Guitar Gear Forum

So I was bored at work, and came across a brand new listing for a Carvin V220, but with no price mentioned. I find it extremely annoying when people can't be bothered to list a price, but I sent a message anyway asking how much. Turns out, much cheaper than I expected. So I tell the guy I can meet him after work. When he shows up he tells me that there's a couple of things that he didn't notice about the guitar and that he's going to drop the price. Uh, okay. So now I have this old Carvin with a few bumps and bruises, no strings, a Kahler Pro, but missing the locking nut. Still has the original Carvin pickups. It has the old Carvin logo, so I assume it must be an early one, however I can't find a serial number anywhere. Anyone know anything about these things? What's a reasonable price for one of these?

https://imgur.com/gallery/wyx0WFW

I’m ld carvins are expensive now. I should’ve gotten one before the keisel thing happened.

People are asking $2k for these guitars now hut they're not moving at all so who knows what the market value is these days.
Before the pandemic they were selling for 900-1200, which seems more reasonable to me

I found a Kiesel/Carvin identification chart. With the old logo, Kahler Pro, and Schaller tuners, this would be from 1984-86.
She's an old girl, and by the condition of the frets, I'd say she's barely been played.

I paid $400 Canadian. So that's probably about $300 real money.

i bought mine about 20 years ago, i kinda stopped playing it for 15 years when my band broke up but i recently put a X500xl in it and its once again my best playing and now best sounding guitars i have. these shot up a ton in price lately

RaceU4her wrote:i bought mine about 20 years ago, i kinda stopped playing it for 15 years when my band broke up but i recently put a X500xl in it and its once again my best playing and now best sounding guitars i have. these shot up a ton in price lately

Sweet! Do you know what year yours is? I've read that the serial number should be either on the fretboard or on the jack plate. Mine is not.

Here's a couple of pictures if I can figure out how to make them work.

Damn, looks extra badass with the murdered out hardware! Hell of a deal!

Fierce axe, hope it sounds as good as it looks!

VTM wrote:Fierce axe, hope it sounds as good as it looks!

I haven't played it through a proper amp yet. I strung it up late last night with 10-52s, and plugged it into the little toy amp that the seller gave me with the guitar. As it came with no strings, I fully expected it to require an extensive setup, but I was pleasantly surprised. Once I tuned it up, it plays really well, and is even intonated pretty well. I've never tried a guitar with these Carvin pickups before, so I don't know if they're any good. I won't hesitate to replace them if need be.

that was my 14 year old dream guitar ... always went through the Carvin catalog designing a custom guitar i would never be able to afford with my paper route money

nice score!

The Carvin pickups are neither good nor terrible, they're just... there. I'd change them for sure.

Try to scrape some of the paint off inside one of the cavities and try to see what wood this guitar is made of.

It was common for Carvin to make these guitars in all maple neck and body with an ebony fretboard. Which is super bright and would need warm sounding pickups. But obviously with Carvin, the customer could choose the wood, if it was a custom order.

But if this is an "in stock" factory build, is most likely all maple. In that case, I'd suggest a pickup with big low end like the Super 3 or Tone Zone in the bridge.

If it's mahogany or alder etc then it's much easier. But I had a DC100 from the same era and that guitar was solid maple and extremely difficult to balance out. I actually ended up giving up on it lol

GuitarBilly wrote:The Carvin pickups are neither good nor terrible, they're just... there. I'd change them for sure.

Try to scrape some of the paint off inside one of the cavities and try to see what wood this guitar is made of.

It was common for Carvin to make these guitars in all maple neck and body with an ebony fretboard. Which is super bright and would need warm sounding pickups. But obviously with Carvin, the customer could choose the wood, if it was a custom order.

But if this is an "in stock" factory build, is most likely all maple. In that case, I'd suggest a pickup with big low end like the Super 3 or Tone Zone in the bridge.

