Misdee

You might well be right; I'm getting too old and confused to understand what young people really want. (That was the basis of my defense in court, anyway.) That whole math rock, new metal thing is unlistenable for me so I don't pay too much attention In terms of sales numbers I have no idea, but traditional designs still seem to proliferate in the mainstream.

It only makes sense for Fender to buy G&L if they keep it separate entity. Migrating features of G&L instruments to their Fender counterparts would be a monumentally silly thing to do for lots of reasons. In terms of marketing G&L is an entity in its self with a profile that Fender could easily improve. It would only take a bit of razmatazz and a couple of big name endorsements to get players interested in buying G&L instruments again. To undertake creating some kind of Fender-G&L hybrid and making it successful is a much more difficult undertaking. Consider that Fender have never had an active bass that could rival the L2000, for example, and if they brought one out now it would be a hard sell to a conservative consumer base. Much better just to promote the existing model from G&L. . There's something a bit exotic about G&L, what with their history, their innovative designs and the interesting players who've played them in the past. Fender must surely have the wit to see what an opportunity this is to resurrect a potent brand. In football terms, their clean through on an open goal, all they need is but if clever marketing to put the ball in the back of the net

I'd be honest and tell them what I really thought from the get-go, in a discreet but frank and honest way. Your friend might well respect you more for doing so. Unless your friend is particularly vulnerable or overly sensitive then I don't think telling the truth is wrong in this instance.

My point is if you want a Bongo then one of these basses will only satisfy your craving for something that looks like a Bongo. If you want an inexpensive bass then a Sire offers much better value for money than one of these. They get much closer to their inspiration than these Sterlings do to a proper Bongo.

Are used prices going up? I haven't bought a used bass in a very long time so I haven't really been following it. That's interesting to know. I still think a Sire makes much more sense. Cheap and cheerful and shockingly good for the money. I bought a one as a stopgap and I have been flawed by how close it sounds and plays to a pro-level expensive bass. I wouldn't necessarily want to take a Sire on a world tour but if I was on a budget it's a no-brainer.

Bear in mind that most bass manufacturers have had to acquiesce to the fact that the prevalent trend is for P Basses and retro instruments in general. Kudos to Ned for completely ignoring that with this offering. There's no dressing this bass up as being anything but futuristic and hi-tech.

If I was after a Bongo but couldn't afford or didn't want a new one then then the £900 that those Sterling version costs is a major chunk of money towards a used example of the real thing or something else a bit more inspiring than a bass which essentially only has the appearance of a Bongo. I'm sure this bass is okay, EBMM don't put their name to poor products, but it's not cheap enough to be cheerful and it's not cheerful enough to be £900. £599 would be a different proposition, but even then I'd probably be looking to get a Sire rather than one of these.

If you had to point to one thing that has impeded G&L as a brand it would have to be that headstock shape. The CLF version is a huge improvement but it's probably a case of too little too late. I think they had to make such a radical revision of the original headstock design because Fender were determined to apply their copyright claims particularly hard because of Leo Fender's involvement in G&L. I would expect maybe nine out of ten players are put off G&L to some extent or another by that headstock shape.

Now they just need to find some customers. I love Steinberger but I fear this bass is a bit too "niche" to be a success. A better marketing plan would be if Ned were to manufacture a faithful and definitive version of the classic XL2 bass and then introduce new and innovative models as well as that recognised classic model. This Finn bass would stand a better chance under those circumstances. However, many years ago Ned told me there was zero chance of him ever making the XL basses again for a whole host of reasons, and that probably hasn't changed, so it's all just wishful thinking on my part. It's just that a headless graphite six string with fanned frets has a fairly narrow appeal. Ned will need to convince some technical metal dudes with deep pockets that they need to invest in his bass rather than an established market-leader like Dingwall. I wish him luck, though, I hope he proves me wrong.

