drTStingray

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1388016399' post='2317954'] There is no different tone in it.... you can hear them a mile off. You always have that unmistakeable Ray sound. Not everyone goes for the same same sound, of course, but the character is there..always. You wouldn't use one otherwise.... It is as much a unique sound as a Jazz or a P, or a Smith... [/quote] Well yes the character is there but that is true of any bass. How about a Ric - people overlook the fact Paul McCartney, Chris Squire and Lemmy sounded totally different on a similar instrument. But it doesn't take much skill to get a vast array of sounds from a Ray - but you need skill in the fingers to unlock it. How diverse can you get between Tim Commerford, Louis Johnson and Bernard Edwards ......... and Carl Raddle, Pino Palladino etc etc etc. and you can tweak the tone controls to adjust your sound. In 35 yrs of playing them, I've found them far from a one trick pony - that adage is yet another silly internet myth. There can be few other bass models which have shown such a range of signature sounds on recorded media as stated above. So JTUK I have to completely disagree with you!!

And then there are USA Sub Sterlings (for confused newcomers - these are not the Sterling by Musicman Sub range) - very very rare but I seem to recall they have a 3 band EQ but no coil selector switch and the same fit and finish as the Sub 4 - don't think I've ever seen one apart from in photos or on EBay. Is it possible these have the standard Sterling ceramic series wired pick up? McNach thanks for clarifying yours - and I had forgotten the Sub 4 Ray has the 2 band EQ so is no doubt nice with a series wired pick up. Does anyone remember how much these retailed for? I seem to remember the old Bass Cellar having a job lot of them at around £400 apiece? They seem to be on the secondhand market for just under that now!

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1387898450' post='2317031'] So when you requested someone to confirm this series/parallel spec were you looking for members from here to oblige or will you trust only a sworn affidavit direct from the Ernie Ball corporation? As you apparently don't view my experience (and by proxy the many others who have discussed and experienced this exact thing both here and on the EB site) as valid perhaps you like me to contact EB forthwith and get the official word. I'd be more that happy to deliver you a swift one from the Balls this Xmas. Have a cool Yule doc. [/quote] Well I did check it out several years back and it was the EBMM people who said they are parallel. I have heard of other people with Subs that are parallel wired. I don't doubt you at all - but there's clearly an inconsistency. Have a good Christmas yourself!

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1387883526' post='2316752'] Well according to the people who own them.... No "dismantling" necessary. Just whip 'em out. My 'ray pup and my SUB pup.... [/quote] Did it come like that new? Is it a Sub Sterling or Sub Stingray? If it is permanently in series it will not sound like a Stingray - my SR5 sounds more active Fender is series and more Stingray in parallel - still a good sound though. A lot of Subs have been used as project basses so you never totally know what you're getting. However a parallel wired one with 2 band EQ will sound pretty close to any regular 2 band Ray. However for me there is nothing quite like an ash bodied trans finish Ray with nice wood figuring with a maple board and I believe they have a certain sound about them also.

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1387840119' post='2316447'] Stingrays are wired parallel, SUBs in series. And one uses ceramic magnets while the other alnico (I canna mind which is which just now). [/quote] Not according to the company who made them - they say they were all parallel - after all parallel wired pick up is part of the Stingray magic. One or two members have dismantled their Sub pick ups and found them wired in series - did they come from the factory like that? Who knows! Perhaps someone can confirm. Has anyone looked at a Sub 5 pick up. For starters the standard SR5 has a glued on pick up cover - presumably the Sub 5 does? Basically the USA built sub is a slab bodied Ray with a poplar body and lower spec finishing and 2 band active or plain passive electronics. Basically they sound virtually identical to a 2 band Ray at about 50 to 60% of the secondhand value of a Ray.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1387828610' post='2316272'] It is a single humbucker pickup with a simple pre amp. I don't need an Ed Friedland review to tell me about a bass I used exclusively for 10 years, tbh. When I think Stingray, I think classic Louis Johnson and the sound of those days have long gone. I think the reason people get a Stingray is for a specific sound... [/quote] I use Stingrays almost exclusively for everything I play - it's not for a specific sound - they cover all genres incredibly well. Anybody with a bit of skill can get a Louis Johnson sound, a Bernard Edwards sound or a Flea sound or a 'generic bass sound' amongst others with one. But the point here is the OP wonders if he ll miss his Ray if he sells it. I suspect he will but only my opinion.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1387825446' post='2316202'] They are a bit one-trick IMO........, [/quote] I have to say I don't believe any bass is a one trick pony ............. least of all a Ray - watch Ed Friedland's review of a classic stingray if you don't believe this - now on the other hand bass players sometimes are indeed one trick ponies - I sometimes find myself sliding into this rut - and it ain't the instrument!!

