it afew months after.. Sure, you can go spend $2 grand on a basic gibson that looks like everyone elses, or you can spend that money on a Carvin that is YOUR guitar; Everything you want.
> 
> ...



Well, the stripped hardware and paint flaws weren't exactly driving home the "quality point" too well. 

Also, for whatever reason, you cannot say that if you ever do sell (and judging by the HUNDREDS of Carvins which sell quite regularly on eBay, CL, and even here they do wind up being sold, regardless of picking out the specs ) you won't get fleeced. It's just how it is. I wasn't saying it as something negative towards Carvin, but simply something to consider, just like warranties, added accessories, etc. Those little BS things, that in a perfect world you shouldn't have to consider. Wake up man, we live on Earth. 

So of the 40+ Gibsons you've played (None of witch you actually owned, not a dig. Owning something, and playing something second hand (and in the case of those 70's Gibsons, who knows how many hands, is a completely different experience.) the gross majority of them had flaws as "serious" as sharp fret ends (a 10 minute fix with a file) and cracked binding? None of these issues were at all related to the guitar being decades old? The great majority of brand new and professionally set up Gibsons you have recently played have had significant issues?


----------



## Zugster (Jul 2, 2010)

My Gibson SG is something special. But then its a 61 reissue that I got used for a fair price and I modded the hell out of it.

I've played some Carvins recently when I went to CA and made a point of visiting one of their shops. I really loved the feel and playability of their CT6. Ebony board with stainless steel frets. I would pick it over just about any Les Paul in a heartbeat.

There are a number of guitar makers offering far better quality, inovation and bang for the buck than Gibson. Carvin is just one of them.


----------



## Zugster (Jul 2, 2010)

Murmel said:


> I'm so with you on this point, that's the only Gibson I could see myself owning, a black Gibson LP Custom with gold hardware. I almost came when I first saw one.


 
I have an Orville LP just like that.  Made in Japan, licensed by Gibson. I upgraded all the bridge hardware to Tonepros and dropped a set of painkillers in it. The only thing about this guitar that isn't better than Gibson is the finish, which is poly, not nitro. Very sweet guitar.


----------



## Duke318 (Jul 2, 2010)

I know a guy who spent $3000 on a les paul. What boggles my mind is why wouldn't you just go custom shop and get something made with your exact specs.


----------



## walleye (Jul 3, 2010)

Duke318 said:


> I know a guy who spent $3000 on a les paul. What boggles my mind is why wouldn't you just go custom shop and get something made with your exact specs.



not everyone is a member of a guitar forum where they are influenced beyond belief as to what "specs" they like by their "peers". some guitar players prefer to pick up a guitar and see if they like it, ignorant of the specs. in fact, that method is the more common and much more sensible.


----------



## hypermagic (Jul 3, 2010)

People play and buy whats right to them, be it a Carvin or Gibson.
Yes, there are problems with how Gibson is running itself currently, but that does not mean the whole legacy gets cause to be automatically labled as "Shit". Unfortunately the economy is in such a way that companies are going to do whatever the fuck they can to make bank, (Lax QC, Price Inflation, etc...) that's just a sign of the times. Is this unfair to the consumer? Yeah, but people vote with their wallets, and if Gibson is smart enough to realize this they may very well clean up their act. Carvin is a great brand too, I dont think I gas for anything as hard as I gas for a Holdsworth. 

I wouldn't say no to either but I'd get something more _bang for my buck_ before shelling out massive cash for Gibson's good stuff.


----------



## maxoom (Jul 3, 2010)

I have owned only the higher end Gibson Customs.I only have Carvins in my collection at this time. I prefer the Carvins unless style of say a SG or LP is important to you. Only fault I can say about the Carvins is the electronics are cheaper but that is easy to upgrade as I have done with 
all four of my Carvin guitars the bass with actives I have left alone.
Bang for the buck with quality being better Carvin wins by a landslide.


