I have the Clarion NASB in black calf split leather. The leather is firm, the binding is solid, and has plain gold page edges. While the goat and calf editions are more stylish and luxurious, the calf split is minimalist and practical. In any binding of the Clarion, the real hero is the excellent paper quality, dark text, large readable font, line matching, single column, references on the outside, and plenty of white space. For me, it is THE ultimate bible.
For anyone watching this & considering getting an ESV Clarion, a correction to something Matt says: the “guts” of these 3 Bibles is *NOT* the same. Only the goatskin uses the 2016 text of the ESV; the others have the 2011 text; they will be updated once Cambridge runs out of stock. What’s more, the goatskin uses 28gsm paper, while the paper in the calfskin and calf split is 27gsm. That might not seem like much, but it makes a visible difference. (My wife has the goatskin; I have the calf split.) One other note: the line matching in both the calfskin and calf split is off in some 40+ pages (at least). That, combined with the thinner paper, makes it harder to read for someone with weaker eyes.
Wondering if anyone can confirm this? the 28GSM and 2016 text on the newer goatskins? I've seen it mentioned a couple times, but most Clarion reviews don't cover it. I'm trying to decide between the PSQ and Clarion and these were some the negatives for the Clarion. Would be great to know they've been addressed.
@@JoshDurston I spoke with a Cambridge rep who gave me this information. Called them after getting the calf-split thinking the inside was the exact same as the goatskin and finding them noticeably different. For the most up-to-date info, I'd recommend calling them.
This what Cambridge emailed me: Not a straightforward question to answer. In theory we do not use different paper for different bindings where the Clarion is concerned. We aim to use the best and most consistent paper that is available. Put simply we print a number of sheets for a particular translation of the edition and those sheets are used without distinction across all the binding styles (calfsplit, calfskin, goatskin etc.) However things can become more complicated over time when we might be forced to change a paper, due to non-availability or a change in the mill’s specifications.* This can sometimes mean that a new printing of a translation may use a slightly different paper than a previous printing and although we would aim to use the new printing across all binding styles, there still may be residual stock in the market place using the previous paper. But generally speaking we do not deliberately differentiate by the binding style. Hope that is useful.
I received the KJV Clarion yesterday and it's my favorite out of all the other Bibles i own. I'm planning to buy the KJV Concord as well. Thank you for the review brother.
GREAT review!! Thanks so much. I was very impressed how you demonstrated the "looseness" of how each of the bibles slide. That helped me make my decision.
Love the video. I have the Calfskin Clarion ESV and my experience is about the same with the lack of stability in the bible. I feel like it slouches in the hand a little to much. I almost wish I went for either the goatskin or the calf-split. It also feels a little to soft for me. I'm actually having a cover made for it so that I don't damage the leather to easily; something I'm not concerned with when it comes to my Calf-Split Pitt Minion ESV and my Goatskin Wide Margin NASB; both of which feel like tanks.
I live near Cambridge and I went into the shop and tried them all out. Many examples had spines that bent the wrong way! A book spine should be straight or rounded outwards, not rounded inwards. Weird, concave spines. Chose a brown Calfskin in the end that was at least flat. The black calf split does have gold edges, but not the pink
@@tingowealeans5712 No it probably won't ever get floppy like the goatskin since the calfsplit is glued to cardboard. But it opens flat, stays open, and is a hard-wearing, durable cover.
I have the nasb wide margin in the calf split. I think it feels studier because the leather is so stiff and thick. I figure I will have it rebound in a nicer leather whenever the current binding gives out, but I think it will last me at least several years.
I imagine that a thicker paper would result in a heavier Bible. People would need to weigh the value of those two factors for themselves. there definitely is a little bit of “ghosting” with the thin paper, but I’m very pleased with the weight and size of this Bible. I was so pleased with my secondhand purchase of a Cambridge Clarion Reference Bible. It made the goat skin binding (without anything printed on the front of it!) affordable for me, and it is such a pleasure to handle - It smells good, is light to carry, so flexible, and there is never any need to hold the book open while I take notes! It just lays there, open to whatever page I choose 🤗!
I don't believe that the movement in the binding is a result of the paste-down vs the edgelined, rather it's the calfskin as compared to the other two. I own a calfskin edge-lined LPUT and it does the exact same thing, even though it IS edgelined.
