No love for G&Ls

[Dave W]

I don't think the MFDs are too bright or harsh, the tone of the ones I've heard just don't particularly appeal to me. Nothing I can easily describe.

Never been a fan of the Bi-Sonic or Dark Star sound. Fans talk about their wide-range sound, fine for them but that's what I don't like. I don't want an even sound across a wide spectrum, that's boring as hell to me. Give me peaks and valleys!

[Spiritbass]

Thanks Anthony. Two Thunderbuckers and two MFD's - WOW. Monstrous potential! My tone preferences are brighter than most, I think. I had a nice dual-DS set-neck LeCompte that was mostly mahogany. It eventually 'left the nest' because it was so much darker than the G&L. Live & learn...

[gweimer]

Thanks Anthony. Two Thunderbuckers and two MFD's - WOW. Monstrous potential! My tone preferences are brighter than most, I think. I had a nice dual-DS set-neck LeCompte that was mostly mahogany. It eventually 'left the nest' because it was so much darker than the G&L. Live & learn...

I played a dual-DS LeCompte in Atlanta a little over a year ago that was incredible.  I almost bought it.  It beat the Manne Glenn Hughes bass by a landslide.

[dadagoboi]

Just bought a Dark Star from Gary in large part because I've never heard one and am looking forward to what it sounds like.  Until then I'll reserve judgement.  I do like the sound of my '81 G&L and how it compares to my '76 'Ray.  Can't comment much on later G&Ls.  Not a fan of EBMM because they don't sound like the originals to me and I hate that tinker toy thing at the end of the neck.   It reminds me of the one on my EKO Vox Phantom that just went round and round and did nothing, though I'm sure theirs works as it should.

There are a few references in this thread to 'thunderbuckers.'  Since as far as I know I'm the one who coined the name I have to say this:

Thunderbuckers are designed and made by Steve Soar of ThunderBucker Ranch, TM pending.  It is not a generic description of a pickup that fits a Thunderbird pick up route.  Neither Lollar nor Lull call their pickups Thunderbucker, it would be nice to keep it that way.  Those guys would probably not be happy having their products called by someone else's name either.

I might be overreacting but that wouldn't be a first.  I have no financial interest in ThunderBucker pickups, just wanted them for my builds.  I'm hoping DS's will be in production and I can use some of those too.

[Psycho Bass Guy]

RE: my mention of "Thunderbuckers" DOES refer Steve's pickups. I would really love to see how they would interact with MFD's. I'm up for a move to another department at work which would mean a substantial raise in my pay.  If I get it, after we finish paying for the cats, I have a proposal for you Carlo.  In my comments about my Epi in another thread, I had a brain fart. I forgot RS called Fralin's T-Bird pickups "Bassbuckers," and that point is moot anyway since I bought the last pair they had made.

[dadagoboi]

RE: my mention of "Thunderbuckers" DOES refer Steve's pickups. I would really love to see how they would interact with MFD's. I'm up for a move to another department at work which would mean a substantial raise in my pay.  If I get it, after we finish paying for the cats, I have a proposal for you Carlo.  In my comments about my Epi in another thread, I had a brain fart. I forgot RS called Fralin's T-Bird pickups "Bassbuckers," and that point is moot anyway since I bought the last pair they had made.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Spiritbass]

Finally got a decent pic with the "precision pickguard replacement" control plate. Gives it a bit of 'old school G&L' vibe:

[Pilgrim]

That is one my-T-fine looking bass!

[Spiritbass]

Thanks Pilgrim. It's also quite pleasurable to the fingers & ears.

[Rob]

That looks realy nice!

[jumbodbassman]

Finally got a decent pic with the "precision pickguard replacement" control plate. Gives it a bit of 'old school G&L' vibe:

Mighty fine.  lovin it alot !!!!!!!

[Barklessdog]

They are a step above Carvin (which are not bad basses either)

[uwe]

I think they are good to very good basses, but the design does nothing for me, lookwise they are caught in a time warp, while EBMM has not just stuck with its iconic Stingray but tried new things such as the Bongo (which I like as a modern design) and the Albert Lee bass etc. G&Ls look like something Ibanez would build today if they had never gone past the lawsuit era. I like the ASAT, but then I'm a sucker for Tele-looking basses. But here really is no iconic model in their line, no 4001/3, no TBird, no J or P, no Stingray, they all look utalitarian too me. But even the Tributes sound great and give excellent value for money.

 

[Dave W]

... But here really is no iconic model in their line, no 4001/3, no TBird, no J or P, no Stingray, they all look utalitarian too me. ..

That's really it in a nutshell. You could point out how a Stingray is derived from a P, for example, but just about every bassist knows it's a Stingray and is not going to confuse it with a Fender product. No matter how much you may like any or all G&L models, none of them stand out as G&L's design.

[eb2]

I have always maintained the Sting Ray was derived from the Mustang.  It was the last Leo Fender bass for Fender, and the styling and features were much more in sych with the Sting Ray.

G&Ls, when they came out, were pretty much passive MusicMan basses with Fenderish headstocks.  They were made by the same people in the same place, but with lots of competitive bad blood.  The L2000 was a Sabre, but more sucsessful.  The L1000 was a Sting Ray, but less sucsessful.  If you played a pre-EB Sting Ray, then you would have a rough idea of the feel and weight of an early G&L. 

I would argue that the L2000 was an iconic model.  It took off really well right away, and still is a respected bass.  But the later models were not unique in any good way.  The split neck truss rod was a novel idea.  Still, I found over the years that any time I picked up one in a shop it was a well-set up and built bass.  Kind of how Guilds used to be.  So I guess that is simillar.