----------



## SnowfaLL (Jul 3, 2010)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Well, the stripped hardware and paint flaws weren't exactly driving home the "quality point" too well.
> 
> Also, for whatever reason, you cannot say that if you ever do sell (and judging by the HUNDREDS of Carvins which sell quite regularly on eBay, CL, and even here they do wind up being sold, regardless of picking out the specs ) you won't get fleeced. It's just how it is. I wasn't saying it as something negative towards Carvin, but simply something to consider, just like warranties, added accessories, etc. Those little BS things, that in a perfect world you shouldn't have to consider. Wake up man, we live on Earth.
> 
> So of the 40+ Gibsons you've played (None of witch you actually owned, not a dig. Owning something, and playing something second hand (and in the case of those 70's Gibsons, who knows how many hands, is a completely different experience.) the gross majority of them had flaws as "serious" as sharp fret ends (a 10 minute fix with a file) and cracked binding? None of these issues were at all related to the guitar being decades old? The great majority of brand new and professionally set up Gibsons you have recently played have had significant issues?



The Gibsons that had those issues WERE the brand new ones, in stores. Theres always significant issues with at least one gibson on the wall at any given store. The 70s one was alright, but definitely not worth the $7000 pricetag or whatever those "vintage" les pauls go for. I'd say at least 50% of the Gibsons (Brand new) are not worth spending more than getting an Agile AL-3000.

Anyways, point of the matter is, You can spend an outrageous amount of money on a Gibson, if you want the name on your headstock, or you can spend ~1300-1600 on a super decked out Carvin exactly how you want it, knowing the quality will always be top notch, and if there does happen to be something wrong with it (very VERY unlikely), they will take care of it.. So unless you just want the name on your headstock, I dont see any reason why to go with Gibson over a Carvin..


----------



## kherman (Jul 3, 2010)

Brand Loyalty is sooooo overrated. 







That being said.
I actually don't care what the headstock says.
If it plays, feels and sounds good to me.
It's a good guitar.












Diodati 59Q, Edwards Sykes LPC, Diodati 58, Fernandes Ravelle Deluxe.


----------



## Murmel (Jul 3, 2010)

Zugster said:


> I have an Orville LP just like that. Made in Japan, licensed by Gibson. I upgraded all the bridge hardware to Tonepros and dropped a set of painkillers in it. The only thing about this guitar that isn't better than Gibson is the finish, which is poly, not nitro. Very sweet guitar.


Yeah, I know that there are alot of Gibson copies that are awesome, we got this brand Bach a guy here sells, it's from the Czech Republic I think, don't know where they're made though. But they're actually very good quality for being a cheap guitar.
I actually have a Bach sevenstring on order right now, it should be here next week.

This is one of the reasons I wish I lived in Japan, ESPs Edwards line is absolutely gorgeous! 
Other reasons include food, women and awesome culture and by being Asian you're automatically awesome


----------



## Cancer (Jul 3, 2010)

NickCormier said:


> Anyways, point of the matter is, You can spend an outrageous amount of money on a Gibson, if you want the name on your headstock.....




and you'll get a guitar covered with housepaint, like this gem currently doing time in GC:






I played this guitar at GC Towson. It plays nice, has a Kahler, and is very much the Flying V experience...but it covered in (what looks like) white housepaint. FAIL.


----------



## Murmel (Jul 3, 2010)

As far as I can see that bitch doesn't even have a locking nut... I might be wrong though, hard to tell. Luckily it has a Kahler so it'll get back in tune if you dump the bar, but that's just annoying.

Gibson fail yet again.


----------



## PnKnG (Jul 3, 2010)

Murmel said:


> Yeah, I know that there are alot of Gibson copies that are awesome, we got this brand Bach a guy here sells, it's from the Czech Republic I think, don't know where they're made though. But they're actually very good quality for being a cheap guitar.
> I actually have a Bach sevenstring on order right now, it should be here next week.
> 
> This is one of the reasons I wish I lived in Japan, ESPs Edwards line is absolutely gorgeous!
> Other reasons include food, women and awesome culture and by being Asian you're automatically awesome



Helges Håla?



Murmel said:


> As far as I can see that bitch doesn't even have a locking nut... I might be wrong though, hard to tell. Luckily it has a Kahler so it'll get back in tune if you dump the bar, but that's just annoying.
> 
> Gibson fail yet again.



Haven't looked up any specs but I would guess it could have locking tuners. That way it wouldn't need a locking nut.


