The MFDs are very hot, and very NOT-vintage. If the Dimarzio was too harsh for your taste, the MFD is not what you´re looking for...
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.
Ok, well back to the drawing board I guess! I appreciate the opinions though, thank you.
Would still like more opinions on the 5 string L2500 pickup question too.
Would still like more opinions on the 5 string L2500 pickup question too.
Again, the MFDs are a beast of their own, and hard to combine with other pickups. The L2500 pickups would overpower the J Pickups by a lot, I´d rather put a classic P-pickup (Seymour Duncan SB-1 for example), or a dual coil or split coil humbucker wired in Series. a lot of options, that would match much better...
Hmmmm, maybe you're right. I just really want a 5 string Jazz shaped bass with L series pickups and preamp and starting overthinking
@jcburn From my experience the Geezer and MFD are two versions of a “modern P” pickup. Both have extra juice that a traditional P pickup lacks. I think they are more similar than they are different. To me, both give you a change of pace that can be very useful in a rock or heavier setting.
When I’m wanting a P tone, it’s to play country or Americana, so aim going to favor a more traditional P pickup. That’s why I swapped my MFD for Lollars in my SB-1. I realize that’s not the tone you are after. Good that there are choices out there.
When I’m wanting a P tone, it’s to play country or Americana, so aim going to favor a more traditional P pickup. That’s why I swapped my MFD for Lollars in my SB-1. I realize that’s not the tone you are after. Good that there are choices out there.
I just put some Labella DTFS through-bodys in a tribby L2500, love ‘em! Different pups and pre, though, so I am not sure if that helps. Damn good strings that get better with time, ime.
Beatiful bass! Is that honeyburst?
The GZR split coil P pickups are really quite "vintage" sounding, in the sense that they can remind you of Fender P pickups from the 60's and 70's, may be with a hair more bite (I still have a '68 for reference). The MFD pickups from the SB series are *very* different. They have very high output and a big warm growly/bitey character when dimed that punches through like nothing else. As you wind the volume control on the bass back toward say 70%, they become much more polite and come close to that same "vintage" quality that you think of in a classic P—and a very similar output at that volume setting on the bass. That combination character is a really interesting feature of these pickups that is quite unique (and in my view at least quite wonderful).
Last edited:
There's quite a number of us who enjoy DR Pure Blues on MFD basses. They're a "quantum" nickel steel string with a fundamentally warm character combined with a refined mid-range kick to their sound: fat and punchy without any sense of grind or twang. They've been on my L-2500 for the last few years and are a great match.
(I'm trained as a materials scientist and I have no idea what is meant by quantum nickel. I suspect only the marketing guys know.)
Interesting.
I replaced the stock pickups on my MJ-4 with DiMarzio model Js because it wasn't "G&L sounding" enough for me (way too tame). Model Js are pretty wooly and aggressive sounding to me. None of that sit back in the mix sound.
So I'm a bit surprised that the M2500 has such a different tonal character to my L2K.
It's also aggressive sounding but in a different way. Seems like lower mids are more pronounced to me? Less highs.
The pan control seems to work pretty well too. Not too much difference in sound when I'm passed mid way towards the neck pickup, but dialing in a bit of neck when turned towards the bridge does result in subtle changes.
Has anyone else played both or have both and agree they're quite different?
I do like it. The sound will fit it quite nicely with my current band (lots of grunge stuff).
The MFDs are always so aggressive. Took a bit of time with my SB-2 and L2K to learn to how to handle the output. I wonder what other people think when they first get an MFD equipped G&L.
It's also aggressive sounding but in a different way. Seems like lower mids are more pronounced to me? Less highs.
The pan control seems to work pretty well too. Not too much difference in sound when I'm passed mid way towards the neck pickup, but dialing in a bit of neck when turned towards the bridge does result in subtle changes.
Has anyone else played both or have both and agree they're quite different?
I do like it. The sound will fit it quite nicely with my current band (lots of grunge stuff).
The MFDs are always so aggressive. Took a bit of time with my SB-2 and L2K to learn to how to handle the output. I wonder what other people think when they first get an MFD equipped G&L.
Well, if they're the kind that like to crank all their knobs up all the way, they're in for a surprise
. Not too long ago one of us related that's exactly how he runs his. Wow! ...that must be a bruiser. It didn't take long for me to realize (1980) these MFD's don't NEED wide open to succeed, like an old P bass might. Because of this, there's an amazing variety of sounds one can get, just twisting knobs. They're a fantastic invention, IMO.Well, if they're the kind that like to crank all their knobs up all the way, they're in for a surprise
Exactly! They are beasts.
It took me a bit of time to understand why the L2K just had tone cut controls on it. Oh, so that's how I don't cause my speakers to melt.
I have both a US L2500 and a US M2500, and have had Tribute versions of both the L2K and the M2k. Despite what you may have seen/heard in Ed Friedland's demo where he tried to make them sound similar, in my experience they're very different beasts.