I like my goatskin NASB pitt minion. It’s broken in nicely and is my everyday carry. I’m thinking of upgrading to a clarion. I don’t mind the paste down on my Pitt but debating calfskin or goatskin for my clarion. The only drawback to the goatskin for me is the lack of embossing Holy Bible on the cover. I kind of like that look. 😊
The Calf Split is a really nice and high quality bible...make no mistake about it. So, if it's the only one you can afford, go ahead, you will not be dissapointed..!!
0:07- he’s confusing “Astrological “ with “Astronomical “. The difference is astrological is based on the greek and roman mythologies, and astronomical is studying the heavens and planets. Hope this helps.
Yes..... In our time astronomy is used to push false cosmologies that compete with biblical narrative, and many celestial bodies are named after pagan gods.
From all my research, most premium Bibles use around 28 gsm paper which the Clarion also uses. The Pitt Minion uses the same paper. Am I missing something? Everyone complains about the Clarion paper but not Pitt Minion, yet they are the same gsm...any suggestions for Bibles with heavier paper?
I have the ESV Clarion in calf split, while my wife has the same one in goatskin. Hers has the 2016 ESV text, mine the 2011. There are VERY NOTICEABLE differences in the paper quality, darkness of the text, and quality of the line matching. In all three cases, my wife’s goatskin is far superior. In fact, the text is quite “gray” in some areas of the calf split, and the line matching so off, that reading except in certain angles is almost impossible. No such problems at all with the goatskin. (The maps in the back are different, too; my older calf split has Moody Bible Atlas maps while the goatskin uses Cambridge/Oxford maps.) The publication page in her goatskin says the paper is from France; no such note is indicated in the older calf split. I wonder if this is something that will be changed when the new calf split with the 2016 ESV text is released. Because , sadly, the calf split - mine, at least - is so difficult to read.
This what Cambridge emailed me: Not a straightforward question to answer. In theory we do not use different paper for different bindings where the Clarion is concerned. We aim to use the best and most consistent paper that is available. Put simply we print a number of sheets for a particular translation of the edition and those sheets are used without distinction across all the binding styles (calfsplit, calfskin, goatskin etc.) However things can become more complicated over time when we might be forced to change a paper, due to non-availability or a change in the mill’s specifications.* This can sometimes mean that a new printing of a translation may use a slightly different paper than a previous printing and although we would aim to use the new printing across all binding styles, there still may be residual stock in the market place using the previous paper. But generally speaking we do not deliberately differentiate by the binding style. Hope that is useful.
I would really like a video that would explain ones preference for ESV over NASB. I see you like the ESV. Or, at least a video of why one prefers the pronouns of Jesus or God in smaller case letters. I have read some of the ESV and I have a hard time with them not being capped. Picky I know. I do understand that aren't capped in the most reliable manuscripts. Also, preferences of black letter or red letter. Thank you.
NASB is superior. The ancient Greek translations are second to none. The only thing the ESV had going for it was the English prose flowed smoother. However the NASB had an update where it took away the ESV edge in smoothness. Get the NASB.
Juan Morales I think I’d have to agree with you on the NASB over ESV. I read a bit of both, and personally prefer the NASB. I have the 1995 version, and it reads very smooth. If that helps any. “He” when referring to God, or any word like that referring to God is always capped, so you know who’s talking. The text and the way it reads, I felt was more “to the point” I guess? Hard to explain. And also I find the NASB to mostly always be Red Letter where finding a red letter version of ESV is rare for some reason, atleast in my experience.
I have owned and used the Goatskin edition for over 3 yrs. It has held up super well and I would highly recommend it.
I have the Clarion NASB in black calf split leather. The leather is firm, the binding is solid, and has plain gold page edges. While the goat and calf editions are more stylish and luxurious, the calf split is minimalist and practical. In any binding of the Clarion, the real hero is the excellent paper quality, dark text, large readable font, line matching, single column, references on the outside, and plenty of white space. For me, it is THE ultimate bible.
It has a paste down - inexcusable
Radical a good paste down can last quite a long time. Edge linking simply moves the weak point of the binding over by a page or so.
I was gifted the calf split in NKJV and it has red over gold guilting. Is this an option or is mine a rarity?
