ever used a Carvin acoustic amp for steel?

Barry Hyman · Post by **Barry Hyman** » 29 Jun 2009 6:48 pm

Have any of you PSG players ever used the acoustic guitar amp made by Carvin for steel? It has 100 watts, very clean sound (no tubes), a 12 inch speaker, two horns, digital effects including very adjustable reverb (type, parameter, and level), bass, mid, and treble eq knobs (where you can dial in the midrange frquency to boost or cut), a five band graphic equalizer, a switch that cuts the mids, a switch that boosts the treble, effects in and out, etc. Plus it is only 36 pounds and costs less than $400! I am borrowing one from one of my students and it seems great for steel.

What is so special about the Peavey Nashville 112? It is heavier, has less power, and costs $700. What makes it so good? Why should I buy it instead of the Carvin?

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 29 Jun 2009 8:03 pm

Most acoustic amps and speaker systems have a response that is too flat for steel and guitar. Electric guitars and steels have lots of highs, and sound harsh with flat response systems. If you notice, guitar and steel amps have a single big speaker that would be considered a woofer in other speaker systems. That naturally causes a big roll-off of the harsh highs. Over the decades that has been the tried-and-true preference. That Carvin seems to have a lot of EQ controls, and it may be possible to roll off the harsh highs those horns give. But you are working against the designed-in flat response of the system. Steel amps are designed with a voice that sounds pretty good if you just set all the EQ controls to their mid points. From there, small tweaks to the controls will give you whatever individual tone you would probably want. Most of us would have a tough time getting that with a flat response system.

This is such a well recognized problem that they make "DI boxes" for situations where you want to run a guitar or steel directly into a PA or recording board (which are flat response systems). Electronics in these boxes roll off the highs to emulate the voice of a guitar speaker.

Mark Eaton · Post by **Mark Eaton** » 29 Jun 2009 8:43 pm

I'll keep this short: I own that Carvin amp, it works okay for steel, but it is obviously not the optimum choice. You can "cancel" the tweeter which is necessary for good acoustic guitar tone, and by doing so it will be better for steel guitar.

And I have plugged various steels into it. You could do a lot worse.

Barry Hyman · Post by **Barry Hyman** » 30 Jun 2009 5:34 am

Actually, I have played steel since the seventies through my Music Man 210-65 tube amp (two ten inch speakers; 65 watts) and have always loved it, as long as the tone controls were set low (bass five, mids three, treble three, brite switch and deep switch off) to minimize distortion. It is in the shop, so I have been toying with the idea of buying something else, but, after reading another post in this section on tube amps, I'll stick with what I've got. I just wanted to hear someone tell me what the Peavey Nashville mystique is all about...

Nathan Golub · Post by **Nathan Golub** » 30 Jun 2009 7:33 am

Hi Barry, I own a couple NV112's now. There's not much mystique about them. I like them because they're light-weight, loud enough to cut through a band 95% of the time and they sound good for psg with minimal tweaking of the controls. They're pretty easy to find used around or under $400, and new between 400 & 500. There are definitely many options out there for steel amps, so the NV112 isn't the only/best amp. But in terms of an affordable work-horse, it's a very good amp.

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 30 Jun 2009 9:04 am

The popular appeal of the NV112 is that it is voiced to give the popular Peavey solid-state steel tone up to moderate volumes in a smaller, lighter, less expensive package. The higher power of the big SS steel amps is less necessary these days, because amps are so often miked through the PA. The aging steeler population was happy to find they could get by nicely with a smaller, lighter amp. On occassions when more volume is needed, some people prefer to bring two NV112s instead of a single big, heavy combo.

For people who were never thrilled with the sterile, characterless SS steel amp tone, there is no mystique or appeal for the NV112. Now, if you could get the tone and close to the volume of a Twin Reverb in a smaller, lighter package, you would get a line forming from the other half of the aging steeler population.

Jim Peters · Post by **Jim Peters** » 30 Jun 2009 1:30 pm

DD, I really enjoy your posts, but your characterization "the sterile, characterless SS steel amp tone" is just a little too opinionated. The NV 112 has a very sweet and mildly compressed tone that is all its own, which is one of the reasons so many steelers like it. The NV112 does not have a sterile characterless tone at all.

Last year I did a Gram Parsons tribute show with Brad Sarno and Scott Schwarz, and used Scott's Twin, which he has set up for steel. It sounded very good, but I honestly prefer the sound of my 112. Have you personally tried one?

The NV112 is more than a lighter version of a NV400, or any other SS steel amp, it is easy to underestimate it's tone----and it is super easy to carry! JP

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 30 Jun 2009 3:14 pm

Yeah, completely opinionated. No, I've never tried a NV112, but I have heard them. Nice tone for a solid-state amp, especially considering it has a 12" speaker. But still, not for me. I just prefer tube tone, in spite of the hassles. $:\$

I agree not all SS steel amps sound the same. The NV112 seems to be an improvement over the NV1000. But I'll bet few players of the old Sessions would consider it an improvement in anything but weight.

Scott Appleton · Post by **Scott Appleton** » 30 Jun 2009 4:27 pm

the NV 400 has a better bottom end than a twin rev, sounds great with the mods.
better I think than a vibrosonic, a vibrasonic, a NV 112 or just about any other combo amp.
I love the clear bottom end of the NV 400 .. It ain't all that heavy anyway.
2 nv112 would be just as much trouble.. the Sarno pre with the split 15
is lite and has the punch in the low end .. looks like the best of two worlds.
Enough power to hear the low end.. plus sweet highs.
Now sometimes I play both a NV 400 and a vibrosonic with a JBL .. that is
a sweet combo .. .. what a great sound .. smooth mids and highs with plenty of warmth plus clear lows .. I don't know what can beat that..

c c johnson · Post by **c c johnson** » 1 Jul 2009 2:37 am

yes. In the 60s I had a Carvin amp and a carvin steel. Great tone in any situation. Again, acting like an idiot, I believed other people telling me other brands were better. Get something you like and stick with it. cc

Ellis Miller · Post by **Ellis Miller** » 1 Jul 2009 6:39 am

Carvin has recently changed their service policy to a "flat rate" system. In short, if you need service on a Carvin product after the warranty expires you will be charged a flat rate for the repair regardless of what is wrong with it. IMHO, these flat rates are pretty expensive.

I would suggest anyone considering a Carvin product review this policy. Here is a link to the flat rate/exchange page.

http://www.carvinservice.com/crg/service.php

Wayne Douglas · Post by **Wayne Douglas** » 2 Jul 2009 9:17 am

Barry,my NV400 has developed an intermitent "pop",which I haven't discovered the source of yet,so I plugged into the Carvin.It sounds just fine with the EQ set to my style.I bought it to run my Taylor acustic elec. thru and have an input for my mic. Another reason was to have a versitile amp that was a little smaller and lighter than the NV400 but there really isn't much difference IMO.I don't understand that just because I put on weight my equipment does too!

The Steel Guitar Forum

ever used a Carvin acoustic amp for steel?

ever used a Carvin acoustic amp for steel?

interesting, thanks

nv 112 and the nv 400

Carvin AG100D