Got this 9 pound 3 ounce beauty on the way!
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.
ptidwell
Commercial User
Can anyone tell me in the early 55-94 isn't the MM pickup a quad coil?
And the current LH3 is a dual coil. I got hooked on Lakland 55-94 and 55-02 during the pandemic. So, I haven't been able to A/B the two live but did find this youtube video. I did drop Bartolini's in my 55-94 but my MM pickup is a dual coil. My 55-02 has the LH3 electronics. Also, I have a John East Uni-Pre in my 55-94 as well. Woods are different and they sound nothing alike which is a good thing in my opinion. Wondering if I want to try the quad MM to capture that classic Lakland 55-94 mojo.
And the current LH3 is a dual coil. I got hooked on Lakland 55-94 and 55-02 during the pandemic. So, I haven't been able to A/B the two live but did find this youtube video. I did drop Bartolini's in my 55-94 but my MM pickup is a dual coil. My 55-02 has the LH3 electronics. Also, I have a John East Uni-Pre in my 55-94 as well. Woods are different and they sound nothing alike which is a good thing in my opinion. Wondering if I want to try the quad MM to capture that classic Lakland 55-94 mojo.
Last edited:
Sadly I did not get time to take photos but today I got my old LPB Glaub back. I had sold it to Tim Marks 10 or 11 years ago because I needed some cash. I had messaged him a few times over the years letting him know that I would buy it back if he decided to get rid of it. Well he has started moving towards mainly Fenders and messaged me a year or two back and regrettably I was not in a position to get it. Fast forward to last week and I see the bass listed here for sale. STILL not in a position to buy it back but I just couldn't let it go again. So I am once again loving my old Lakland and trying to off some stuff quick to cover it. So I now have back my favorite USA Glaub I owned and one of my favorite Skylines Glaubs. Never to be sold again. I will post photos tomorrow.
I also spent a lot of time paying closer attention to the small spec differences as far as measurements. If anyone is interested in any of that info, I will be happy to document a lot of it. It would be interesting to get some measurements on the newer Skylines as well. I know that there have been some small changes to the USA 44-64's and XX-60's but I have a theory that they did not transfer over to the Skyline line.
2ndBassGuitar
Commercial User
- Jan 17, 2008
- 1,250
- 1,692
- Disclosures
- Dealer for Phil Jones Bass, Lakland, Brubaker Basses, Maruszczyk Instruments
I have a new 44-64 here and a couple 44-64 Custom PJs I can measure (a lot of the specs are on the Lakland web page already). What exactly are you looking for?
Body thickness and headstock thickness. I knew that the Skylines had (or still have) thinner bodies than the USA line but I just learned today about the headstock thickness difference. Or maybe I knew and forgot I knew.
The body thickness difference is new to me, but the headstock is visibly thicker on the US basses.
But I am not sure if that's just the Korean ones are all of them. Also when the body and neck manufacturing came in house the CNC info for the neck profiles (for the JO and BG models at the very least) wasn't able to move over so the profiles are slightly different. I never got full details on what way its different but I know they are. I am curious if the Skyline models changed too. My guess is they didn't because there would be no need to but I don't know for sure. That means the XX-60 and 44-64 Skyline models might have the classic profiles but the USA models don't.
2ndBassGuitar
Commercial User
- Jan 17, 2008
- 1,250
- 1,692
- Disclosures
- Dealer for Phil Jones Bass, Lakland, Brubaker Basses, Maruszczyk Instruments
Skyline 44-64 headstock thickness is .75". Appears to be standard on all the Skylines I have here (including a 2010). Bodies appear to be 1.75" standard (obviously there are contours). Thought one might be a tad thinner.
So
- I think I am wrong about vintage Fender body thicknesses. I think they are thinner than 1.75"
- They must have made an update at some point because 1.75" is the USA body thickness and the Korean Skylines were thinner than that.
OK, I have it backwards. The USA 44-64 is 1.625" thick which is vintage Fender thickness. Skylines are thicker (not thinner like I said) at 1.75".
I would be interested in knowing if the other USA models that aren't based on vintage Fenders are also 1.625" thick.
I would be interested in knowing if the other USA models that aren't based on vintage Fenders are also 1.625" thick.
there were 2 thicknesses (at the nut) of P-basses produced over the years.
in the old days, there was the "standard" width of 1.75" which had the name of Bob Glaub attached to it.
and the jazz width 1.5" which had the name of Duck Dunn attached to it
at one point, you could see either US or Skylines with these names and nut widths
when Lakland started in on the number scheme, 44-64, etc. things got a little more weird, and limited on the Skyline side of things. so it gets a little more murky for me.
But there was a Skyline bass called the 44-64 Custom, with a bound and blocked jazz-width neck (that would have earlier been called the Duck Dunn). I think the 1.75" width Skyline went away around this time.
I am just not aware of any 4-string P-basses made with the tweener 1.625" neck, unless they were custom built that way.
Others can chime in that know better.
in the old days, there was the "standard" width of 1.75" which had the name of Bob Glaub attached to it.
and the jazz width 1.5" which had the name of Duck Dunn attached to it
at one point, you could see either US or Skylines with these names and nut widths
when Lakland started in on the number scheme, 44-64, etc. things got a little more weird, and limited on the Skyline side of things. so it gets a little more murky for me.
But there was a Skyline bass called the 44-64 Custom, with a bound and blocked jazz-width neck (that would have earlier been called the Duck Dunn). I think the 1.75" width Skyline went away around this time.
I am just not aware of any 4-string P-basses made with the tweener 1.625" neck, unless they were custom built that way.
Others can chime in that know better.
wow, I was off....oh well...has happened before, will happen again.
I have nothing on body thickness.
I have nothing on body thickness.
2ndBassGuitar
Commercial User
- Jan 17, 2008
- 1,250
- 1,692
- Disclosures
- Dealer for Phil Jones Bass, Lakland, Brubaker Basses, Maruszczyk Instruments
Wow! I had no idea that they moved to B width on the 44-64. I wonder when that happened.
A Wayback Machine search shows that the last website capture that mentioned 1.75" for the 44-64 was Oct 27th 2020. In the next capture on Jan 20th 2021 this mention is gone. So it must have happened in that timeframe.
This is good to know. The 1.75" nut was the reason I wasn't interested. A 1.625" makes a lot more sense.