For anyone watching this & considering getting an ESV Clarion, a correction to something Matt says: the “guts” of these 3 Bibles is *NOT* the same. Only the goatskin uses the 2016 text of the ESV; the others have the 2011 text; they will be updated once Cambridge runs out of stock. What’s more, the goatskin uses 28gsm paper, while the paper in the calfskin and calf split is 27gsm. That might not seem like much, but it makes a visible difference. (My wife has the goatskin; I have the calf split.) One other note: the line matching in both the calfskin and calf split is off in some 40+ pages (at least). That, combined with the thinner paper, makes it harder to read for someone with weaker eyes.
Wondering if anyone can confirm this? the 28GSM and 2016 text on the newer goatskins? I've seen it mentioned a couple times, but most Clarion reviews don't cover it. I'm trying to decide between the PSQ and Clarion and these were some the negatives for the Clarion. Would be great to know they've been addressed.
@@JoshDurston I spoke with a Cambridge rep who gave me this information. Called them after getting the calf-split thinking the inside was the exact same as the goatskin and finding them noticeably different. For the most up-to-date info, I'd recommend calling them.
Is this paper issue still present
This what Cambridge emailed me:
Not a straightforward question to answer.
In theory we do not use different paper for different bindings where the Clarion is concerned. We aim to use the best and most consistent paper that is available. Put simply we print a number of sheets for a particular translation of the edition and those sheets are used without distinction across all the binding styles (calfsplit, calfskin, goatskin etc.) However things can become more complicated over time when we might be forced to change a paper, due to non-availability or a change in the mill’s specifications.* This can sometimes mean that a new printing of a translation may use a slightly different paper than a previous printing and although we would aim to use the new printing across all binding styles, there still may be residual stock in the market place using the previous paper. But generally speaking we do not deliberately differentiate by the binding style.
Hope that is useful.
I received the KJV Clarion yesterday and it's my favorite out of all the other Bibles i own. I'm planning to buy the KJV Concord as well. Thank you for the review brother.
GREAT review!! Thanks so much. I was very impressed how you demonstrated the "looseness" of how each of the bibles slide. That helped me make my decision.
I just picked up a second hand calf split and its a beauty!
Love the video. I have the Calfskin Clarion ESV and my experience is about the same with the lack of stability in the bible. I feel like it slouches in the hand a little to much. I almost wish I went for either the goatskin or the calf-split. It also feels a little to soft for me. I'm actually having a cover made for it so that I don't damage the leather to easily; something I'm not concerned with when it comes to my Calf-Split Pitt Minion ESV and my Goatskin Wide Margin NASB; both of which feel like tanks.
I live near Cambridge and I went into the shop and tried them all out. Many examples had spines that bent the wrong way! A book spine should be straight or rounded outwards, not rounded inwards. Weird, concave spines. Chose a brown Calfskin in the end that was at least flat.
The black calf split does have gold edges, but not the pink
The calfsplit wears in quite well. I've read from my NKJV Wide Margin in calfsplit basically daily for 6 months and it has broken in nicely.
is it nice a floppy?
@@tingowealeans5712 No it probably won't ever get floppy like the goatskin since the calfsplit is glued to cardboard. But it opens flat, stays open, and is a hard-wearing, durable cover.
I have the nasb wide margin in the calf split. I think it feels studier because the leather is so stiff and thick. I figure I will have it rebound in a nicer leather whenever the current binding gives out, but I think it will last me at least several years.
I imagine that a thicker paper would result in a heavier Bible. People would need to weigh the value of those two factors for themselves. there definitely is a little bit of “ghosting” with the thin paper, but I’m very pleased with the weight and size of this Bible. I was so pleased with my secondhand purchase of a Cambridge Clarion Reference Bible. It made the goat skin binding (without anything printed on the front of it!) affordable for me, and it is such a pleasure to handle - It smells good, is light to carry, so flexible, and there is never any need to hold the book open while I take notes! It just lays there, open to whatever page I choose 🤗!
I don't believe that the movement in the binding is a result of the paste-down vs the edgelined, rather it's the calfskin as compared to the other two. I own a calfskin edge-lined LPUT and it does the exact same thing, even though it IS edgelined.
