TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Interesting. His post had attachment 152122, which doesn't work, and yours has attachment 152123, which does work (obviously). Are you saying you can also see the other one (still)? Maybe even after closing your browser program completely (all tabs and everything)? It really doesn't matter at this point, just curious is all.here:
The answer is infinity. They've never read the HH's Guide.From a pure math standpoint the answer has to be 0, pi, 42 or infinity.
well, maybe the 42 isn't from the math house...
Interesting. His post had attachment 152122, which doesn't work, and yours has attachment 152123, which does work (obviously). Are you saying you can also see the other one (still)? Maybe even after closing your browser program completely (all tabs and everything)? It really doesn't matter at this point, just curious is all.
I played a Mike Lull he had in stuck and really liked it but it felt more like playing a Fender then a Sadowsky. Also, I notice that the join neck/body was not as tight and a couple of other things about aesthetics that was not as top notch as a Sadowsky NYC. Things that would not affect sound but none the less, it was noticeable.
I think I would still like to own one of Mike Lull's basses but if I have $2300 to spend, I think I would go with a Metro.
In fact, my current Lull I find much better than the Metro I just had.
Makes sense, and per the above comment on 'ringing truer', while I'm sure it is subtle, less glue and fewer seams would seem to always be a good thing in instrument construction.
"one piece vs two piece ash bodies"
If you can tell that diff between otherwise same make and model, consistently, blindfolded, I'll be the first one to buy you a sixpack of your preference.

+1, but I'm Canadian, so the beer'll be better.