drTStingray

This is completely right - and the close succession of She Loves You (yeah yeah yeah) and Can't Buy Me Love and others - the fact that my entire primary school class suddenly became fans - the girls mostly enthusing over Paul - for those in a certain age group in the mid 70s the Bay City Rollers did it - as did David Cassidy etc etc. The rest was three singers with guitars shaking their heads in 63/64 and bopping around and a drummer doing the same - and an amazing energy in the music and performance. None of my 9 yr old class mates had any idea who played what as far as guitar was concerned except George played the solos - and air guitar was there even then 👍 They and Epstein blew the musical establishment apart in the UK also - by the Beatles writing a lot of their own material, not having their material generally played by sessions players and being outside of the established light entertainment business - the rest of the late 50s early 60s UK acts were very much part of it - for instance doing panto etc etc. The Beatles and others broke the mould - a total revolution to match the whole mid 60s vibe in the UK. I still believe QJ reverted to late 60s jazzer type looking snootily down his nose at 'pop music' and 'pop artistes' generally. I'm happy to just ignore it and will continue to love a great deal of the work he produced.

You know what Blue I feel empathy for your position regarding the Beatles and their impact. I was about 9 in 1964 - I was aware of most pop music peripherally until then as in the UK it would only appear on the Light Programme on the radio interspersed with everything from Richard Tauber to Elvis. The Beatles were the first major pop phenomena for me from Cant Buy Me Love onwards - and bear in mind there were multiple singles in the charts at the same time and the Beatles were also subject to broader marketing like a series of 50 cards sold individually with bubble gum. Coincidentally pop music TV shows like Ready Steady Go and Top of the Pops started around then. So like for you they were a major phenomena - as for opening my mind to bass, apart from knowing that Ringo played drums and the others played guitar I hadn't a clue how those duties were split up. So I don't empathise with McCartney opening my mind to bass at that time. What was very clear to me was all the girls swooned over Paul so he must have had some aesthetic superiority over the rest of them!! As for the Shadows and Cliff Richard unfortunately for me they were amongst a group of less musically challenging artists (the sort my dad would like - unlike the Beatles and Stones and the like) by that time they were more likely to appear as light entertainment artists in pantos and the like. Ive only come to really appreciate that era of very early 60s Shadows in more recent years particularly through meeting other musicians who very much lived the late 50s early 60s era and playing in bands with them - I suspect of Grandad's era. I still prefer the Shadows' later bass players but there's no mistaking some of those early bass lines are excellent. The Shadows, as mentioned, had some of the first if not the first Fenders in the UK - post war import restrictions restricting them till the early 60s - Cliff Richard was responsible for their acquisition brought from the US.

Is that Anton Du Beke on Les Paul as well? 🤔

I like those too - the ones on Musicman basses feel particularly satisfying and robust - however similar ones on cheaper basses do not -- rather like the same analogy with machine heads/tuning pegs etc. I suspect it may have something to do with the quality of the pots they're fitted to also. They come in black as well - and the original ones fitted to Stingrays had flat tops, not domed (the reissue Old Smoothie has them). The very early Musicman Stingray basses from 1976 had what are called radio knobs and they do indeed look like something from a radio (black plastic with a silver top). Funnily enough, possibly because of their rarity, radio knob Stingrays are quite sought after. I've never even seen one other than in photos.

Here you go Blue - this is definitely pre Beatles - from an album of the same name and released December 1960. I like Quincy Jones but his comments are very similar to something I saw on a light entertainment show in the late 60s where Oscar Peterson was berating Beatles melodies - it seems to have been a bit of a jazz thing in that era to look snootily down the nose at 'pop' music - very much the vogue amongst the classical fraternity at the time also. The Shadows even included the jazzy instrumental Nivram on their first album - the sleeve notes mention that it demonstrates these guys can really play, contrary to held beliefs in some sections of the music industry/listeners.

You had the Ventures in the US? The Shadows were a huge influence on many bass players and guitarists from the 60s - I've read several interviews where they are cited as the biggest influence - David Gilmour, Glenn Cornick and others. Jet Harris is quoted as the first bass guitarist these guys had seen.

I noticed on that demo (some fantastic sounds there) that with both pick ups selected as humbuckers, the sound was quite scooped. This is similar to my Stingray 4HH - I tend to not boost bass or treble in that setting and boost the mid range a little. Without a mid control on the bass id do that on the amp (as I do occasionally with a 2 band Stingray). I think a naturally scooped sound is likely with both humbuckers selected - but you can get really nice tones like that and wicked slap sounds. I probably use that setting on the SR4HH than any other.