I like my goatskin NASB pitt minion. It’s broken in nicely and is my everyday carry. I’m thinking of upgrading to a clarion. I don’t mind the paste down on my Pitt but debating calfskin or goatskin for my clarion. The only drawback to the goatskin for me is the lack of embossing Holy Bible on the cover. I kind of like that look. 😊
The Calf Split is a really nice and high quality bible...make no mistake about it. So, if it's the only one you can afford, go ahead, you will not be dissapointed..!!
That calf-split looks like a prime candidate for a rebind!
0:07- he’s confusing “Astrological “ with “Astronomical “. The difference is astrological is based on the greek and roman mythologies, and astronomical is studying the heavens and planets. Hope this helps.
Yes.....
In our time astronomy is used to push false cosmologies that compete with biblical narrative, and many celestial bodies are named after pagan gods.
Great info. Thank you
From all my research, most premium Bibles use around 28 gsm paper which the Clarion also uses. The Pitt Minion uses the same paper. Am I missing something? Everyone complains about the Clarion paper but not Pitt Minion, yet they are the same gsm...any suggestions for Bibles with heavier paper?
I have the ESV Clarion in calf split, while my wife has the same one in goatskin. Hers has the 2016 ESV text, mine the 2011. There are VERY NOTICEABLE differences in the paper quality, darkness of the text, and quality of the line matching. In all three cases, my wife’s goatskin is far superior. In fact, the text is quite “gray” in some areas of the calf split, and the line matching so off, that reading except in certain angles is almost impossible. No such problems at all with the goatskin. (The maps in the back are different, too; my older calf split has Moody Bible Atlas maps while the goatskin uses Cambridge/Oxford maps.) The publication page in her goatskin says the paper is from France; no such note is indicated in the older calf split. I wonder if this is something that will be changed when the new calf split with the 2016 ESV text is released. Because , sadly, the calf split - mine, at least - is so difficult to read.
interesting thanks for the information
This what Cambridge emailed me:
Not a straightforward question to answer.
In theory we do not use different paper for different bindings where the Clarion is concerned. We aim to use the best and most consistent paper that is available. Put simply we print a number of sheets for a particular translation of the edition and those sheets are used without distinction across all the binding styles (calfsplit, calfskin, goatskin etc.) However things can become more complicated over time when we might be forced to change a paper, due to non-availability or a change in the mill’s specifications.* This can sometimes mean that a new printing of a translation may use a slightly different paper than a previous printing and although we would aim to use the new printing across all binding styles, there still may be residual stock in the market place using the previous paper. But generally speaking we do not deliberately differentiate by the binding style.
Hope that is useful.
U like the Clarion better than the Pitt Minion?
To the grave I will always maintained the Clarions are the best blocks ever produced
What do the tabs in the front of your Bible mean?
Carson Michael I use them to mark places I am reading or sermon texts etc.
I know the goatskin is black letter. Are the other two? I find red letter text harder to read
I was just gifted the calf split in NKJV and there are no red letters in the gospels
All Clarions are black letters
I would really like a video that would explain ones preference for ESV over NASB. I see you like the ESV. Or, at least a video of why one prefers the pronouns of Jesus or God in smaller case letters. I have read some of the ESV and I have a hard time with them not being capped. Picky I know. I do understand that aren't capped in the most reliable manuscripts. Also, preferences of black letter or red letter. Thank you.
NASB is superior. The ancient Greek translations are second to none. The only thing the ESV had going for it was the English prose flowed smoother. However the NASB had an update where it took away the ESV edge in smoothness. Get the NASB.
Juan Morales I think I’d have to agree with you on the NASB over ESV. I read a bit of both, and personally prefer the NASB. I have the 1995 version, and it reads very smooth. If that helps any. “He” when referring to God, or any word like that referring to God is always capped, so you know who’s talking. The text and the way it reads, I felt was more “to the point” I guess? Hard to explain. And also I find the NASB to mostly always be Red Letter where finding a red letter version of ESV is rare for some reason, atleast in my experience.
NKJV > NASB
One ribbon eh?
Fooled me too!
😂
Looks like 2 ribbons to me
Looks like two ribbons to me
A total solar eclipse is an ASTRONOMICAL event, not an ASTROLOGICAL event. Just sayin'.
Terrible synthetic liner for a premium bible! Leather or never!
I tend to agree but they are durable bibles all the same...