• 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 vs. MusicMan

#41
BigOldHarry said:
If you are talking about the USA EBMM Sterling, then there is no debate: That's a better bass than the MIK Skyline (which is a nice bass, no doubt). Build quality out of the EBMM factory is top-notch.

If you are talking about the Sterling "Sterling", then I'd guess the Skyline would be the ticket.

The EBMM will have better resale too - - The market is flooded with these 55-02s right now...

Which makes me think: Why don't you buy one used?
Click to expand...


I totally disagree with every aspect of your post........1st off, a USA EBMM has about the same resale value of a used 55/44-02. Either bass will run you about $900 on the used market. If anything, the 55-02's have the better resale value when you consider the fact that a new 55-02 typically sells for a few hundred less than a new EBMM. In regards to your claim that a USA EBMM is a better bass than a MIK/MII 55-02....well that's just nonsense considering that a 55-02 has a better electronics package, (usually) has a deluxe quilted maple top, and has an equally impressive fit/finish when compared to their 55/44-94 big brothers. I would claim that a MIK/MII 55/44-02 is every bit as good, if not better, than a USA EBMM (in regards to quality, the rest is pers. preference). As far as personal preference is concerned, I would choose a Lakland over an EBMM any day. Furthermore, I would choose a USA Lakland over a Skyline....but that's just how I roll. So, to the OP.....if being made in the USA is important to you - buy the EBMM (or save some more $$ and buy a USA Lakland....if buying the better bass is more of a concern, then get the 55-02!!
 
#42
Can't speak for the 5ers, but when it came time to let a bass go I kept my SR4 H and sold my 4-94. The SR4 has always felt right in my hands and I love its plug and play tone. While the 4-94 was beautifully crafted, the LH3 pre didn't move me. I love digging into my SR4 and I think the 4-94 was just too polite for me.
 
#43
christianharger said:
Here is my question for those of you who know way more about these specific basses than I do: What are, in your opinion, the major pros and cons of the Lakland Skyline 55-02 and the MusicMan Sterling 5 HH?

I realize that they are completely different pieces of equipment but I'm just interested in some opinions. You know, things that the "specs" lists on the websites or Musician's Friend can't tell me.

What do y'all think?
Click to expand...

These are very distant cousins at best. :)

You really need to just go out and demo them in person and let your ears, eyes and hands decide (not necessarily in that order).

Things to consider: active vs active\passive, 34 vs 35 scale, H\J pup config vs HH pup config, string spacing.

FWIW - I've owned a Lakland 55-01 and 44-02. Own a Stingray 4H. Have played SR5HH's and 55-02's but not in a gigging or recording situation.
 
#44
The downside with the Sterling5 HH is you wont get the traditional Musicman parallel humbucker sound because the humbucker is wired in series. Just choose 35" scale or 34"?
17.5 or 19mm string spacing? Blend knob or 5way switch? Its all up to you. Both has great customer service. The only 2 things i hate about the Lakland 55-02 are the tuners. Which i feel is not built like a tank. And i prefer the Bartolini pickups.
 
#49
Well I had the chance this past weekend to give them both a shot in a guitar store. The Lakland dominated the competition in my opinion, although the EBMM I was trying up against the Lakland was a 4 string (the only one they had) and it seemed to have a pretty lousy set-up. So maybe it was just an unfair battle, but as of now- my eyes are on the Lakland.
 
#50
christianharger said:
Sigh. I know deep down that the EBMM would be the more quality instrument. Something about the Lakland, though I haven't touched it yet, keeps drawing me in. We shall see after I play them both in the same sitting.

and believe Harry, I've got my eyes glued on the used market for these instruments.
Click to expand...

I can tell you from personal experience, I have had two USA EBMMs and I hated them. I got a Skyline and that was, as in the immortal words of Paul Harvey "the rest of the story"...the Laklands from Skyline to USA are friggin awesome.
 
#52
I just got my Lakland 55-02, and I am in the process of finding out whether to keep my SR5 or the Lakland (or both :-)

The MM sounds great, and it plays reasonably well. The Lakland doesn't sound 100% similar to the MM with the bridge humbucker ony, but I never expected it to do so as it is has different pickup and preamp, etc. But it sounds geat too, nonetheless. In fact, I also love the ability to blend in a little of the neck single coil, or even go 50/50 for a more 'J' kinda sound, and it plays great - I have always liked 35" for 5-stringers, and this one is set up great.

I'll update when I have tested both over a period of time and in different band contexts. So far, the Lakland is ahead by just a notch - I'd say 55/45...
 
#53
christianharger said:
What are, in your opinion, the major pros and cons of the Lakland Skyline 55-02 and the MusicMan Sterling 5 HH?
Click to expand...

You got your Lakland contingent and you got your Music Man contingent and they're both gonna root for their team, it just makes sense.

I just got a Sterling 5 HH the other day - first one I've ever even touched - and have fallen head over heels. I have a slew of Bongos and Stingray 5s and even a Jazz bass (shhhh) and none of them have been touched since the arrival of the Sterling.

Even allowing for the obvious "honeymoon period", this one is a killer. With my Stingray 5, I just flip the switch back towards the bridge and forget it even has a switch, but this Sterling has some seriously useful tones in all 5 positions.

Anyway, you have to play them both. There are some differences, and some people (not "a lot" or "most") find the 35" scale on the Lakland to be tiresome after a certain amount of time onstage. I am one of those people.

I'd say the Sterling is more capable of being aggressive, although that can be tamed with judicious EQ. (Keep in mind the last time I owned a 55-02 was about eight years ago, but I have had a 55-94, a Jerry Scheff 5, a Lakland Hollowbody, etc since then.)

Also keep in mind that I am a dedicated Ernie Ball Music Man kind of guy, but my vote is "Try the Sterling 5HH and you'll see what I mean."

goldSterlingHH5.jpg


Jack
 
#55
Even better in person, too. It's Medallion Gold, which I guess didn't sell well enough to keep around....so discontinued.

Funny, almost everyone says the same thing you did. But then we're hardly representative of the average bassist, I'm told.
 
#59
Well before I ever played a Lakland, I was a big fan of musicman. They always had a bunch of nice ones at the music store near my house and I love the way they sound... Then I played a Lakland. In the category of playability there is no comparison IMO. I still love the way a musicman sounds, and I would like to own one someday. However, I just bought a Lakland, and I couldn't be happier.
 
#60
Robs1887 said:
Well before I ever played a Lakland, I was a big fan of musicman. They always had a bunch of nice ones at the music store near my house and I love the way they sound... Then I played a Lakland. In the category of playability there is no comparison IMO. I still love the way a musicman sounds, and I would like to own one someday. However, I just bought a Lakland, and I couldn't be happier.
Click to expand...

Playability? What does that mean to you?

I ask because I consider "playability" to be quite dependent on how any given bass is setup. Relief, type of strings, bridge adjustments, all affect playability - and are all, of course, adjustable by the user.

It might mean something else to you, however.

Jack
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back