Difference Between NS Design CR and new EU series

I own a CR5 and I briefly tried one of the new ones in a shop and it seemed identical to me.

 

Hi...


I've also tried both models and own a CR5-m, they sound the same to me.

 

I coudn't see any difference at all - but I only tried the new one briefly and I have worked on getting my CR5 to how I like it over a few years...

 

Well, I wouldn't pay the extra bucks. Go for the CR-5m, that's what I say...

Good luck.

 

The CR series have a traditional neck shape while the EU series has the multi-laminate (graphite&maple) concave neck profile. That's a pretty big difference, IMO.

They sound very similar.

 

which one has the reference point in the back where the neck heel would be on a traditional double bass? i need that for reference, and to know when to go to thumb position...

 

I played an EU series bass at NAMM, the neck profile makes a huge difference. Also, there's no reference point on the back of the neck like an URB, however, they do have position markers on the 'fretboard'. The Bass Central web site has some really good pictures.

http://www.basscentral.com/2003/upright.shtml

 

one of them does offer a refernece point on the back of the neck, i'm just not sure which one...

 

What's the idea behind the concave neck on the EU series? Does it somehow make it easier to play? For someone accustomed to acoustic bass is that really disorienting?

 

Right on. The neck is the thing. The EU series are a marvel of bent wood. The neck is very comfortable and a lot thinner than the CR series. Mechanically, the thing is a nightmare though ...

 

Why do you think that?

 

Here are some of the mechanical issues I've experience with my EU5.

The bass itself:

- can't adjust magnetic pickup height without removing all strings and the back cover, because the holes for the pickups were drilled too small.

- have to loosen at least 2 strings to get at the battery compartment.

- batteries fit so snugly you can't extract them with your fingers

The stand:

- The screw and rubber gasket assembly cannot be tightened adequately to prevent slippage. For awhile I the bass at about a 15 degree angle, and if left overnight in the stand, regardless of how much torque I applied to the screw, it would slip and I would find the bass rotated with headstock on floor. I have a nice divot in my headstock because of this.

The endpin:

- The hip bolster is of a fixed length, the radius of the bolster is also fixed for some other humanoid species. I'd like an adjustable arm, so that I could get the bass an inch or two further away.

- The hex screw that allows the part of the bolster that touches your body to rotate cannot be tightened adequately to eliminate wobble. Seems to be of cheap metal, so that no matter what you do, it loosens after a few minutes of playing.

The endpin stand adapter:

- The wood and aluminum boot rattles itself off the stand. I resorted to duct tape.

I think the concave shape of the EU5 is brilliant. The composite construction and the piezo pickups yield a compelling tone. Its too bad the mechanical stuff is so third rate. And then there is the disgraceful gig bag ...

I have a love/hate relationship with my EU5, as despite my frustration with the issues above, I don't see myself replacing it with another EUB anytime soon. Nothing and nobody is perfect, but NSD really needs to get its act together. E.g. I had to exchange a bunch of emails with them to inform them that their website had the manual for CR series for the EU series and that the control layout was different.

 

I sold my NS Design 5 string (like the EU model) a few years ago. I can also say that I liked mine, but that the beauty was skin deep and the mechanics were somewhat nightmarish.

I didn't like the concave neck. But that's a personal thing.

But what really seemed odd, given the price of the thing, was that the inside of the instrument was so amateurishly constructed and the accessories were such pieces of crap. It was like the great designer (which I believe Ned Steinberger is) had spent all his time on the cosmetics (and, to be fair, the sound...which was unique, although very unlike a DB).

The tripod stands were nightmares of design, the pots were ****ty and needed frequent replacement, battery life was lousy and replacement a monster, etc.

Maybe things are improved on the newer instruments. I haven't played one since. But for the dollars (huge at the time) I was underwhelmed with the build quality and other flaws.

 

The bent wood is worthy of the NY MoMA design exhibit. The rest, I agree, feels like Ned didn't have any interest in. That makes me angry, as a $3K (street) instrument shouldn't have ANY of the mechanical issues noted.

 

During a conversation with Ned Steinberger I asked him the same question and he told me himself that the only difference between the Cheq model and the USA model was that the USA has a concave neck profile while the Cheq has a more traditional neck profile and the fact that the Cheq model is not made in the USA.he said for what the made in Cheq model cost it would be a better bargain,being that the only difference are the neck profiles but if you want the USA neck profile you will have to pay more.

Kind of like having two Fender J's,one having a C profile neck and the other a D neck