Sadowsky vs Mike Lull

[bass12]

I've owned four NYC Sadowskys (three Jazzes and one Modern) and have tried out several others at the shop in NYC on a couple of occasions. I own one Lull (an M5V) and have tried a few others. Both companies make first-rate basses and are run by cool, down-to-earth people. Sadowskys are 34" exclusively, while Lull makes 5 strings in both 34" and 35" scale lengths. Lull 5s have 18mm string spacing while the Sadowsky 5s feature 19mm spacing. The neck profile on both basses are different. I personally feel more at home on the Lull necks than on the Sadowsky necks (I find them to be slightly less chunky). Ultimately, I sold all three of my Sadowsky Jazzes. They just didn't sound quite the way I wanted them to (despite really liking the Sadowsky preamp). My Lull has a Sadowsky preamp and, yes, it sounds very much like a Sadowsky. The B on my Lull is definitely superior to either of the Bs on my 5 string Sadowsky Jazzes, though the B on my Sadowsky Modern stands up very well.

It's funny, because when I bought my Lull I thought of it as a "lesser" bass than the Sadowskys simply because, at the time, the price was considerably lower. But I soon came to the conclusion that my Lull was every bit as well made as my Sadowskys. I've now been playing my Lull for going on twelve years, on I don't know how many hundreds of gigs, and it has been an absolutely fantastic bass. Would I recommend one over the other (assuming we're talking NYC Sadowskys)? It would depend entirely on what you are looking for in a bass.

 

[bass12]

Lull is gone and Roger keeps on kicking arse......

Mike is gone but the rest of the Lull family is still going strong.

 

[stevensivak]

How can two basses with the same pre-amp, scale length and similar construction have B strings that sound different?

 

[bass12]

I was under the impression that Lull get their parts made to their specs at various vendors and assemble them, whereas Sadowsky is doing all the woodwork themselves.

Sadowsky outsources the making of the bodies and necks. Assembly is done at the shop. I took a tour of the Lull shop a couple of years ago but I don't remember if I saw any CNC machines. I'm pretty sure Lull also outsources the making of the bodies and necks.

 

[Geri O]

Lull is gone and Roger keeps on kicking arse......

Excuse me, but you are way out of date…

We lost Mike, but Spencer has picked up and taken off with Mike Lull Custom Guitars big-time.

Unless you are trying to make a point about Mike’s passing….

 

[pfschim]

I got my Lull M4V 16 years ago. Worked with Mike himself on the build, which was great as he was a super nice guy to work with. This bass was a 50th birthday present to myself.

When I went to a local shop (Gelb Music in Redwood City) that had a fairly wide range of high end basses (Lull, Sadowsky, F-Bass, Pedulla etc..) to make my choice, I initially felt like I would end up with a Sadowsky based on reputation. I kept an open mind, and took my time playing a half dozen or so basses and the Lull just kept coming back into my hands like it belonged there. The sound of the Lull was exactly what I wanted a Jazz to sound like ... the whole "sound in my head" thing. The Sadowsky was a fine instrument for sure, but it felt kind of clunky and stiff to me (if that makes sense), and while it sounded fine, it just did not resonate with me any where close to the Lull.

So, I ended up with the Lull and have never been disappointed in my choice.

 

[bass12]

How can two basses with the same pre-amp, scale length and similar construction have B strings that sound different?

Are you asking about the Sadowsky Jazzes vs the Moderns? If so then pickup placement plays a large role. Then there is the fact that basses can be inconsistent, regardless of whether or not they share identical specs.

 

[Holdsg]

I have owned several basses from both manufacturers. Loved each and every one from both. Including a few that were custom built for me from both luthiers.

I currently own one Lull, a P4 that I consider my #1 passive bass. It’s perfect for my Americana band.

I don’t own a Sadowsky currently, but have his preamp in two basses from other manufacturers, because, IMO and IME, it is the best preamp for me and my needs. Both of those basses I use in my Zeppelin band, for which I need to play a sunburst Fender Jazz bass. thanks to the preamp, I actually love how the Fender (and my Sire backup) sound and the Fender and Sire sound so similar due again to the preamp.

So to me I have the best of both worlds.

Can’t really go wrong with either a Sadowsky NYC or Lull Bellevue.

 

[KellyC]

I'm curious as to how Valenti compares to Sadowsky and Lull.
Anyone have any insights they can share?

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

Sadowsky outsources the making of the bodies and necks. Assembly is done at the shop. I took a tour of the Lull shop a couple of years ago but I don't remember if I saw any CNC machines. I'm pretty sure Lull also outsources the making of the bodies and necks.

I thought I had read that Sadowsky did some limited outsourcing of parts in the early days, but was now doing everything. Maybe things have changed.

 

[bass12]

I thought I had read that Sadowsky did some limited outsourcing of parts in the early days, but was now doing everything. Maybe things may have changed.

Perhaps you're talking about Sadowsky obtaining parts from Warmoth at one stage? But, yeah, I think Sadowsky has otherwise always outsourced the making of bodies and necks.

 

[tb-player]

I’ve owned 3 Lulls and 3 NYC Sadowskys. They are both phenomenal choices. However, I think Sadowsky edges Lull because of a couple of things.

Neck profile: Sadowsky has a nicer feel. I found the Lull to be a teensy bit thick while the Sadowsky has a very comfortable tapered neck that gradually gets thinner as you go up the neck.