Well if you like the sound you get out of a Ray then a jazz or a p is very unlikely to replace it. That's not to say a p or j is not a good bass - for some they are but I have to say I've never heard these instruments played by anyone I'd list as a favourite player without an outboard (or inboard) pre amp!! I freely admit I don't get it with these instruments - I recently played a 63 p reissue and 64 j reissue in a shop - preceding that I played a Wal mk 1 and after a 78 Stingray. The p and j looked gorgeous but the covers prevented aggressive playing except in front of the pick up ( neck one on the jazz) and they frankly sounded pedestrian - lacking detail in sound. Someone in the shop was trying out a Ric and it sounded far better at routine bass things and had a lot more to boot. Compared with the Wal and Stingray they sounded positively low fi. Another interesting point - I listened to and watched a DVD recently of ten years after in 1991 - now Leo Lyons is some bass player but hitherto I'd only really heard him play tya stuff on an old jazz through Marshall stacks. This time he was playing a Warwick through Hartke (4 x 4 x 10) - for the first time I could hear the detail of his playing.........which was fabulous - I've only been waiting since 1969 to hear such things!! So my take is the. P and j are excellent meat and potatoes basses for some genres but then so are most basses - but if you want to go further..... Or want the detail of your playing to be heard - or like the sounds your Ray can get then don't sell your Ray!!

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1387547476' post='2313226'] It is a 4 string. It is one of the nicest ones I have ever seen . You are in serious trouble. [/quote] Do you know what, I looked at the pics and the last thumbnail (from the Wal site) at the bottom shows a 5 string headstock - I hadn't noticed previously - my mind immediately said you are ok it's a fiver!! And you are right that is very beautiful and I am caused a major problem!!

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1386635187' post='2302623'] Surely it would be possible to track down the previous owner responsible for this" work" and bring them to justice? Instead of contacting Martin Simms and the Bass Doc I would be more inclined to get in touch with Interpol! This is a guitar crime the likes of which I have seldom seen. If this bass could talk , all it could probably say would be " Aaaaaahhhhhh!!!!!!!", or at or maybe just "Ouch!". What I find hard to understand is why , even before they were as valuable as they are now ( fifteen years ago you could easily pick up a decent used Wal for £600) , someone would choose a Wal of all basses to do this to. It just makes no sense. It's like giving me a pair of fake breasts, a jug of custard and wig and expecting me to be able to perform a Liza Minnelli tribute act at a local holiday camp . This bass would never substitute for a Jazz Bass , even if you lived in Albania and had previously been playing bass on an egg slicer strung with razor wire and tuned down an octave. All I can say is that my thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this senseless and vicious attack . Lets hope you can at least give this poor beast a dignified and comfortable existance for the rest of its' days . [/quote] Cripes - couldn't agree more - the following simple adage normally applies to selected owners of the six string variety of guitar (not bass) - but obviously applies to some bassists as well. 'Some people should not be allowed to own guitars!' This crime is akin to removing the engine of a Classic Ferrari and replacing it with a souped up Ford Anglia engine. Hope you manage to get it back to former glories. Wouldn't Wal be willing to do it?