If you want a traditional P-style sound and feel then the Sire is probably a better bet. The Yamaha is a decent entry-level BBC, but the Sire is a much more faithful rendition of a Fender Precision. Whether it's a P Bass, Jazz Bass or Stingray, Sire get shockingly close to the sound and playability of the more expensive basses they are trying to emulate.

That would be a dream scenario, but I expect that in the current economic climate and, let us say, governmental unpredictability in the USA I doubt that EBMM would be likely make that kind of a committment. . The tragedy is that G&L have got terrific products, a great heritage and so much to offer to the marketplace. Once any company gets a reputation for sub-standard quality it's a long way back to regain their reputation. As you pointed out Russ, G&L used to be a byword for build quality and solid, reliable instruments.

Quarter sawn necks are an extra-cost option on current USA G&L basses. A very worthwhile upgrade, in my opinion. There's also some confusion about the hardware in so much as I read on Talkbass that the Tribute basses were no longer using the same hardware as the USA models, and indeed that the USA models were now using the imported hardware previously for the Tribute series. If that's true then G&L have been trying to keep prices down by cutting corners on costs. That's never a good strategy, and smacks of desperation. If you want to be a prestige brand, once you degrade your own product it's very hard to recover from that.

I remember back in the 1980's when G&L had big glossy adverts in all the American guitar magazines with various prominent musicians endorsing their wares. Larry Graham had an L2000, and Dee Murray had an L1000, if I remember correctly (it's a long time ago.) They kind of lost that marketing edge and became a respected but not-so-prominent brand. I think one problem they had, similar to pre-EB- MusicMan, is that the guitars were never as popular as the basses. In the guitar business "doing the double" is pretty essential for long term success. There's a lot more guitarists than bassists.

I have to say Russ, I respectfully disagree that a G&L L2000 sounds anything like a Wal. I don't want to sound pedantic, but then again this is a bass guitar forum, so I'm gonna be! I agree with you on the rest, though. G&L needed to do a better job letting the world know about their superb instruments. I hear the same proposition quite often, usually from American bass players who admire Justin Chancellor but can't get hold of a Wal. My theory is that someone first came up with this notion based on the fact that the G&L pickups look a bit similar to those on a Wal. The rest is wishful thinking. Don't get me wrong, an L2K is a wonderful bass in its own right with a powerful and forthright tone, but sonically it's dissimilar to a Wal because of it's inherent mid scoop, both in series and parallel mode. It's got some MusicMan DNA somewhere in those pickups and electronics that give it a bit of a cut in a narrow band of mid frequencies, whereas the Wal has a consistent midrange presence no matter how you set the controls. With or without the filter preamp engaged the Wal has got that rubbery midrange thing going that makes them so great. The G&L might be able to mimic some of the Wal's top end and bass thump,but the mids are what really make the Wal sound.

I really enjoyed hearing that. If anyone needed proof how good Spector basses can sound out in the wild, now they have it. That band sounds tight, and the repertoire really suits your Spector basses. Great job all-round.

Was that the outboard preamp Chris? Buying an outboard Sadowsky preamp would makes good sense for a lot of reasons. That bit of kit makes most basses sound better, cheap and not so cheap, so it may well stay useful if someone upgrades to a more expensive instrument. Even if the Sadowsky preamp doesn't make your cheaper bass sound good enough to satisfy, you can keep it for the next bass. Sooner or later it will be useful and money well-spent.

How do people know? They often don't, they just think they do. If you've got a cheap bass that sounds deficient it's not necessarily the pickups or the preamp that makes it sound deficient. It could be shortcomings in how the bass has been designed and built, the structure of the bass itself. If the bass is active and has a preamp you can bypass and it sounds markedly better when doing so that can be a sign that the preamp is poor or knackered, to use the technical term. If the pickups sound very weak or hum excessively or both then they might be either rubbish pickups and or faulty. Overall, if you play bass unamplified and it sounds lively and dynamic and if you then find that isn't reflected in the amplified sound that can be an indication the bits that produce the amplified sound are not up to the job, but working out where and why can take a bit of investigation and experimentation. Throwing money and replacement parts at an inexpensive bass won't necessarily remedy your dissatisfaction.

