G&L Club Part 7

[MrB64]

Is the height of the J45 about the same as the SD Apollo?

 

[Hawk620]

That is strange. Why would any company build pickups designed for a Jazz Bass and build them so they don't fit a Jazz Bass? It sounds like something I would do! Have any of you who have used them had installation issues? Back in the '90s when I'd backed off on playing bass and pedal steel was my main instrument, a couple players I knew used Lawrence pickups on their steels and really liked them. I was satisfied with the sound of my steels, so I never changed, but since I've been back to playing bass in the 21st century, I was thinking about a set of these. But to say the least, I'd be very disappointed if I bought a set of these Jazz Bass pickups only to find they didn't fit.

But they do fit a Jazz Bass. I've installed those pickups in 3 different Jazz Basses. Two MIA specs one MIM specs. They are drop in replacement. No alterations needed.

 

[Nedmundo]

It's weird that Fralin offer the option of raised A and D pole pieces for basses with 7¼" radius for their standard Jazz, but not for their Split Jazz (Assuming that their website is correct)

My fretboard is 9½", so I should be okay. Bass is with my tech atm, so I'll know soon enough!

I bought my Split-Jazz set almost 20 years ago, so things may have changed, but mine have raised poles for the A and D strings. They provide great balance with the 9.5" radius fretboard on my 2003 MIA Fender.

On my G&L JB with a 12" radius, I found better balance when I switched to DiMarzio Area J with raised poles for the A and D strings, but after that I went with Lace Man O' War, which don't have poles at all, and the balance is fine.

I have no clue why some pickups with no radius provide decent balance, while others don't, but if I have the choice I would usually want some radius to the poles, especially on a five. On my M-2500, I like the balance with the poles under the A string very slightly raised, so the A has similar punch to the E and B strings. Through the rig at my bands' rehearsal/performance space, it works extremely well.

 

[Hawk620]

I'm suspecting it's bogus info on the website, or I think we'd hear a lot about it from people who couldn't fit them in their jazz basses. I'm not ready to purchase anything yet and I'm not sure that's the direction I want to go, so I haven't dug into it any further.

It's been years, but I do remember the Fender Roscoe Beck IV and V very fondly. I probably never should have sold my RB IV. Those were more or less J45 pickups set up as dual coils. However, I don't remember the Fender SCN pickups that fondly at all, but I don't recall what I didn't like about them at the time. Too long ago! My Jazz at that time had SD Antiquity II pickups, which were more to my liking (until they eventually went microphonic).

The pickups on the Roscoe Beck Basses are a Bill Lawrence design as were the SCN used for awhile on the Deluxe Jazz Bass. I've never played those but the J45s have always used Alnico II mags not Samarium Cobalt.

The J45s are a dual coil air-gap design so they are a bit deeper than some traditional Alnico JBass pickups but the width and length are a drop in fit for any bass using the same rout size as a Fender Jazz Bass.

 

[bowthing]

It's been years, but I do remember the Fender Roscoe Beck IV and V very fondly. I probably never should have sold my RB IV. Those were more or less J45 pickups set up as dual coils. However, I don't remember the Fender SCN pickups that fondly at all, but I don't recall what I didn't like about them at the time. Too long ago! My Jazz at that time had SD Antiquity II pickups, which were more to my liking (until they eventually went microphonic).

I still have my RB IV! I love that bass. The pickups are Lawrence, with the poles under the strings lower (under the cover), so the 4 string looks like it should be for a 5 string. I usually play them in series, the output is kind of low. I also ended up grinding away the potting and glueing a ground strip to the poles with conductive epoxy. I have one set of the RB IV pickups that have coils that aren't matched very well (in the same pickup, that is), so they hum a little. The other set is quiet.

 

[Ricky Rioli]

Fitting a Jazz neck pickup to my SB-1 means a new pickguard. I'm a bit dubious about this, but I've gone for a Cream Pearl pg, to go with the Pharaoh Gold Firemist.

I suspect the cream is going to be deeper than ideal. But the warmth should go with the Pharaoh Gold better than the blue-ish tones of the white pearl pg I've had recently

 

[mouthmw]

I'm looking into getting a G&L again.
I had a beautiful MIJ L2K Tribute, but the 7.25" neck radius wasn't quite my thing and I couldn't get the action to my liking.

That said, I'm looking at Tribute L2000s and M2000s (Indonesian this time, for a more modern neck radius).
I'm leaning more toward L2K as I'd need this bass for heavier style music, but I still need a controllable output. The project needs a drop C tuning.
M2Ks are generally thought of as more polite sounding, with more straight forward preamp controls.
Someone in this thread mentioned that their M2K actually overloaded the audio interface more than their L2K did.