----------



## Andromalia (Jul 3, 2010)

Murmel said:


> As far as I can see that bitch doesn't even have a locking nut... I might be wrong though, hard to tell. Luckily it has a Kahler so it'll get back in tune if you dump the bar, but that's just annoying.
> 
> Gibson fail yet again.



I've played on a floyd guitar without locking nut for years (Ok, it had a locking nut, I just ended up losing the screws and not replacing them  ) . Not all people use their tremolo like crazy, and good tuners make a difference.


----------



## Rashputin (Jul 3, 2010)

Isan said:


> yes .... yes they are





Carvins are up there man. Comparing Gibson to Carvin is like comparing a Ford Taurus to uhm....something better than a Taurus... doh... 

Anyway. Carvins are awsome. So many more options than on a Gibson. Better quality, better craftsmanship (even though they use cnc machines), better sounding, better playing. Better everything.


----------



## That_One_Person (Jul 3, 2010)

Cancer said:


> and you'll get a guitar covered with housepaint, like this gem currently doing time in GC:
> 
> 
> 
> I played this guitar at GC Towson. It plays nice, has a Kahler, and is very much the Flying V experience...but it covered in (what looks like) white housepaint. FAIL.


 
I saw one of those at a Guitar Center along with the Explorer counterpart. They were both marked down to $1100, which was kind of odd considering there was a regular white explorer at its price of $1400.


----------



## Andromalia (Jul 3, 2010)

Tribal Vs and Explorers are cheaper than good ol' 79s at Thomann too, no clue why.


----------



## Murmel (Jul 3, 2010)

PnKnG said:


> Helges Håla?
> 
> 
> 
> Haven't looked up any specs but I would guess it could have locking tuners. That way it wouldn't need a locking nut.



Nope, Edgaraudio, it's an internet based store but they do have them at Helges Håla aswell.

And there is a guy on youtube who bought a Gibson Explorer with a Kahler, no locking but and locking tuners, he did a review on it. They barely helped at all if he did stuff like divebombs etc. And by just bending the string it went out of tune. If you only use subtle stuff with the tremolo then locking tuners might be enough.

Edit: The youtube embedding wont work.. Here's a link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS3AJuRl5F4


----------



## Duraesu (Jul 3, 2010)

Murmel said:


> And there is a guy on youtube who bought a Gibson Explorer with a Kahler, no locking but and locking tuners, he did a review on it. *They barely helped at all if he did stuff like divebombs etc. And by just bending the string it went out of tune. *If you only use subtle stuff with the tremolo then locking tuners might be enough.
> 
> [/URL]




that is what is called... bad setup. People like Mark Tremonti and Malmsteen use vintage trems and locking tuners, and they abuse it sometimes and they dont go out of tune! chris broderick also uses trem with just locking tuners and it also does not go out of tune. Its all a matter of setup and string stretching.


----------



## Murmel (Jul 3, 2010)

_velkan said:


> that is what is called... bad setup. People like Mark Tremonti and Malmsteen use vintage trems and locking tuners, and they abuse it sometimes and they dont go out of tune! chris broderick also uses trem with just locking tuners and it also does not go out of tune. Its all a matter of setup and string stretching.


I think this guy knows how to set up his guitars fairly well as he's done it for decades.
But I'm not gonna argue about this, IMO: A guitar with a floating bridge without a locking nut is retarded.

And it's common knowledge that those Fender style trems don't stay in tune very well, I don't know how those keep them in tune but every single one I've tried has been awful. Hendrix used a Fender tremolo, his guitar went out of tune all the time because of that.

And I've read an interview with broderick asking why he doesn't have a locking nut. He said that he doesn't need one because he only uses it very subtely. (<-- spelling) And by subtle I mean small vibratos etc.


----------



## potatohead (Jul 3, 2010)

If anyone has watched the Blood in the Water Megadeth DVD, Broderick does not use the trem once in that entire show. I am not real familiar with Nevermore when he played with them, so I am not sure how much trem use they require. The locking tuners don't really help more than a regular tuner, they can still turn, they just lock the string into the tuner post rather than having to wrap it. I personally would always want a locking nut, I have an archtop Soloist that I can completely wail on doing the most retarded shit and the thing just will not go out of tune. It is actually a little bit comical. 

