Carvin/Cobalt's definition of "solid back" guitars!?

FlashBazbo · #1 02-24-2003, 03:51 PM

Because I own a Carvin electric guitar I sometimes participate on their forum. Recently there has been a Cobalt customer on the Carvin forum asking about the back on his "solid back" Cobalt 7-series. Apparently the back on his guitar is pieced together "like a cutting board" out of dozens of pieces of wood. Since the spec sheet on that guitar says it has a "solid back" and his looks laminated (albeit laminated differently than most laminated backs), he asked when Carvin had changed their specs. A Carvin employee/moderator replied in a way that surprised me.

The Carvin spokesman said the "cutting board" back was, by Carvin's definition, a "solid" back because each individual piece that was glued together went all the way through the back. It is made of dozens of pieces and glued together, but Carvin/Cobalt considers that a "solid" back. Is this definition common in the guitar industry? For me, it's a whole new definition of "solid." I would have been highly ticked if I had bought a "solid" guitar that was so obviously laminated.

Can they use this same definition of "solid" for "solid top" guitars? YIKES!

Any thoughts?

kkrauss · #2 02-24-2003, 04:27 PM

It's safe to say that's certainly not the convention! With some of the more exotic woods, it's common to make three or more piece backs (I've heard of 5, for example), because the wood just can't be found in strips wide enough to make a conventional two-piece book-matched back. Taylor does 3-piece backs some times for this reason (the recent 800-series cocobolo LTD's were three piece). But in these cases, the builder almost always puts an interior strip of this spruce lengthwise down the seam.

Building a guitar back out of 1/2" wide strips that are just butt-joined, or at best stuck together with long mortise and tenon joints (think interlocking cedar fence boards) with the grain running haphazardly just sounds lame to me.

I was just up at Carving last weekend looking at electrics for my son, and I've always been impressed. This sounds way sub-par to me... I'd rather have the laminated back. I doubt if they could hand one of those to a walk-in customer with a straight face.

Here's the original thread:

http://65.112.173.194/cgi-bin/ubbcgi...c;f=1;t=006682

-Kent

FlashBazbo · #3 02-24-2003, 05:13 PM

Kent, I think part of the irony here is that Carvin's electrics are American-made and are of a very high quality. They are among the most consistent, highest quality electric guitars in their price range.

Their Cobalt acoustics, though, are imported and -- if this is any indication -- open to question.

kkrauss · #4 02-25-2003, 09:37 AM

Absolutely! I have a bunch of Carvin gear, and was up at the factory showroom playing their electrics with my son, who has recently developed an interest. I wouldn't mind having one of their electrics myself. I love that you can have a custom guitar built in a couple weeks with the exact options you want at a price that's decent.

But I'd hope that their management is smart enough to realize that their reputation is reflected in every product they sell, and to offer an acoustic guitar that has a back made of 1/2" wide wood strips glued together while at the same time calling it "solid wood" is pretty rediculous. Maybe Carvin was expecting something different from their overseas factory and is working to correct the issue. But to have a Carvin rep join in on their thread and acknowledge that the back of an acoustic that looks like a butcher block meets their definition of "solid wood"... well, let's just say their stock in my book has gone down significantly. I'd rather have the laminate!

-Kent

FlashBazbo · #5 02-25-2003, 10:46 AM

My feelings exactly. I own a Carvin BOLT and I like it a lot -- enough to sell my Gibson Les Paul and ES-135 guitars from lack of use. Still, this "definition" issue leaves a negative taste even if I were considering buying one of their electrics. It has made it a certainty that I won't be shopping one of their acoustics.

Cobalt was one of the two finalists when I bought my first Taylor. They won't be considerred for the list next time.

JohnZ · #6 02-25-2003, 11:02 AM

"The Carvin spokesman said the "cutting board" back was, by Carvin's definition, a "solid" back because each individual piece that was glued together went all the way through the back."

Isn't that how you make a lute?

kkrauss · #7 02-25-2003, 01:49 PM

Heck, if Taylor can have a Pallet Guitar, I suppose Carvin can have a "Chopping Block" guitar. Maybe they should start calling it a "Limited Edition" and double the price.

I find the attitude of the Carvin moderator over on their board pretty condescending and flippant in the referenced thread.

Oh well,

-Kent

Ace43 · #8 02-25-2003, 01:56 PM

Well, it may not be a solid back in the conventional sense but it sure isn't laminated in any sense of that term either. It requires a new description, like cobbled-back.

FlashBazbo · #9 02-25-2003, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ace43
Well, it may not be a solid back in the conventional sense but it sure isn't laminated in any sense of that term either. It requires a new description, like cobbled-back.

It seems to me that they've managed to bring together the disadvantages of both types of construction without any of the benefits of either.

muzz76 · #10 02-27-2003, 07:46 AM

From your description, i'm guessing it the same way Seagull builds many of their guitars and they certainly don't claim them to be solid.

It would qualify to me as being a deceptive business practice because the industry standard of that term isn't what they're delivering.

If I was an owner, i'd certainly feel duped, and they'd be in for some very nasty correspondence.

virtuoso · #11 02-27-2003, 10:32 PM

I suppose I can get technical and say it is solid back, but due to the ridiculous high number of stripes used there must be that much more glue. So not exactly "solid" product, even though the back is technically solid.

Or I can just be like every normal person, and say, that's a load of pigShyt, and there really is nothing solid about making a back from laminating wood the width of binding strips side by side.

The quality of the instruments has nothing to do with where it came from (I don't care if it's made in etheopia as long as it's a good guitar), although there are generalizations about them. But, US or Japan or any country in the world, this is the kind of practice that will eventually run a company out of business.