CONSTRUCTION: 8.5/10

Not much to complain about in this department.

The bridge, while not state-of-the-art, is the tried and true design, virtually unchanged since 1980. There is a slight difference, however. Originally, a set screw on the side of the bridge pressed the saddles together, turning them into one consolidated mass. They claimed this eliminated the need for running the strings through the body. (This idea is also used on Steinberger and Spector basses.) On this model, the set screw hole is blocked with a plastic plug, and in it's place, you have the option to string through the body. (This is a cool feature, but I'm glad you can still string through the bridge; the D'Addario Slowound set I had handy wasn't quite long enough to go through the body.)

With 6 bolts and a very tight fitting pocket (almost too tight -- I had trouble putting the neck back on!) this neck joint is about as solid as a bolt-on can be.

Speaking of necks, this specimen is very interesting. It looks like one of those old style one-piece maple necks, but there's no "skunk stripe"! Instead of putting the truss rod under a fingerboard or routing from the back, they use a unique "bi-cut" construction method, They rout SIDEWAYS into two separate neck halves, then install the truss rod and join the halves under great pressure. The resulting joint is almost completely invisible, and they claim it enhances stability. I'm quite partial to the old one-piece maple necks that no one makes anymore, and these newfangled "bi-cut" necks seem to be as close as anyone comes. The thin satin finish feels smooth and keeps the sound muffling to a minimum. You might want to upgrade that plastic nut at some point.

If you dislike neck-heavy instruments, you'll appreciate all the work they've put into the headstock. I'm not completely swept away by the design; it looks like they drew it to be as tiny as possible but still accommodate 5 tuning gears. (Look on the gear arrangement on the back and there's not 1/16 of an inch to spare.) I've seen uglier headstocks, but I've sure seen prettier ones, too! (I like big headstocks. I know they add weight, but they also add resonance to the neck. And, of course, they look cool!) The G&L tuning gears are intriguing, with their lightweight tapered aluminum string posts. It only takes one or two winds to send the string to the bottom of the post, where it should be, and the narrow diameter down there helps tuning accuracy. Very cool!

My sample has a subtle "black sparkle" finish that has been buffed mirror smooth, with no visible flaws.

ELECTRONICS: 6/10

There is no shielding, whatsoever in the control cavity. As a result, the bass does most certainly buzz when you take your fingers off the strings, and this was very noticeable onstage, with the amp turned up high. My '81 G&L bass had partial shielding; even some old Fenders have more than this bass! I wonder why? As it is, I get to spend a few tedious hours of my time (or a C note for a trip to the shop) if I want to kill this buzz. One more small manufacturing step and a couple pieces of foil could have saved me a lot of hassle.

The preamp circuit board floats freely on so many wires, with a piece of foam to keep it from shorting on something. It's adequate, but just barely. There's a separate compartment routed for the battery so it can't bump around and wreak havoc on the electronics. That much is good. There's no separate lid; you have to undo 6 wood screws to change the battery. (And it's wrapped in foam with icky, gooey adhesive. Yecch!)

Speaking of batteries and preamps, I'm not too crazy about the active circuit. It's not too noisy, but it's a bit unsubtle with the tone, especially the highs. I look forward to the day that gets upgraded.

Fortunately, there is a passive bypass switch, something I always like to see on an active bass. Even when the preamp isn't cheesy, I still often go passive for certain songs that call for it. And of course, there's the reliability factor. I hate being dependent on a battery.

Speaking of which, both of the tone knobs still work, even with the battery disconnected. How often do you see that? Many people mis-represent the G&Ls as having "active bass & treble boost". In fact, it's the exact opposite. It's a PASSIVE bass and treble CUT. This is good for reducing excess sizzle (as you would with a standard passive tone knob) or reducing boominess (very handy in certain rooms).

But wait, there's more! You also get a series/parallel switch to play around with, and it, too, operates passively. Parallel is the mode we're used to hearing; most basses with two pickups are wired this way. The sound is well-balanced and versatile. In series mode, there's more output and more bottom, which can be a very addictive for some playing styles. (It's easy to see how some people mistakenly refer to it as a "bass boost" switch.) The highs become a little bit too muffled for slapping. In series, the signal is more affected by the passive tone controls, and is more prone to lose some audio fidelity without help from a good preamp.