Back on topic, I have a Carvin on order and I am a big fan of their stuff. I really don't have much experience at all with Gibson because they just do nothing at all for me whatsoever. My only issue with Carvin is the 25" scale on neck thrus, but I think I am becoming more of a bolt on guy anyway. I do not care about resale simply because I wouldn't buy a guitar without full intention of keeping it, and you have the ten day trial if you don't like it anyway. Someone did hit the nail on the head earlier, resale isn't as good simply because you can spend a bit more and get exactly what you want. Also as far as Carvin QC dropping, it's not so much the actual quality of the guitars, but they seem to be having a wrong option here or there, which is weird. I spend a good bit of time on the Carvin forums and it's not all that common really, but it does happen.


----------



## Edika (Jul 3, 2010)

I don't want to steer of the conversation in this thread but I would like to ask why do most people think that the Carvin pup's suck? Is it particular pickup models or is this a general opinion for all Carvin pickups?

I would like to share my experience with Carvin pickups. Since I am not a professional musician (but have studied music for some years) and not that rich my experience with guitars and different kind of pickups is limited. My measure of comparison is my ears when hearing an instrument in person and comparing it with guitars that happened to come by, that where owned by friends. I own a Carvin DC400 with the classic C22B and C22J humbuckers and a DC747 with the C26 humbuckers and P12 single coil. The Carvin DC400 sonically slays. When the fishman bridge is activated there is some extra humming but the cleans are amazing. When using the humbuckers without the active circuitry they sound very high output and articulate at the same time. They complement the woods of the guitar. I put it side by side with a soloist with the Duncans JB and 59 and was shocked that the soloist sounded so crappy (and I am a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiig soloist fanboy). I also tested it with a BC Rich equipped with the EMG 81/85 set and thought that the BC Rich had a problem with it's electrics because it sounded really really weak. In single coil mode the pickups sound like very good single coils without being very noisy.

The pickups in the DC747 don't have the same output but have a wide frequency response and are also clear and articulate. Ok the bridge pickup could have been a bit better and a bit more clear for the B string but does the job very well. If you don't play the more extreme genres of metal it can do very very well.

I haven't heard in person all these cool pickups I see in this site like Lundgrens, Bareknuckles, Bill Lawrence, Kent Armstrongs and many other. And I didn't have the pleasure to play and compare with 7 string guitars with dimarzio's, duncans active or passive. 

But from what I have heard so far I can't accept this notion I keep reading in this and other forums that Carvin pickups are an immediate swap and especially for the DC400. I would like to read some of thoughts from people that have had experience with Carvin guitars, what didn't satisfy them in the sound of the instrument and for what kind of music, which model of Carvin pickups they replaced with what and what kind of improvement they heard after a pickup swap on their instrument.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 3, 2010)

Anyone know where I can get hold of a fairly cheap Carvin 7 string hardtail in the UK? WIth piezos if possible. I really like the look of them but don't want to shell out a grand on a new one etc. Thought I'd ask here instead of making a new thread.


----------



## Esp Griffyn (Jul 3, 2010)

vampiregenocide said:


> Anyone know where I can get hold of a fairly cheap Carvin 7 string hardtail in the UK? WIth piezos if possible. I really like the look of them but don't want to shell out a grand on a new one etc. Thought I'd ask here instead of making a new thread.



It will cost a lot more than a grand to get a new one in the UK unfortunately, I know from experience


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 3, 2010)

Esp Griffyn said:


> It will cost a lot more than a grand to get a new one in the UK unfortunately, I know from experience


 
For the loss.  Sticking with Ibanez for now then I guess.


----------



## SnowfaLL (Jul 3, 2010)

vampiregenocide said:


> Anyone know where I can get hold of a fairly cheap Carvin 7 string hardtail in the UK? WIth piezos if possible. I really like the look of them but don't want to shell out a grand on a new one etc. Thought I'd ask here instead of making a new thread.



Carvin doesnt offer piezo on their 7 strings, so you'll have to do that mod yourself. Find a used Carvin 7 then buy the graphtech saddles/setup


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jul 3, 2010)

NickCormier said:


> Carvin doesnt offer piezo on their 7 strings, so you'll have to do that mod yourself. Find a used Carvin 7 then buy the graphtech saddles/setup


 
Ah fair dooze I'd seen a few of em about so I assumed it was an available spec.


