1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Double humbucker MM vs G&L anyone?

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by dgce, Mar 29, 2006.

  1. dgce


    Jun 17, 2001
    Massachusetts, USA
    Okay, has anyone tried a 2 humbucker Stingray back to back with a new G&L (preferable 5 string models)? I'm dying to know how either size up. I'm a G&L man but I've had a look at a few new HH SRs on the Bass Northwest website and wow!-- I'm smitten.

    What's the scoop? Anyone?
  2. Make a run to a local Guitar Center, they have the dual-humbucker MM's in stock. I've seen'em but have yet to pick one up, as the local Guitar Center has'em on an elevated fixture so you have to summon a worker to get'em down to check out.
  3. dgce


    Jun 17, 2001
    Massachusetts, USA
    Oh believe me, I intend on doing so! However the nearest GC is over an hour away and I can usually only wing it on a weekend. Needless to say EVERY weekend day I've ever been in that GC the place has been mobbed with mind-splitting chug chug chug detuned guitarists (for lack of a better word) making the experience a drag. So I figured I'd check in with TB figuring that somebody on here much have had a taste test. Still, there's no beating experiencing it for yrself. Sooner or later I'll pack some earplugs and haul my butt to Connecticut to GC.
  4. Detuning is cooler than you. CGDGBE is one of my favorite tunings atm.
  5. dgce


    Jun 17, 2001
    Massachusetts, USA
    You seemed to have missed my point, sir.
  6. brothernewt

    brothernewt Some people call me the stormtrooper of love...

    Apr 13, 2004
    Happyrock, OR
    I have a friend that calls those chug chug detuned bands "cookie monster" bands 'cause all the singers sound like the cookie monster (think about it for a minute!).

    Ok here's my input based on really limited tests (many done at gc while being drowned out by cookie monsters). I'm a stingray guy, I've played a handful of G&L's and never found one I like as much as most stingrays I've played. On paper the G&L is a winner, it's built every bit as well, it has more options, but it just never sounds "it" for me. The second H on the SR just widens that gap...
  7. I think that the winner has got to be Music Man. G&Ls do sound great, but the body is huge and uncomfortable to sit with, they are heavy, the head stock is ugly... Just the FEEL of the G&Ls is off. The Music Mans are much better balanced, are lighter, but only by a little, and I like the feel of the necks. The tone of the G&L will be better, but only by a very small amount, and that little amount isnt worth putting up with all of the cosmetic flaws of the G&L, plus you can buy some Nordstrand pickups and a better preamp later on if you do want a better sound.
  8. Mojo-Man


    Feb 11, 2003
    I was at GC last week and played the new HH musicman stingray.
    I dug the dual pickups, nice tones.
    I liked the sound of this bass.
    On the down side, I thought the musicman was made cheaper than older musicmans.
    What I mean is, lower quality wood, feel of bass felt cheaper.
    Finish, fit, construction just felt off.
    I played three new musicman they had, all felt off, less quality than past.
    Not as well made as older 70's and 80's musicmans.
    It's sad to see musicman following fender in this trend.

    Also play a new L2000.
    It also had dual pickups, sounded good.
    But to me , construction of bass was better than musicman.
    I due not own a Musicman or G & L bass at the moment.
    But based, on playing these two. I would buy the G & L.
  9. bovinehost

    bovinehost Supporting Member

    Dec 5, 2002
    Endorsing Artist: Ernie Ball Music Man/Sterling By Music Man
    Cheaper? Lower quality wood? Hardly. QC has gotten better at the factory over the years and they've always been very picky about wood selection. While everyone has an opinion and you're certainly welcome to yours, my opinion is that you've fallen prey to the "Older Has To Be Better" syndrome.

    The only sad thing is knowing that there are people who actually believe this. The people who make all the decisions at EBMM are players, not bean counters or management experts. They play the instruments. So they're hardly in danger of "following Fender" in any way imaginable.

    I've owned numerous Stingrays, Sterlings, Stingray 5s and now Bongos. I'd put the quality of any modern-era EBMM bass up against the spotty QC of the 70s any old day...and I owned more than a few of those, too.
  10. ras1983


    Dec 28, 2004
    Sydney, Australia
    I played a pre-eb SR4 at the basscentre the other week, and i was actually quite dissapointed. it was a nice bass, but i had been led to believe by several posts over the last year that pre-eb SR's were better than EBMM's. no way man, i didn't like the 2 band eq and its effect on the tone. i'll take an EBMM anyday.

    (i'll also take a pre-eb and hang it on the wall).
  11. Mojo-Man


    Feb 11, 2003
    I stand by my post.
    I also owned a 2003 Sterling, and a 2004 Stingray 5.
    That were better made than the 2006 musicmans I played last week.
    I don't believe older is better, I believe better is better.
    To each his own.
    P.S. the Bongo's I played last week were better made than the Stingrays???
  12. pickles

    pickles Gold Supporting Member

    Mar 23, 2000
    Ventura, CA
    I had both at the same time for a while, liked both a lot, but still have the musicman. Both were 5ers. Both played and sounded great, so note that I'm splitting hairs by comparing them.

    MM: feels sleeker and more refined. neck is less chunky and has no glossy finish... this bass feels great. Body feels nicer. Body to string rise is smaller, and more natural for me. Tone is smoother, more polished, with clearer more transparent highs. More modern sounding.

    G&L: chunky feel with a P-bass vibe. Wierd preamp that I thought sounded best in passive mode. Big, thick, and rich tone. Not polite. Highs are on the ganky, snarly side. More vintage sounding, and LOUD pickups.

    I can't fault anything about the construction on either one.
  13. kazuhank


    Nov 12, 2002
    Portland, OR
    This whole QC issue is a bit off topic but I've noticed something too...

    Now, I may be crazy, but I've noticed a difference between 90s EBMMs and the newer EBMMs. I own a '92 and '94 Stingray and they both have the non-beveled (or sharp-edged) polepieces, and to me (or to my ears anyway) the 90s EBMMs sound more aggressive than their newer counterparts.

    Before Jack flames me, I'm not making a QC comment, just an observation on a change in SOUND. I have never owned a newer EBMM Stingray (save an SR5 that i kept for about 2 weeks), so I haven't had the opportunity to swap out the strings and setup to my liking, but in the store the new Stingray's never have quite the same sound as my 90s models. Seeing as the different pickup (and bridge w/mutes which shouldn't make a diff) is the only real difference, I wonder if it has changed???

    Mind you this is a Stingray 4 specific observation--I can't speak to 2 p/u rays or Bongos.
  14. syciprider

    syciprider Banned

    May 27, 2005
    Inland Empire
    I'm a Musicman fanboy.
  15. Akami

    Akami Four on the floor

    Mar 6, 2005
    The only thing I've noticed I like better about the older MM basses is that I liked the inset neck plate and maple fingerboards that have been played a lot look better. Other than that I'll take either one! :)
  16. dgce


    Jun 17, 2001
    Massachusetts, USA
    I find that I can get pretty slap happy on my G&L when I want to as I'm sure one could do on a MM as well. However, is there much room to romp on a 2 humbucker MM? Also, with the 5 string models, would anyone here say that the string spacing is a bit tighter on the MM than the G&L fivers?


Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.