To use an oft used and seldom, if ever defined expression - they lack the heft 😉 See/ listen to sound systems and bands in the 70s in West Indian areas like Handsworth and the bass would be so loud and rumble so much you'd have to hear it to believe it - big flappy speakers were part of that!! To be honest I personally use 2x10s these days - and with a Mark Bass LM3 can fill a room with fat bass sound with only one cabinet with the advantage it's also a tight, focussed sound if required, and I can play some cutting slap/pop if needed or I fancy it! So ultimate flexibility for me. It strikes me that vintage is very much a process of picking from a menu - and the 'classic' speakers are simply not part of it - probably because they're so damned heavy and quite frankly technology has moved on. Funny the same doesn't seem to extend to amps and basses - it never ceases to amaze me the amount of woolly bass sound people put up with these days!! Back in the 70s, as with hi fi music systems, everyone was aiming for more focussed, recording-like sound live. Funnily enough, I still am 😀 🤔

Surely you need 18" speakers for that 60s/70s bass woof. Used to be beloved of reggae players in the early 70s. My Acoustic 370 with 301 cabinet had an 18" speaker mounted in a reflex housing. I find it extraordinary that the vintage guys have overlooked this. 10" speakers were unheard of, 12" for bass were pretty wimpish and 15" was really the minimum desirable in the early 70s.

These appear on Fender basses from the 70s and Musicman (pre EB) - the current MM Old Smoothie Stingray has it. As has been described it relates to a rear loaded (during manufacture) truss rod, usually with a bullet truss rod adjuster at the head stock (the Old Smoothie has the usual MM wheel truss rod at the neck heel and six bolt neck attachment because MM think it's more robust and easily adjustable, I think I saw quoted). The inserted piece of wood was, in the 70s, a piece of dark contrasting wood. I have heard of truss rods appearing through these before now but never on Musicman or Fender basses from that era - more regularly occassional problems relate to some vagaries with the tilt system on those 3 bolt neck joints - though it had to be said I never had problems with mine and many other people find them fine. I would think it likely that any differential effect with the skunk stripe finish is likely related to operation/movement of the truss rod - and maybe unusual environmental conditions.

I know this thread's been running for a while but I want to start off by saying good bass tone is entirely subjective and as someone who has been playing for over 40 yrs and been listening consciously to bass on recordings probably for 50 yrs, I think I have a very good idea of what constitutes a good bass sound and what doesn't - does it matter - well yes it most certainly does - to me at least - the fact that most people I come across like the bass sounds I like and often achieve gives me some comfort that I might be getting it right or rightish - there is no right of course because everyone's life's musical experience and focus is different. Do I find myself at odds with some people's idea of a good bass sound - I think I do more now than ever - perhaps that's because my hearing has deteriorated - maybe but I don't think so (I do know that one or two other people's compromised hearing has resulted in argument about the volume of the bass in the mix as they have lost their 'treble' response - the problem has actually been dealt with effectively eventually) - and yes I do take exception to a lot of current commonly held misnomers which seem to be based on an overly 60s centric 'vintage' opinion of things. Of course, you'd have probably been hard pushed to even hear the bass either of the transistor radio of the time and more definitely in live settings. As a for instance, 18" speakers were quite normal in the 60s and 70s - 10" really appeared in the 80s and appealed to the more treble centric approach - eg Mark King. So why aren't people suggesting 18" speaker housing with vintage Precisions and valve amps? If you want that authentic woolly tone surely that would be correct? Bass tone and sound most certainly matter in most musical genres - that sound can take a variety of approaches though - there is no right and wrong - I favour a focussed sound. So Mark Bass and Musicman suits me absolutely fine.

The average is advertised as 9.5 lbs - so likely there are some lighter ones around - mine is 9.75 lbs. However the 2018 standard non Classic basses are meant to be at least 1 lb lighter - suggesting an average of at least 8.5 lbs if not lighter. I find getting a perfectly adjusted, well padded strap along with a well balanced bass (EBMM basses are almost always very well balanced), followed by issues like a comfortable posture - sometimes an issue in cramped areas if, for instance keyboardists take up half of the available width or drummers turn up with a van load of equipment - I find these are as important if not more so than the overall weight of the bass - as long as it's under about 10.5 lbs.

Interesting to hear the response from S and T, Pete. I'd have been inclined to email EBMM Customer Services direct.

Ha ha - that would be fun!! However I think you'll find a comprehensive package of upgrades to Stringrays have just been announced - both for SR4 and SR5.

I wouldn't worry - I'm sure you'll find wearing one is absolutely fine - they balance really well and ergonomically are a revelation - I'm near retirement age and I've got a 5HHp Bongo and apart from being a great and versatile bass, it attracts a lot of very positive comments from audience members and other musos - often based on the look which people seem to really like - avoid drunk middle aged women as I once had a group of them asking to 'touch my instrument' when I was using the Bongo once...... 😧 The only potential problem for you will be MM appears to have dropped the single H option on both the 5 or 6 string version - you'd have to ask a dealer if there are any of those in the system - I guess you can't order one now. The single H Bongo has a 3 band EQ so I'm wondering whether they are using that EQ on the new Stingray - or possibly a modified Old Smoothie one. I'm going to find out in a few months as I'm about to order an SR5 HH in cruise teal as per the attached flyer pic

That's a nice 1966 Motown track, complete with overdriven bass - too bad the first picture of the Funk Brothers in the montage shows a picture of an LA studio session with Carole Kaye in prominent view........