----------



## Edika (Jul 4, 2010)

NickCormier said:


> Carvin doesnt offer piezo on their 7 strings, so you'll have to do that mod yourself. Find a used Carvin 7 then buy the graphtech saddles/setup



They offer piezo on the DC727 model. But it is the fishman acoustic piezo.


----------



## Rashputin (Jul 4, 2010)

Edika said:


> I don't want to steer of the conversation in this thread but I would like to ask why do most people think that the Carvin pup's suck? Is it particular pickup models or is this a general opinion for all Carvin pickups?
> 
> I would like to share my experience with Carvin pickups. Since I am not a professional musician (but have studied music for some years) and not that rich my experience with guitars and different kind of pickups is limited. My measure of comparison is my ears when hearing an instrument in person and comparing it with guitars that happened to come by, that where owned by friends. I own a Carvin DC400 with the classic C22B and C22J humbuckers and a DC747 with the C26 humbuckers and P12 single coil. The Carvin DC400 sonically slays. When the fishman bridge is activated there is some extra humming but the cleans are amazing. When using the humbuckers without the active circuitry they sound very high output and articulate at the same time. They complement the woods of the guitar. I put it side by side with a soloist with the Duncans JB and 59 and was shocked that the soloist sounded so crappy (and I am a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiig soloist fanboy). I also tested it with a BC Rich equipped with the EMG 81/85 set and thought that the BC Rich had a problem with it's electrics because it sounded really really weak. In single coil mode the pickups sound like very good single coils without being very noisy.
> 
> ...



My Carvin DC727 came with the stock C26 buckers. I actually agree with you 100%. They sounded really really good. Very organic and warm sounding pickups that would be awsome for most types of rock, jazz or metal. I did however miss some "omph" from the bridge pickup. My guitar was almost entirely made from koa also, so the sound got a bit boomy with a bit too much low end with the stock pickups. I put some BKP Painkillers in there, and the guitar is now perfect for me in every way.

Here is my beast (pre bkp):






So yeah, I dont understand why people say that Carvin pickups suck. THey don't. But they are not suited for the thightest of djents.. That being said, I'd use them for pretty much anything else. In a swamp ash or alder Carvin the C26 pickups are great.


----------



## Duraesu (Jul 4, 2010)

Murmel said:


> I think this guy knows how to set up his guitars fairly
> 
> And it's common knowledge that those Fender style trems don't stay in tune very well, I don't know how those keep them in tune but every single one I've tried has been awful. Hendrix used a Fender tremolo, his guitar went out of tune all the time because of that.




sorry again for the off-topic but people who say that fender style trems dont stay in tune should watch this and feel enlightened lol



this guy know is sh*t!!


----------



## Murmel (Jul 4, 2010)

_velkan said:


> sorry again for the off-topic but people who say that fender style trems dont stay in tune should watch this and feel enlightened lol
> 
> 
> 
> this guy know is sh*t!!



I don't feel the least enlightened, he didn't do a single pull-up with the tremolo only dives. And in the end, when he bends, it goes out of tune so he has to dump the bar.
I'm not the least impressed.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Jul 4, 2010)

Hey guys, is red better than blue?


----------



## kherman (Jul 4, 2010)

Edika said:


> They offer piezo on the DC727 model. But it is the fishman acoustic piezo.



Incorrect.

Carvin does offer the active preamp module that's used with the DC400s for the DC727.
But, do not offer the Fishman piezo upgrade for the DC727.

There was a petition on the forum for it.

But, I think that petition has been buried quite a few pages back.

Same with offering recessed TOM for the 7s.


----------



## Duraesu (Jul 4, 2010)

Murmel said:


> I don't feel the least enlightened, he didn't do a single pull-up with the tremolo only dives. And in the end, when he bends, it goes out of tune so he has to dump the bar.
> I'm not the least impressed.





maybe because you cant pull up a fender style trem? 


anyway, the guy has more videos explaining stuff that most people dont know or talk without having a clue. enjoy!


----------



## Murmel (Jul 4, 2010)

_velkan said:


> maybe because you cant pull up a fender style trem?
> 
> 
> anyway, the guy has more videos explaining stuff that most people dont know or talk without having a clue. enjoy!


