Got it and responded....JP will take care of you....
he was grateful to hear the feedback...
Thanks and thank you for the PM back. I will let you know how things go
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.
LAKLAND OWNERS GROUP #46
- Thread starter Bryan R. Tyler
- Start date
- Status
Thanks and thank you for the PM back. I will let you know how things go
My next challenge... a short scale fiver!!!
That's awesome, seriously. Once I get my CallowHill, it'll be a shootout as to whether I go Lakland or CallowHill on a Five. This makes it touugghhhh
sorry man! the stakes keep getting tougher and tougher..I know.....
I am always in a GAS quandry......just gotta resist...which I have been doing the last few weeks (at least!)
Can you still get a callowhill 5er? I thought they were out of business...
JazznFunk
Supporting Member
I'm wondering about the physics of a short-scale fiver. I mean, come on... the taut, piano-like Lakland B is what got a lot of us into these basses, the 5'ers specifically. Is a short-scale 5'er going against the Lakland 'sonic mission'? Money and GAS talk, of course, but is a short-scale 5'er with a great B sort of contradictory?
While I agree with you, and love the 35" scale 5ers, it is as you said....Money talks....in this economy, you do what you gotta do I guess. For people who cannot play a 35" scale, it does open up a whole new world to them. Good business it sounds like!
The awesome feeling neck is why I got into Laklands... Owen Biddle's short scale 6er has an awesome b string sound.
Wowza!
That is a purdy machine, congrats bro
What do you call that burst?
Thanks Luke! I suppose since the burst was my design, I get to name it, right? Well, I had it in my head, and I sent Carl a bunch of pictures to help get the idea into his head. When the finished body came back, he said it reminded him of a trip he took to Jamaica. I reckon that, for that reason, it should be called Jamaica Burst!
I've been hearing that forever, but for some reason, in January I just got it in me that I should email Dan Lakin and ask him myself, even though I couldn't think of one reason why his answer to me should be any different than the hundreds of other times I'm sure he's been asked. Rather than just say no, he directed me to Carl, and the rest is history.
Actually, it wasn't any more expensive than a normal US Lakland; in fact, it was less expensive than the 55-94's I see on Musician's Friend. Making this happen wasn't one bit about throwing enough money at someone; it was all about Carl's arrangement with Lakland and his willingness to take a shot at something different.
I've actually ventured off into a similar passion on my 2005 Dodge Ram. Here's a similar story for another hobby of mine:
Invalid Link Removed
I know a bit off subject, but if you want something bad enough, some of us think outside the box, show persistence, and get it done - regardless...
You'll enjoy your original Lakland bass - as well as telling the stories of its history down the road. Kudos for the staff at Lakland for pulling it together as you wanted from the beginning!
Haha, no worries
Well, whatever it ends up being called, JamaicaBurst is a sweet colour choice
I can see how giving your customers what they want is a good way to do business, but it seems that opening up to 34" 5vers is kind of doing away with something that had been a Lakland identity thing.
JazznFunk
Supporting Member
Nah - I think it's a good option...I know for me the 35" was not a selling point..but I ended up liking it. If I buy another 5er from Lakland I'll go to 34"
I remember my first 5er (F%$#er)----man talk about a Wobbler!!!!...alot has changed in the past 7-8 years tho.
JazznFunk
Supporting Member
I guess what I am trying to understand, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or offer some extra insight, but the extra inch is made up in bridge placement. I'm looking at my 55-01 and 44-01 basses now and have held them side by side (as much as one can) and also measured the fret spacing before. If the spacing between frets changed the intonation would change. Intonation is a finite, mathematical equation for all intents and purposes. Even if the bridge is further back, which it is, you intonate to the 12th fret as usual. How can one extra inch, made up by bridge placement only, make a bass so unplayable to some? I have never had any problem going back and forth from one bass to another, 4-string or 5, 34 or 35 inch scale. I'm guessing it's a string tension/feel thing?
That's not correct. The 12th fret is always located exactly half of the scale length away from the nut. So on a 34" bass, the 1th fret is 17" away from the nut, and on a 35" bass, the 12th fret it's 17.5" away from the nut. The bridge location never affects these dimensions.
That extra half inch in the first octave of frets is accomplished by spacing out each of the frets on a 35" bass a small amount, so as to keep the placement of each fret in proportion with the longer scale length.
The other extra half inch is located between the 12th fret and the nominal location of the bridge saddles, and this serves to move each of the upper frets a tiny amount relative to the nut as well, but this distance is not very noticeable. Of course the bridge is never exactly 17.5" away from the nut because it must be adjusted for intonation, but again the bridge location has no bearing on where the frets need to be.
JazznFunk
Supporting Member
I appreciate the clarification. I can't feel the difference, so I wondered where the variations were. Either way, 35" doesn't make much of a difference to my hands, but it certainly makes a difference in tone to my ears.
yeah it's a really small difference, i have no problem going back and forth between instruments of different scale length, be it 34" fender, 35" lakland, or fanned fret dingwall... but i agree that the instruments certainly feel different in terms of string tension.
It doesn't make any difference to my left (fretting) hand, but it makes a hell of a difference to my plucking hand. The change in string tension, particularly in the D and G strings, is pretty significant to me, and although I could use a 35" scale just fine on a gig or for recording, my preference by far is for 34" scale.
Anyway, I hope we don't rehash the whole Is-Scale-Length-Important topic in this thread (there are plenty that do that already), but the issue of what this means for Lakland's identity is certainly relevant. To me, one man's adherence to identity/tradition is another man's inability to adapt. Dan Lakin felt that 35" scales were best suited for his designs, which is certainly a fine choice for starting out, when he simply couldn't afford to have a bunch of different designs on hand. But now that Lakland is a well-known, marketable brand, IMO, it would have benefitted them to have offered 34" scales some time ago to appeal to people who want the Lakland sound but at a feel that is more traditional.
Of course, Roger Sadowsky has made a fine career out of building 34" scale basses, and I doubt he's inclined to start offering 35" scales. However, Roscoe, MTD, Skjold, Nordstrand, Valenti, and countless other companies offer multiple scale lengths (admittedly, some may require an upcharge), and I'd bet most would view it as an option/feature to attract a wider market as opposed to a hindrance.
- Status
