Modifying a G&L L-2500

Discussion in 'Hardware, Setup & Repair [BG]' started by feanor727, May 15, 2003.

  1. feanor727


    May 15, 2003
    Arlington, TX
    I've owned a G&L L-2500 for about 3 months now and absolutely love it except for one thing. There's no way to blend the pickups. After much thought and deliberation, I'm considering making the following modifications: A) Replace the rear EQ control with "stacked" pot wired for bass and treble. B) Rewire the existing volume and treble pots to each control the output volume of a pickup. I found the wiring schematic for it on G&L's website, and I realize I'd have to change the "position" of the volume knobs to before the pickup selector switch.

    Now for the point of my post, is there any advice/warnings/suggestions that you could offer before I start this? Have any G&L owners tried this modification and found it doesn't work? Any who are feeling a desire to throttle me for marring the perfection of this instrument? Any recommendations for replacement pots? I appreciate any and all comments. Thanks in advance.
  2. What will you do with the mini switch for the pickup selector? If you are thinking of blending, then I wouldn't use two volume pots, it just isn't as practical if you like the slightly-favoured sound of one pickup. Have you looked into installing a center detented pot as an actual blend? You could then switch out the pickup selector for a two-way kill switch, muting the bass even when it is in passive mode. A cool thing to look into would be changing the selector for a parallel/series switch, and having the ability to have each pickup in series or parallel. This would give you even more tonal options, and make your 2500 the most versatile beast around.
  3. Chasarms

    Chasarms Casual Observer

    May 24, 2001
    Bettendorf, IA USA
    AN L2500 already offers series/parrallel switch as part of the original circuit.

    Why not simply replace the three-way on/on PU selector with a pan pot?

    I certainly wouldn't take any on more than that, as it is a really sweet circuit that you run the chance of screwing up.

    I think you'd also goof the active/passive selectibility if you did that.