drTStingray

Part of the set up process I think - not on all of them though. Look out for the Sabre - I wasn't joking - already available to pre order on Ebay!!

[quote name='Les' timestamp='1351617220' post='1853333'] Thanks DocT but there's nothing EBMM going on my pre EB, I have everything but the foam anyway, spring plates, screws etc. Searching now for the right mousemat to lay down it's life for the cause. [/quote] Double thickness might do it. The thing is, a lot of the parts are the same as the pre EB. If it was me I'd buy the kit and just use the spring mounts/pads and keep the original ones in case you want to sell the bass - personal preference but I think they look better than the home made ones I've seen. The later thumb screws have a different diameter from the pre EB.

[quote name='Grand Wazoo' timestamp='1351714117' post='1854603'] ... it appears that the way things are EBMM neck pockets have a tendency to be inconsistent along the same range, often too tight or too wide, hence the reason all their basses have shims in the neck pocket. [/quote] The OP was talking about fitting a Stingray neck to an OLP body - not sure what EBMM neck pocket consistency has to do with it. What data do you base the allegation of variable neck pocket width on? From my experience their quality is up there with the highest. I would doubt ALL of their basses have neck shims. I don't think any of mine have! The remainder of the post is possibly more accurate! All will be revealed when the Tony Levin re-issue Sabre is released later this week

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1351543923' post='1852483'] I think you could probably use a bench grinder to create the little recess in the back of the bridge failing that the spring plate is really only about .5mm anyway so it might just squash down, I did not realise the OLP had the big flat area like the ebay ones so its crying out for the mute kit! I will send you a link when its up Jose for the Mag cover, I'm not really sure exactly what is going on there myself 28'000 copies though [/quote] The spring plates are far less than 5 mm thick - I'd say 1 mm or less. The only recess on the Classic bridge appears to be at the front edge - if you look carefully you can see the four plates fit into the recess, which is about 1 or 2 mm deep. I've just checked my 93 fretless and it has the same system. I suspect the plates are just wedged between the bridge and body, and into the front edge slot to keep them in place laterally. I'd go for it - if it doesn't fit I'm sure you'll be able to sell the mute assembly without a problem. [quote name='Les' timestamp='1351545378' post='1852516'] what's the foam bit like ? quite dense ? My 79 has all the mechanics but someone took the foam off, might try it, I assume the foam is just glued on ? [/quote] The foam bit is similar to the innards of a mousemat, but without the smooth covering. It's a bit thicker as well. They are glued on. The pre EBs seem to be notorious for losing them - I had one from new and the G string mute disappeared during a gig on a dark stage after I'd had the bass for about a month - if you look at pictures of Pino's fretless Ray whilst with Paul Young, IIRC at least one of the mutes is missing off his. Presumably glue technology wasn't what it is now, back then!! The modern ones appear to stay put. If I had a pre EB with missing mutes, and I wanted it to be fully functional, I would certainly consider buying the mute kit which McNach is referring to, which is an EBMM part.

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1351534780' post='1852321'] This is the OLP in question, I think that bridge should be ok, shouldn't it? so much blank space is calling for something to be installed there! [/quote] This is what they look like fitted, in detail - not sure if they'll fit between the back of your pickguard and the bridge. Note these are on EB 4 string basses up to the mid 90s and well as the Classics from 2010, as well as the pre EBs. [attachment=122300:12082010700.jpg][attachment=122301:15082010704.jpg][attachment=122302:15082010705.jpg]

