funkle Posted 12 hours ago Posted 12 hours ago 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. Quote
neepheid Posted 12 hours ago Posted 12 hours ago (edited) 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 12 hours ago by neepheid 1 Quote
funkle Posted 11 hours ago Posted 11 hours ago 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… Quote
Stub Mandrel Posted 11 hours ago Posted 11 hours ago 54 minutes ago, neepheid said: And lots of folks don't... like me. We love you Neepsy. 1 Quote
Mokl Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago (edited) 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 10 hours ago by Mokl 1 2 Quote
neepheid Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago 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? Quote
tauzero Posted 7 hours ago Posted 7 hours ago 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. 1 Quote
neepheid Posted 13 minutes ago Posted 13 minutes ago There is no 100% correct bass for everyone. This forum would probably half in size if that were not true... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.