G&L L-2500 vs Lakland 55-01

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by BeaverBass94, Jan 9, 2012.


  1. BeaverBass94

    BeaverBass94

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    So I thought I had made a decision on the Lakland then the G&L popped it's head up. What are your opinions on these, which would be a better, more versatile guitar and which would you pick.
    Thanks
     
  2. scubaduba

    scubaduba Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Location:
    Michigan
    Between the 55-01 and L2500 my vote would be the L2500. Those MFD pups are aggressive and loud. Sounds awesome passive.

    If you were talking about the 55-02 vs L2500 it would be a different story with my vote going for the 55-02 by a tiny margin.
     
  3. Ken Baker

    Ken Baker

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    Location:
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    I have one of each, and both have been modified with the Lakland much more heavily so.

    The G&L, for all of its mods (but NOT the pickups!), is still VERY much a G&L. Classic G&L tone and great G&L feel.

    The Bartolini electronics in the Lakland are long gone, replaced with Nordstrand and Aguilar.

    Which is more versatile? The L-2500, hands down. Even unmodified. Coil switching, active/passive that leaves EQ working when passive, and a responsiveness to touch that is legendary. And that G&L tone.

    This doesn't mean that the 55-01 isn't a good bass - it is. It's just way different.

    Play both as much as you can before you make your decision. One will fire your rocket. Hell, maybe they BOTH will.

    Ken...
     
  4. Johnny Alien

    Johnny Alien

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2003
    Location:
    Harrisburg, PA, USA
    US L-2500? If so then G&L all the way.
     
  5. Register to disable this ad
  6. BeaverBass94

    BeaverBass94

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    No the Tribute.
    Not too sure, still love the Lakland to be honest. I'll have to take a few more days deciding haha
    thanks everyone
     
  7. mmbongo

    mmbongo Chicken Pot Pie. My three favorite things!! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, South Carolina
    Keep in mind that the G&L has narrow string spacing and 34" scale, while the Lakland has normal (wider) string spacing and 35" scale. Two totally different animals right there. If you get the Lakland, plan to replace the pickups and preamp. I sold my G&L a while back and have a 5501 on the way now..I like the wider spacing and 35" scale better. Let's just hope it sounds as massive as the G&L.
     
  8. ric stave

    ric stave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    I've had 5 Laklands - (4) 55-01's and (1) 55-02 - the 55-01's were 1)stock with upgraded Bart preamp, 2)stock, 3)stock pre with Nordstrand Big Singles, and 4)completely stock. I love the feel and playability of them, the 35" scale did not bother me at all, the spacing IS wider than on my L-2500's, but felt just as good playing.

    But I always ended up selling one of them over my L-2500.....

    Just MY opinion.

    And I'm betting I'll own another Lakland 55-0? in the near future.......
     
  9. fourstringbliss

    fourstringbliss Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    I'd say go with the G&L and I can walk you through modifying the electronics to have tons of options. I took out the preamp and now each of my pickups have their own parallel, outer single, series switch and the push/pull volume allows be to toggle between the stock series setting and the fabled OMG mode - all without changing the look of my bass.
     
  10. Chef

    Chef Moderator Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Media:
    1
    Location:
    Columbia MO
    Disclosures:
    Staff Reviewer; Bass Gear Magazine
    Wow; talk about two very different basses;
    both in how they sound
    and ergonomically.

    That these are your two choices makes me think you've played neither, and that you ought to.

    I've owned several version of both, and would not think of these as interchangeable.
     
  11. CertifiedLurker

    CertifiedLurker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Location:
    MD
    While I prefer the G&L I think it would boil down to if you want to be able to blend the volume between the two pickups. You can on the Lakland, but not with a stock L2500.
     
  12. Chef

    Chef Moderator Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Media:
    1
    Location:
    Columbia MO
    Disclosures:
    Staff Reviewer; Bass Gear Magazine
    "boils down to blend"

    I disagree.
    34" vs 35" scale.
    Narrow versus wide string spacing.
    Very mid forward gritty older school tone versus very big lows, very glassy highs, very modern sound.
     
  13. pbass2

    pbass2 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    FWIW I owned a Trib L2500 and a US. I liked the Trib so much I bought a US that was the exact same finish, etc.
    Frankly, to me, they sounded almost identical, and both felt great. The neck WAS different though--my Trib had a rounder, more C-shape neck than the US.
    Ultimately, while they sounded darn near the same, the US did win on the fit 'n finish and hardware (but not by much!)

    I miss 'em both--I just never use a fiver so they had to go, but one day I will own one again . . .

    EDIT: oh yeah, possibly the most ergonomic/comfy Fender-style bass I have ever played . ..
     
  14. fourstringbliss

    fourstringbliss Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Not really. The "blend" on the 5501 is passive so you still just get the three main tones.
     
  15. chadhargis

    chadhargis Jack of all grooves, master of none Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    I owned a G&L L-2500 (US) and I also own a Lakland 55-02.

    I LOVED the G&L. Ergonomically, it was a far better fit for me. I loved the neck.

    I fell on some hard times, and had to part with one of the fivers. In my opinion, it was an easy choice. I was going to part with the Lakland. I sought council from others...all voted for me to keep the G&L.

    Then I decided to put the two through a comprehensive test. I played both back to back. Played with the pickup configs (both the Lakland and G&L had coil switching options). Tweaked tone controls (or EQ settings in the case of the Lakie). Recorded both basses playing over the same song.

    In the end, I kept the 55-02. Tonally, it was more diverse. The active electronics on the Lakland sounded MUCH better than the active mode on the G&L. The passive mode on the G&L smoked the Lakland.

    The EQ on the Lakland gives you a lot more options in the end. If you set both basses flat, the G&L just whips the Lakland's butt. But learn to tweak the Lakland and you will be rewarded.

    The G&L was designed to sound like....well....a G&L. It's unique. The Lakland was designed to sound like a P, J, or MM...and it cops pretty good impressions of each. You can even find a video from Lakland that compares the 55-02 with each of the basses it attempts to copy.

    To sum it up, if you like simple "plug and play" basses and dig the passive vibe...go G&L. If you want a "jack of all trades" and don't mind doing some knob twisting to get the tone you want, the the Lakland is the ticket.
     
  16. lovenotfear

    lovenotfear

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    G&L hands down!!!! 55-01 is just ok, unless you mod it, now if it was a 55-02 that would be a different story!!
     
  17. Fair Warning

    Fair Warning Deliverin' the Goods! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    I too am looking at the same comparisons. Since I have grown used to closer strings, and 35's do slow me down, I am going with a G&L USA. Also, to be able to get a real USA G&L for the same price as a Skyline...that seals the deal.
     

Share This Page