I need a bass that can work well with my board and not be too hot for my pedals (all analog except the digital delay).
I'll be able to tame it a bit with my Broughton HPF/LPF and I don't have to crank the onboard controls obviously.

I'm still leaning more towards L2K as I feel it's a more "classic G&L" tone, and more of a Leo legacy.
Any suggestions?

 

[jglunt]

I'm looking into getting a G&L again.
I had a beautiful MIJ L2K Tribute, but the 7.25" neck radius wasn't quite my thing and I couldn't get the action to my liking.

That said, I'm looking at Tribute L2000s and M2000s (Indonesian this time, for a more modern neck radius).
I'm leaning more toward L2K as I'd need this bass for heavier style music, but I still need a controllable output. The project needs a drop C tuning.
M2Ks are generally thought of as more polite sounding, with more straight forward preamp controls.
Someone in this thread mentioned that their M2K actually overloaded the audio interface more than their L2K did.

I need a bass that can work well with my board and not be too hot for my pedals (all analog except the digital delay).
I'll be able to tame it a bit with my Broughton HPF/LPF and I don't have to crank the onboard controls obviously.

I'm still leaning more towards L2K as I feel it's a more "classic G&L" tone, and more of a Leo legacy.
Any suggestions?

Having owned both an M- and an L-, I'd say your assessment of the M- being more polite-sounding is correct, so if you're looking for the "classic G&L" sound for heavier music, I'd recommend the L-.

 

[mouthmw]

Having owned both an M- and an L-, I'd say your assessment of the M- being more polite-sounding is correct, so if you're looking for the "classic G&L" sound for heavier music, I'd recommend the L-.

Does L have a higher output than M or are they similar output volume wise? My old L2K could easily clip my GK preamp (no way to reduce GK input gain except with an input pad switch, which might as well be called "tone suck" switch).

 

[jglunt]

Does L have a higher output than M or are they similar output volume wise? My old L2K could easily clip my GK preamp (no way to reduce GK input gain except with an input pad switch, which might as well be called "tone suck" switch).

Sorry, I never compared the two, but I'd believe that an L- in series would be hotter.

 

[jfh2424]

I have several Ls and several Ms. I'll share my opinion.

There are more similarities between these two basses than differences. Both have that dominant MFD thing going on.

It's possible to have the L native, mid heavy tone out of the M. One just needs to boost the mids. It's not possible to have the native M sound out of the L, in my experience.

The advantage of the M is that the pre is really very useful to dial in exactly what is wanted. The advantage of the L is that it can be put in several modes. This includes passive, active, active treble boost, single coil, parallel, etc.

I also find that the bridge pickup of the Ms sound way better and beefier than the bridge pickups of the Ls. I don't know why this is. It could just be a personal preference thing. I find it useful when I want to do the Jaco ish thing.

To me, it really boils down to how useful the M preamp is to you. Personally, I find it really intuitive and useful, so I often bring one of the Ms. That said, I've done a lot of playing on my Ls and there is really nothing missing on them, either.

If you like that dominant MFD thing, you will be happy with either of these basses. If you're not sure you are into that dominant MFD thing, I think the L is a better bet because with the single coil option, you can dial it back into something that is more...usual. Something that doesn't automatically call attention to yourself and scare people. An L in single coil mode sounds more "polite" than an M that can only be run in series, in my option. Again, others may hear things differently.

 

[mouthmw]

I have several Ls and several Ms. I'll share my opinion.

There are more similarities between these two basses than differences. Both have that dominant MFD thing going on.

It's possible to have the L native, mid heavy tone out of the M. One just needs to boost the mids. It's not possible to have the native M sound out of the L, in my experience.

The advantage of the M is that the pre is really very useful to dial in exactly what is wanted. The advantage of the L is that it can be put in several modes. This includes passive, active, active treble boost, single coil, parallel, etc.

I also find that the bridge pickup of the Ms sound way better and beefier than the bridge pickups of the Ls. I don't know why this is. It could just be a personal preference thing. I find it useful when I want to do the Jaco ish thing.

To me, it really boils down to how useful the M preamp is to you. Personally, I find it really intuitive and useful, so I often bring one of the Ms. That said, I've done a lot of playing on my Ls and there is really nothing missing on them, either.

