• 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.

G&L compared to Musicman Basses

#21
jmattbassplaya said:
I disagree that they're similar. EBMM basses feel a lot nicer to me than G&L basses. The few GLs I've played were comparable to some of the better MIM Fenders I've played. Not bad basses, but they weren't amazing.
Click to expand...


Agreed with all of the above - and will add that I've never played a G&L that I absolutely had to buy, but currently own 3 MIA Fenders and 1 MIM Fender - that *I* prefer over any G&L I've ever played... I will say that overall, G&L's quality is quite good, and you're less likely to get a crappy G&L than a crappy Fender - BUT, IMO a good Fender is a better bass than a good G&L...

In short, not on par with EBMMs, but consistantly good - but nothing spectacular *to me*...


- georgestrings
 
#23
G&L's fit me slightly better playability-wise. Sound-wise G&Ls are hot, and the tone is less colored than MM's, and possibly more versatile. On the other hand, MM's are pretty straight forward to use, and you know what you're getting, while G&Ls require more tweaking.
 
#25
I can speak for the USA and Tribute G&L, as well as the new Sterling SUB line. My Tribby JB-2 is Indonesian-made, like the SUB Ray4. The QC is on a similar high level, for the price point. There is still a difference between my Tribby and American-made instruments, in tone and feel, with the USA being richer, and more detailed (must be the reinforced neck, or maybe the QMT...or they are co-factors). I prefer the G&L body and lighter weight over a MM bass, but that Ray 4 is an eye-opener, for how much quality instrument can be had for under $300US. I do wish that the G&L's had the MM's easier battery access, however.
 
#27
I have owned both, and both companies make well above average basses. And yes they are very similar, but there are also what I would consider major differences.

The Music Man basses I actually own are both USA Sterling 5s, and the only G&L I have at the moment is a US fretless L2500.

Without posting a really long list of differences and similarities, I suggest a hands-on comparision.
 
#28
I've owned both as well. Both are quality, I'd say well above average basses.

I think the EBMM might be more 'unique', and I absolutely love their bridges and tuners.

The G&L has a more diverse line though, IMO. I would love to have a high end SB2 & L2000 someday..
 
#29
For me, this one is very interesting:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

I like it simple, with nice woods - ok, in another color, not that vomit green.;-)

To mee, the concept and the look is nearly the same as the anniversary MMs.
And in Germany, the G&Ls are much cheaper than MMs. Don't know why.

Greetz
 
#30
Last summer when I was in the market for a new 5-string, I played an HH stingray and an L-2500 against each other. I ended up going with the G&L, and I'm in love with it. It's hard to describe, but I just felt that the L-2500 was a "fuller" sound, and seemed a bit more versatile. I was able to get a bigger spread of tones that I dug out of it.

None of this is to say that the MM is bad at all. They're both fantastic basses, and I had to start splitting hairs to decide betwen them.
 
#31
2meterbassman,

Whatever you do, DON'T look at this link. Don't build a custom L1505 or anything else. Turn away now. Just say no.

http://www.americanguitarboutique.net/Bass_index.html

Personally, I find the G&L to have a certain *thing* about it that just draws me in more than the EBMM. It's the whole package, though - not one particular thing. However, I like the MM enough to have purchased another after selling my first one. Both have their strong points.
 
#32
lowfreqgeek said:
2meterbassman,

Whatever you do, DON'T look at this link. Don't build a custom L1505 or anything else. Turn away now. Just say no.

http://www.americanguitarboutique.net/Bass_index.html

Personally, I find the G&L to have a certain *thing* about it that just draws me in more than the EBMM. It's the whole package, though - not one particular thing. However, I like the MM enough to have purchased another after selling my first one. Both have their strong points.
Click to expand...

Damn, I followed the link - great stuff!!!! Thx!!!!

That's my result of a dream G&L:
gandl2sav5wb1k6.gif


(I hope the link will work)
 
#33
I think G & L sound much better than Musicman but neither play very well. I had a Stingray that had dead spots in the fretboard. The G & L I had sounded great but I didn't like the neck radius. We are all different and have our own preferences but my experience with both has been disappointing.
 
#34
I must say that everyone makes a big deal about pre-Ernie Ball, like pre-CBS Fenders. I had a 1978 that had a bad lateral twist in the neck, and a sloppy neck pocket. Sold it to a collector who spent money to have the neck put in a steam box on a neck jig to straighten it. It was also a boat anchor, I hated it.
 