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1351362643' post='1850592'] I would very respectfully disagree. There isn't anything very special about the body or the bridge etc. [/quote] I was quoting Sterling Ball on this - he has commented on the contribution the bridge design makes - those bolts go some way into the body. Try the acoustic sound in the way I said - you'll be quite surprised. The other thing notable is the 'snap' of the strings when popping and slapping acoustically - it is stronger than say a P bass - thus contributing to that awesome slap/pop tone. [quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1351362643' post='1850592'] In fact, take that big MM humbucker and move it an inch towards the bridge, and you lose the Stingray. Move it an inch towards the neck, and you get a lovely meaty bassy mighty thump from it, but it does not sound like a Stingray. You will not hear a difference "acoustically". I'd say a Stingray is by far mostly defined by that prticular pickup at that particular location. The preamp contributes to the variety of tonalities you can get, but as you say, even a passive 'Ray sounds like a 'Ray. [/quote] You are right regarding the pick up position - anyone who has used an HH or HS Stingray will be aware that the different coils make significantly different sounds simply from their position relative to the string length. My real point was the Ray sound is the sum of a number of fundamental parts.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1351339508' post='1850270'] Funky looking bass but we need to see the logo to be more accurate, the bridge serials are very hit and miss IMO, the rear logo makes it at least '87 and the four bolt no later than '91 but a close up of the logo should date it even closer as the little mens jumpers can even give the game away! Thermos flask and adanoids at the ready [/quote] The Musicman database is pretty accurate - in fact totallly so!! You are right though - the trans logo (Ernie Ball applied over the Musicman name) as on my Classic (attached) was only used for a couple or three years - resurrected for the Classic series in 2010.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1351338857' post='1850257'] Even Passive modded Rays sound quite Ray like to my ears even cheap copies have that sound in some way probably the pickup position more than anything?[/quote] The body construction has a lot to do with it (bridge etc) - if you press your ear against the upper horn of a Ray or SBMM etc, the acoustic sound gives that overall characteristic sound - passive Sub Rays also sound similar. No doubt the pick up and circuit contributes but the underlying sound is the instrument itself. [quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1351338857' post='1850257'] Get a P bass pup installed in the P bass position and a scratchplate made to fit and then fit something like a John East P bass preamp, its all reversable other than the body route that will be covered by the pick guard should you wish to sell it, we have seen them before in the FS already done [/quote] I think the problem with a P pick up is it's designed to give more treble on the D and G strings by positioning - something you don't need on a Ray - the first prototype had a reversed P style pick up (D and G section closer to the neck) presumably to counter the effect. As it sounds like you want a Fender but with the playability of a Musicman, another route could be to buy an after market series wound pick up (as per the Sterling) - in series form the sound is more Fender-ish than the parallel version - it boosts the mids quite a bit. Other than this, you are probably already aware that the Stingray is very responsive to changes in playing style and EQ settings - it's entirely possible to get P bass thump by playing towards the neck with significant muting of the strings (less if you use flats) - you don't even need to alter the EQ setting as the treble helps to define the thump created by your playing. Other than that, if you really favour the Fender and Warwick, it maybe better to stick with them.

I would say it's late 80s to very early 90s. The six bolt neck attachment and truss rod wheel commenced early 90s. If you join the Ernie Ball Musicman bass forum, there is a sticky thread on there for individual bass info - give them your serial number and request all of the info they have on your bass and someone from Musicman will respond with the date of birth, original spec and where it was shipped to etc. If your bass is trans red it's likely it has an alder body (most trans red were alder up to the 2000s). Many trans red of that era had transparent pick guards also - 87-88 era is most likely. Arguably slightly smoother sounding than an ash bodied Stingray. You can get a new mute assembly for the bridge - it's sold as a Musicman part - phone Strings and Things, the UK Musicman distributor and they should either be able to order you one or point you to a dealer who can. You have to loosen the bridge screws/bolts to slide the old one out/new one in. V nice bass btw!

The classic Stingray has a high gloss varnished neck finish. My 93 Stingray also has a varnished neck but it's more of a satin finish. In terms of weight, Stingrays are around the 9.5 lb mark - I used my Classic SR4 for around 4 and a half hours of gigs yesterday, and do not have any aches as a result. I do see where Dingus is coming from on this and I would not wish to play a 10.5 lb bass for that long. Reflexes and Bongos can tend to be a little lighter I believe. However sub 8lb USA Sterlings and even Stingrays are not unknown.

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1350488285' post='1839595'] I've really got the sound of each bass firmly established in my head now. So much so that I heard something earlier & decided to play along and immediately knew that the '64 was going to sound best. [/quote] Forgive me for asking, but are you guys playing authentic 60s music on these - I could imagine the sound fitting a Beach Boys tribute or something, but NOT a Beatles one. I like the 71 - lovely wood - not so sure about the metalwork though but it's your bass etc. Is that one ash and the others alder? I also like the LPB.

[quote name='Stance' timestamp='1350222518' post='1835910'] are you sure is SR5?- It sounds more like Tobias [/quote] One of the tracks I heard has fast, poppy 16ths, fingerstyle and it does sound like an SR5............but who knows! As you say it could be something different. I've certainly seen him using one in that era. +1 on the film, it will be very interesting.

I think you're doing Trujillo a dis-service in terms of his playing - have you heard him in the band Infectious Grooves? Some nice SR5 sounds - a bit like Level 42 fingerstyle at times. He must be one of the most technically able of modern bassists.

[quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1350143167' post='1835134'] See above...I'd like one VM and one TM...probably 5ers...they seem to look better in 5 string format. I'm edging towards maple. [/quote] These look very unlike Bongos with piezos.......... They look rather like (whispering) [size=1]Fender copies[/size]. V nice looking though.

