Misdee

Lighter wood is not necessarily more expensive. Employing somebody to sort lighter wood from that which is too heavy is significantly more expensive. Rejecting the wood which would be too heavy is also a very expensive process. Wood is bought in bulk and EBMM would be stuck with a lot of useless planks.

I cannot help but wonder why other manufacturers manage to make traditional Stingray -style basses of a reasonable weight and yet it seems to elude EBMM. US- made 44-94 series Lakland basses consistently weigh in at between 8 and 9 lbs, for example. They are essentially the same shape as a Stingray and are made out of the same woods. These new Stingrays look and sound ok, I suppose, but ultimately they appear to be a compromise designed to protect EBMM's profit margins whilst addressing the increasingly pressing need to make a lighter bass for a more fussy modern consumer. The design of these basses is as much to do with the politics and economics of manufacturing as it is to do with the efficacies of guitar design.Rather than use lighter hardware it would be preferable to select lighter wood. But that would cost more. Similarly, they will have chosen neodynium for the pickup because they can adapt the spec they are already using for the Bongo.I am reserving judgement until I have tried one, of course, but to my sensibilities these basses look uncomfortably close to being a "diet" Stingray. From a personal point of view, Stingrays just don't look right without the traditional mute bridge. Black hardware also looks wrong on a four string Stingray to me. I am in the market for a Stingray at the moment, but these new hybrids might be a bit too much of a compromise,to my taste anyway.

These are very nice basses. The narrower-than-usual nut width seems to make the fat neck more playable. The '74 Jazz pickups are fantastic, too. I notice that Fender are offering these pickups as a separate item now. This range was recently discontinued and it will be interesting to see what Fender replace them with, if at all.

I had a '73 P Bass identical to DeeDee back in the '80s. I sold it for £200 when I moved house in late 1988 . I thought I had done a good deal. ( Although, to be fair, £200 was the going rate back then.) There's lots of great P Bass pups on the market nowadays, but to my ears the DiMarzio Model P is still one of the growliest and obnoxious.

All with the proviso that if you have a nice old vintage bass that works well for you ( like a genuine 64 P Bass! ) don't give it up for scrap.

I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with this view. I am sorry to say that I am old enough to remember when an increasing amount of the gear which is now considered "vintage" was new and current. When I see mid- to- late 70s Fenders selling for thousands of pounds I am a bit aghast. Then again, I think Mk 1 Wal Custom Basses are grotesquely over-priced at 4k+ on the second-hand market. Because I am well familiar with basses from that era they hold no particular mystique for me. At the risk of stating the obvious, the problem with a lot of vintage instruments is that they are old and worn. A lot of these instruments were made without any thought of longevity. No one suspected they would become holy relics. More often than not, once the romance has worn off you are left with something not particularly special, riddled with niggling problems that you have paid over the odds for.

I've got a fairly recent 4402 fretless with Lakland/Hanson pickups and electronics and it sounds fantastic. No problem with the A and D strings whatsoever. A very, very versatile bass.

I've got one of these basses and they are indeed fantastic instruments. They do have lots of great tones available as someone else has noted, but I find them to be relentlessly "modern". The Bongo isn't a bass I would choose for retro tones. It has its own signature sound and is all the better for that! A refreshing change from the plethora of basses on the market desperately trying to evoke a fashionably "vintage" vibe.

The maple core of the P34 could be pretty heavy. I suppose a lot depends on luck! Less chrome on the P34 but it still has metal knobs and a scratch plate.

Just to clarify, you'll get no lack of punch from a Spector - they're one of the most powerful sounding basses out there - but it doesn't sound like a traditional Fender P Bass. Probably because it sounds too powerful!

They may both be PJ's, but comparing Spector and Yamaha is not comparing like with like. Both great basses in their own way, but very different, in terms of construction, overall feel and tone. The Yamaha will give you more of a traditional P Bass sound and feel. The Spector NS2 is much more of a modern hifi tone and a unique ergonomic, feel due to the curved, compact body. Not necessarily neck-heavy but definitely a different balance to a conventional Fender- style bass.

Beautiful bass, Chris, exactly the same as mine! I can honestly say these Yamaha BB's are one of those rare instances in life where the value of something becomes even more apparent over time. I hope you get as much enjoyment as I do with mine. May I ask if you have any impression how the weight of the new P34 compares with the 2024X? The 2024X's tend to weigh in at about 9 1/2 lbs in my experience.

