martthebass

I'm looking forward to the arrival of my bad boy. Good luck with India...

[quote name='OutToPlayJazz' post='296067' date='Sep 30 2008, 11:56 PM']I suppose it's because the graphite necks have that certain extra growl to them.[/quote] What about Warwick - King of growl?

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='293395' date='Sep 27 2008, 12:53 PM']Great thanks for that. Did the Stingray pickguard screwholes fit exactly?[/quote] Just one thing of note Dave - don't forget the MIA Jazz (and P bass) have the 'notch' out of the pg for the truss rod (like a Lakky).

[quote name='Shockwave' post='293081' date='Sep 26 2008, 08:35 PM'] Maybe your Stingray was a particularly light example? Anyways i am used to 5 string basses which are usually heavier anyway.. Heres hoping [/quote] The 1990 was about 9.5 lbs (like the spec) but the Sterling was closer to 10. The 2005 Ray I currently have is about 9.25 - go figure.

[quote name='Shockwave' post='293036' date='Sep 26 2008, 07:41 PM']This is my 2nd Musicman and i cant wait! Reasons i went with a sterling is my crumbling back (At 23 yeah i know!) And The need for a funky 4 string.[/quote] Rob, I hope you don't get a shock. The 2004 Sterling I bought to replace my 1990 Ray weighed about 1/2 lb more Having said that it did sound pretty good. And, in purple it's definately a girls bass - better get that hair cut me lad :ph34r:

Tried Comfort Straps, thick straps you name it. Sometimes the only solution is a lighter well balanced bass or shorter sets. For me this means my MIA Precision (8.5lbs) gets the long gigs and my Ray4 (9.25lbs) gets the shorter sets. Oh - and avoid Thumb basses like the plague......

[quote name='Mr Cougar' post='290762' date='Sep 24 2008, 12:22 PM']Comment on the bridge and neck are really aesthetic, the current bridges are fine they just don't look as good to me, I know lots of players who lament the passing of the older necks, the waxed finish is also horrific for picking up dirt but once again it's taste. In general, and it's very evident on the neck the materials on the ones I've played later than say 1995 ish seem cheaper, minor details like the quality of the maple previously used for the necks, the quality of the woods used in the body, even the plastics and the chrome all show evidence of a drive towards economy at the expense of quality. I've played lots of MMs and I'd agree there were some total dogs made in the mid 80s. I'd say that the newer ones are still a quality instrument, they just aren't as good as the late80s/early90s ones. I mean they haven't deteriorated like say the Fenders did.[/quote] J in the main can't disagree, but like you I've owned both 1990 and new and the differences to me are cosmetic. The neck wood was prettier on my old one but it wasn't as highly figured as some (some in the shop were no more figured than new ones) but again that's cosmetic - it doesn't imply better. My 2005 for some reason has a fair bit of flame in the neck but unfortunately the waxed finish doesn't do it justice - if it was laquered i'm sure it'd be a peach. I for one like the waxed neck but I've gotta admit it gets dirty - having said that, the grubby neck on mine came up perfect with the MM wipes (think it's a marketing ploy?). Regarding 'fit and finish' IMHO there's no difference between old and new - if anything the neck sockets have been better on my new one and the 2004 Sterling I had.

Hi Rich, Like track 1 - nice balance. Track 2 really ain't me (don't like the vocal + too 'up' in the mix) but I can 'feel' the craft. Loved track 3 - must be the 'new romantic' in me (well it was my time and I am a Sheffielder - nearly).