• 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.

Steinberger - L2 or XL2 - what is the REAL difference?

M

markorbit

Apr 16, 2004
626
173
#1
OK so I've dig out my old XL2 and I'm starting to think 'wow, what a great bass' BUT it just doesn't quite have the mojo of the old L2 that I used to have and I'm not sure why.

I know that on the original L2s:-
- the screws are on the top faceplate
- the battery compartment is centered
- the 3 knobs are styled differently
- the pickups are the orig EMG SS (mine has been retrofitted)
- the bridge has the knife-edge saddles

But what else changed? I THINK that the XL2 doesn't sound as Steinie as the L2 did and unless it is my imagination the neck seems a little more chunky but that could just be poppycock.

Can anyone shed any light on these excellent basses. Are L2s better and if so, why do you think that is?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RawOrange
#4
I was under the impression that the mould changed structurally and I wondered if anybody could confirm that and say 'yes, the old ones resonated much better' or something...

Wonderful basses though. I'm definitely going through a Steinbergers are so cool phase.

I'm always accidentally rotating the knobs though, wish I could really tighten them up somehow.
 
#5
I must have had a transition XL2 then, as mine had the removable 'half hoop' leg rest (not the flip down thingy) and XL2 style nut. I really like the original leg rest, and how it would pivit - really made this comfortable to play sitting.

I don't recall the XL2 having a battery box ... XL2A maybe, but the XL2 was passive all the way.

FWIW, mine was Ser#1066 IIRC

all the best,

R
 
#7
There seems to be a bit of confusion here about active versus passive Steinbergers. The EMG pickups in all the L-series basses (Ls and XLs) are active, while the XL-2A also has a Haz Labs preamp (active electronics)

I've owned a few of each over the years (except for an XL-2A) and I definitely hear the difference between the SS PUPs in the L2 and the later ones used in the XL-2. The L2s sound considerably warmer. I usually had flats on them, as I do on one of the two early L2s I own now.

The only other difference tonally might be due to the knife-edge bridge, but I can't quantify it. The sustain on all the graphite Steinbergers is insane.

The necks might have a slightly different profile, but I never noticed a particular difference.

The pivot plate changed as well with the newer model; they are slightly different in size, and the later one has a mottled matte finish while the one on the L was smooth and glossy.

The only other relevant issue I've heard about involves some VERY early L2s. Apparently Ned was experimenting with different composites for the bodies, so they weren't identical at first, and thus some might sound a bit different.

There are a lot of transitional examples out there, with one or the other leg-rest, for example.
 
#9
Have to say I agree - to an extent - with One Drop's comment that L2s sound warmer. I've not long taken delivery of an early '80s model and, compared to my XL2A, it does sound a tad warmer. I'm gonna have to explore this A/B test a bit more, but I doubt it's the pups; possibly the active circuit, even set flat? Unless someone with both an early L2 and and later XL2 (non active circuit) has done a similar comparison? Perhaps they can comment?
 
#10
It is the p/u's. The early L2's have what is now considered HBCS pickups. Most of the XL's have std HB pickups. Call Don at headless USA, he keeps HBCS's in stock. It will warm up the sound to the L2. I have done this conversion myself. Beyond that I have a set of Bartolini CB pickups that are reported to add a lot of lowend heft to the L2/XL2 sound. I'll report back once I've tested that theory. Rock on.
 
#11
One Drop said:
The only other relevant issue I've heard about involves some VERY early L2s. Apparently Ned was experimenting with different composites for the bodies, so they weren't identical at first, and thus some might sound a bit different.
Click to expand...

I can confirm that. That's what I was told by the guy doing the fabrication when I ordered mine in '81. He also said they had to discard many of the castings due to imperfections, which was at least part of the reason for dabbling with the composite formula, and why they were falling behind on production. Mine was # 082. It was quite heavy and had a dull satin sheen. The next one that arrived at the dealer a couple months later was # 063 or # 064. It was much lighter weight than mine, had a shiny "plastic-like" appearance, and sounded noticeably thinner. So yeah, the early ones can differ in material and their serial numbers didn't necessarily run sequentially along a build timeline.
 
#13
Hello, I have a 1983 Brooklyn L2 and I think it is a amazing bass. I have also purchased a Newburgh 1988 XL2 and brought it home to play them back to back. They are both loaded with Rotosound Swing Bass strings in a 40/60/80/100 and both have similar PU heights. Needless to say they sound COMPLETELY different. The L2 sounds as expected, dark yet with omnipresence, near as studio clone a sound of the L2 that Geddy Lee used on Grace Under Pressure, as it should...... BUT, the XL2 is brighter and more active sounding. It can easily duplicate the L2 but it has a sound capacity that is immeasurably deeper and broader, and even has additional gain over the L2 electronics. The best way to describe the difference is akin to playing a STD Fender Jazz bass, then change over to an active Warwick Streamer Jazzman with the Alnico HBs. Simply stated the 1988 XL2 I own has much deeper pockets, sharper insiors, and sounds modern as any active bass sold today. The L2, in my opinion IS the signature tone. I admire both equally and relish owning both. On a side note, nobody has mentioned this so far but the sizes are subtly different as well. The L2 is the smallest of the bunch and is easily 5mm narrower and 6mm shorter on the body. The XL2 is what the XT2 was cloned from, as I also purchased a used XT2 and in comparison, the XT2 mimics the L2 sound well, IMHO for 1/40th the price. Finally, the new bridge design on the XL2 has saddles that are rod captured with spherical ends that retain with the bridge where as the L2 saddles simply fall away like black LEGOS........ Looking into a XM.... or a X-Factor.... any feedback on these is appreciated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: One Drop, Iristone and MBB
#15
lowrez said:
All XL2s have a battery compartment as the emgs require em. The xl2as also have a active preamp... I think the only passive basses (spare spirits) were The Flying V-ish looking P series.
Click to expand...
Old thread, but I can confirm that at least some of the XP2s were indeed active... a 9v batt went under a small front cover (it looked like a crack in the pickguard). My first bass was an XP-2 (1986)... wish I still had it.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back