In the interest of clarity, I've got a 2024X and a 2024. The major difference apart from the obvious cosmetic ones, is that the 2024 is over 1/2 lb lighter in weight. As a relatively old bloke from the pre-computer age, I am not very au fait with digital technology, but I will try post a picture when I can get one of my kids to help me. To be honest with you, I haven't played any of the 10 Series basses so I can't comment on the relative merits in relation to the 20 Series, but I am perfectly willing to believe that the 10 Series offers a great deal of the same qualities for a fraction of the price. What I can say with conviction is that the 20 Series compares very favourably with much more expensive high-end "boutique" basses I own and have had in the past. For example, I've got a USA-made Lakland PJ with a Jazz-width neck that is a lovely bass, but it has a far more conventional Fender-style tone and overall vibe .These Yamahas, in contrast, sound effortlessly huge and surprisingly un-Fenderish considering that, at face value they are share many similarities in construction. The Lakland has essentially the same tone as the PJ 5 string that Paul Turner is playing in the video Funkydario posted .In comparison, these Yamahas have a unique tone that you really wouldn't want to change. There are so many basses on the market that sound like Fenders but the Yamahas are refreshingly different.

Thanks for the info Chris. Looks like I will be adding a BBP34 to my collection then !

I've got a couple of BB2024's and they are the best basses I have ever owned in nearly forty years of playing bass. I'm sure you'll be pleased with your purchase in the long term. I'd be very interested to hear more of your impression of the BB P34. I'm really keen to know how it compares with the previous range in terms of sound, playability and and overall quality.

The original post was asking which model MM to plump for, so I mentioned the Bongo because I am a big fan. I've had a few Stingrays myself, and one in particular had a problem with the G string. You don't have to look too far to find others who've had the same problem. I've played bass for over 40 years and owned some very good instruments. I wouldn't discourage anyone from buying a Stingray, I just want this chap to be aware of some of the issues. They are often heavy and that can be a bigger problem than any tendency to sound uneven. Great basses, if you can find a good one, nevertheless.

To be fair,this a very common gripe about Stingrays, and even EBMM have all but admitted it is an inherent characteristic of these basses. It is not just a matter of people being inexperienced at setups.

This is exactly what I mean by a propagandised version of music history. I was about at the time and yes there was plenty of crap music before punk rock. However, there has been just as much crap music since the advent of the Sex Pistols and their supposed salvation of popular music from the demon of self-indulgence. So what then, exactly did this seismic change bring about? The Sex Pistols were essentially a media event not a musical one. There was nothing remotely new about the sound of the band. Their significance was all about context. They have been turned into something that they never actually were, in reality, by people with their own agendas.

Super Furry Animals ? I can smell a rat. Surely one of their friends or relatives compiled this list. They might just scrape into the top twenty bands from Wales. Another questionable inclusion would have to be T Rex. And Radiohead at 3 ? Such lists seem to have been put together by music critics of broadsheet newspapers, who want to rewrite the story of rock music to fit their own pretentious agenda. Thats why bands like Iron Maiden have been conspicuously omitted. They don't fit into their airbrushed view of history, despite being one of the biggest selling and most influential British bands ever. To be honest with you, I can't stand their music myself, but nonetheless Maiden are surely much more important than most of the bands on this list.

One thing to consider about a Stingray is that many of them tend to be rather heavy, and they have an inherent problem with the G string sounding weak. My own personal preference when it comes to MM basses is the Bongo, but I totally understand that the looks are not to everybody's taste. I've got an HH Bongo and it is an absolutely fantastic bass, light with an incredibly powerful and punchy sound.

May I ask Leroy, having read elsewhere on another thread that (like me) you are very aware of weight when it comes to basses, how are you coping with this beauty? Mick Karn is my favourite fretless player too.Japan were a great band.

What's more, I don't even remember particularly being aware of the weight of individual basses. Back in the 80's I had a pre-EBMM Stingray. Chances are it weighed at least 10 lbs, going by what vintage examples weigh in at. In my memory, it was weightless! Nowadays I am just as neurotic as everybody else about bass weight. I have it in my mind that Jazz basses seem heavier than other styles of the same given weight. i.e. a 9lb Jazz bass feels more cumbersome than a 9lb Precision. I know this defies the laws of physics, and yes I probably do need some kind of professional help.

Stunning!

I'm getting backache just reading some of these posts! My heaviest basses are 9 1/2 lbs, and anything heavier than that would be useless to me personally. I am, however, very weight-sensitive. What strikes me most is how much weight has become an issue nowadays. Back in the 70s and 80s I really don't remember anybody commenting (let alone whinging) about the weight of basses. And believe me, there were plenty of boat-anchors about! The shops were full of Kramer, Aria, Ibanez, JayDee, Wal etc. all of which were weighty by today's standards. In those days heavy weight was seen as a mark of quality woods and substantial hardware .But then, men were men in those days!

It's fair to say that slap bass certainly isn't as mainstream as it once was :- listen to the Top 40 from just about any week in the 1980's and it was epidemic - but it still has a place. There is no reason why bass players of any generation can't use this technique tastefully and imaginatively. As Duke Ellington famously said: if it sounds good, it is good. As a bass player who started playing in the late 70's, I like a bit of slap now and again, especially if it has an old-school vibe. In no way am I primarily a slapper, but like Dr T, I enjoy playing that style and practice it regularly. Nothing wrong with that!