• 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.

The Mike Lull Club

Status
Not open for further replies.
#21
Here's my M5 # 759, can I join. I still gotta figure out how to post large pictures
 

Attachments

  • DSC03145.jpg
    DSC03145.jpg
    32.2 KB · Views: 357
#24
I had 3, trying to sell the last one, not because i don't love Lull but I am off work for the next few months and need cash. I will turn around and buy more when this turns around. 1st was a M5V ash/Maple, frailns and
bart with natural finish. That one went to Ryan. I bought AG's custom that was M5V Ash/Maple, figured maple top, Nordstrand single coils and Audere pre. Sold to tb'er. Last is my Trans black M5 figured maple top with Duncans and Bart. If I can get by, I may keep that one. All different versions of a great builder and a great person to deal with, Mike Lull.
If my house is suddenly Lull free, that will be just depressing...
 
#29
I know this has been covered in other threads, but allow me to make this observation.
I see these High End builders making basses that are kind of like the 70s Marcus Miller Jazz on steroids but then instead of using the 70s placement like they should,they use the 60s.
What's up with that?
I have a Moon and a Atelier Z, both with the 60s placement and both are just a little bit off, as far as the sound that I'm looking for.Both of them are natural so moving the pickup back would leave an ugly scar that would be difficult to hide.Maybe a ramp made out of nice ash finished in hi gloss.It would destroy the resale value of my basses, but if that gets me the tone I'm after there would be no reason to sell them.
What was it about the 60s placement that makes it still the #1 choice for builders?
 
#30
gimmeagig said:
I know this has been covered in other threads, but allow me to make this observation.
I see these High End builders making basses that are kind of like the 70s Marcus Miller Jazz on steroids but then instead of using the 70s placement like they should,they use the 60s.
What's up with that?
I have a Moon and a Atelier Z, both with the 60s placement and both are just a little bit off, as far as the sound that I'm looking for.Both of them are natural so moving the pickup back would leave an ugly scar that would be difficult to hide.Maybe a ramp made out of nice ash finished in hi gloss.It would destroy the resale value of my basses, but if that gets me the tone I'm after there would be no reason to sell them.
What was it about the 60s placement that makes it still the #1 choice for builders?
Click to expand...

You know, IME and IMHO, the 60's sound is what more people are after. You can make it sound fuller like a P but still have that jazz growl. The 70's thing I think is a more selective market and the majority of shoppers want the traditional jazz bass tone, which, in what I see, is more of the 60's sound.

Just for reference I have an American Jazz with 60's positioning and I have a Mike Lull on the way with 70's placement.
 
#32
B.C. said:
You know, IME and IMHO, the 60's sound is what more people are after. You can make it sound fuller but still have that jazz growl. The 70's thing I think is a more selective market and the majority of shoppers want the traditional jazz bass tone, which, in what I see, is more of the 60's sound.
Click to expand...
Just to expand on this, as I've dug into this myself...

The "60's" placement is really very simply the "standard" placement. Fender started off with this placement, and relatively speaking, for a limited period of time, tried a different pickup placement in the 70's. There may have even been a third, but I can't recall for sure, tho even if they did it was probably even shorter lived.

Eventually, Fender returned to the original pickup placement, because it makes the bass sound a bit warmer and fuller, which appeals to a bigger market.

However, for a smaller market that really enjoys the extra aggression you get from moving that bridge pickup 1/2" further towards the bridge (such as myself), the 70's placement is the way to go. It adds a little more bite, focus, and aggression, but it also takes away some bottom, so you typically have to use a bit more neck blend.
 
#33
Vic said:
Just to expand on this, as I've dug into this myself...

The "60's" placement is really very simply the "standard" placement. Fender started off with this placement, and relatively speaking, for a limited period of time, tried a different pickup placement in the 70's. There may have even been a third, but I can't recall for sure, tho even if they did it was probably even shorter lived.

Eventually, Fender returned to the original pickup placement, because it makes the bass sound a bit warmer and fuller, which appeals to a bigger market.

However, for a smaller market that really enjoys the extra aggression you get from moving that bridge pickup 1/2" further towards the bridge (such as myself), the 70's placement is the way to go. It adds a little more bite, focus, and aggression, but it also takes away some bottom, so you typically have to use a bit more neck blend.
Click to expand...

+1, the warmer comment is kinda what I meant by P-Bass tone.
 
#36
JRB said:
man I thought the lull club would be bigger then this there must be more of use out there. I have always thought that mike would have a huge biz if he was in NYC or another large market.
Click to expand...

+1 but for some reason they don't get as much love on Talkbass. The deserve it though. Come on, lets get Lull big on TB:hyper:
 
#38
I think the issue is everyone thinks of Sadowsky and Lakland first when they think of Fender-styled basses. I've played the US Lakland Bob Glaub and I've played Sadowskys and to me the Lull P series comes closest to capturing the vintage Fender vibe. The necks really work for me. That's why the PJ5 and M5V have been mainstays in my arsenal while other basses have come and gone.
 
#39
Ron Plichta said:
I think the issue is everyone thinks of Sadowsky and Lakland first when they think of Fender-styled basses. I've played the US Lakland Bob Glaub and I've played Sadowskys and to me the Lull P series comes closest to capturing the vintage Fender vibe. The necks really work for me. That's why the PJ5 and M5V have been mainstays in my arsenal while other basses have come and gone.
Click to expand...

+1 Agree completely. As much as I like Sadowskys, I think the Lull PJ I am recieving is going to be the main bass for a long time.
 
#40
Ron Plichta said:
I'll be glad to run the club list if you want to join.
Click to expand...

I'd love to join! My Mike Lulls are #796 (very light-weight natural M5V w/ Duncans and a Bart preamp), #1016 (Lake Placid Blue PJ5 with matching headstock, Brazilian Rosewood fingerboard, Duncans and an Aggie OB-2 preamp), and #549, (Lake Placid Blue M5V fretless w/ lined Ebony board, Duncan pickups and Bartolini preamp). I'll try to take some pictures soon!

All of these basses are great, but right now, I'm having lots of fun with the PJ5 and the fretless! :hyper:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back