I like 'em and plan to purchase a new SR5 when they're available. I'm thinking the aqua sparkle that comes with black hardware and an ebony board 
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
All New Redesigned 2018 Music Man Stingray!
- Thread starter rogerbmiller
- Start date
i like the direction they're going in.
that sounds like a good move for a 2018 model.
i'm still confused about those G&L basses going to back to the early 80s... this is the opposite of that, and i dig it.
that sounds like a good move for a 2018 model.
i'm still confused about those G&L basses going to back to the early 80s... this is the opposite of that, and i dig it.
Weakest link is their neck construction which they did nothing about. They either need to use better quality cuts of hard maple, or use high modulus carbon fiber rods. They are still constructing necks like it was 50 years ago and better quality maple was plentiful and cheap.
Their cheap flat sewn maple boards in the necks are too susceptible to movement on climate changes. I cannot keep the strings low without constant adjustments to the truss rod. I have to raise the strings in order to cut down on the frequency of adjusting.
Until then, no more EBMM's for me.
Their cheap flat sewn maple boards in the necks are too susceptible to movement on climate changes. I cannot keep the strings low without constant adjustments to the truss rod. I have to raise the strings in order to cut down on the frequency of adjusting.
Until then, no more EBMM's for me.
I played the "new" Stingrays at NAMM and wasn't impressed. I only play 4-strings and have no opinion on the 5'ers, but the weight difference on the Stingray 4 was negligible. They still felt in the high 9- low 10 lb range to me. I thought the new bridge and tuners felt and looked cheaper in terms of quality. The off-the-shelf body and neck woods and fit and finish also seemed reduced from what I have seen from EB in the past.
Oh boy... 
The old saying about "if it isn't broken..." comes to mind. Other than the color choices (FINALLY), half of those changes I would consider downgrades and none of them would I consider upgrades. Thing is, I've had "regular Stingrays" that were in the 8 - 9 pound range. It's more a function of the hunk of wood than it is the hardware. Just have a talk with the wood buyers, guys.
It's not a huge deal to me, though, because although I used to play Stingrays and Sterlings exclusively, the only model I would even consider owning now is the Classic Series Stingray. As someone else said... they've tried to turn the Stingray into a Sterling, but there is already the Sterling model. Honestly, I'm not sure why these choices were made. Folks who play Stingrays play them because they want a Stingray, not a cross between a Stingray and a Sterling. Sadly, I think Music Man has made some very questionable choices lately. But... that's just my opinion. Carry on.
The old saying about "if it isn't broken..." comes to mind. Other than the color choices (FINALLY), half of those changes I would consider downgrades and none of them would I consider upgrades. Thing is, I've had "regular Stingrays" that were in the 8 - 9 pound range. It's more a function of the hunk of wood than it is the hardware. Just have a talk with the wood buyers, guys.
It's not a huge deal to me, though, because although I used to play Stingrays and Sterlings exclusively, the only model I would even consider owning now is the Classic Series Stingray. As someone else said... they've tried to turn the Stingray into a Sterling, but there is already the Sterling model. Honestly, I'm not sure why these choices were made. Folks who play Stingrays play them because they want a Stingray, not a cross between a Stingray and a Sterling. Sadly, I think Music Man has made some very questionable choices lately. But... that's just my opinion. Carry on.
That must have more to do with the additional pickup being wired in, than anything else : the Stingray pre-amp & pickup have not changed at all since about 3 years after it was introduced - ie not for several years before Ernie Ball bought the company.
I wasn't clear, I've owned a few H models (4 I think) in addition to the HH and HS models. At one time I owned a 2011 H, a 2013 HH, and a 2011 HS. The 93 was noticeable louder than all of them and just flat out sounds better. Pickup? Wood? Preamp? Who knows.
Same here - my ‘92 absolutely crushes every other Stingray I’ve owned. The mutes are cool too.
I think I view these new basses as actual ‘new’ basses versus a revision of an existing model.
They will be cool I’m sure, but won’t take the place of the Stingrays of old in my brain - think late ‘70s Mustangs lol
I usually appreciate change in models as it gives choices. I know I like certain model years of jazz basses more than others. It's been a long time since there was substantial changes to the stingray so I'm not surprised. Some are good. Some are terrible. Cutting weight is a great idea, but those tuners look stupid on the proportions of a stingray. 22 frets is awesome. I think the preamp changes will be hated by some but a different voicing is a cool option. Those bevel cuts are a BIG no! Makes it look like a 90s ibanez metal bass with any painted finish.
You'll eat our mush and like it!
Sorry Sterling I have moved on.
I love Stingrays but the weight and the string spacing of the Vers made me search further.
That ship has sailed and I'm much happier now.
IMO you just cant slap on an 17 mm spacing like you can on 19mm might as well play an Ibanez if that spacing works for you.
To each his own.
If my memories serves me well, in the early days of Lakland, they were known for repairing and modifying old Stingrays. Later on, they started building their own line of basses, which were inspired by the early Stingrays.
I give Sterling Ball credit for not being afraid to make a change, but he was smart because above all else, a Stingray still looks like a Stingray. I am looking forward to trying a new even though I won’t be buying one because other than my Pedulla, I am not in the market for more basses.
That sounds sort of familiar. And for a while at least, they seemed to have quite a few MM/J basses. I don't think they had the nasty the was a stringray does, but they were still in the ballpark
I agree. Why change it just to shave a pound. I played a heavy jazz bass before my Stingray and the 'Ray seems light weight by comparison. Well balanced too.Oh boy...
The old saying about "if it isn't broken..." comes to mind. Other than the color choices (FINALLY), half of those changes I would consider downgrades and none of them would I consider upgrades. Thing is, I've had "regular Stingrays" that were in the 8 - 9 pound range. It's more a function of the hunk of wood than it is the hardware. Just have a talk with the wood buyers, guys.
It's not a huge deal to me, though, because although I used to play Stingrays and Sterlings exclusively, the only model I would even consider owning now is the Classic Series Stingray. As someone else said... they've tried to turn the Stingray into a Sterling, but there is already the Sterling model. Honestly, I'm not sure why these choices were made. Folks who play Stingrays play them because they want a Stingray, not a cross between a Stingray and a Sterling. Sadly, I think Music Man has made some very questionable choices lately. But... that's just my opinion. Carry on.
One other thing.... Am I the only one that really likes 21 frets? That is an E in standard tuning right? That makes more sense than an added fret, unless you go to 24 which of course makes sense also.
I wonder this same thing. At $2k and up you are not paying as much of a premium to get a boutique stingray style bass. At least not compared in the premium you would pay for a boutique J or P.
