MUSICMAN stingray 4 / 5 & Sterling - Same sound??

[Shonks]

met a guy recently who bought a Stingray 5, and promptly returned it. Hated the sound, and insisted it sounded the same as a Sterling bass.
He said the Stingray 5 and the Sterling use the same pre-amps and don't compare to the Stingray 4.
He recons Ernie Ball has changed the pre amp now, and they're crap

I personally have a Stingray 5 and have owned a 4 in the past. My SR4 was a 2 band early Ernie Ball with the old fashioned bridge and metal battery cover.
To me, the SR5 3 band EQ with the select switch in the bridge position sounds exactly the same as my old SR4, with the added bonus of the other selections and the mid EQ control. Its a wicked wicked sounding bass.

I don't see why Ernie Ball would want to change the sound of a bass that's already proved to be a winner.

I have no experience of the Sterling. Do the have a different sound??
Are the new SR5 different?
Do you think the Earlier SR5 sounds like the SR4, and the later ones come to that!?

Whats going on - love to know what you guys have to say!!

Edited April 4, 2009 by Shonks

[Delberthot]

The Stingray 5 is a bit strange. It has the looks of the Silouette guitar and the electronics of the Sterling which is a bit strange in itself since there is now a 5 string Sterling - surely it would be better to change the 5 String Stingray to have the same electronics as the 4 string.

the preamp in the Stingray has changed over the years from the first 2 band Eq models to the 3 band EQ. If you want more info on the preamps, go to the EB forum and go into the thread that begins 'dating your musicman' or something like that. In there, there is a link to a whole host of info about the evolution of all the components of the Stingray.

I've had 2 5 strings, 2 standard 4 strings, a fretless, 20th anniversary and 30th anniversary models. the best one I had was the 30th anniversary which I put down to the mahogany body which is really the only thing different about that model.

I've always wanted to try a 2 band EQ as many feel that this is the true Stingray sound without the mid-band.

The SR5 came out around 1987 and as far as I know is still exactly as it was when it first came out. I think that it is mainly or possibly only the SR4 that has evolved over the years.

Its just like Fenders - there have been many changes over the years, some better than others so different people like different eras of models. I personally prefer the newer models as they have the rounded over pole pieces on the pickups - the older ones, especially on my 20th anniversary SR4 were cut straight across and a bit rough to the touch, especially if you play right over the pickup.

[OutToPlayJazz]

I played Mart's lovely met.red 4 yesterday & it's definitely very different to the 5. I've never found a 5 I really liked, to be honest. There's just something inherantly dull about the sound.

[~tl]

The Stingray 5 traditionally had pickups with ceramic magnets (like the Sterling) while the Singray 4 had ones with alnico magnets, which may account for some difference in tone. However, with the release of the Sterling 5, the Stingray 5 has been updated to have alnico pickups too, so I guess newer models will sound more like their 4-string counterparts.

[obbm]

The original Stingray 5 had Alnico magnets and no phantom coil. They changed to ceramic magnets and added the phantom coil in 1992, probably at the time they were developing the Sterling. The early pre-amps are different from the later due to the way they handle the coil switching in order to equalise the gain between settings and reduce noise.

Physically the Sterling and later SR5 pre-amps are different and have some different value components.

[henry norton]

[quote name='obbm' post='454498' date='Apr 5 2009, 09:47 AM']The original Stingray 5 had Alnico magnets and no phantom coil. They changed to ceramic magnets and added the phantom coil in 1992, probably at the time they were developing the Sterling. The early pre-amps are different from the later due to the way they handle the coil switching in order to equalise the gain between settings and reduce noise.

Physically the Sterling and later SR5 pre-amps are different and have some different value components.[/quote]

My pre EB 4 and early SR5 both sounded similar (and very good in both cases I might add) so the thing about magnets rings true although a phantom coil shouldn't change the sound at all except for the abscence of hum. There's a confusingly big range of MMs to choose from now and if Ernie Ball are to believed, every model has its' own unique sound. I suppose they felt they were missing out on some of the market share but I'll bet most people would fail the pepsi challenge if it came to a blind test back to back. That's unless you're one of those people who have a MusicMan collection....

[martthebass]

The SR5 (2002) which I've recently let go (sniff) had ceramics and the Sterling pre. As Rich above says, it was much less 'in your face' than the SR4 (that I still have - 3eq), duller sounding but with plenty of depth. The Sterling 4 I had was much brighter than the SR5 and apparently it has the same pups (albeit smaller ;0). Go figure.

[Duarte]

And each have different preamps...sterling has one to compliment the ceramic, stingray one to compliment the alnico. SR5s changed over time.

[Shonks]

blimey.....its all as clear as custard...!

I got a SUB 4 passive the other day - feck me, it sounds supprisingly fantastic!!!.....and loud!
(just thought I'd slip that in - as I said to the actress)