Ah, passive electronics. Simple to wire up, not quite so simple to use. Everything you do with one knob or switch affects how all the other knobs and switches behave. The G&L controls aren't as effective and intuitive to use as are most modern active setups, but they do provide subtle and friendly variations of tone that you can't get any other way.

PLAYABILITY:7.5/10

After the mandatory new set of strings and comprehensive setup (checking and/or adjusting neck tilt, neck relief, saddle height and intonation), the G&L really plays very nicely. The lower register is super solid, while things get just a tad buzzy, up around the 17th fret. A medium action setup cleared away most of that. The neck is narrow but hefty, which I like. The tight spacing (about average for a 5-string, actually) makes some riffs much easier and faster, while the thickness of the neck provides good tone and slows you down enough to keep you from gratuitously racing all over the place. This is a good axe for grooving.

The pickup makes a good thumb anchor, with the "sweet spot" for plucking being just slightly back towards the neck. Without a neck pickup, there's acres and acres of room in which to slap. The string spacing allows you to do most slap and pop maneuvers without too much difficulty.

SOUND: 7/10 (9.5/10 in the studio)

Unplugged, the G&L sounds lively and resonant.

With the one pickup set relatively close to the bridge, midrange presence is pretty much unavoidable. You can dress it up any number of ways, but the bedrock signal is very punchy, with an almost vocal quality. Onstage, I noticed my bass wah pedal "spoke" much more than it does with my usual basses (Fender Jazz w/ Aguilar preamp & G&L L-2000). With the pickup so bridge-bound and a lack of active bass boost, it's hard to get extremely boomy, but series mode kicks in most of the thump you'll ever need. The bass passed the Lou Rawls ballad test with flying colors, and it sure is nice to have those extra low notes handy.

Compared to an early G&L L-2000, the 1505 has a similer overall character: thick and punchy. With it's single pickup, the 1505 lacks some of the tonal variations of it's dual-pickup L-2000 cousin. However, due to the placment of the one pickup, the L-1505 hits a spot that the L-2000 can't quite reach. With the one-sound-fits-all approach, it's still useful for a wide variety of gigs, and there's one less switch to keep track of!

Another obvious comparison would be with it's single pickup, Fender-designed ancestor, the Stingray. I'd say that the G&L is more passive in nature, which would appeal to old-school players, and confound those accustomed to real active EQ. Stingrays are noted for being extremely slap-friendly, but the G&L's stock slap and pop sound is somewhat harsh. (Note: with a modest reinvestment, you could easily retrofit the G&L with a new active circuit by Bartolini, Basslines or even Aguilar, and then you'd have an entirely different beast. And the total cost would still be considerably less than a new Stingray.)

The B string doesn't really need any babying; you can attack those low notes just like you would any other. Even so, it doesn't quite "speak" the same way the other strings do. The notes below E lose just a bit of presence and sustain (stringing through the body might help a bit). This bothers me; if I'm going to have that extra low string there, I want it to be 110% there, not 99%. Some players aren't quite so fussy about low Bs, and thus might not have an issue here.

For recording, this bass was great. I used it on a soul ballad, and it had a nice warmth: not too muffled, but nice and present in a friendly way. On another song, I did a synth-inspired slap line, with a lot of low Ds. The pops were a bit brittle, but overall the track was clear and smooth, and it fit much better than a previous effort, slapping with a detuned 4-string.

OVERALL:

I like the concept: a well-built, no-frills, professional caliber workhorse 5 string, priced on the lower end of the medium price range. With the stock electronics, it's more of a mids-enriched member of the G&L family, and not a completely viable Stingray substitute. If you're cruising in the $800 range ($600 used) for a nice and simple but reasonably versatile 5 string, you might find the G&L L-1505 well worth a look.

Or how about a listen; on THIS TRACK (284K mP3), the low D rings out surprisingly well and the overall tone sits nicely in the mix.