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.
I would like to see a slim\modernised version of the 4+1. The current 3+2 is enough for me not to buy a 5er. I know that looks are subjective but I just think 4+1 flows better than the squashed up 3+2.
If one puts aesthetics aside (and I know that's hard) the 3+2 design makes really good sense in terms of neck dive.
On most 5ers the wooden neck is more massive than it is on a 4-string. That tends to increase neck dive—especially in a 35" scale, but even at 34". From an engineering viewpoint, additional mass at the end of the neck creates a greater additional moment tending to rotate the neck downward. (Moment = mass x distance from centre of mass) Therefore, if one can move the weight of the outermost tuner—for the D-string—toward the player, and move its supporting wood inward as well, one can substantially decrease neck dive. The effect will be significant even with the lighter weight US-made G&L tuners.
The 3+2 design on my L2500 looks kind of dorky, but as an engineering prof I appreciate the good sense in it. It's the same way I feel about the tiny headstock on my Ibanez Soundgear bass. It looks kind of ridiculous, but the balance is terrific with the small Gotoh tuners—even with the reduced mass body on those basses.
A modern slimmer version would be nice. The 4+1 on my L-5000 is great, but that's essentially a 4 string neck and headstock anyway.
3+2 for me, all the way. I think it looks great, but I also appreciate the smaller size and mass for the reasons @jmlee pointed out. I'm an engineer, too...
In truth, a 4+1 wouldn't deter me from owning an instrument (that's one of the lamest of reasons, IMO), but after having several basses with shorter headstocks, I'd chose that option in a heartbeat over a longer headstock - simply for the benefits of balance and overall length.
In truth, a 4+1 wouldn't deter me from owning an instrument (that's one of the lamest of reasons, IMO), but after having several basses with shorter headstocks, I'd chose that option in a heartbeat over a longer headstock - simply for the benefits of balance and overall length.
Good points guys. Anyone have experience with the 4+1 on the JB-5?
I still want an L-2500.
I have both the JB-5 and the L-2500, and both in Empress wood. I moved from the Fender 4+1 right to the JB and really loved that look. I was a 4 over 1 guys for sure.... then I got the L-2500 and the 3 over 2 has really grown on me. As for the JB-5, I love it, it's SO, SO right. The lines and fit and finish are fantastic with a great tone to boot. I'm a fan of simple controls and really like a V,V,T setup. (I'm bias now I know) but I.M.H.O... the JB-5 is twice bass of a Fender Jazz USA V at the same cost.
I've only had the L-2500 for a weekish, so it's too early to really tell, but I dig the 3 main tones I get from it. It really does SOUND like 3 different basses and IF I could use those tones (I suck, that's why I can't use them, it's not the bass) I think I would stick with the L as my number one! I can't believe I said it out loud.... Again to soon to really tell, but EVERYTHING about the L's tone is so customizable and... RIGHT.
My new Kiloton 5 has a 4+1. I don't see any downside to it but I'm accustomed to Fender and EBMM with the same setup. To me there is benefit either way outside of what you find aesthetically pleasing.
Couldn't agree with this more! For whatever reason I cannot get a 4-string G&L neck to work for me. Tried different profiles and different finishes but all were a no go. Always felt like I was fighting them. Played two 5's recently - a JB5 and the Kiloton. Both have the same neck profile and both are perfect. IMO, the JB5 is hands down the best 5-string passive jazz on the market.
Interesting. My SB-2T has a #8 neck and it is my favorite neck of all my basses. I find it the easiest and fastest to play.
I wonder if the 4x2 head stock hasn't shrunk a bit here over the last few years. I could be wrong but it always seemed to me that the head stock on my Korean tribute was bigger and goofier looking but the newer US L2500's head stocks seemed smaller and more compact. Maybe it's just the size of the tuner's that made it seem that way.....In any event I have no issues with the 4x2 but if it was an option on an L2500 I might go with the other just for a change but only after I'd heard that it wasn't producing any significant neck dive.
Yes, the 3+2 headstock started by mid-1997 or 1998.Nice! That was back when 4+1 on the 2500 was stock right?
Also, where is the rest of it?
No neck dive with me, but the beast is heavy.
The neck is wide and chunky, but I have no playability issue, even with the short fingers I was given (and say, up to the 17th fret). 17mm spacing, as usual.
Last edited:
I solved the weight problem with the Empress wood version of the L-2500.... mine is 8.2 lbs. Yes it does have just a touch of neck dive, but it's so light and manageable I don't notice.
I think I finally found my second G&L "keeper" to join my JB (tried the LB-100 but didn't take to it- great bass though).
Fretless Kiloton. I saw this online and could not resist. Feels and plays amazing and sounds different than anything else I have. Loving series mode.
I've been looking for a fretless that can sound like a buzzsaw and this thing is it.
(mocked up my own G&L type pics since they didn't have this one on their facebook page)
Fretless Kiloton. I saw this online and could not resist. Feels and plays amazing and sounds different than anything else I have. Loving series mode.
I've been looking for a fretless that can sound like a buzzsaw and this thing is it.
(mocked up my own G&L type pics since they didn't have this one on their facebook page)
Can anyone photoshop a Sterling SUB over an L-1000? Thought about picking up a SUB and modding it to serve as a cheap backup to my US L-2000.
