Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by cosmicpimp2, Nov 14, 2010.
just wondering who prefers what. I like the G&L stuff but haven't had much time on the Lakelands.
Just for the record, it is Lakland, not Lakeland, although it is pronounced like "Lakeland"
Personally, I love Lakland basses. I've had very positive experiences with them. I've owned 6 now, and each one has been great. They have incredible necks and set up very well with the low action I like. I also love the tone I get out of them. I've never been able to bond with a Fender like I have with Lakland basses.
G&L also makes very solid stuff. I like the styling of Lakland more for the most part, but G&L basses are definitely nice. I really like the JB model, but I haven't had a chance to try it. I think for the money, G&L tribute is hard to beat. I think if I could like the looks of L-2000's, JB-2's, etc, I would like G&L more.
I think you'd be happy with either one, but Laklands work for me.
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad and more.
I agree: both brands are excellent, but I definitely favor Laklands. Fantastic workmanship, playability, looks and usable sounds.
I much prefer G&L's from both an ergonomic as well as aesthetic standpoint. Lakland bodies look very oddly proportioned, so much so that I can't get past it and I don't like the necks at all. The quality of both is very high so it ultimately comes down to personal preference.
I would concur with regards to the value of the Tributes. Used G&L Tributes is (generally) between $300 (L-2000) and $400 (L-2500). In my searches, I never found a comparable Lakland for less than $600
All Laklands oddly proportioned? Or just the 55s and 44s? Their jazz basses are the same as jazz basses. The Lakland neck is the best part. They play themselves.
I own a Tribute L-2500, and I've played the Lakland 55-01. Personally, I prefer the G&L. To be fair, I didn't play the Lakland for long. It was comfortable, I just didn't care for the sound.
I would like to try the 55-64 (5 string P) however. I bet I'd like that one.
EDIT: I don't like the price of the Laklands though.
Another difference is the 35" vs 34" scale of their 5-strings, as well as the radically different neck profiles, string spacing and the fact that Laklands have tiny vintage frets, while G&L uses jumbo 6100 frets. All of these factors can make or break a bass playability-wise, depending on what you prefer.
It came down to the pickups for me. My SB-2 with MFDs destroyed my 4-94 with Barts.
I've owned both a Lakland 55-02 and a G&L L2500 Fretless and now own a G&L L2500 Blueburst. Lakland and G&L both make fantastic instruments. You really can't go wrong with either. I really boils down to personal preference.
But since you asked, here's my $.02. The 35" scale of Lakland basses is what I just can't get over. I just don't dig the 35" scale. The G&L's are so much more comfortable for me. G&L's feel nicer strapped on too. Both Lakland and G&L are heavy instruments.
As far as tone goes the Lakland I owned was more "hi-fi" sounding compared to the more "organic" tones of the G&L's. Now that being said, Lakland is by no means considered an out there "hi-fi" instrument but the G&L has more old-school vibe going.
Hands down for me the G&L's are my preference. But that's really personal preference.
Here's some G&L eye candy for you. My blueburst.
Are you asking about a G&L jazz or equivalent compared to a Lakland...? G&L has alot of different models available, alot of which are not really jazz basses. The L2000/2500s are nothing like a jazz bass IMHO (which I have two of and absolutely love). If you are talking about the G&L jazz bass to a Lakland, thats more of an even comparison.
I have owned and played both brands, and currently own a G&L USA L2500 and a Lakland 55-01. I like both, even though they are quite different from each other.
The MFD pu's in the G&L are killer, prob my favorite. My current 55-01 has the stock pu's, and I'm suprised at how good they sound. My 1st Lakland was a stock 55-01, I didn't like it much in my band compared to my G&L (didn't 'cut' through well), but then used it for a theatre show and it was grerat.
The body fits nice, the neck is a dream to play. I have no problem going from the thicker/rounder more closely spaced 34" G&L neck to the flatter/wider 19mm spaced 35" Lakland neck - they both feel good to me.
The Lakland 55-01 and 55-02 series aren't really Jazz basses. Just like the G&L L2000 and L2500 aren't really Jazz basses. Both of these series are probably the most versatile in both brand lines. Although with the split coil option in the Musicman style humbucker on the 55-02 you can get close to a Jazz.
I didn't care for the 44/55 shapes when they were first introduced. I got past that and now love them. Wearing one on my shoulder is what changed my opinion. Very comfy, and the cutaway is fantastic for upper register access. It is one of the best realized bass designs out there IMHO.
I have an exact twin for this. Such an awesome bass.
I had the same thought. I like Lakland basses, but I have never played one that I thought was particularly unique. There's nothing bad to say about the tone, but there's certainly nothing "signature" about it either. I also agree that they feel and play very well. Both they and the G&L jazz basses are simply variations on a theme, IMO. I think with a little effort, you could find a good one with either label on the head stock.
On the other hand, the L series G&Ls are very much of a "signature" bass in my opinion. They are much like an EBMM in that the preamp and PU circuit really defines their unique tone options. I love G&L basses in terms of tone. One of the best recorded sounds I have ever gotten in studio came on my old ash L2500.
The down side to the G&L L series, again IMO, is the feel. Every one I have ever picked up feels "chunky." Most I have tried were relatively heavy. Others that were not actually heavy still had that chunk feel. Of course, if you dig that, then all is different. One man's chunky is another man's funky. That said, if I was doing a lot of rock stuff, I think I'd still have to find another L2500. I like them that much.
I was reading the g&l tribute's have a wider string spacing? how does a L-2000 compare to like a ric (im used to those).
I know the L-2500 is 17.5mm, I don't know the spacing for the the L-2000 off the top of my head though.
The US L-2000 has 2 options for the neck. The wider one (P-type) is the same width as the Tribute neck. The narrower neck is more of a Jazz-type width.
Separate names with a comma.