Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Absolutely!
It's a great sounding bass, and the neck profile is very comfortable.
Not quite the same, the MJ-4 pickups and preamp are unique I believe. The mil spec (G&L's words) preamp in the MJ-4 may be the same preamp that's in the M-2000 (?), but the MJ-4 stacked Jazz pickups are unique, which pretty much means the MJ-4 itself is unique.
I agree with Ed F. that the MJ-4's pickups sound darn close to actual single coils. Since I got my MJ-4 back from G&L with a new replacement neck, I think I'll hang onto it after all. It just sounds too damn good.
Yeah it kinda came and went un-noticed. No clue as to why. The M-2000 seemed to sell much better and got lots of praise. There was one niggle with the the MJ though...some complained that the balance control had an abrupt, nonlinear taper that acted more like an on/off switch than a blend control. Mine is like that too, but once used to it, it's not a problem. The "blend" is there, it just requires a finer touch.
I forgot about the pickups being different.
I wonder if you could still order the MJ-4 pickups.
I wonder if you could still order the MJ-4 pickups.
With either the MJ or M series, I tend to treat the blend as it has five positions: (i) all neck, (ii) neck with a touch of bridge, (iii) both, (iv) bridge with a touch of neck, and (v) bridge. The narrow range of action of the blend control means that there isn't a lot of room for further finessing; however, like @Templar, I don't find that's much a problem and the five settings are all useful.
I really don't think there's much special about them. Dual coil j bass pickups. A bit darker than single coils and really low output.
On my MJ-4, I swapped out the pickups and electronics. It has DiMarzio Model Js with a Nordstrand 3 band preamp with switchable mid frequency, passive mode and a tone control.
The Model Js make it much more aggressive and preamp has a tone of flexibility.
I think the MJ-4 was a decent active jazz bass but it was little different from all the other active jazz basses out there. I like that G&Ls with MFDs have a pretty unique sound. I didn't think the MJ-4 had that at all.
Perhaps in the market's mind – which is not the most complex place – a G&L is either an MFD bass (L2000, SB-2 etc) or a straight Fender style design (LB-100, JB) and the MJ-4 fell between those two stools?
Totally possible. I still think an MJ-4 with those MFD jazz pickups they've been teasing us with would really cool.
There's nothing wrong with Fender copies either. Maybe if you're a session bassist, the producer wants a straight up p bass sound and an SB-1 probably won't work.
I'd agree with that. The M2000/M2500 are wonderful instruments with the MFD pickups and that preamp. Replace the pickups with unexciting J-types and you get the MJ-4/MJ-5 which are not wonderful. (At least mine wasn't...)
Last edited:
$0.02...
Except the M-series MFD's are not the same as normal MFD's. The M-2000 pickups need a strong preamp to perform. That's why the M-series basses are active only. Unlike all actual MFD's, which need no help sounding great. I found the M-2000 to sound bland next to an L-2000, and next to other passive-only MFD basses. But that's just me and what I (and others) like about MFD basses.
I think the main (only?) attraction to the M-series is the fact that it has a typical 3-band pre layout, and most importantly from a marketing standpoint, a Mids control. Familiarity is a powerful motivator, and let's be honest, the L-series controls have always been a bit counter-intuitive. Even to this day, 40 years later, many question exactly how the L controls work. For them the M-series may "make more sense".
But an M-2K will never sound like an L-series bass, or even like an L in passive mode. Some will prefer the M basses, but not because they sound like what we've come to expect from a G&L, but because they don't. And that's fine, but one may wonder what's the point of buying a G&L that sounds like a hundred other milk toast basses? YMMV
Templar, I'm curious because I respect your opinion and expertise…do you really find that the Ms sound like other non-MFD basses?
With respect, have to disagree. The Ed Friedland mashup demonstrates that the M2500 is very much an MFD bass and that's absolutely my experience.
It's a more contemporary take, but underwinding the MFDs slightly doesn't remove their characteristic flavour. Nothing but nothing milk toast about my M2500.
Agreed on the comment about the MJ-4/5 being in a spot that may have been difficult to market.
As far as the M series goes, I now have a L-2000 and have played a M-2000 once. I still want the M because the flavor is a bit different (in the case of that bass, it seemed to have deeper lows. Thanks @TimBosby for letting me play it. I will order one with the same neck yours had and bring it to a gig. I would probably string it with Roto Swing Bass 66 strings). I like the L, but it reminds me a bit of how I run my Steinberger (I run that with the neck pickup only and prefer the L in series mode with the preamp and treble boost on).
The M may not have the grind, but it is not lacking in the power. It did seem to have a bit more finesse, but I suspect that strings can color how that bass comes across.
As far as the M series goes, I now have a L-2000 and have played a M-2000 once. I still want the M because the flavor is a bit different (in the case of that bass, it seemed to have deeper lows. Thanks @TimBosby for letting me play it. I will order one with the same neck yours had and bring it to a gig. I would probably string it with Roto Swing Bass 66 strings). I like the L, but it reminds me a bit of how I run my Steinberger (I run that with the neck pickup only and prefer the L in series mode with the preamp and treble boost on).
The M may not have the grind, but it is not lacking in the power. It did seem to have a bit more finesse, but I suspect that strings can color how that bass comes across.
Longtime L player here, and I have had an M. The M was pleasant, had some of the hints of the L, but just didn't have enough to really stand out. At the same time, the M had hints of "generic 3-band active humbucker bass" that just was, well, generic sounding. Not bad, but just didn't seem to have enough character to be really distinguishable to me. But I wouldn't mind having another one.
Yes, I found that the one I had sounded more akin to a Bartolini equipped bass than to my L-2000 and several other MFD basses. A more neutral or transparent sound to my ears. Definitely tame next to the compelling natural sound of an L-2000, or any other MFD bass in my herd. That's not a "bad" thing, but it's certainly a different thing, which is why the M and MJ basses were conceived in the first place....to add something different to the line up, with a more familiar control layout. No?
Unlike Ed F, I didn't find enough MFD "flavor" in the M bass to come away thinking that the M is pure MFD. The idea that you can modify an MFD pickup by underwinding, then couple it to a completely different 18v preamp, and expect it to sound just like an L-series bass, is a bit of a stretch to my way of thinking. My real-world comparison between the two confirmed that for me. The typical MFD "excitement" simply wasn't there for me with the M.
I had high hopes for the M basses, especially after snagging an MJ-4, which I thought accomplished the goal that G&L had in mind with its design....an active version of the JB-2, but without the 60 cycle hum from the JB_2's single coil pickups, but still sounding close to real s/c pickups. Personally, I don't care for dual-coil jazz pickups, set up passive or otherwise. Not DiMarzios, Fralins, Barts, or Fenders, and probably some others that I don't recall atm. In that regard I agree with Ed F, that the MJ's do sound close to real s/c pups (at least when coupled to the MJ preamp). Mission accomplished, bravo G&L. But that seems a different design goal than the M basses. IMO, there weren't/aren't any design deficiencies in the L-series basses. They've endured the test of time to prove it.
That's exactly my takeaway. Which was why I passed on the idea of a custom spec'd USA M bass. I already have that sound in spades, elsewhere.
If I were responding to the "M" vs. "L" post, that is exactly what I would say, so thanks TDR1138. I had an L-2500 and purchased an M-2000 thinking it would be a more versatile MFD sounding 4-string, which I personally prefer. I was disappointed with it because it sounded bland compared to my L-2500, so I sold it. Looking back, it wasn't that it sounded bad, it just didn't sound like an MFD bass--more like it had regular alnico or ceramic pickups on it. There's nothing wrong with that. That just wasn't what I was looking for.
