• 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.

MTD 535 or Lakland 55-94?

#21
I've played quite a few 55-94's and MTD 535s at Bass Central. IMO the 55-94s have a deeper tone. The 535 sounds more hi-fi. I also thought the 535 had a slightly better slap tone due to the extra brightness the bass has compared to the 55-94. I also thought the 535s neck felt more comfortable in my hands than the Laklands. The Laklands necks felt bulkier to me.

Both basses have extremely good quality and tone and depending on the music your doing each would have its own role. You did say you play in your church and I know MTDs are notorious for being played in the world of church music.
 
#23
Dr_Funkdamental said:
Dont hear that too often...wow. I can see a -94, but a 5501? Ive played both, and the MTD destroyed my 55-01. I dont think you can go wrong either way. My two fav bass players ever play each (Gouche on MTD, and Skeet Curtis on Lakland).
Click to expand...

Sounds a bit strange, but true :) Though I may add that the MTD 535 had a amazing sound. The standard pickups in the 55-01 were a bit weak, but for the price good enough. THe playibilty however could not be compared. Even though my MTD 535 was setup by a local luthier, the 55-01 was much nicer to play on. The B-string on the MTD 535 was weak and unfocused. I also had problems with a few dead notes on some of the frets. The lakland had none of these problems.
 
#24
I've never owned both but I've played both live. MTD hands down for me but I like that hifi zing that it has and the monstrous low end it projects. Although that may not help much in a dense mix unless you boost the mids a bit, that's the sound I dig. I never thought to use the word compressed while describing the 55-94 but it makes sense. The low end wasn't as full as I would like but it works well for a lot of my favorite bassists such as Jackie Clark, Eric Smith, Dale Black, and my friend Akil Wemusa. They would sound great playing anything though. :)

In a nutshell, both basses are excellent. It just depends on your sound goals.
 
#26
I prefer the 535, although I traded mine and kept the 55-94... since my wife bought me the Lakland as a surprise!

The only reasons the 535 went was that it had a LOT of sonic overlap with my #1 bass (Ken Lawrence Brase 5) and I was offered an Alleva Coppolo LG-5 in trade when I was really 'jonesin for a jazz bass.

You really can't go wrong with either, but I like the neck of the 535 better and the clarity and sustain of the bass was just amazing AND it was a great player!

What a horrible (yeah, ...right!) choice to have to make! Either way you win!

Dan K.
 
#27
hasbeen said:
that's not just your ear: the 55-94 is quite compressed. It is not as big and round as a Fender or a USA MTD.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this if you are talking about the original Bartolini electronics package. Those 55-94's are very punchy, very warm, very mid present, and maybe a bit compressed in the deepest lows and the upper treble (so kind of the mirror image yin yang of the inherent MTD voicing).

With the new Lakland electronics package, the tone of the 55-94, while not as 'wide as the MTD (nothing is), is MUCH deeper and has the capability the get much more 'zing' to the tone.

As posted above, both of these basses (MTD and Lakland) are equal in quality. Most 55-94's that I've played sound quite similar, while the MTD's, while always having a general MTD profile (big, wide and modern) can vary a bit due to wood combinations.

I've owned a 55-94 (Barts) and two MTDs (ash/ash with maple board and wenge/ash). I liked the MTD's a LOT better at home, but that Lakland really sat in a busy mix better to me. So, depends what you want!
 
#29
KJung said:
I would agree with this if you are talking about the original Bartolini electronics package. Those 55-94's are very punchy, very warm, very mid present, and maybe a bit compressed in the deepest lows and the upper treble (so kind of the mirror image yin yang of the inherent MTD voicing).

With the new Lakland electronics package, the tone of the 55-94, while not as 'wide as the MTD (nothing is), is MUCH deeper and has the capability the get much more 'zing' to the tone.

As posted above, both of these basses (MTD and Lakland) are equal in quality. Most 55-94's that I've played sound quite similar, while the MTD's, while always having a general MTD profile (big, wide and modern) can vary a bit due to wood combinations.

