What is it I don't like about Ernie Ball guitars?

[JTUK]

[quote name='Cameronj279' timestamp='1408488572' post='2530774']
I was having a eerily similar conversation with someone earlier. We both came to the conclusion that we loved the tone but hated how clunky they felt to play. The body and neck of them are just too big for my liking. But at the same time, I find a jazz bass to be a bit too big!
[/quote]

I loved everything about my early MM ...but the sound. I brought it as was going through a LJ phase and it was my staple for a good few years.
I came to hate it and swapped out the pickup and went passive ..which helped massively
I sold it when I went to 5's and knew there was no going back, but for a mass product 'block of wood', it was rock solid.

Now, when I see and hear a MM in a band... they tend to get it all wrong, IMO.

At the time of my MM..which was probably early 80's it was certainly a better bass build-wise that almost anything else
around, upto a certain price point, and certainly equivalent Fenders of that time, IME.
I've never been struck on the EB version and whilst I did consider a 5 in the early nineties that was mostly because they were one of the few mass produced makers at the time available in the U.K. The others being Yamaha and maybe Warwick...who weren't that big a builder anyway.

So, I went Custom...

Edited August 21, 2014 by JTUK

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1408639989' post='2532152']

Now, when I see and hear a MM in a band... they tend to get it all wrong, IMO.
[/quote]

My sh*t playing is far more of a concern than the tone of my basses

[JTUK]

Well, my example would be that the bass doesn't sound big enough down beliow and doesn't suppprt the
band at all... and when they slap, you wouldn't know/hear it unless you watched the guy actually doing that...??

Now with the EQ on them.. ( +15 db of bass and +-12.15 of treble, iirc ) how on earth do you get all that... but they all seem to..!!!!!


But my early MM... probably the most solid neck I've ever had and went to a really low action. In that sense, bombproof.

[stingrayPete1977]

One of the best deep down and solid supporting the band sounds I can think of is done on a Ray, Cliff Williams AC/DC

[martthebass]

Easy to generalise, a Ray can be rock solid at the deep end with us eof the pre and the amp. Hell, even a Rick can be made to sound good using this ;-)

[Josh]

In the right hands a Stingray can sound fantastic, both warm and defined, but for me a lot of SR players tend to over do it with the treble and mids (amp and pre in some cases) and then it becomes a scooped and harsh tone. Some pick players I know use 'rays and unfortunately have no idea what EQ is and as such have a really nasty tone that is instantly recognisable as a 'ray. Again, with the right know-how and technique they can sound great for anything.

[stingrayPete1977]

If you get the EQ set just right you should be able to use the treble pot like you would a tone pot on a P bass off for reggae, a little bit when using a pick, bit more for funky disco etc.

[drTStingray]

For anyone who wants to hear how EB Musicman basses sound in skilled hands watch Ed Friedland's video reviews as the Bass Whisperer. Dispels umpteen internet myths in one go concerning sound and flexibility.

Now I have six of these basses and a seventh on order (I'm beginning to worry after watching a TV prog about compulsive shoppers!!). I first became a fan in the late seventies and bought a brand new Stingray after having my heart set on a natural Precision since I started playing - what drew me to the Stingray?

1) Sound was fabulous and so responsive 2) being blessed with smallish hands and at that time not good technique, I found the Ray neck profile fitted me well, whereas a Precision did not and a Jazz was too small - they got the profile dead right for me - one of the biggest disappointments I ever experienced in a bass sense was picking up a sixties (late) Precision and not being able to play it properly for that reason. 3) it looked brilliant - v high gloss 3 tone sunburst. 4) it came with a maple fingerboard, which I was set on. 5) weight was on a par with a Fender 6) Fenders had become quite uncool by the late 70s/early 80s - the last thing I wanted to do was emulate the Shadows - for a child of the sixties liking something your dad liked was a no no - he hated the Stones, the Who and Hendrix which was cool with me - he could tolerate the Shadows.

So how have I become an enthusiast - well the necks are still fabulous for me - even more so the 5 string versions. Each one is hand finished so there are minor differences between basses but all of mine fit like a glove. The sound still brings a big smile to my face.

The fit and finish is brilliant - these days weight is an issue for me but thankfully these basses balance so well that on a decent wide and padded strap even my well over 10 lbs SR5 is good for two 45 minute sets without problem - the others are lighter. The Sr5 has a gorgeous natural finish so is my Bernard Edwards tribute bass and it has a fabulous deep and growly tone (it's ceramic pu).

