EBMM no longer makes "The StingRay"?

[Wood and Wire]

Interesting, I didn't know that.

The Classic was actually TOO classic imo. I know, you can't please everyone lol. But the hollow bridge barrels and lack of body contours are things that belong in the past. Not to mention the figured necks which aren't as reliable as non-figured. So those basses to me were a little too fusty and had some offputting features.

Would be interested to see how they improve the idea of offering a classic style Ray. Aside from the sound my other objection to the StingRay Special is the different shape. It just doesn't look as cool or badass as the old style. Might sound silly but the extra fret protruding into the body and weird looking upper horn really stick out to me. So for me a traditional Ray spec would address both those things.

Bottom line it would just be nice to see 2 band/alnico coming from EBMM USA again in some capacity. That's the true Music Man legacy right there.

Personally, EBMM 1984 - 1987 is my favourite era (basically a pre-Ernie Ball with body contours, and toploading bridge).

Early 90's are amazing looking, and arguably better instrument too (infact I think on the whole they continually improve their instruments).

I just wish they'd kept the metal battery cover (and I'm a big fan of the toploading mute bridge).

For me, the ideal range would be the Special, the Classic, and the "EB Classic" (Classic with body contours, and toploading bridge).

 

[dkelley]

The mid control on a two band is the volume knob.

IF only it worked that way in reality. For those of us that always play with the volume control maxed so there is simple absolute 0db+- level repeatability, that is not true. the volume control is just a volume control. It has not detents to say, ok, you can run me at 60% most of the time, and then if you want to turn down the treble and bass and crank me up, you know where to bring me back to.

The overall volume repeatability is far more critical than the exact placement of the treble and bass controls, which also are pretty easy to tune by ear. Volume is not.

I have to say though that even for treble/bass controls on stingrays... having no center detents is actually a drawback, since there also are no numbers to read or document. It's why, as a session player, I walked into studios and had tape put on the controls from start until end of session, including all overdubs or additions. Not my choice... just a common thing with stingrays because of the lack of repeatability in the knob positions.

Man, seriously, I love 2 band rays.... but there are so many things about them that frustrate me LoL. What they do, they do better than any other bass.

 

[Wood and Wire]

I absolutely love playing my classic ray, at home…. sitting down. it’s just not a comfortable bass to be playing for hours at a gig.

I always got the impression that the Classic was fundamentally about tapping into the pre-EB market, and not necessarily about producing their idealised version of the StingRay.

By which I mean :

1) it offers a brand new instrument to people who would otherwise divert their funds away from EBMM, towards the vintage, second hand market.

2) it helps slow the value of pre-EB from spiralling exponentially.

3) which in turn, stops a perception that "the old pre-EB ones are more valuable, and better than new EB ones".


So it's no surprise that ergonic shortcomings are an issue - EB solved that, along with several other quirks, for good reason.

 

[Wood and Wire]

When the standard classic returns to production, they can call it the BE signature and double the price

The EBBE.

Wasn't that a Swedish band?

 

[Ricky Rioli]

The EBBE.

Wasn't that a Swedish band?

The EBBE Pre-EB etc.

 

[MuthaFunk]

I always got the impression that the Classic was fundamentally about tapping into the pre-EB market, and not necessarily about producing their idealised version of the StingRay.

By which I mean :

1) it offers a brand new instrument to people who would otherwise divert their funds away from EBMM, towards the vintage, second hand market.

2) it helps slow the value of pre-EB from spiralling exponentially.

3) which in turn, stops a perception that "the old pre-EB ones are more valuable, and better than new EB ones".


So it's no surprise that ergonic shortcomings are an issue - EB solved that, along with several other quirks, for good reason.

I sling my basses somewhat low and haven’t had an issue with the ergos of my ‘78 Stingray. It sounds so nice when I get to use it with my Top 40 rock band. The boys always say how much more they like the sound of that bass when I use it during practices.

The only issue is, it never makes it out on our gigs because it only a 4 banger and I rely on the 5 string for a lot of tunes in our sets.

Enter the EBMM Classic 5! Thank you EB!

It’s very close to the same sound but now I can enjoy gigging with it.

 

[Wood and Wire]

I sling my basses somewhat low and haven’t had an issue with the ergos of my ‘78 Stingray. It sounds so nice when I get to use it with my Top 40 rock band. The boys always say how much more they like the sound of that bass when I use it during practices.

The only issue is, it never makes it out on our gigs because it only a 4 banger and I rely on the 5 string for a lot of tunes in our sets.