I could do pulls with my buddies Fender tremolo. It just doesn't have much range, it barely has any range.
And if it goes out of tune from a bend, then that means that it doesn't have good tuning stability. You can like having such a tremolo, I despise them.


----------



## Edika (Jul 4, 2010)

kherman said:


> Incorrect.
> 
> Carvin does offer the active preamp module that's used with the DC400s for the DC727.
> But, do not offer the Fishman piezo upgrade for the DC727.
> ...



My mistake then and thanks for the correction! I thought that since they offer the preamp module they would also include the fishman piezo. Would be nice though!


----------



## Edika (Jul 4, 2010)

Rashputin said:


> My Carvin DC727 came with the stock C26 buckers. I actually agree with you 100%. They sounded really really good. Very organic and warm sounding pickups that would be awsome for most types of rock, jazz or metal. I did however miss some "omph" from the bridge pickup. My guitar was almost entirely made from koa also, so the sound got a bit boomy with a bit too much low end with the stock pickups. I put some BKP Painkillers in there, and the guitar is now perfect for me in every way.
> 
> Here is my beast (pre bkp):
> 
> ...



It looks awesome! I am sure it sounds massive! Did you have to route a lot the pickup cavities to fit the Bareknuckles? 

I agree with you about the bridge pup, it does lack a bit of punch but would do very very well for a non metal, or non extreme metal player. But the DC400 classic C22B pup is very very hot and tight pup.


----------



## Ravelle17 (Jul 5, 2010)

My Carvin CS4 is the best guitar I've ever played. It's built flawlessly and has just about any feature I could want from an axe. It does NOT get that legendary Les Paul sound...and *I'm okay with that.* Not everyone may be, but I am. Rather than that one-or-two use (yet oh so wonderful) thick tone, my Carvin offers far more clarity and a tad less output than a traditional LP. It's much more versatile - especially with coil taps, and with some EQ and gain finagling I can get an absurd amount of sounds from it. 

And yes, I've got to say that modern Gibsons are garbage. Terrible QC = terrible instruments. I've found that Gibsons from the '90s back are pretty great, though.


----------



## crankyrayhanky (Jul 6, 2010)

somebody said Apples & Oranges, right on....

Gibson's flat out rule in my world, but I like the cheap copies too...in fact, if you try a bunch of Epiphones out, you may find one better than a random Gibson. Usually QC is better the more you spend, but $ does not always equal inspiration. I have a $275 guitar that I enjoy as much or even more than my more pricey axes. The key is to find the axe that speaks to you. (Lol, I just over $400 in upgrades on that axe)

Carvin's features are impressive, but generally a bright guitar. Gibson is overpriced but generally a thick rock machine...plus I love the 24 3/4, Carvin does not offer that.


----------



## Rashputin (Jul 6, 2010)

Edika said:


> It looks awesome! I am sure it sounds massive! Did you have to route a lot the pickup cavities to fit the Bareknuckles?
> 
> I agree with you about the bridge pup, it does lack a bit of punch but would do very very well for a non metal, or non extreme metal player. But the DC400 classic C22B pup is very very hot and tight pup.



Thanks: ) The picture is really dark. It has a nice DTS quilt top with blackburst, but you can't really see it in the poor lighting. You can see it a bit better in this one:






I wish Carvin made their six strings in 25,5" scale as well. The bolt on one (C66) is nice as all hell, but it doesnt have 24 frets. I'm basically a fan of neck thru guitars and I always want my guitars to have exactly the specs I want. Carvin makes the 727 100% perfect imo, but they dont have a six string that I currently want. I'm building a Warmoth V next (also with BKP). I'll post an NGD thread once I get the parts. Only have the Sperzels for it so far...

I havent tried the C22B pickup. I'll be sure to order that in the bridge if I order a six string. I'd probably end up with the DC400 Premium one as well. That thing is the sex. I hope they come out with one in 25,5" and I'm all over it.

Oh, crap. Edit: I forgot to answer about the routing. Yes, my tech had to rout a tiny tiny amount in the top of the cavity to fit the base plate of the Painkillers. You literally can't see it unless you put your nose right up to the strings and stare at it..haha. No really; its pretty much invisible and makes no difference sound wise or as far as looks. Its just a few millimeters to fit the top screw. I'm sure its possible to file down the actual pickup base plate as well though, but as I said the routing expansion needed is so small its hardly anything to worry about at all.