I haven't tried a new standard one recently - my most recent is an Old Smoothie which has the Classic type of neck. My 2014 Sabre has a very comfortable profile - definitely not chunky (to me at least) - the chunkier feeling ones I have are a 93 and an 03 - these are both fine on a gig though. Curiously I have a 93 Fretless which is far less chunky feeling than the 93 mentioned - curious!! I see your point though - it will be interesting to see how these 2018 ones compare. We need to get Rodney72a to give us his view as he has quite a few EBMM Rays.

Don't think so - couldn't tell you with mine as I don't have another Sabre to A B - from other Sabres I've played it just sounds as i'd expect the response from a maple board Sabre (as opposed to rosewood) - however the stainless frets (which mostly accompany roasted maple on Musicman basses) look good are possibly slightly more resonant - eg for slap (sort of like stainless steel strings are - just hope they don't lose their resonance as quickly as the string variety 😐 ) Roasted maple v CITES - not linked as far as I can see - these were around long before that and Musicman are offering ebony on some, and rosewood on others as well as maple. I think it's largely an aesthetic thing and some of the figured and lacquered ones Musicman have turned out are gorgeous. Thus a differentiator from the norm and something which appeals to buyers (like the figured maple on the Classic Stingray basses). No doubt the Fender one is a dipping of the toe in that water!! The first I heard of roasted maple necks was Sadowski and Musicman.

The Musicman ones have been around for a long while on certain limited editions they've offered. That Fender Precision edition has as well I think. I have a Classic Sabre with a roasted flamed maple neck - it's about three and a half years old. There are no downsides to it in my opinion, so long as you like the look - the idea is you get the equivalent of aged wood through the roasting process - not just in look but in structure - leading to potential improvements in stability. My bass is fine with no downsides to it - it also has stainless steel frets like the new ones and those are fine as well. No doubt they will wear better. I personally think the roasted maple looks absolutely stunning if the neck is laquered and slightly better than the oil and wax finish but that's just my preference. Not that it's of any importance but a curiosity is if you sniff the neck you get a faint but definite whiff of maple syrup (seriously!!!)

It depends which type you tried - the EBMM Stingrays always had 11" radius profile - the Classic Stingrays have 7.5" profile and feel different (more rounded, less flat). Also the neck finish on all but the Classics and some limited editions (PDN) is the super slick wax and oil and has been since the early 90s. The necks are hand finished so that is the only area of potential very minor variation. The wheel truss rod adjustment and six bolt neck attachment replaced the bullet head stock adjuster in the early 90s as well. The bridge changed to the shorter version in the mid 90s -The MM bridge is anything but flimsy - in fact is one of the chunkiest of any bass - it's just that the later ones don't have the mute assembly and the area it was fitted to. Are you sure it was a US Stingray you tried? Many of us don't have a problem with the weight of a Stingray (for a 4 averaging around 9.5 lbs these days) and even with a super light one like my US Sub 5, the design enables superb balance on a strap. The shorter headstock compared with 4 in line helps improve the balance amongst other things. The 3 band EQ appeared in the late 80s I think. If the new basses weigh 8 lbs or so they will be super light.

Excellent, but you missed the Parliament - Give Up The Funk 😕

I think there definitely is an element of that in the industry and customer base for instruments, otherwise Fender and Gibson wouldn't spend so much time and effort repackaging vintage reissues - and sticking to the same basic packages for their other output, with a few exceptions. It's interesting that although there's a perception that business model is what the market wants - no doubt some of it does, but neither company seems to make a roaring financial success out of it, which suggests it's not a successful model, but one they can't break out of because they are trading on brand history. However there is a lot of innovation going on everywhere else you look and not all people are either wedded to or only wedded to those old designs. I think Musicman have picked up on the things people have most asked for with the Stingray, notably weight reduction, sparkle and other cool colours and other things. You notice they are careful to offer black, sunburst, natural and white - the first three apparently sell more than any other colour. Ive seen lots of requests for green, yellow and other colours on forums, in fact the reduction in colours seems to have created the most criticism. That they've come up with such an attractive set of finishes is remarkable. I think they've been listening, which is good. I love my Classic 2 band but am very open to this new approach also - I'm unlikely to buy a second Classic Ray but almost certain to buy one of these new ones.

Mr Collins at his best - another essential bass part for a funk/soul/groove player to learn!!

I thought this was the best groove and especially bass groove I ever heard 40 odd years ago and still do - so hard to play this and create the groove

The new colours are great - I will certainly be ordering one if not two. I've been out with my Classic Stingray tonight in the house band at a jam session and wonderful it sounded too - but an HH 3 band it ain't, and as a result hasn't got the sound flexibility I like on some gigs. Timely comment about Mr McFly and his LEDs, part of the family Sims sang backing vocals whilst I was playing tonight - and good they were too - apparently Mr Sims was otherwise engaged at some music show or other.