I had an Antoria Jazz bass copy from new at the beginning of the 70s - it was in a sort of walnut colour, with rosewood board, blocks and binding on the neck - the only thing non Jazz copyish about it was the pick ups, sort of mini humbucker looking things with flat chrome covers. It sounded great - came with black tapewounds and I actually learned to play on it. I moved to Rotosound rounds eventually - I recall the bridge pick up was nowhere near as powerful as the neck one. I replaced it with a new Stingray in the late 70s and sold on the Antoria eventually - I would love to have a go playing it again! Does anyone know what model it would have been? At the time, Antoria were considered the best of the copies available, and later ones looked/felt like the real thing.

[quote name='Fat Rich' timestamp='1349512566' post='1827150'] Edit: Arrrghh what's the point, I've lost the will..... As long as you're happy with your basses. [/quote] You're not being very helpful to someone seeking info - there must be some difference in the pick ups - or maybe there isn't? But ultimately you're right - it's as simple as that.

The brand strategy of companies like Fender and Musicman is pretty straightforward - those buying in at the entry level aspire to the more expensive version, those who buy the middle range one do the same - so they sell more equipment and cultivate brand loyalty - if they can back up with a good product and service. It's similar with cars and lots of other brands - of course some people buy a basic Mini or Hyundai and never want to upgrade to something more expensive. I think the problem musical instrument makers have is building in enough differential between the different level of product to justify the vast ranges in price. My questions about Fender pick ups were bona fide - I don't know the technical differences but hear people talking about noiseless cobalt, vintage custom etc etc and suggesting you need to swap the pick ups out of an MIM. I know this is part of the genral culture with Fenders but modding is much less prevalent with the main brand I know (Musicman) so I'm curious about the culture - reminds me of the after market for car modifications/go faster equipment.

[quote name='The Dark Lord' timestamp='1349462925' post='1826746'] The big thing though is ........ there is THAT Precision sound which cannot be replicated. It's most noticeable (to me) on the low G note. A sort of thud with a burble, which, if the sound could be translated into English........ would say "rock'n'roll". Accept no substitute. [u]Nothing [/u]even comes closes. Fender MIA Precision. Strap on. Rock. [/quote] I'm afraid I disagree - the 2band Stingray with the EQ boosted extends those drivers far better than a P bass (ie old school thump), no matter which continent was its origin. I'm curious about two things:- Firstly pick ups - what is the difference between a MIA pick up and a MIM one - surely they're to the same spec anyway in terms of material and winding - why wouldn't they be - it doesn't really make sense. What difference is a 'vintage custom pick up' - does it make much difference? Secondly - I take the point for solid colours that MIM may have more body pieces than MIA (though I don't buy the fact that MIA have only two). But for trans such as sunburst, how do you hide the grain joints?? I would doubt this is possible without a veneer and they don't seem to have that. Just curious.

[quote name='bengovier182' timestamp='1349441044' post='1826358'] Thanks a lot guys, an ad just popped up for one and figured id get a little bakground on them. Cheers, ben. [/quote] I suggest if its used, and an MIA Sub you ask the year the bass was made and the serial number (on the back of the headstock for an MIA Sub) - if you register on the EBMM Musicman bass forum, you can post the serial in the sticky thread at the top and they'll reply with year, colour etc and you can check whether its bona fide etc. You ought to check whether its active or passive - the passive are OK but obviously not as powerful. If it's an SBMM sub it can only be a couple of months old at most. An MIA Sub bass is a great value used bass.

[quote name='badboy1984' timestamp='1349440225' post='1826341'] i would personally pick the Musicman SUB any day over the sterling by musicman because the Musicman SUB is a proper musicman bass but just a lower model compare to their famous stingray version etc. Is just like Fender MIM which is a proper Fender compare to Fender Squier. [/quote] Not totally - the SBMM basses are closer to the American MM basses, if only by the extent of range covered and finish standard available. In hindsight I think the SBMM Sub would sit somewhere between an MIM and Squire.