The one bass which gets most attention if I use it is the Bongo - from both musicians and non musicians. The looks get very positive and admiring comments - those who don't know think it's a custom order high cost boutique model - well of course it is two of them - and you get a decent colour choice, various fingerboard options and on the Stingray, wide or narrow neck width - the profile on the Classic is fabulous.

Consistent product - I've ordered blind four times now and bought used 3 times - all are great and do what I expected of them.

What else is good about them - exceptional customer service and after care. It never ceases to amaze me how some manufacturers get away with offering non existent customer service profile and inconsistent product - incredible - I mean who's ever heard of people trying five toasters before they get 'the one' - the same with cars! Barmy if you ask me.

Those who have said it are quite right - some people can sound dreadful on them - worse still I've heard some other people sound dreadful on my own instrument(s)!!! I got one of them sorted by adjusting amp and bass EQ for them. However these basses are much more dynamic than some and respond to technique - and the old adage that give a limited player a very expensive bass like a Fodera they will sound exactly that - except because you can hear it that much better it actually accentuates any technique issues.

Getting into nuances, the various body woods used over the years affect the sound. An ash bodied Ray with a maple board sounds different from a rosewood. Poplar bodies (as per USA Sub or some 90s solid colours or blueburst (I now have one of these) sound a little smoother. The basswood body of the Bongo also contributes to the sound (compare with a Big Al - mahogany body) or Reflex (ash body with mahogany tone block) - expanded version of the 4 band EQ with coil tapping (Bongo has pick up pan) - they sound quite different.

I can understand someone not liking an MM if they love Warwicks - I love the Warwick sound and look but can't stand the necks - the MM is far closer neck and feel wise to Fender territory - however I believe my Classic Ray to be on a par with a custom shop instrument.

For those who don't know, MM (and indeed every other manufacturer) make far fewer instruments than Fender, which is a true mass production operation. Only Gibson are in that ball park. So I don't know where this idea of 'mass production feel' comes from. There are many reasons why they don't.

We have to accept we all have different views - a Stingray is not some people's choice (but maybe people should try another model before writing the manufacturer off!!). I love Wal basses as well but I know quite a lot on here think they're rubbish and prefer a Fender - we'll have to agree to differ I'm afraid!!

Come full circle, and playing at one time in a Shadows tribute band, the bass sound I achieved with my Classic Ray (in the 'right' colour as well!!) got some very positive (actually glowing) comments from respected officianados (and if you've never done it, it's an eye opener and also initially rather scary coming under such scrutiny by other musicians). Of course the non musician punters hadn't a clue my bass wasn't an authentic make for the band - we did do some 70s/80s stuff however - I even used the Bongo (with permission!!!) for two songs once!!!!

Edited August 21, 2014 by drTStingray

[ambient]

[quote name='M@23' timestamp='1408636138' post='2532091']
Which Fenders?
[/quote]

Both the USA Fender 5's I had, a Marcus Miller Jazz and a standard Jazz, had through body stringing, the little metal cup things that fitted in the rear of the body used to fall out, the holes they fitted in were too big.

The standard Jazz had a very badly cut neck pocket, 2 or 3 mm gap between the body and the neck, tapering to nothing.

[drTStingray]

[quote name='martthebass' timestamp='1408646280' post='2532228']
Easy to generalise, a Ray can be rock solid at the deep end with us eof the pre and the amp. Hell, even a Rick can be made to sound good using this ;-)
[/quote]

Saw a show which used variously two Fenders, a Hofner and a Rick - guess what the Ric sounded best - more bassy and more defined!!

One of the main reasons people started using active basses in the 70s was that basses of the era could not provide more bass boost when asked (eg in the studio).

[Subbeh]

When I'd previously played a Stingray, I think my inexperience and cack handedness meant I was one of those players playing a Ray and not doing it justice. My playing has come on a lot since then and I've really tried to get into new genres and master new techniques and I'm finding the sound much more to my liking this time round.

Mine is a weighty beast with a nice chunky neck and the build quality is great, the bass just feels so reassuringly solid and well put together, I certainly couldn't be happier with the fit and finish.

[JTUK]

I do think the Subs and Sterlings are laughable efforts, tbh.
Cheap and cheerful tho..