Thank The Lord it's not a 4 or I would have had a serious problem with this bass

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1387378345' post='2311287'] A Wal would be a great addition to your collection , not least of all because of the contrast between that and your Stingray, ect, like chalk and cheese. Looking back , when I was 21 years old I had a Wal Custom and a pre -EBMM Stingray (and a 30 inch waistline) . And I still used to complain that life wasn't fair . That will probably be because of the mullet hairstyle , though. [/quote] 30 inch waists are very much a thing of the past for me as well - Dingus you were making serious money to have a Wal custom at 21! Rightly or wrongly I've always viewed the Wal sound as a development of a Stingray type sound but the basses themselves are totally different as you say. I really was surprised how natural the bass felt for me to play and the sounds produced are just brilliant. Even slap sounds great . So yes a definite must have for me.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1387385862' post='2311395'] Veering OT for a moment.... Alan Spenner first got my attention in the Grease Band and then up close and personal in the sweaty pubs and clubs he used to play with Kokomo. I feel blessed to have seen that band as often as I did. [/quote] Shamefully off topic - but I was also blessed to see him play with the Kokomo line up towards the end of the 70s at the Roundhouse - I'm pretty sure he played the Wal - my abiding memory of this gig was them playing one of Rose Royce's 10 minute high production disco funk songs - what you waiting for - in which he did a couple of phenominal bass solos, one of them slapped! Criminally overlooked as Dingus said - this guy really had the funk - he's also the bass player on the original soundtrack of Jesus Christ Superstar - sounds like Jamerson on steroids! Back to the Wal - I was given a talk through of the controls on the Mark 1 and I found no problem using them and getting great sounds out of it - the one thing I found a little disconcerting was the neck and fretboard - I found it reminiscent of a Warwick - basically not what I'm used to but at the same time it didn't hinder me - the frets seemed a little closer together than I'm used to. I really would love one of these basses.

I have to agree with you all. I spent a day noodling in guitar shops recently with the idea of relieving one of them of a Musicman Sabre - of which I tried 3 - all rather nice BUT they had a Wal and horror of horrors I tried it - it was absolutely fabulous and I now want a Mk 1 quite badly - I always loved the sound Alan Spenner and Percy Jones got from theirs. And whoever said this ain't no P bass is quite right - the next bass I played was a v expensive sonic blue P which looked the nuts - but sounded like sh** in comparison and with those covers in place was really quite difficult to play. My last noodling of the day was on a 78 Ray which was rather nice - and reminded me why Fender basses became almost extinct in the late 70s/80s. But the Wal is in different league and is most definitely on my GAS radar now........bloody expensive though - but fantastic basses.

[quote name='Meddle' timestamp='1386442261' post='2300251'] A curious bass. [/quote] Herbie looks uncannily like Mick Jagger (late young period, before middle age set in). Anyway I prefer Herbie's tuba playing - Tuba Smarties is v good. Actually that's not strictly true - I love his playing on Space Oddity and several other tracks as well. He's part of English bass guitar folk lore along with Jet Harris and John Paul Jones...........we shouldn't fall out over the age of his old Fender as it matters so little - it's old and interesting. For those arguing about prototypes, there are prototypes and pre production prototypes - there were a few of both in the case of the Musicman Stingray. Look at car models - you'll find examples of both. I'm inclined however to go along with Ricks Fine 52's view of this bass.

[quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1385252211' post='2286222'] I'm developing this theory that Precision or Jazz style bass is such a basic design that it's essentially the quality of the neck and pickups, possibly the body and then the skill of whoever bolts it together and sets it up that differentiates a good one from a bad one. Get it working for you right and it will outplay basses 3-4 times the value. [/quote] Sorry to be pedantic but doesn't it also depend largely on the quality of the player - I remember someone on here saying they'd seen one of the top pros play someone's starter level bass and made it sound good. OP that's a great looking bass - nice score.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1384794856' post='2280808'] Loads of fives infact most are 3&2? Are you having a moment drT I recall someone saying they will only buy fives that are 2&3 as it gives more space and wood around the B and E tuners yet they are not very common with most I see being 3&2 or just 5 in a row instead. Smith being the only one off the top of my head from the none one off custom stuff. [/quote] Very possibly!!!!! Lol. I don't get out much but I'm sure all EBMMs are 4 over 1, and Fenders are either 5 in line (neck dive??!!) or 4 over 1. When I first saw a Lakland with 3 over 2 on the tele back in the early 90s, pre internet and pre much bass info being widely around, I thought it was a new Musicman so similar was the headstock concept!! I guess I was thinking fender/musicman style headstock rather than the Warwick/Spector/Wal pattern!!!