If it's mahogany or alder etc then it's much easier. But I had a DC100 from the same era and that guitar was solid maple and extremely difficult to balance out. I actually ended up giving up on it lol

I'm pretty sure you are right, and it's all maple. That's what the Kiesel/Carvin identification chart points to, and the guitar has some weight to it. It's not a boat anchor, but definitely substantial. My Lado Lazer is also all maple and has always had a SH-5 Custom in it, and it sounds damn good. I'm not sure though, I may go with something with a lower output. I've got a couple dozen pickups laying around that I can try out.

If it's bright, lower output will only make it brighter still in my experience. The only Carvin I had was a CT6. Beautiful guitar that played amazing, Mahogany body and neck, ebony board. It just never had any low end no matter what pickups I put in it. Hence why I sold it. I thinknthe earlier ones like your were much better from what I have heard.

Mike Oxhuge wrote:If it's bright, lower output will only make it brighter still in my experience. The only Carvin I had was a CT6. Beautiful guitar that played amazing, Mahogany body and neck, ebony board. It just never had any low end no matter what pickups I put in it. Hence why I sold it. I think the earlier ones like your were much better from what I have heard.

Correct. PAFs in an all maple Carvin will make it sound like a beginners tele. Go in the opposite direction.

With my old DC100 I got the best results with a set of Duncan Invaders. Which I dislike in nearly every other guitar, but on that one it actually worked well. I was still not completely satisfied with it so I sold it. But it was the closest I got to sounding good. The DiMarzio X2N works well too. But again, go in the opposite direction of PAFs.

And yes, the earlier Carvins were slightly better sounding but not by much. They're a hard guitar to dial in unless you are specifically looking for a thin sound.

Full disclosure, I worked for Carvin before Line 6. I enjoyed it, they treated me well and it was a fun experience. So I like the company and my opinion is biased in favor of them because of it. Some of their amps were cool. I love the Legacy and the X100. But it is what it is. The guitars are well made but sound thin. And I literally played hundreds of them since I worked in their showroom for almost 3 years in the late 90s.

edit: sthis is specifically for all maple Carvins. The other ones are a bit easier, but Carvins tend to be thin/bright overall

ZEEGLER wrote:

RaceU4her wrote:

Sweet! Do you know what year yours is? I've read that the serial number should be either on the fretboard or on the jack plate. Mine is not.

Not sure, I’ll have to look. Does yours have a bass nut and saddles?

The V220 was the flagship of their line for many years.

RaceU4her wrote:

ZEEGLER wrote:

RaceU4her wrote:

Sweet! Do you know what year yours is? I've read that the serial number should be either on the fretboard or on the jack plate. Mine is not.

Not sure, I’ll have to look. Does yours have a bass nut and saddles?

The nut is not brass. Looks to be some kind of black phenolic material. The roller saddles on the Kahler are not brass either.

I played it briefly at low volume through my Roadster last night. Even at low volume it doesn't sound thin at all, and the pickups sound good. I'll give it a try at higher volumes tonight, but I may just leave these pickups in it for now.

ZEEGLER wrote:I played it briefly at low volume through my Roadster last night. Even at low volume it doesn't sound thin at all, and the pickups sound good. I'll give it a try at higher volumes tonight, but I may just leave these pickups in it for now.

One of the things that drew me to Carvin back in the mid-1980s were the pickups, especially the cream ones. To 14 year old me, those pole pieces were srs bidnet.

Love it! \m/

ZEEGLER wrote:I played it briefly at low volume through my Roadster last night. Even at low volume it doesn't sound thin at all, and the pickups sound good. I'll give it a try at higher volumes tonight, but I may just leave these pickups in it for now.

i dont think ive ever read anyone say a carvin has sounded good, like ever lol. i remember questioning mine 20 years ago when i got it cause all i read was how dead they sound and the paint sucks and theres no saving them and all this, i remember being confused cause i thought it sounded fine against whatever other guitars i compared it to other models must not be very good cause if they play and sound as good as my v220 theres no way carvins wouldnt be more popular

congrats!!

Congrats man! Whenever I see those Carvins I get the "We built this city!" song stuck in my head. That dude always rocked them.

Yeah Marty Friedman too, before Megadeth. I wanted one as a kid and still think they look cool. The X220 is cool looking too