Attached is a pic of the pau ferro fretboard of my fretless Stingray (1993) - it is quite swirled around 14th fret and 3rd fret areas by previous owner use of roundwounds and particularly, has a bit of a ridge between 12th and 15th fret under the G string (from extensive use of groundwounds by me). As a result I moved to flatwounds - I tried lots of types but have settled on Ernie Ball Group 3 flatwounds (100, 80, 65, 45). These give a great sound and the bass has tons of mwah - and they have similar tension to roundwounds (some flatwounds seem to have huge tension which affects playability for me). I have used this bass as a main gigging bass in a couple of bands so has had a lot of use - but it does show that roundwounds will (in Jaco's words) eat your fretboard - especially if you use the bass on a regular basis for performances. I just didn't fancy having to have expensive work done on mine, which has a great figured birds eye maple neck and fretboard, too often.....it's not cheap to do either. [attachment=120202:basses 001.jpg]

Simple ... but complicated as well. Musicman Sub Bass - made from about 2003 to 2005 ish - USA built cheaper versions of the Stingray (with 4 or 5 strings) and Sterling 4; poplar slab body (no contours for belly or forearm); limited colours; textured finish; painted neck (like the Bongo), with rosewood board; available as 2 band active EQ (or in the case of the Stingray passive also); chequerplate aluminium pickguard; 5 string is as 4 string Ray in terms of oval pickguard and body (ie not the regular SR5 body). If you see one available used v good value for money and get the 2 band Stingray sound exactly (in the case of the active versions). Sterling By Musicman (SBMM) - more affordable versions of the Sterling 4, regular SR4 and Classic SR4 and SR5 basses in limited colour finishes and single pick up only - made in Indonesia (same factory as Laklands etc) using some parts shipped out from USA; set up and quality checked in USA; generally have cheaper hardware, but swamp ash bodies (SR) and basswood (Sterling), some with trans finish (honeyburst or natural) and every bit a more affordable version of the MIA Musicman basses. The version of the Classic SR4 has a Sterling profile neck abd 2 band EQ - the other models have the 3 band EQ. SBMM Sub Series - Released a couple of months back - low price point (£250) version of the SBMM basses (except SR5 is the SR4 type with oval pickguard etc (whereas the regular SBMM SR5 is literally a more affordable version of the normal EBMM SR5 with coli tap, 3 band EQ, teardrop pickguard and contoured body edge) - active 2 band EQ only; limited range of finishes including walnut stain - can't remember the body wood but it's a hard wood local to Indonesia. Again, these are said to cop the MM 2 band vibe very well at a low price point, so a good back up bass or higher priced entry bass, or upgrade from a cheaper Fender copy. Probably the best analogy in terms of quality and range is Fender Custom Shop (MIA MM) (because EBMM generally allow far more choice of colour, pick up config, neck config etc and high quality standard; after sales customer service - effectively a custom shop); somewhere between MIA and MIM Fender (SBMM) and somewhere between MIM Fender and Squire (SBMM Sub). Price wise, they compare as MIA, MIM and Squire ranges.

I thought as a post script to this thread I would let on a little additional information. I raised the self same thread topic on Talkbass on the same day - got 20 replies and about 200 views - 3 or so useful replies and a number questioning my religious belief and various other random strangeties - basically it bombed. At the same time, a guy raised a thread seeking views on the best colour of replacement scratchplate on a vintage white Precision - got around 1500 views and tens of replies...........almost all tort needless to say. An interesting forum (or maybe cultural) comparison I thought. I have spied a nice sonic blue Fender Jazz (64 I think), fairly mint, and a battered 62 fiesta red Precision - strangely the latter seems very attractive. So the GAS is beginning to swell - but alas no cash at this stage. But there again I have started lusting after a Status (Chris Wolstenholme's fault) - I think I must be having yet another repeat mid life crisis.........................!!

Some people will disagree with you - but wait till you get that Bongo!!! The bass EQ control alone is a wonder to behold - can damage structures instantaneously!! If you haven't tried them, EB Grp 3 flats on a Ray are wondrous. Possibly on a Jazz as well.

[quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1349181564' post='1822827'] So far, still very happy. Part of me wants to get a matching Jazz with a glossed maple board...but that is the collectors side of me coming out. [/quote] Gareth remember you will soon be taking delivery of your tangerine pearlescent Bongo, at which point everything in the world of bass will fit into place.................glad you're enjoying your Jazz though. In the meantime, just boost the mid range on your amp a little to overcome the scooped sound if you feel the need - but remember the audience may not be hearing quite the sound you do on stage. I do this sometimes with my Stingray 2 band in a guitar heavy mix (well to be precise a guitar mix where they're playing in similar sonic territory as the bass - but possibly at or near their soloing volume). I find with a Stingray HH, particularly in the 2 humbucker setting, I like to boost the mid control on the bass a little and cut the bass control a little. I think it's the same issue to be honest - clearly you'd need to control it from a box or the amp if you're using a passive or 2 band EQ Jazz.