Stingray versus Stingray versus Stingray

[BIGEJ2]

I currently play a SR4 HH 3 band Ray. A good friend loves the bass, but would rather have a 2-band single H model. Going in this direction, his options are either a standard or classic model. From what I understand, my HH, the H standard and classic models all use the same bridge pickup. I also understand that the only difference between the standard and classic models is the body contour, neck finish and string-thru body.

So here's my question. How does a 3 band HH differ from a 2 band H differ from a classic? I've tried to do a direct comparison but have not had these three basses in my hands at the same time. Also, I know there have been threads on the difference between the 2 band and 3 band EQ's. Is it possible to replicate the 2 band on a 3 band and vice-versa?

[mdogs]

The question for the ages... Have owned both (recently), I prefer the two band, I believe that it actually has more tonal range than the 3 band. I also find that the HH regardless of bridge pickup placement, does not have the same MM sound as the H. But, you will get as many opinions to this questions as people who answer it...all in the users ear.

[cmlax21]

I have a 1998 Stingray 3 band and a 1980 Stingray 2 band and it's hard to explain but the 80 sounds kind of "warmer" but other than that they're really pretty much the same because on the 98 I always keep the mids all the way up and I think that's basically what the 2 band does. (Not sure on that though, anybody know for sure?)

[Caca de Kick]

Nope. The two preamps are simply voiced differently.

[Freddels]

The difference b/w a new 2 band and the classic is:

Classic has the gloss flamed or birdsye neck (and fretboard if maple), the regular 2 band has the plain neck.

Classic has 7.25 radius, the regular has the 11" radius

The Classic has the bridge mutes and string through, the regular does not.

Classic has slab body . . .

I believe there's a different headstock logo on the Classic.

[BIGEJ2]

Thanks all!

Does the wood type (flame or birdseye maple), neck finish or string-thru bridge have any affect on the tone? If so, how and would the difference be all that noticable?

[Freddels]

Originally Posted by BIGEJ2

Thanks all!

Does the wood type (flame or birdseye maple), neck finish or string-thru bridge have any affect on the tone? If so, how and would the difference be all that noticable?

I don't think so. Flame or birdseye to me is for the look. I do like the 7.25 radius though. String through is more of a PITA to me.

[WilsonMusic]

But string thru has more sustain, doesn't it?

[BrandonBass]

Originally Posted by WilsonMusic

But string thru has more sustain, doesn't it?

not really. it looks cooler tho

[BrandonBass]

btw, i much prefer the 3band rays over the 2bands. More cutting power from the 3band imo with the mids control. I like it with a rock band

[BIGEJ2]

I always thought the 2 band EQ was simply the 3 band EQ without mid control. Do you know if they use different caps or tone circuits?

[BIGEJ2]

Originally Posted by Freddels

I don't think so. Flame or birdseye to me is for the look.

Callowhill and G&L once told me that Flame and Birdseye maple was a softer wood than the standard maple you see on most basses. Would this affect tone? How about under the thick glossy neck finish?

[kesslari]

Originally Posted by BIGEJ2

Callowhill and G&L once told me that Flame and Birdseye maple was a softer wood than the standard maple you see on most basses. Would this affect tone? How about under the thick glossy neck finish?

There are those who will say that it will, and those who will say that it won't.

It will almost certainly have a smaller affect than the type of amp and cabs you use, the type of strings you use, and your EQ settings.

[73jbass]

Originally Posted by BIGEJ2

I always thought the 2 band EQ was simply the 3 band EQ without mid control. Do you know if they use different caps or tone circuits?

Completly different circuit all together.The boys at the EB forum could fill you in.

[rojo412]

I will say, I've had the 3 band in an 88/89, a 91, a 95, a 96, a 99 (Sting and Sterl), an 04 SUB Sterling, and have played numerous new ones at the stores...

The earlier they are, the better they sound, as far as I'm concerned. The newest ones I've played sounded harsher and more brittle than the one I currently own (88/89 SR5) and my former old ones (91 SR4 and 95 SR4).

The 2 band, I've had limited experience with (a SUB active and Classics in store). What I heard was always nice, but with Stingrays, I like the ability to cut treble, as they tend to have a lot of it, no matter what.
I did like the boost only bass control. It's easier to find the right amount with that wide sweep, and who CUTS bass?!?

[IncX]

i have owned a pre EB 80's stingray, and a modern 2009 SR 5 HH ...

the Pre EB SR sounded like a passive bass, while the SR5 sounded a lot more modern. having said, i prefer the modern sound, although it can be "crushing" at times.

[BrandonBass]

It seems like some folks here doesnt know what they're talkin about.

The 2band EQ rays are NOT boost only. They cut and boost, they just dont have a center detent.

I owned a 2band 87 ray, and with both controls at zero it is a middy tone with low output and with no low and high end presence.

[Orpheus55]

I'm no expert, and only have had one experience with Stingrays, and that is with my 2009 3 band standard H Ray. I thought it a little harsh at first, but flats have given it a great tone; I love the mid-range option and find it changes the tone considerably when playing live.

[eastcoasteddie]

I have a '94 3-band, and it does sizzle...but it's easy to calm that sizzle down by cutting the treble just past the center detent. it growls reel nice, too!