[Hutton]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1408695871' post='2532542']
I do think the Subs and Sterlings are laughable efforts, tbh.
Cheap and cheerful tho..
[/quote]

I take it that you are referring to the more recent Subs and Sterlings and not the older USA SUB basses.

[drTStingray]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1408695871' post='2532542']
I do think the Subs and Sterlings are laughable efforts, tbh.
Cheap and cheerful tho..
[/quote]

Come on........the Sub SBMM is an entry level bass and the SBMM a mid price range version of three or four US basses. They're all perfectly well built and solid basses - a parallel there in a market sense with the comparable Squire and MIM versions of Fenders.

[Bolo]

Frankly the Sterling by MM basses, manufactured in a good facility in Indonesia, are finished and set up in the regular MM factury in SLO-California. With the same stuff as is used for the US MMs.
The overall quality is only marginaly lower, the wood selection for example.

They outclass MIM fenders without breaking a sweat. IMO etc etc

[JTUK]

[quote name='Hutton' timestamp='1408697329' post='2532563']
I take it that you are referring to the more recent Subs and Sterlings and not the older USA SUB basses.
[/quote]

Yes for Subs... but not a fan of Sterlings, full stop.
I think they cheapen the marque... but then I tend to think EB did that anyway, to a degree.
I'd say the same about Warwicks etc etc etc as well, tho, tbf.

[JTUK]

[quote name='drTStingray' timestamp='1408698711' post='2532588']
Come on........the Sub SBMM is an entry level bass and the SBMM a mid price range version of three or four US basses. They're all perfectly well built and solid basses - a parallel there in a market sense with the comparable Squire and MIM versions of Fenders.
[/quote]

I could say the same about those as well but we are talking about EB basses.
Good for the business, not so much for the punter...IMO.

[stoo]

[quote name='Bolo' timestamp='1408702685' post='2532660']
Frankly the Sterling by MM basses, manufactured in a good facility in Indonesia, are finished and set up in the regular MM factury in SLO-California. With the same stuff as is used for the US MMs.
[/quote]


Are you sure about that? I seem to remember reading that the main SbMM models were setup in the USA, but at Praxis in Orange, California - not at EBMM in SLO. And the SbMM SUBs don't go via the USA at all.

Either way - they're still decent bits of kit and great value for money

[neepheid]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1408703432' post='2532670']
Yes for Subs... but not a fan of Sterlings, full stop.
I think they cheapen the marque... but then I tend to think EB did that anyway, to a degree.
I'd say the same about Warwicks etc etc etc as well, tho, tbf.
[/quote]

You are entitled to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree with you. "Cheapen the marque", really? That sounds kinda snobbish to me. Providing a [b]decent quality (appropriate for the price bracket)[/b] stepping stone to the USA instruments is not only sound business, it breaks down barriers of exclusivity that you seem to think are better left up.

I know this is an EBMM thread, but the related story is that there's no way that I would have gone down a G&L voyage of discovery without the Tribute models, I can tell you that with certainty. I don't find it "cheapens the marque" at all - it's clearly a forward thinking organisation which listens to its customers and that is nothing but positive to me.

What about other benefits that having a less expensive, imported range give? The Epiphone Jack Casady is a prime example - Gibson had no appetite to reissue the Les Paul Signature bass (and I think they're right - niche instrument even when it was made), but having an Epiphone wing of the organisation to take a punt on stuff like this because the monetary risk is less means that it becomes reality.

I think the only thing EBMM is guilty of is underutilisation of this opportunity - choice of models is rather limited (especially now where it seems they might have binned the SB14 (Sterling) - the page is down and it's not in the main menu?). I would certainly have a sniff around a SBMM Big Al for instance, whereas the USA one is a little too expensive for my tastes.

[stingrayPete1977]

Oooh yes I'd try a big Al version of an sbmm.

Jtuk only plays fender copies anyway

[JTUK]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1408710543' post='2532818']
Oooh yes I'd try a big Al version of an sbmm.

Jtuk only plays fender copies anyway
[/quote]

That is true....
but I did say that EB aren't alone in this. It is a business decision of many many companies to ship
build from the Far East. This isn't about better QC..it is about CHEAPER QC as those places are
cheaper to build in. Simple.
Now, some companies might split and have an entry level line and a U.S/western build line
so this does, IMO dilute the marque.