If you like that dominant MFD thing, you will be happy with either of these basses. If you're not sure you are into that dominant MFD thing, I think the L is a better bet because with the single coil option, you can dial it back into something that is more...usual. Something that doesn't automatically call attention to yourself and scare people. An L in single coil mode sounds more "polite" than an M that can only be run in series, in my option. Again, others may hear things differently.

Great rundown!
That said, I don't plan on doing the K mod for single coils. I'm mostly gravitating towards the L series because it can be run passive and M series is 18V preamp only. The M is interesting to me if it would be easier to control volume wise. I'm used to moderate output basses like my passive P bass (11 kOhm pickup) and my 90s 3 band Stingray.

 

[Hawk620]

Great rundown!
That said, I don't plan on doing the K mod for single coils. I'm mostly gravitating towards the L series because it can be run passive and M series is 18V preamp only. The M is interesting to me if it would be easier to control volume wise. I'm used to moderate output basses like my passive P bass (11 kOhm pickup) and my 90s 3 band Stingray.

I've owned both L and M series basses as well. I sold the L2500 and kept the M2000. JFH2424 nails their differences really well. I would add that from my own perspective the M2000 is easier for me to control both tonally and volume wise and I really don't miss having a pickup selector since the blend control can handle that as well or better for me. And I don't miss not having parallel and series options either.

Even with an 18v preamp the volume and output is easily tamed by the smooth taper of the volume pot. While the L Series are wound hotter there's more than enough "juice" available from the M Series pickups when you need to dial them up. I believe one reason some feel the M Series is more "polite" is because the 3 band active EQ makes it easier to do so but is can get very growly and nasty as well.

I do believe it's mostly a matter of personal taste and feel. I also agree that an M Series Bass can pretty much cover any tonal territory an L Series can but much less so vice versa. The other thing I appreciate on my M2000 which is Tribute is the PBass size nut width and neck profile and the satin finish neck. So for me personally an M Series just works better for my style of playing which is more oriented to Classic Rock, Blues and Blues Rock, R&B/Soul, and anything I prefer to use a JBass style bass for rather than my PBass.

 

[steveh35]

Picked up a JB5 yesterday. Feels super well made, love the neck feel and don't mind the string spacing. However, I've mainly been playing a Mustang with flats and between a longer scale, roundwound strings, and that floppy B, the feel on my fingers is not great. Easiest to change is to try a set of flats. Anyone running flats on JB5? Which are you liking?

 

[jmlee]

Picked up a JB5 yesterday. Feels super well made, love the neck feel and don't mind the string spacing. However, I've mainly been playing a Mustang with flats and between a longer scale, roundwound strings, and that floppy B, the feel on my fingers is not great. Easiest to change is to try a set of flats. Anyone running flats on JB5? Which are you liking?

What I've used to great (in my opinion) success on my JB5 is Labella 45-105 (black silk) Deep Talking Flats 760FS strings for G-E and a D'Addario Chromes 132 B string. They work together superbly and the sound is excellent. The Chromes B is a great-sounding, firm B string while the available Labella B flatwounds are really not. This sort of mix and match is really common on the DB side. Give it a whirl!

 

[steveh35]

Classic $100 string option

 

[Nedmundo]

I have several Ls and several Ms. I'll share my opinion.

There are more similarities between these two basses than differences. Both have that dominant MFD thing going on.

It's possible to have the L native, mid heavy tone out of the M. One just needs to boost the mids. It's not possible to have the native M sound out of the L, in my experience.

The advantage of the M is that the pre is really very useful to dial in exactly what is wanted. The advantage of the L is that it can be put in several modes. This includes passive, active, active treble boost, single coil, parallel, etc.

I also find that the bridge pickup of the Ms sound way better and beefier than the bridge pickups of the Ls. I don't know why this is. It could just be a personal preference thing. I find it useful when I want to do the Jaco ish thing.

To me, it really boils down to how useful the M preamp is to you. Personally, I find it really intuitive and useful, so I often bring one of the Ms. That said, I've done a lot of playing on my Ls and there is really nothing missing on them, either.

If you like that dominant MFD thing, you will be happy with either of these basses. If you're not sure you are into that dominant MFD thing, I think the L is a better bet because with the single coil option, you can dial it back into something that is more...usual. Something that doesn't automatically call attention to yourself and scare people. An L in single coil mode sounds more "polite" than an M that can only be run in series, in my option. Again, others may hear things differently.

I've owned both L and M series basses as well. I sold the L2500 and kept the M2000. JFH2424 nails their differences really well. I would add that from my own perspective the M2000 is easier for me to control both tonally and volume wise and I really don't miss having a pickup selector since the blend control can handle that as well or better for me. And I don't miss not having parallel and series options either.

