I love the look of this bass. Man.
Those vintage colored P5's look great.
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.
I love the look of this bass. Man.
Mine is one of them. Really love the bass but I'm needing a more modern-ish J/MM style 5string. I agree with all the positive comments on the Fender P5's. Really well built, great sounding and playing P basses with a low B.
And the pearloid PG looks sweet on the Candy Cola!
Apparently, P5 owners are too busy playing them to talk about them...![]()
Bump, regardless.
That's how P Bass players roll.
Has anybody had the opportunity to do an A/B comparison with a Fender P5 and any of the basses from higher end builders (Alleva-Coppolo, Lull, Sadowsky, Nordstrand, etc)?
Curious how they each stack up, tone-wise.
Fat beams or Lo-Riders. Anyone using these on their pV?
I've owned P5 basses made by Lull, Benavente, and Sadowsky. I haven't done a direct A/B because I've never owned a Fender P5, but I've played a few.
In short, the Am Std P5 has the most traditional Fender P-bass tone. The Lull P5 I had was passive (Fralin pickups), but also 35" scale, which gives a slightly but distinctly different timbre to my ears: "tighter", more modern, across all strings. My Sadowsky P5s are 34" and sound more traditional than Lull, but due to construction methods and electronics they still sound slightly more hi-fi than Fender, even in passive mode.
Last time I went to the Benavente site, their "51 Model" slab-body P-basses weren't listed so I guess they are no longer in production.
I would like to own a Fender P5 one day, but right now I'm delighted with the Sadowskys. Yes, they sound a little more modern than Fender, but response is amazingly even over the entire fretboard. Sure, you can find Fenders with no significant weak spots, but the Sadowskys are amazing, perhaps due to the thicker headstock and graphite stiffening rods in the neck. I also like the light-weight chambered bodies, and fretwork is second to none. I'm not going to get into the "is a Sadowsky worth the price?" debate, but for the NYC models you are paying for a top-of-the-line custom shop bass rather than a production line one.
I posted pics of my Sadowsky and Benaventes earlier this thread. I no longer own the Lull.
I've never played Alleva-Coppolo, but from numerous threads here on TalkBass they are the boutique to buy for the most traditional Fender tone. If I want that, I'll get the Fender P5. Again, Sadowsky is working best for me right now. The B string is amazing, as good as the 35" basses I've owned (except maybe the composite-necked Modulus Quantum, which was a very different animal tone-wise), and I have one strung with TI flats that sounds killer for Motown/Stax/blues/classic rock.
Cheers, Fuzz - that's exactly the type of response I was looking for!![]()
You're welcome. Thanks in return for the most excellent thread!
You didn't ask about playability, but in short: my Lull had a "slim, fast" neck, whereas Sadowsky is chunkier... at least as much as Fender, maybe a slightly more. The Benaventes are chunkiest of all.
Oh: in a Lull thread someone said they ordered a Lull P5 in 34" scale, so that might be something to consider if scale length matters to you. Last I checked, Lull was less expensive than Sadowsky, Nordstrand (which I haven't tried), and Alleva-Coppola, but that was a decade ago.