I have a sneaking suspicion that these kind of threads are started by Russian bots, now that the Kremlin has decided to further undermine NATO by sewing the seeds of cultural conflict amongst its' bass players. We seem to fall for it every time, me included. Getting back to the O.P, I wouldn't play Fela Kuti covers because I don't like that music played by Fela Kuti, let alone anyone else especially me. But if for whatever reason I did fancy having a go I would, wearing whatever ethnic-inspired outfit I felt like wearing and other folks would be free to like it or lump it. The whole thing is ridiculous. If Slade came out today Noddy Holder would be accused of culturally appropriating a garden gnome. Whatever oppressed peoples in the world anyone is being offended on behalf of, they are unlikely to be further harmed by someone playing their popular music, probably badly. No Biafrans will be napalmed as a result of your dalliance with afro beat. These bourgeois anxieties are a symptom of having too much time to think up things to think about.

These basses look pretty good for a Mexican-made Fender, if a tad pricey. The extra cost has gone on the cosmetics if there's nothing special about the pickup or hardware. Sounds like a decent enough P Bass. In terms of cosmetics these basses would be more period-correct with an off-white pickguard, but tortoiseshell = vintage so that's what we get. I would want to change it for a white one, so add that to the overall cost and it's getting even more expensive for a Mexican Fender Regarding of the neck and overall playability I think the biggest drawback isn't the finish so much as the 1.75 nut width. I know some people like that vintage spec, but I think the majority of players find something closer to the "B" neck at 1.625 much more comfortable. I know I certainly do. I think Fender would sell more of these basses at that spec. The most special thing about these basses is that Fender has deigned them worthy of a colour scheme and lightly-aged look usually reserved for their Custom Shop basses. That's their biggest selling-pojnt.

Listening now, early UB40 were superb, just as good as anything coming out of Jamaica. To me it's authentic because they authentically meant it; their feeling for that music is sincere. That's why they played it so well. The drummer and bass player are so good. I really don't think Sly and Robbie could have done a better job on those first few albums.

The cultural appropriation accusations on that song could get a bit complicated, bearing in mind that Bob Marley was half Welsh, or half English, or half white Jamaican, depending on who you believe.

If musicians want to play some music that's strongly identified with a culture, ethnicity or race that's not their own then that's a wholly positive thing. Whether they make a good job of interpreting and performing the music is an entirely different discussion, but to say that certain music is out-of-bounds is ridiculous. You can't use potential offense as a yardstick for what is and isn't permissable. All kinds of people get offended about all kinds of things. Individuals have a right to cause offense. They may be justified in doing so. Human beings are capable of infinite subtlety and music is one of the sublime expressions of that subtlety. That so many people would give such conscientious consideration to a dogma that places offense and historical grievances above all else is an ominous development. Even if those things were true they would not justify compromising anyone's right to freedom of expression. . If you want to play Fela Kuti then play Fela Kuti. If it sounds crap and/or you look ridiculous playing it, we'll let you know. The responsibility for making a decent job of it is yours.

Is your bass also a five string, may I ask?

I actually put that to Ned Steinberger himself, and he said that for all kinds of reasons he will never be involved in reissuing that bass, and most likely no one else would either. It's a shame because if someone were to make a proper reissue of the original L2 then they could have my money, for sure. I'd be very interested to know how you thought the Streamline (and S2) compare to the Steinberger.

I've got a Status Streamline bass, pretty much as a substitute a Steinberger L2. It doesn't really sound that similar, but it's a beautiful design in its own right and it's the closest I'm going to get to the heart's desire of my younger days. I find the Streamline to have a warmer tone that's a bit less strident in the midrange than the inherent Steinberger L2 sound, while retaining a similar graphite-derived clarity. It would've been interesting if the Streamline had been on the market back in the 1980's heyday of the Steinberger. Rob Green would probably have been fighting off customers with the proverbial unsanitary stick.