G&L in trouble...?

[funkle]

I have had 2 problems that have stopped me wanting to own or play a G&L bass. 
 

1.  The headstock, apart from the CLF version, is awful. 

 

2. Nut width on most of their 4 strings is P bass, not J bass. And I have no need to buy a G&L Jazz bass when I already have a Jazz. And the headstock if I bought a G&L Jazz would still be fugly. 
 

I rehabbed an old L2000 with a CLF headstock that sounded great. Nut width was too wide for me to be comfortable though, so I sold it. Lots of folks want a Jazz Bass nut width. 

[neepheid]

5 minutes ago, funkle said:

I rehabbed an old L2000 with a CLF headstock that sounded great. Nut width was too wide for me to be comfortable though, so I sold it. Lots of folks want a Jazz Bass nut width. 

 

And lots of folks don't... like me.

Edited Wednesday at 19:16 by neepheid

[funkle]

45 minutes ago, neepheid said:

 

And lots of folks don't... like me.

Fair enough. But all of us are united on the headstock being fugly…lol. Well, I know some people love it…but I have a feeling the market has spoken here…

[Stub Mandrel]

54 minutes ago, neepheid said:

 

And lots of folks don't... like me.

 

We love you Neepsy.

[Mokl]

36 minutes ago, funkle said:

Fair enough. But all of us are united on the headstock being fugly…lol. Well, I know some people love it…but I have a feeling the market has spoken here…

But I quite like the headstock 😂 

Edited Wednesday at 20:42 by Mokl

[neepheid]

All this talk of nut widths reminds me of another sign of decline - I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that they reduced the variety of neck options for their made to order basses.  If I'm remembering correctly, then that's not a good sign either, is it?

[tauzero]

If Leo got it right with the G&L, why did he persist with that stupid overweight and oversized 4 inline/4+1 headstock when better-designed basses are 2+2 or 3+2, or headless? It's reminiscent of Edward Turner when he was brought back to Triumph to design a 350cc twin to compete with the Japanese and persisted with the vertically split crankcases, so there was no centre main bearing and the crankshafts kept breaking. Admittedly not quite as disastrous, but definitely a poor idea.

[neepheid]

There is no 100% correct bass for everyone. This forum would probably half in size if that were not true...

[itu]

Half? 1 % would be closer to truth. Some even think that P bass with flats is all I ever need. 

[ezbass]

 

[Musicman20]

12 minutes ago, ezbass said:

 

I can't handle watching any videos by that guy. 

 

G&L basses and guitars are great IMO. I would have bought one of their USA basses had I seen more stock over here.

 

I do like that they dragged out old paperwork over the past 10 years or so to build close new versions of old designs.

 

It'll be a shame if they go under, but someone will swoop in and buy them.

[LeftyJ]

9 hours ago, tauzero said:

If Leo got it right with the G&L, why did he persist with that stupid overweight and oversized 4 inline/4+1 headstock when better-designed basses are 2+2 or 3+2, or headless?

 

*ahem*

 

 

It's the one current G&L headstock I don't like the look of though. It's blobby, wonky, and the way the G tuner is positioned just feels like an afterthought. 

In the past there have been far worse offenses, like the headstocks (and everything else, really) on the Interceptor guitars and basses. 

[JohnDaBass]

Having moved to short scale basses because of my osteoarthritis I have a great deal of love for my G&L Fallout basses a CAR Tribute and yellow US with go faster black stripes. 

Happy Days  😃 

[Sean]

36 minutes ago, LeftyJ said:

 

*ahem*

 

 

It's the one current G&L headstock I don't like the look of though. It's blobby, wonky, and the way the G tuner is positioned just feels like an afterthought. 

In the past there have been far worse offenses, like the headstocks (and everything else, really) on the Interceptor guitars and basses. 

 

That’s what I had on my Trans Orange one. It looks like it went wrong in the wash. 

[neepheid]

Aye, be careful what you wish for...

 

[tauzero]

And yet there are people who don't like headless basses.

[neepheid]

8 minutes ago, tauzero said:

And yet there are people who don't like headless basses.

 

Like me - it's not so much the basses in and of themselves, it's more that I feel like a complete twit when playing one.  Appreciate that it's a me problem, not the bass's fault - but I get around it by not playing headless basses.

 

Anyway, this thread is going off the rails in a classic BC kinda way.  So how about G&L and their alleged woes, eh?

[tauzero]

3 minutes ago, neepheid said:

Like me - it's not so much the basses in and of themselves, it's more that I feel like a complete twit when playing one.  Appreciate that it's a me problem, not the bass's fault - but I get around it by not playing headless basses.

 

Anyway, this thread is going off the rails in a classic BC kinda way.  So how about G&L and their alleged woes, eh?

 

They should try putting out a line of headless basses. It's worked for Ibanez and Cort, and Dingwall are jumping on the bandwagon.

[Stub Mandrel]

The problem for G&L is they don't have mass appeal, but they are not seen as 'boutique' and therefore don't attract premium prices.

[wateroftyne]

I love ‘em for this.
 

 

 

[martthebass]

A shame.  I had a US Fallout as my main gigging bass for a couple of years and sound wise it was up there/better than most shorties I'd played (the build was up there with my EBMM shortscale Ray).  I only parted with it as I decided to move onto lighter basses for gigging and it was above 9lb.

[ped]

I guess the G&L basses, despite being part of Leo's legacy, are not as distinctive as a P, J or MM. Each of those, you can easily identify in a mix. G&L either do the same sorts of things or something else which sounds like a more modern bass, but not one that can be characterised so easily. Maybe that leads to a sense that they aren't as 'landmark' as the previous designs, regardless of the incremental developments like the locking bridge, MFD pickups etc.

[martthebass]

4 minutes ago, ped said:

I guess the G&L basses, despite being part of Leo's legacy, are not as distinctive as a P, J or MM. Each of those, you can easily identify in a mix. G&L either do the same sorts of things or something else which sounds like a more modern bass, but not one that can be characterised so easily. Maybe that leads to a sense that they aren't as 'landmark' as the previous designs, regardless of the incremental developments like the locking bridge, MFD pickups etc.

The 'OMG' setting on some of the basses has a great sound, but I agree with you that there's probably not enough players out there for the sound to become distinctive.

[EJWW]

I owned a US LB100 for a while and it was a quality product in every sense. 

The problem with G&L is that they are mainly seen as the Volvo of the bass world (not sure about in the guitar world). We expect rock solid and high quality engineered parts. 

But they are just not very cool. That is a shame because I think if some well known players played them that could change. 

I've always wanted to try a JB (the p bass with jazz pickups) and the SB1.

Let's hope G&L gets snapped up and they get a bit of a makeover. 

I'm just thinking of their employees who are probably really worried about their future right now. 

 

[Sean]

I just received the regular newsletter email from rguitars.co.uk. 

 

I think it's safe to say that Richard is slightly optimistic with this...

 

He's promoting G&L being back in stock. Hmmm.