I've owned a 55-94 (Barts) and two MTDs (ash/ash with maple board and wenge/ash). I liked the MTD's a LOT better at home, but that Lakland really sat in a busy mix better to me. So, depends what you want!
Click to expand...

Yes...my 55-94 has the Bart package. Side note: just as of recently, I've been playing the bass in passive mode. I actually like it better.
 
#30
hasbeen said:
Yes...my 55-94 has the Bart package. Side note: just as of recently, I've been playing the bass in passive mode. I actually like it better.
Click to expand...

+1 That Lakland Bart pre was a bit wooly sounding to me. IMO and IME, it helped a LOT to shift the mid frequency up to one of the higher settings (750 I believe, maybe 800hz). The factory setting sat right on top of the bass control. When you move that mid freq up and dial just a bit in, it adds a bit of brightness and 'growl' that those basses seem to be missing. Playing passive has a similar effect, since you are removing the built in bass boost I hear with that pre.

The new Lakland circuit does not have this issue IMO.
 
#32
Dan Knowlton said:
I prefer the 535, although I traded mine and kept the 55-94... since my wife bought me the Lakland as a surprise!

The only reasons the 535 went was that it had a LOT of sonic overlap with my #1 bass (Ken Lawrence Brase 5) and I was offered an Alleva Coppolo LG-5 in trade when I was really 'jonesin for a jazz bass.

You really can't go wrong with either, but I like the neck of the 535 better and the clarity and sustain of the bass was just amazing AND it was a great player!...

Dan K.
Click to expand...

My PC crushed when I was typing the post to the thread, so I need to type everything again.

My MTD 535 felt and sounded better to me than any Lakland I've tried (by no means the Lakland is an inferior bass; nice bass, not my cup of tea)

The MTD - KL Brase comparison is spot on.

I own the first ever Ken Lawrence Brase I (one of my top 5 basses of the herd), and I've compared the Brase to my custom ordered MTD 535 in every possible way (live, recording, rehearsal situation). There was a great deal of tonal overlap between the two, but the mids and low mids of the Brase are bolder and fuller, so the MTD had to go
 
#33
drnknmstr said:
I know you live in Singapore and that shipping's a pain in the butt, however those instruments are relatively easy to flip. If you bought something used for $2000 and you didn't want it, you could probably resell it pretty easily without taking a huge hit or loss of money.
Click to expand...

that would probably mean shipping loss 2 ways. it's really difficult to flip high-end stuff over here, takes a tremendous amount of luck
 
#34
pickles said:
Try it passive with a Sadowsky outboard :bassist:

For me 55-94 with either set of pickups sounds way better in the mix than a 535 for 99% of the music I'd consider playing.
Click to expand...

I'll have to give that a shot. I do have an Aggie Tone Hammer coming for that very same application.
 
#35
KJung said:
+1 That Lakland Bart pre was a bit wooly sounding to me. IMO and IME, it helped a LOT to shift the mid frequency up to one of the higher settings (750 I believe, maybe 800hz). The factory setting sat right on top of the bass control. When you move that mid freq up and dial just a bit in, it adds a bit of brightness and 'growl' that those basses seem to be missing. Playing passive has a similar effect, since you are removing the built in bass boost I hear with that pre.

The new Lakland circuit does not have this issue IMO.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Yes...I already had shifted the mids up. It's such a challenge though with active basses. On board pres in addition to these damn amps I play that have WAY too many knobs. :hiding:;)
 
#36
fullrangebass said:
... I've compared the Brase to my custom ordered MTD 535 in every possible way (live, recording, rehearsal situation). There was a great deal of tonal overlap between the two, but the mids and low mids of the Brase are bolder and fuller, so the MTD had to go
Click to expand...

I really agree with your assessment of the Brase/MTD tone. I play mostly at churches, so there are some occasions where I'm playing very legato passages - the Brase just shines on that and does equally well with the MTD on the more stacatto, burpy lines as well.

I just don't understand why Ken Lawrence is not as sought after as the Fodera's!

Dan K.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back