The L—especially with the k-mod for single coil function—is an absolute Swiss Army Knife capable of a huge range of tones, both by flipping the various switches, and by tweaking the two treble/bass cut knobs—*and* the volume knob (as noted above). It can be super-aggressive or quite sweet depending on approach and really rewards time spent getting to know all it can do, especially in a live setting. It also can be run passive or active (a curious sort of active, really) and for many of us it works best as a fully passive bass. It's absolutely one of a kind.
The M on the other hand is a sort of "modern" always-active bass with slightly more house-trained MFD's and a really excellent preamp matched to them. It has a certain kernel tone that characterizes it and it doesn't run too far either side of that basic tone, although the pickup blend is a very useful tool for that purpose.
What I'm writing here makes it seem that the M is something of a less-capable city mouse to the L's burly and multi-faceted country mouse. While that's sort of true, I absolutely *adore* my M2500 and if I had to keep one of them, it might well be the M. Given that I play in a lot of old guy jazz, blues, and music theatre stuff, when I bring the L along I often feel like I've brought a gun to a knife fight. The M always seems to fit in, yet its distinctive voice is obvious in the mix.
Oh, I can keep both? Excellent!
The L—especially with the k-mod for single coil function—is an absolute Swiss Army Knife capable of a huge range of tones, both by flipping the various switches, and by tweaking the two treble/bass cut knobs—*and* the volume knob (as noted above). It can be super-aggressive or quite sweet depending on approach and really rewards time spent getting to know all it can do, especially in a live setting. It also can be run passive or active (a curious sort of active, really) and for many of us it works best as a fully passive bass. It's absolutely one of a kind.
The M on the other hand is a sort of "modern" always-active bass with slightly more house-trained MFD's and a really excellent preamp matched to them. It has a certain kernel tone that characterizes it and it doesn't run too far either side of that basic tone, although the pickup blend is a very useful tool for that purpose.
What I'm writing here makes it seem that the M is something of a less-capable city mouse to the L's burly and multi-faceted country mouse. While that's sort of true, I absolutely *adore* my M2500 and if I had to keep one of them, it might well be the M. Given that I play in a lot of old guy jazz, blues, and music theatre stuff, when I bring the L along I often feel like I've brought a gun to a knife fight. The M always seems to fit in, yet its distinctive voice is obvious in the mix.
Oh, I can keep both? Excellent!
I have both a US L2500 and a US M2500, and have had Tribute versions of both the L2K and the M2k. Despite what you may have seen/heard in Ed Friedland's demo where he tried to make them sound similar, in my experience they're very different beasts.
The L—especially with the k-mod for single coil function—is an absolute Swiss Army Knife capable of a huge range of tones, both by flipping the various switches, and by tweaking the two treble/bass cut knobs—*and* the volume knob (as noted above). It can be super-aggressive or quite sweet depending on approach and really rewards time spent getting to know all it can do, especially in a live setting. It also can be run passive or active (a curious sort of active, really) and for many of us it works best as a fully passive bass. It's absolutely one of a kind.
The M on the other hand is a sort of "modern" always-active bass with slightly more house-trained MFD's and a really excellent preamp matched to them. It has a certain kernel tone that characterizes it and it doesn't run too far either side of that basic tone, although the pickup blend is a very useful tool for that purpose.
What I'm writing here makes it seem that the M is something of a less-capable city mouse to the L's burly and multi-faceted country mouse. While that's sort of true, I absolutely *adore* my M2500 and if I had to keep one of them, it might well be the M. Given that I play in a lot of old guy jazz, blues, and music theatre stuff, when I bring the L along I often feel like I've brought a gun to a knife fight. The M always seems to fit in, yet its distinctive voice is obvious in the mix.
Oh, I can keep both? Excellent!
Here's the link for Ed's mash up with the two 2500 basses. In fairness, he doesn't so much try to make them sound similar as to illustrate both the family resemblance and how they differ. Nobody does this stuff better.
So, something I'm curious about...what kinds of tones have people here been able to get out of their L2000s/L2500s? I've been messing around a bunch to get in the ball park of both a Thunderbird and a Justin Chancellor-ish Wal and I've been pleasantly surprised at how close I've been able to get with both.
Finally found one for an incredible price!
Ships tomorrow.
Maybe it will arrive by the end of the week.
GHS black tapewounds and it'll be good to go!
Ships tomorrow.
Maybe it will arrive by the end of the week.
GHS black tapewounds and it'll be good to go!
I’ve got a weird issue with the M2500 Tribute. I’ve got a line 6 g10 wireless transmitter that works great on my MJ-4 (same preamp). When I use it with the M2500, I can’t turn the volume all the way down. It works fine plugged in.
I’ve shielded the control cavity on the MJ.
On the M2500, none of the pots are connected directly to ground (verified with a continuity tester between pot case and ground on output jack).
On my MJ all are grounded.
Is the M2500 preamp different than the MJ? Do I just need to shield the control cavity?
I’ve shielded the control cavity on the MJ.
On the M2500, none of the pots are connected directly to ground (verified with a continuity tester between pot case and ground on output jack).
On my MJ all are grounded.
Is the M2500 preamp different than the MJ? Do I just need to shield the control cavity?