Even with an 18v preamp the volume and output is easily tamed by the smooth taper of the volume pot. While the L Series are wound hotter there's more than enough "juice" available from the M Series pickups when you need to dial them up. I believe one reason some feel the M Series is more "polite" is because the 3 band active EQ makes it easier to do so but is can get very growly and nasty as well.

I do believe it's mostly a matter of personal taste and feel. I also agree that an M Series Bass can pretty much cover any tonal territory an L Series can but much less so vice versa. The other thing I appreciate on my M2000 which is Tribute is the PBass size nut width and neck profile and the satin finish neck. So for me personally an M Series just works better for my style of playing which is more oriented to Classic Rock, Blues and Blues Rock, R&B/Soul, and anything I prefer to use a JBass style bass for rather than my PBass.

I have an M-2500, and these are great posts. I'm familiar with the L-series pickups, because I used to have an L-1500 and I've played several L-2x00s, and while the M pickups aren't as hot, they still bring serious MFD punch. It's still a monster.

For awhile after I got the M, I thought I would prefer an L-2500 for the hotter output and passive mode, but now I'm glad I have the M. I think the slightly less intense pickups have an excellent balance of punch, clarity, and warmth, and I strongly prefer the blend knob to the L's three-way selector. I would like a passive mode, but it isn't necessary.

 

[jfh2424]

I have a weird question.

Does someone here own a Reunion Blues Expedition case and a M or L series bass with a G&L gig bag?

I'm thinking of purchasing an Expedition case as well as a G&L bass guitar that has a gig bag. This would be shipped from the USA to Canada. The Expedition case is pretty spacious. I'm wondering if it would be possible to put the bass and gig bag in the Expedition and save some shipping cost, as opposed to shipping them separately, which would cost more.

If someone has all three of the things and could let me know, that would be cool.

Thanks!

 

[EncoremMP]

I have a weird question.

Does someone here own a Reunion Blues Expedition case and a M or L series bass with a G&L gig bag?

I'm thinking of purchasing an Expedition case as well as a G&L bass guitar that has a gig bag. This would be shipped from the USA to Canada. The Expedition case is pretty spacious. I'm wondering if it would be possible to put the bass and gig bag in the Expedition and save some shipping cost, as opposed to shipping them separately, which would cost more.

If someone has all three of the things and could let me know, that would be cool.

Thanks!

Not sure, but I do know the G&L gig bag that came with my SB1 was pretty minimal and cheap. It would likely be better to put the bass in the RB Expedition case and then slide the G&L bag next to it using it as packing material. It's fairly flat.

 

[FearNoEvil65]

I'm looking into getting a G&L again.
I had a beautiful MIJ L2K Tribute, but the 7.25" neck radius wasn't quite my thing and I couldn't get the action to my liking.

That said, I'm looking at Tribute L2000s and M2000s (Indonesian this time, for a more modern neck radius).
I'm leaning more toward L2K as I'd need this bass for heavier style music, but I still need a controllable output. The project needs a drop C tuning.
M2Ks are generally thought of as more polite sounding, with more straight forward preamp controls.
Someone in this thread mentioned that their M2K actually overloaded the audio interface more than their L2K did.

I need a bass that can work well with my board and not be too hot for my pedals (all analog except the digital delay).
I'll be able to tame it a bit with my Broughton HPF/LPF and I don't have to crank the onboard controls obviously.

I'm still leaning more towards L2K as I feel it's a more "classic G&L" tone, and more of a Leo legacy.
Any suggestions?

I have a USA M-2000 and L-2000. The M-2000 has a hotter output than the L-2000, at least mine does. If the L-2000 is in series and active, it's similar to the M-2000 naturally. The output gain of the M-2000 isn't tamer, maybe the tone is somewhat.
The M-2000 will more easily distort when recording, maybe it's the equipment I have, I have a Motu M4 interface.
I prefer the L-2000 in passive, parallel or SCM for recording but I can get a good recording with the M-2000 but it's a work around the really high signal output and massive bass response it seems to have.
Live through an amp or playing with a band both basses sound great and no issues, I'm not sure about pedals as I don't use any.
I don't find the pickup blend very useful on the M-2000, with mine a little turn off the center detent and it pretty much sounds like the pickup it's turned towards, it's not a very slow blend taper. I run both basses with both pickups on anyways.
If I had to choose one or the other I'd probably go for the L-2000 because with the SCM option, it has a lot of different sounds available.
But I'm not getting rid of either!
The solution is, get both LOL. Good luck!