Shortscale Stingrays — Sterling vs US EBMM

[Jean-Luc Pickguard]

I've always liked the look of a stingray, but have not been tempted to aquire on as I mostly play short scale basses, and I don't get on with active electronics.

 

When I heard about the (passive) short scale stingrays I checked out the sterling version online thinking it would be more to my taste, but the metrics just look a little off, so I decided it wasn't for me after all.

 

Yesterday a short scale musicman stingray appeared onscreen when I was idly looking at ebay and it doesn't look oddly proportioned like the Sterling. Am I imagining things or do the metrics of the EBMM look way better than the Sterling by MM version?

 

In addition to the better proportioned bridge, it looks like the US version might be using a smaller control plate where the Sterling uses a full size control plate as used on the long scale basses. Whenever I see the Sterling version I can't unsee how oddly large the control plate appears to be — it reminds me of a toddler stomping around in his dad's boots.

 

 

[alittlebitrobot]

I completely agree that the full-size control plate on the Sterling looks off. Obviously it's an economical decision on their part but it does look squeezed.

One other thing that might be an issue here; I brought these images into Photoshop and there's a decent amount of camera distortion on the EBMM which is pretty normal when photographing something this size. The fact that there's none on the Sterling makes me think that the headstock in that photo has been replaced digitally. It just adds to the subtle feeling that something's a bit off. I think you'd have to compare them in person to really know what you think about the Sterling.

 

....I'd gladly have one if it was going to waste..

[martthebass]

I concur on the control plate - think it looks hemmed in.  After many months of searching for a EBMM Shortie I finally gave up and bought a used Sterling (and a new EBMM Darkray...) and to be honest it doesn't look that 'unbalanced' in the flesh.  As you'd expect quality isn't exactly EBMM though.......functional I'd call it.  Having said that, the sound is pretty much like the EBMM (watch the Andertons YT Vid) and it's a great little player.  It just does without the comp nut, shaped neck pocket and hand oiled/waxed neck but it is a quarter of the price.

[Aidan63]

@ash is selling one, doesn't look as extreme as that blue one

Edited November 19, 2024 by Aidan63
@ function

[songofthewind]

Is it me, or does the headstock on the Sterling version look much larger?

[Count Bassy]

If you scale the black one to 105% the two overlay each other almost exactly, except for: 

The head which does seem to be a bit bigger on the Sterling,

The tuners themself which seem significantly bigger on the Sterling.

The control plate which is bigger on the sterling.

[Ahedgcock]

I have the sterling short scale and also the new Ernie ball custom, and it’s worth noting the new aluminum lightweight bridge on the Ernie ball is quite a bit narrower and this adds to the illusion on a much larger control plate. 

[Ahedgcock]

I am very impressed with the sterling short scale feet work. 
ground and black filled feet tangs were a nice touch on a bass for 650!  Quality is remarkable.  The main difference I see vs the American other than the badging, bridge, and control plate, is the heavier hardware, but the weight feels good on such a small bass, and make it feel substantial dispite its surprisingly small size. 
Love it!

[martthebass]

The 

3 hours ago, Ahedgcock said:

I am very impressed with the sterling short scale feet work. 
ground and black filled feet tangs were a nice touch on a bass for 650!  Quality is remarkable.  The main difference I see vs the American other than the badging, bridge, and control plate, is the heavier hardware, but the weight feels good on such a small bass, and make it feel substantial dispite its surprisingly small size. 
Love it!

The weight of my EBMM shorty is 7lb 5oz vs 8lb 8oz on the Sterling shorty that it replaced