TOP TEN REASONS G&Ls AREN'T MORE POPULAR
(donning flame-retardant suit)Anyway, these are my honest thoughts no offense intended to the faithful. And I'm no hater, either I'd really like to try an L-2500 (the headstock doohickey looks much better on a 3+2, IMO).
- Lack of a Unique, Original Design a Rick is instantly recognizable from across the room, as is a P, a Jazz, a Stingray, a Steinberger, a Thunderbird, a Wal, a Status, a Hofner, a Burns, a Mosrite, a Danelectro, a Spector, a Corvette, etc, etc. When I see a G&L from a distance, my first thought is "what is that... a Carvin..? A G&L..? A Washburn..? A Dean? A Stingray without a pickguard? A... ???" G&L's most instantly-recognizable, distinctive body style is the ASAT... a TELECASTER GUITAR COPY! All of the other G&Ls lack a unique style they're just kinda... there. To my eye, they're just, well... generic. And dare I say it..? Carvin-y.
- Brand Recognition I think it would have been of great help to G&L if they had chosen one headstock shape, and stuck with it. Brand recognition matters (and I'm sorry, but that pointy little doohickey on the headstock is so blatantly the quickest, laziest, least-inspired way to get around copyright infringement MusicMan did the Fender headstock copyright-dodge better.... Lakland did it better... Sadowsky did it better... cripes, RONDO/SX did it better!).
- Weight All the G&Ls I played (many years ago) were absolute boat anchors maybe they've changed (?), but bad impressions (and back pains) last a long time.
- Too Complex Most basses (at least the ones that sell in the zillions of units) have Volume/Tone or Volume/Volume/Tone. Even the classic active Stingray established itself with only three knobs. Start putting mini-toggle switches on a bass, and people get confused and intimidated it's sad, but true even a cursory glance at the forum reveals this. Give 'em a Jaguar, they start clamoring for schematics!
Want to scare your average bassist? Show him a mini-toggle switch!
- No "trademark" Sound Read any of the threads here, people want "P-Bass thump", "J honk", "Rick clang", "Warwick growl". When was the last time you heard someone ask for a "G&L sound"? IS there even a "G&L sound"? Which leads us to...
- Too Versatile What people don't seem to want is true versatility. Don't believe me? Do a forum search for Wal basses, like I did last night all you'll read are a bunch of complaints from people who couldn't instantly "dial in their tone".
- Unorthodox Colors If G&L offered more traditional colors (Candy Apple Red, Lake Placid Blue), I have no doubt they'd sell more instruments. People like tradition.
- Lack of B&M Vendors I like to try a bass out before I buy it. There aren't enough G&Ls in STORES.
- Lack of Celebrity "star" Players no Jaco, no Entwistle, no Geddy. Granted, this is a really STUPID reason, but no one can deny it's veracity no McCartney = no Hofner. People buy what their idols play. If Flea/Claypool/Fieldy started using G&Ls exclusively, G&Ls would start flying off the shelves.
- Carrots.
I'd probably have bought one, had I been able to actually try one first.
After reading this, I can say that I see some valid points and some logic that is rather "interesting".
As far as the comment about having a recognizable body design, how many basses can really lay claim to that? A very large percentage of what is in the market is (at least) influenced by Fender's original design and is often an outright ripoff. In fact, body designs that are innovative, distinctive, or just unusual often tend to push away more buyers than they lure(for example: MM Bongo, an instrument with a great tonal range but a great number of negative reactions based purely on sight). When you mention the notion of the Stingray as "instantly recognizable from across the room", then later say that, when you see a G&L, you could confuse it for "A Stingray without a pickguard", you offer the strongest possible argument that a Stingray is visually distinctive only because of its rather unusual pickguard. Take that away, and the essence of the body is (say it with me) a P-bass.
With respect to the headstock, I would suggest that the patent infringement territory is now very crowded with all the vendors who have made slight modifications to avoid the wrath of the "Big-F". The "pointy thing" was probably a rather safe choice to avoid not only "Brand-F" but all the other guys who are trying to stay out of the way of "Brand-F".
The arrangement of the tone controls and switches is scary to someone who is used to having two knobs there. For those who are willing to invest the time to learn how to use them, there is significant payback. The versatility is definitely there.
Is there a "trademark" G&L sound? Go play a modern L-2000 or L-2500 and tell me. When I bought my first G&L, I went to the music store considering several brands, none of which were G&L. The owner of the store had just become a G&L dealer and suggested that I play one. I took an L-2500 from the rack, played a while, tried different switch settings, and found myself saying "This is how a bass is supposed to sound". In fact, I bought the L-2500 on the spot. About 2 years later, the lure of "Brand-F" caught up with me and I sold the L-2500 to buy an American Deluxe P-bass V(I grew up playing P-basses and J-basses and hold a love for them to this day.). For about a year, I played the Fender with my band and constantly fiddled with EQ and amps, trying to get a sound that I wanted. "J-bass!" I thought, so the P was sold and I bought an American Deluxe Jazz V. Another year of fiddling with settings and being unhappy with my sound. To make a long story even longer, on a trip to CG I discovered a used L-2500 fretless on the rack. The preamp had failed, so it worked passive only, and I was able to make a pretty good deal on it. I took it to play with my band and found that even in passive mode, the L-2500 cut through the band and sounded much punchier than either of the active "Brand-F" basses. This led me to sell the Jazz and buy a fretted L-2500 to go with the fretless. Now I have no problem getting the tone I want in any song we play, and when I play the bottom 5 tones on my B string, tables and other room furnishings are known to go flying through the air. Again, to me, it's "how a bass is supposed to sound". Trademark? Let your own ears decide.
Both Candy Apple Red and Lake Placid Blue are standard colors in the G&L line. In fact you can find both on dealers' racks today if you look. I dare say the G&L color lineup offers some of the most "traditional" choices possible. Take a look at the G&L web page.
I agree that enlisting a high-profile player might have some merit, as people put an unrealistic amount of stock in that. I'm not one who cares too much for that kind of thing, but I frequently visit a local music dealer where I see the G&L that was played by the late Dee Murray, one of the most musical and solid bassists I have had the pleasure to hear. That, by itself, is good enough for me.
G&L could certainly do a better job in the marketing and distribution ends of their business. It is possible that they don't want to grow to a level that would require an extensive overhaul of their production methods...who knows?
What I do know is that you can't find a better value in a bass and they have a sound that can compete with anything in the price class and many instruments that are twice the price.
Play one with an open mind. You might be surprised.
)
