• 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.

anyone not like musicman basses?

Status
Not open for further replies.
#101
Andrew Jones said:
I've learned that allot of singers don't like them.


I believe it's something about that aggressive sound that fights with them in the mix.



Aj
Click to expand...

Now that is interesting! Good to know!

Love Leo MM's & early EB's... Never ever played a Sterling that I didnt hate! The Bongo... ehhhh, its like,,, ummm , maybe, just ahhh-ight.. Not something I would buy (I like the 24 fret thing though. ) The newer MM's, since they stopped useing birdseye maple for the necks, I havent cared for them at all. It seems like @ some point the materials changed & they havent been the same since... I got into a youtube argument with Ed Frieland (doing a review of the new EBMM) about the seemingly balsa wood necks on the newer MM's, but he admitted that he didnt own a MM @ all whislt I have a Leo & a early EB...(draw your own conclusions from that..)

Someone also mention Warwicks... I, persoanlly, have the same issue with Newer Warwicks... Im just not feeling them.. The older ones, post early 90's, are the stuff DREAMS are made of!!! Absolutly sublime!!! I was gonna mention this in the "Are Warwicks that bad" thread... I may not care for the newer Wicks, but they do have top-notch customer service as many have said!!! I was researching an older Wick & they, Dale specifically, helped me immensly!!! That alone could bring me back for more!! I have not had any experience with EBMM customer service.. Has anyone else?
 
#102
Kemet09 said:
The newer MM's, since they stopped useing birdseye maple for the necks, I havent cared for them at all. It seems like @ some point the materials changed & they havent been the same since...
Click to expand...

It may seem that way, but it isn't true. Of course, you're more than welcome to "feel" a certain way regardless of the facts.

Birdseye maple costs shot through the roof. Furniture and car manufacturers dominated the market. EBMM had to decide whether to raise prices and go for the birdseye (which adds.....what to the tone or playability?) or go with non-birdseye maple and keep the price the same.

Other than that, what materials might have changed?

Answer: nothing.

Kemet09 said:
I got into a youtube argument with Ed Frieland (doing a review of the new EBMM) about the seemingly balsa wood necks on the newer MM's, but he admitted that he didnt own a MM @ all whislt I have a Leo & a early EB...(draw your own conclusions from that..)
Click to expand...

I know Ed fairly well and I guess you'd have to say he's pretty smart about basses, whether or not he owns a particular model. I think this is why magazines hire him to review instruments. Because he knows a lot. Ed may not own a Music Man, but he's certainly had a few (including some of mine) pass through his hands. I could call him and ask him about the balsa wood, but I don't think we really need to do that, do we?

Nah. They're hard maple. Even I, a relatively ignorant wood person, can tell they're maple.
 
#104
I am the original owner of a 1978 MM Stingray. I also have two '62 reissue P-Basses (1984 and 2007-The 2007 is AMAZING!). In general I prefer to play the P-Bass. The weight is better distributed and the instrument "gives back" more than the MM in terms of feel and playablility. I also think the P-Bass tone is more complex and richer than the MM. The Stingray is very heavy and the G-string has always sounded different from the other 3 strings. It is nowhere near as versatile as the P-Bass. However, for a solid fundamental, punchy tone that will cut through ANY mix (live or recorded) nothing in my experience can touch the Stingray. IMHO, it's especially great for rock, funk and country. Sounds best with the bass and treble controls backed off slightly from maximum. The treble control all the way up can harsh and overly bright. Bass control all the way up is too boomy. The EB MusicMan Basses are a completely different animal. They seem okay, but I much prefer Leo's.
 
#105
I wouldn't say "I don't like them" But I've tried a few and was never drawn to them, by feel ,sound ,build quality or what ever. They're just not for me. Same goes for Rics. For reference sake,I play Fenders and customs which I build.
 
#110
I've played Bongos and Stingrays. Can't stand 'em. One time I went shopping around, hell-bent on buying a Stingray until I played some. I'm really not sure what it is. I just didn't like how they felt. Another thing is that I hate how they look. In terms of looks, I'm just a modern bass type of guy. I suppose you could argue that the Bongo is a modern look and I suppose you'd be right, but ughhhh...that thing is ugly.
 
#111
I love how punchy my SR5 single H is. It has a specific sound. It pokes through the on-stage mix so well (maybe my Eden rig helps out also, but it sounds great in a rock-oriented worship band). The neck is super comfy - I like the gun oil matte finish. With so many basses out there, why start a thread to flame EBMMs to the ground? I just don't get it. :hmm: I guess that's TalkBass.

:ninja:--have you tried a Dingwall yet?--:ninja:

Peace,
Brim
 
#112
they are useless to me. The feels is great. The 3 band eq sucks because it isses the right center freq for me and I thought the 2 band was a much better deal. Also the for me the dynamic range was too limited. On a scale of 1-10 I could only play it from 4-6... under 4 they did not repsond, over 6 they bottomed out.JMO
 
#116
Squash.

The vegetable, not the sport.

I freakin' DETEST squash. It's like it's not done yet or something.

Why in God's name would anyone eat that crap? My mom, who was a farm girl, just couldn't get it through her head that I HATED squash! She continually said, "Oh, try it, it tastes great!"

Only it DIDN'T. Not to ME.

I personally didn't even like seeing it on my plate! It was nasty.

What?

I'm sorry, what?

No one cares?

Oh.

Sorry.
 
#117
I'm still on the fence regarding MM Basses.

I bought three recently. #1 - A used Bongo. Loved it. Sold it and bought #2 - a new Bongo. It's probably a keeper. For me the playability & tonal flexibility are great. Why they insisted on making them so horribly UGLY is something I'll NEVER figure out. EBMM needs to take the electronics, neck, & general design highlights of the Bongo, package it in a Sterling-looking configuration, and get ready to sell a zillion of them. They would if they did this. The eccentric Bongo ugliness chases away too many EBMM customers that would buy the same bass with the same features if it wasn't so unconventional looking.

The #3 Stingray is a different story. I bought a single humbucker model. I'm still trying to figure it out. It's not intuitive at all. I have Fenders that are EASY to figure out. Even the active ones. The Stingray isn't getting me much useful tone. I think there are a few factors going on including my playing style. Regardless of the reasons, I'm trying but I'm not too successful with the Stingray. I am going to look towards an HH model. If I can't work with that, I'll abandon the SR models altogether as unuseable for me.

In my experience, more people I have talked to have bailed on MM to use Jazz & P-Basses than have bailed on Fender to use MM basses. In my world, I will always have my Jazz basses. The MMs will come & go
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back