Enter the EBMM Classic 5! Thank you EB!

View attachment 4307482

View attachment 4307483

It’s very close to the same sound but now I can enjoy gigging with it.

Now that's a different can of worms : didn't the Classic 5 actually get discontinued?

 

[Chickenwheels]

The screws holding the knobs on? My settings markers.
Set up your sound so you don’t have to have everything up full, especially the volume knob. I never run my volume at full on any of my basses. Having options is a good thing.

 

[Chickenwheels]

I dig that there aren’t signature StingRays. The legacy of the instrument and it’s players speaks for itself. Marketing jive be dang’d. That Cliff Williams bass is just a good pre EB copy. And not cheap. Or as abundant.

 

[metron]

So that really magical tone from so many great records is at risk of becoming unobtainable.

In my opinion EBMM could do something similar to Gibson's Modern and Original collections.

Hmm, it’s controversial to say the least.

After reading your post, I think the premise seems a little out in the weeds. There are a million Stingrays out there, very unlikely that they become difficult to find any time soon, and probably the last thing they should do is consider following a Gobsonesque model of anything.

 

[JakobT]

I dig that there aren’t signature StingRays. The legacy of the instrument and it’s players speaks for itself. Marketing jive be dang’d. That Cliff Williams bass is just a good pre EB copy. And not cheap. Or as abundant.

There are in fact two other signature StingRays as well: the Joe Dart and the Mike Herrera.

 

[Chickenwheels]

Owners manual for pre-EB StingRay. Some interesting points regarding the use of the preamp:
- 1978 Hangtag Manual

 

[MattZilla]

There are in fact two other signature StingRays as well: the Joe Dart and the Mike Herrera.

I don’t even know how a guy from some band similar to but less popular than NoFx, Sum41, Blink 182 joins another band which has been similarly but more irrelevant for a quarter century gets a signature bass when that same company duffed on giving a Flea model while RHCP was still filling stadiums.

In March 2020 Ernie Ball announced a new Mike Herrera signature Music Man StingRay bass featuring an ash body, maple neck, Schaller tuners, and a unique electronics configuration, being the pickups are wired directly to the input jack with three "dummy" knobs for aesthetic purposes.

at least he doesn’t claim to use it for any funk-adjacent genre or have any hopes at all of ever playing it at MSG.

 

[SteveCS]

There are in fact two other signature StingRays as well: the Joe Dart and the Mike Herrera.

If anything, the Dart is a Sterling, and the Herrera is an abomination, IMHO.

 

[JakobT]

If anything, the Dart is a Sterling, and the Herrera is an abomination, IMHO.

I’m not sure I agree with either of those assertions, but according to Musicman, they’re both StingRays, and what you or I might think about them is fairly inconsequential.

 

[SteveCS]

I’m not sure I agree with either of those assertions, but according to Musicman, they’re both StingRays, and what you or I might think about them is incidental.

The Dart is 100% Sterling body and neck. Offset body, smaller headstock, 1.5" nut, 22 frets, contoured heel, and a Sterling ceramic pickup...

 

[JakobT]

The Dart is 100% Sterling body and neck. Offset body, smaller headstock, 1.5" nut, 22 frets, contoured heel, and a Sterling ceramic pickup...

I stand corrected.

I notice, too, that the Joe Dart has no model designation except «Joe Dart Artist Series», so you’re right - it’s definitely not a StingRay.

 

[SteveCS]

I stand corrected.

I notice, too, that the Joe Dart has no model designation except «Joe Dart Artist Series», so you’re right - it’s definitely not a StingRay.

Yet it does seem a little odd that it is listed on the StingRay page, not the Sterling page as might be expected.

 

[_Obra_]

Special has it all.
For me, no need for old fashioned Ray's.
Had it all at some point in the past. Special solved all the problems and improve everything.
However, it would not be bad to occasionally release a "historic" series for for enthusiasts and collectors.

 

[58kites]

So you buy a $2000 bass, Heck, even a $1000 bass.
You're going to start hacking it up if you discover you don't like the lack of body contours, and you know they make a version that has the body contours you want?

No, you sell it.

Did you sell yours and buy another one that sounded exactly the same but had body contours?
I don't buy $2000 basses, I don't buy $1000 basses.
Most of my basses are Made in USA, two are made in Taiwan, two are made in Indonesia.
The basses I buy get modified however I want to modify them.
I have made money on every bass I've sold.