I don't think a £600 far east product is necessarily poor in itself, but they make far more profit selling
a £600 bass made in the far est than they do made in the West, paying western salaries.
You can outsource pretty much anything, but sooner or later you are going to put a lot of people out of work
getting it made cheaper elsewhere. This is why I say it cheapens the Marque as the MAIN beneficies
are the 'Shareholders'. I use the term shareholder loosely as it may well be a privately owned company..so
consider that a euphermism for 'MAXIMUM PROFIT'

But back to the core point, it is not solely EB's fault, I apply this thinking to all my kit and I don't own any amp, cab or bass
made in the Far East.

[KevB]

I did have a pre EB stingray for a while. Took it on as a project as it needed a lot of work. Sort of gave up on it after spending the thick end of £400 getting it sorted to a decent level of playability and a sound closer to what it would have been originally (pu and preamp had been replaced), all of which I then lost in selling it on to someone on here (don't think he still has it though). Had a touch of the notorious weak g string (oo er missus) so I never quite warmed to it. Occasionally wonder where it is these days and if it ever got the proper refin it desperately needed.

[drTStingray]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1408711946' post='2532837']


That is true....
but I did say that EB aren't alone in this. It is a business decision of many many companies to ship
build from the Far East. This isn't about better QC..it is about CHEAPER QC as those places are
cheaper to build in. Simple.
Now, some companies might split and have an entry level line and a U.S/western build line
so this does, IMO dilute the marque.

I don't think a £600 far east product is necessarily poor in itself, but they make far more profit selling
a £600 bass made in the far est than they do made in the West, paying western salaries.
You can outsource pretty much anything, but sooner or later you are going to put a lot of people out of work
getting it made cheaper elsewhere. This is why I say it cheapens the Marque as the MAIN beneficies
are the 'Shareholders'. I use the term shareholder loosely as it may well be a privately owned company..so
consider that a euphermism for 'MAXIMUM PROFIT'

But back to the core point, it is not solely EB's fault, I apply this thinking to all my kit and I don't own any amp, cab or bass
made in the Far East.
[/quote]

The thing this does do is to open up the opportunity for people to buy into a sub-set of the marque at a lower price point - after which some people may hanker after the real thing and buy into the original marque.

On the question of SBMM basses (as opposed to SBMM Sub) IIRC they are assembled from parts made in and shipped from the US and then checked for set up etc by Praxis after completion whereas the SBMM subs do not have US parts.

EBMM have been v careful to protect their Musicman customers and the marque by making these basses have slightly different dimensions thus avoiding people concocting MM basses from them (although some very obvious fakes have appeared on EBay which no doubt started off as the cheaper copies).

Not sure how much extra profit they make but it increases market turnover and penetration and tends to combat competitors marketing cheap MM copies. EBMM is a family owned company AFAIK and is not a corporation, say like Fender. This probably means they can respond more readily to customer requirements.

Edited August 22, 2014 by drTStingray

[odysseus]

I love Stingrays. I got 2 of them. It feels like you can really get hold of 'em and dig in. And they have that distinctive funky bit of chunk in the attack. Having said that, they're not necessarily suitable for everybody or every type of music. Just spent a year in a rock and roll band and I used my jazz predominantly for those gigs. Seemed more appropriate in sound and look. Horses for courses...

[Count Bassy]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1408711946' post='2532837']
That is true....
but I did say that EB aren't alone in this. It is a business decision of many many companies to ship
build from the Far East. This isn't about better QC..it is about CHEAPER QC as those places are
cheaper to build in. Simple.
Now, some companies might split and have an entry level line and a U.S/western build line
so this does, IMO dilute the marque.

I don't think a £600 far east product is necessarily poor in itself, but they make far more profit selling
a £600 bass made in the far est than they do made in the West, paying western salaries.
You can outsource pretty much anything, but sooner or later you are going to put a lot of people out of work
getting it made cheaper elsewhere. This is why I say it cheapens the Marque as the MAIN beneficies
are the 'Shareholders'. I use the term shareholder loosely as it may well be a privately owned company..so
consider that a euphermism for 'MAXIMUM PROFIT'

But back to the core point, it is not solely EB's fault, I apply this thinking to all my kit and I don't own any amp, cab or bass
made in the Far East.
[/quote]

Possibly "Cheapen the Marque", but probably does wonders for sales, and encourages people to take dip a toe in the EBMM lake.