[quote name='brensabre79' timestamp='1383049177' post='2259466'] Type 1: Type 2: [/quote] There's a type 1a - pre EB as type 1 (ie exposed pole pieces - but neck pick up with possibly shorter pole pieces) stingray EQ and bridge but with slide switch as per the post EB version. This is so different as to probably be type 2 and the EB 80s/90s version pictured above is type 3. The new EBMM classic sabre is as type 3 but with different coil selections, single coil patented noise reduction, the 6 bolt neck joint and wheel truss rod adjuster with birds eye or flame maple figured neck - type 4?!!

You're ok with a 3 + 2 afaik unless Lakland has patented it. Funnily enough no one else (not even Musicman) seem to use this for a fiver but IMHO it looks great. The 3 + 1 is patented I think and EBMMs lawyers do pursue in particular knock offs (ie people selling fakes) - all this helps buyers to have confidence in what they're getting. I bet Fender are kicking themselves their designs/layouts weren't patented back in the day!!!! As someone who's thought about buying a vintage Fender the first thing that crossed my mind is is it a fake / then is it a jumble of spare parts - worse still a refin jumble of parts etc etc. All would be far simpler if they'd bothered in the first place I reckon!!

Pete, I have to take issue on some of your points - and I'm sorry your Classic Ray was a disappointment sonically - they're generally very good [quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1384633637' post='2279042'] 1- Poor neck stability on ebmm versions with unfinished necks. Possibly on occasional examples but not a general issue - and EBMM are approachable if you have a problem. 2- Some shoddy fret levelling from new (my own 2010 ray 5) Again not a general issue 3- Low output from preamp (my classicray, swapped for a john east). Very surprising 4- Finish cracking and crazing on 70s basses (cool to some, gash to others). As with many makes of basses of this era 5- Weak G phenomenon, never had it myself but others swear by it. I have - caused by over enthusiastic EQ choice - especially bass boost 6- Batteries being eaten by faulty preamps, quite rare but it can happen. EBMM improved the design by adding features to stop battery drain when plugged in and to avoid pre amp frying 7- Faulty jacks, happens to most basses but the ray has an extra tab for the circuit. Probably to do with 6 above 8- Some bridge saddles pull to one side or let the string jump out of the groove. Corrected in the early 90s - you'd need to be an arm wrestler or seriously out of your head on something to achieve this. Im sure there are other faults but you get the idea, they are actual faults rather than the weight or body shape, string spacing etc, those are things it is meant to leave the factory with like the Ric pickup cover. [/quote] But I get your point!!

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1384683838' post='2279352'] The biggest problem most bassists have with a Rickenbacker is that they are not a Fender bass. They see lots of well-known players getting great sounds out of them and basses are very iconic looking in themselves. However the whole design and construction philosophy behind Rickenbacker owes virtually nothing to Leo Fender. So of course it's going to be different. That's the whole point. If you've spent your whole playing life playing instruments that are deign one way you can't really expect to be immediately comfortable on one built in a completely different style and that also may require you to think about your band's overall mix in a different way to find it's place sonically. It seems to me that what most people really want is a Fender bass with the image of a Rickenbacker holographically laid over the top of it. [/quote] This is 100% correct - read Stingray, Wal, Warwick etc etc for Ric also. There are many people for whom a Fender P or J are a perfect fit for their playing style and ability who are disappointed when they move to another bass. Funnily those Fenders have their own problems - total dead spots on the G string anyone? I've heard great bass sounds from people playing Rics - though I was never a fan of Chris squire's sound with Yes - always struck me that Roger Waters was trying for a similar clankathon on his P bass at times - would have been much better on a Ric.

[quote name='Urban Bassman' timestamp='1384511496' post='2277480'] I'm lovin' my two recently acquired Bongos - 4 String HH Stealth and a 5 String HH in Tangerine Pearl. They play beautifully, sound immense, are very comfortable to play and I can't fault the build quality. I'm now GAS-ing for a fretless 4 H Piezo.... Wish I'd found out years ago just how good they are! Is there Bongo porn thread? [/quote] There's an Hp CAR Bongo for sale on the EBMM forum for sale thread. There's a Bongo club on Talkbass but not on here I think...........

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1384452189' post='2276929'] Wow, they are doing the rosewood neck option again ? That would be something special. [/quote] And the rosewood neck Reflex with rosewood top!!!! An available option!!