Preamp: The Sadowsky onboard pre is iconic. Nothing sounds like it. Lull uses Bartolini. It’s nice but can’t quite match the tone of the Sadowsky. Also, all active basses should have a passive tone control. Sadowsky does. Lull doesn’t.

String spacing: Lull only does 18mm on a 5. I need 19mm, so Sadowsky wins.

String retainer: this might seem silly, but a Lull 5-string headstock has 2 round string retainers. With the 5 tuning pegs, it looks really messy. My Sadowsky 5 had a nice, clean bar. Although I wish one of them would do an angled headstock so retainers aren’t necessary at all. In the end, the Sadowsky headstock seems less crowded.

Headstock and body shape: it’s a preference thing but Sadowsky wins both categories.

In other areas like fit, finish, quality, fretwork & overall sound, they’re neck & neck. Both really nice basses.

My opinions, but yeah, Sadowsky wins… unless you decide to let MTD in the contest.

 

[chris_b]

You never see them in the same place. Coincidence?

For the last 8 years you'd have seen a Sadowsky Jazz and Lull PJ5 on my gigs.

Both sound excellent (the best sounding basses I've owned), look good (burst and tort) and play like a dream.

 

[Kevan Campbell]

Both great options, for me it came down to liking the Sadowsky “sound” more than the Lull I checked out (although that Lull’s neck felt absolutely amazing). I was about to buy a Sadowsky Metro when a used NYC popped up on Roger’s website for a few hundred more, so I went that direction.

When it came time to commission custom builds is also a pivotal moment for my story. I had a Mike Lull T5 for a while that I adored the sound and look of but was in physical agony playing, and after I sold it I asked Paul and Mike about a custom T5 with some unique options…they very kindly declined as my ideas would have taken them too far from the vibe of the models they offered. I wasn’t angry at all about their answer but that did stop me from pursuing Lull basses any further.

Later I asked Roger and Ellis about some custom build ideas and they made them into reality in the form of an amazing bass (which I now have two of).

One amazing thing about both companies is that they welcome people to come visit with them to discuss builds, which I find very helpful after getting the blocked from visiting Fender Custom Shop.

 

[bass12]

I’ve owned 3 Lulls and 3 NYC Sadowskys. They are both phenomenal choices. However, I think Sadowsky edges Lull because of a couple of things.

Neck profile: Sadowsky has a nicer feel. I found the Lull to be a teensy bit thick while the Sadowsky has a very comfortable tapered neck that gradually gets thinner as you go up the neck.

Preamp: The Sadowsky onboard pre is iconic. Nothing sounds like it. Lull uses Bartolini. It’s nice but can’t quite match the tone of the Sadowsky. Also, all active basses should have a passive tone control. Sadowsky does. Lull doesn’t.

String spacing: Lull only does 18mm on a 5. I need 19mm, so Sadowsky wins.

String retainer: this might seem silly, but a Lull 5-string headstock has 2 round string retainers. With the 5 tuning pegs, it looks really messy. My Sadowsky 5 had a nice, clean bar. Although I wish one of them would do an angled headstock so retainers aren’t necessary at all. In the end, the Sadowsky headstock seems less crowded.

Headstock and body shape: it’s a preference thing but Sadowsky wins both categories.

In other areas like fit, finish, quality, fretwork & overall sound, they’re neck & neck. Both really nice basses.

My opinions, but yeah, Sadowsky wins… unless you decide to let MTD in the contest.

I actually find the Lull necks to feel a bit thick. Weird! Regarding the preamp, Lull offers Bartolini, Aguilar, Nordstrand or Trickfish as standard options, but if you want them to install a different preamp for you then they will.

Edit: I meant to say that I find the Sadowsky necks a bit thick feeling.

 

[tb-player]

I actually find the Lull necks to feel a bit thick. Weird! Regarding the preamp, Lull offers Bartolini, Aguilar, Nordstrand or Trickfish as standard options, but if you want them to install a different preamp for you then they will.

I said the Lull neck was thick too.

Good point on the preamps. I only had bartolinis so I never experienced the other options.

 

[bass12]

I said the Lull neck was thick too.

Good point on the preamps. I only had bartolinis so I never experienced the other options.

Oops, I meant the Sadowsky necks, not the Lull.

 

[wysiwyg248]

In January 1997, Bass Player magazine evaluated a bunch of 5 strings. Lull and Sadowsky were among them.
Sadowsky was rated better than Lull, but not by much.
In any case, I am biased. I own a Sadowsky and that thing plays by itself, I get a ton of complements about tone, looks, etc. IMHO their preamp is legendary.

 

[bass12]

In January 1997, Bass Player magazine evaluated a bunch of 5 strings. Lull and Sadowsky were among them.
Sadowsky was rated better than Lull, but not by much.
In any case, I am biased. I own a Sadowsky and that thing plays by itself, I get a ton of complements about tone, looks, etc. IMHO their preamp is legendary.

I love the Sadowsky preamp and it’s great that you can buy it on its own. To me my Lull is the best of both worlds: I get a 35” Jazz with a neck I prefer the feel of, and the Sadowsky sound (I find that the Sadowsky pre pairs really nicely with the Seymour Duncan single coils that come stock on the Lull M5Vs).

 

[BlueTalon]

We lost Mike, but Spencer has picked up and taken off with Mike Lull Custom Guitars big-time.

Pssst. Don't forget about Preston.