----------



## SnowfaLL (Jul 6, 2010)

well.. the DC127 is everything exact as the DC727, except 25", not really a big difference imo


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 6, 2010)

Murmel said:


> I could do pulls with my buddies Fender tremolo. It just doesn't have much range, it barely has any range.
> And if it goes out of tune from a bend, then that means that it doesn't have good tuning stability. You can like having such a tremolo, I despise them.



Fender trems are not designed for pull-ups, they can be rigged to do so, but in theory they are meant to be dive only. It takes a neck shim, and some work, but it is very doable. 

As for the trem going out of tune, it NOTHING to do with the bridge. Tuning issues like that on non-locking systems come from the nut, and more specifically, the string binding in the nut. 

A properly set-up Vintage/Fender style unit will work perfectly, and keep incredible tuning stability as long as the bridge pivot bolts (for 6-screw style) or trem posts are well maintained and the nut is properly cut and lubed.

Another factor is the strings. A set of Fender "Bullet" strings will reduce ball end movement on extreme dives, and thus improve stability further.


----------



## Zugster (Jul 6, 2010)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Fender trems are not designed for pull-ups, they can be rigged to do so, but in theory they are meant to be dive only. It takes a neck shim, and some work, but it is very doable.
> 
> As for the trem going out of tune, it NOTHING to do with the bridge. Tuning issues like that on non-locking systems come from the nut, and more specifically, the string binding in the nut.
> 
> ...


 
True, but I take exception the last part. I don't think the bullet ends offer much if any improvement. Also, IMO at least, Fender strings suck badly. They sound lifeless and dull within a week. Almost any other brand is preferrable. I happen to like D'Addarios.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 6, 2010)

Zugster said:


> True, but I take exception the last part. I don't think the bullet ends offer much if any improvement. Also, IMO at least, Fender strings suck badly. They sound lifeless and dull within a week. Almost any other brand is preferrable. I happen to like D'Addarios.



I'm not a huge fan of the strings themselves, but on some of the Fender/Vintage trems I've seen the holes in the block for the strings are highly enlarged, with a flat part where they make contact to the ball end. The ball ends of the strings can move and shift in these (which are typically found on lower-end bridges) especially when you dive the part, and I've even seen them wedge the ball end out of the string.

For the record, I prefer D'Addario as well, love them in fact. So I agree with you for the most part, but depending on the trem in question, the bullet strings can help if you're planning on doing a lot of trem work on a Fender/Vintage bridge.


----------



## Edika (Jul 6, 2010)

Rashputin said:


> Thanks: ) The picture is really dark. It has a nice DTS quilt top with blackburst, but you can't really see it in the poor lighting. You can see it a bit better in this one:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The quilt is freaking awesome, but Carvin makes very beautiful guitars. I am sure it looks magnificent in person.

It would be nice if they made a 25.5" 6 string but the 25" is not that bad. You get a little crammed up in the higher frets but it's like playing a PRS but with no neck heel. There is also the M22SD (super distortion) which should be the highest output pickup they offer. If the C22B has this output I wonder what that one will sound like.

Thanks for the info about the pickup cavity. I am thinking of replacing the bridge pup with a bareknuckle warpig and wouldn't want to take any drastic measures.


----------



## jbcrazy (Jul 8, 2010)

Played and owned both at some point or another. I am not a fan of either...  Haha. I think the great examples of both brands are pretty comparable.

Carvin makes some nice looking guitars but their pickups/electronics aren't up to snub. Gibson... eh. Other makers make much nicer guitars although Carvin seems great for the price range. 

Gibson you're paying for the history of those guitars.. and that's about it as far as I am concerned. I think the Les Paul is one of the overrated guitar designs ever. And the "nice ones" cost more than a custom made instrument. 

... It's all opinion of course. Anyway.... "Is Carvin better than Gibson?" ... Play both and find out.  Me? I'll take Carvin's prices. You're defintely not taking a step down from a Gibson IMO.


----------



## GibsonVGuy (Jan 7, 2012)

*mod edit: check the thread date before responding, this is over a year old and your comment added nothing new to the discussion*


----------

