1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Lakland 55-94 -vs- Sadowsky 5 (21 fret models)

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by g4string, Mar 26, 2003.

  1. Lakland

    9 vote(s)
  2. Sadowsky

    17 vote(s)
  1. g4string

    g4string Supporting Member

    Sep 19, 2002
    Melissa, TX
    I have a US Lakland 55-94. I have been thinking about getting another bass. I like the low profile neck depth and the extra width of the neck the Lakland 55-94 provides. I was thinking about a Sadowsky Vintage or Standard 5 with the dual single coils. If you have played both, let me know what you did and did not like about either bass. Thanks.

    PS What is a new Sadowsky Standard or Vintage 5 with a deluxe top going to cost me?
  2. bikeplate

    bikeplate Supporting Member

    Jun 7, 2001
    Upstate NY

    I prefer the Sadowsky sound and the fact that it's a 34" scale. A new one the way you want runs approx $3400

  3. JimS

    JimS Supporting Member

    1. I prefer the Sadowsky.

    2. Since you have a Lakland, the Sadowsky would give you more tonal variety to compliment your first bass.
  4. Nino Valenti

    Nino Valenti Supporting Member Commercial User

    Feb 2, 2001
    Staten Island NYC
    Builder: Valenti Basses
    One plus of getting a second lakland is you know the bass. If you want it strictly as a bas up bass or you gust have the urge to buy another (familiar) bass. the Lakland would be a good choice for you since you like them.

    I, Personally, don't like Bartolini's. I try every so often to get into them but I can't. My latest BArt basses were a Lakland 44-02 Deluxe & a Dean Jeff Berlin Standard bass. I was actually suprised how well the 44-02 mixed in Theorem rehearsal. It was alot better then I expected but I like Jazz basses. (preferably Passive p/u's or EMG's with a Sadowsky pre-amp.) I ended up selling it caue I wasen't too fond of the P width neck. Should id gottne the J width. :)

    I currently have a USA 55-63 that has single coil BassLine Jazz p/u's & a Bartolini pre. Again, I'm not too fond of the Bart pre. I ran the bass thru my Sadowsky pre-amp pedal & it smoked!!!!!. *note. I also tried the 44-02 thru the Sadowsky pre pedal & I liked the bary pre thru the Bart pick-ups better. :) I'n thinking of trying to trade this bass for a Sadowsky is anyone is interested or I might end up putting a Sadowsky onboard pre-amp in her.

    My Sadowsky's are IT, I currently have 3 USA models & I have one Tokyo model on order. Jim's point about having 2 differnt basses is right on. Variety is the spice of life, they say. :)
  5. g4string

    g4string Supporting Member

    Sep 19, 2002
    Melissa, TX

    You have a PM
  6. Jerry J

    Jerry J Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2000
    P-town, OR
    I had a beautiful Lakland that I loved dearly. But then I got a Sadowsky and I sold the Lakland. The Lakland's are great basses but the Sadowsky just did it for me.
  7. Larry Kaye

    Larry Kaye Retailer: Schroeder Cabinets

    Mar 23, 2000
    Cleveland, OH
    I didn't love either of em!!

    BUT, I didn't have the Sadowsky with the single coil pickups or the Lakland with Basslines.

    Gentlemen, there was zero comparison SOUNDWISE between my F Bass BN5 and the Lakland 5594 or the Sadowsky Modern 5 with Sadowsky pups and preamp.

    The F bass, as Adrian G often says, SMOKED the other two. It's simple ALIVE compared to the others, clearer, more punch. I can't say that it would smoke the Sadowksy 5's with single coils or the Lakland with basslines. The preamp is a ton more versatile than the Sadowsky and is much more musical and a bit more versatile than the Bartolini pre on a Lakland.

    No other comparison with other basses will be offered, Sorry if I'm a bit off the topic. Between the Sadowsky and Lakland, I preferred the Lakland tonewise again....my ears, fingers, amp, speakers, technique, band etc. etc. etc.


    LKaye the Sadowsky and Lakland grinch.
  8. JimS

    JimS Supporting Member


    No sweat. Everybody's entitled to their opinion and you expressed it in a non-flammable way.

    ...even though your post proves you're tone deaf.;)

    I'm a big fan of Sadowsky basses. I've played two different 5 string F basses and to my surprise they did nothing for me. But the nice luxury is there are so many talented luthiers to satisfy our diverse bass cravings. F for you, Sadowsky for me and others, etc, etc.
  9. Jeff in TX

    Jeff in TX Supporting Member

    Nov 1, 2000
    Lone Star State
    Great post... well said!
  10. gfab333


    Mar 22, 2000
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    The two basses that you're comparing are two entirely different sounding basses, IMHO. I used to own a 55-94 deluxe with Barts, and I have played the Sad standard 5. A search of each bass in this forum will yield many posts summarizing the respective tone of each, so I won't regurgitate what's already posted. They sound different and you can't really get one to sound like the other, or vice versa. It's a matter of personal taste. If you like the Lakland tone, go with Lakland; if you like the ballsey jazz bass on steriods tone, go with the the Sad with single coils.

    If I had to choose between the two basses you described, I go with the Sad because my personal taste leans me toward that distintive single coil Jazz Bass tone, rather than the Lakland jazz + dual coil humbucker combo.

Share This Page