#35
guymanndude1 said:
I must say that everyone makes a big deal about pre-Ernie Ball, like pre-CBS Fenders. I had a 1978 that had a bad lateral twist in the neck, and a sloppy neck pocket. Sold it to a collector who spent money to have the neck put in a steam box on a neck jig to straighten it. It was also a boat anchor, I hated it.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, man.

In the 80s, when I used to play a Fender Precision Special (the first Fender with a preamp) a friend of mine had a MM Stingray (white, with maple neck) from 1978 or 1979.
He gave it to me for trying it in a concert, he wanted to sell it if I like it.
I played it for only one song and then switched to the P-Bass.
The MM had very thick lacquer (looked very cheap), a very thick neck and was hard to play. After switching to the P-Bass it was like leaving a truck with flat tires and entering a brandnew Porsche.
And the P Special was a monster in weight!

Last time I tried a new MM Stingray Classic, it felt much more comfortable, and it was a 5-string!

As you can see in my comments in vintage themed threads, to me that whole vintage stuff is crap.
The really good old stuff is so expensive, that you have to be afraid, that it is damaged or stolen - and the newer pseudo-vintage stuff from the 70s is mostly anchor weight, unexact build crap.

And for the same money, some people spending for 70s guitars, you can order a custom guitar/bass at a guitar manufacture, fitting perfect to your needs.

No vibe in new guitars? Play the vibes in it...

Greetz
 
#36
From a pure quality I would give the edge to G&L simply because they make far fewer instruments then Musicman. With Musicman you have to look at Ball Family Reserve or some of their more limited run, exotic wood to find an exciting quality.

From a tone stand point of view, Stingray has the edge. They have a signature tone. Meanwhile G&L is a bit in the never never land as far as tone is concerned. They sound very good but very few people would recognize them on a recording. One added note, I like the G&L passive and active option. They sound good, they just don't have their own voice.
 
#37
I've owned a Stingray and Sterling (both USA made), and a G&L SB-1 (USA, sold), 2 L-2000s USA, and a L-2000 Tribute. Sold both of the MM's.

Both MM basses played wonderfully, and felt very comfortable and natural to hold, standing or sitting. They won there. Tonally, however, the G&L's won easily. To me, the MMs had a built-in "smiley face eq". They could ALMOST sound like a P or J, or a hi-fi "modern" tone, but kinda weak-ish. The G&L's absolutely sound like a P, or a J, or an Alembicy-type hi-fi bass, but with more. Just more. Love em!

My 2 cents, etc....
 
#38
I owned a MM Sabre that had MFD pickups in it. It was a "Transition" period build when George & Leo were bailing on MM and starting G&L. I guess Leo started a seperate company, CLF, that made electronics for one or both...At any rate, THAT was one HOT Bass!

It seems that once Ernie Ball took over Music Man the Stingray Bass became more Mainstream, while the New Company, G&L never REALLY "Took Off". I've owned Stingray's (MM & EBMM), Sterlings, Sabre's on the MM side, and an El Toro, SB-2, L-1000, L-2000, and I'm about to take delivery of an L-1505 on the G&L side. Of the Bunch, the afore mentioned Sabre was probably the most interesting, while the Kramer Made Pre-Ernie Ball 2-Band Stingray was probably the best playing & sounding.
 
#39
I LOVE passive G&Ls. I like active G&Ls. I mostly love EBMM basses. I have owned 12 G&L basses - 6 of them passive, 6 active. I have owned 8 EBMM basses - a Bongo, StingRay 5, StingRay, and 5 Sterlings of multiple and single pickup configurations.
Playability-wise, the best basses of the lot have been G&L SB-2s and Sterlings, with the SB-2s faring better in weight and the Sterlings faring a smidge better in neck profile.
Only one of these 20 basses had a quality issue and it could have developed in any bass over time.
They're both great brands.
G&L active/passive basses have electronics that are very versatile, but maybe a tad difficult for some to tame. EBMM basses are a bit more plug and play in the single pickup models and vary in complexity with the later model added pickups and switches capability.
G&L passives are as potent output-wise as any bass out there. They, in my experience, are clear, strong and very present in the mix. G&L passives are what I prefer tonally out of all the basses I referenced.
Go forth, play and find your own happy place.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back