They do still make the US EBMM Sterling in 4 and 5 string configurations. They’re on the website, each with two color options.
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.
Looking for Comparison Between MM Stingray and MM Sterling...
- Thread starter Count Bassie
- Start date
Cool. Now try searching for what the OP actually asked for (USA Sterling model - NOT Indonesian Sterling brand - vs USA StingRay - NOT Indonesian Sterling brand StingRay).
Ernie Ball sure didn't do us any favors with their confusing nomenclature of reusing the same names for different things. I've got a Sterling (the model, not the brand) that is also a SUB (the early discontinued USA-made SUB, not the later Asian-made SUB). If I ever attempt to sell it on Reverb or TB I'll have to begin the listing with a taxonomic tutorial.
The jazz-style neck and 3-way switch would make the Sterling a no-brainer for me. Even if you prefer the alnico or new neodymium pups, a pickup swap is easy to do. Even with a 3-band EQ, the StingRay has a very baked-in sound. The 3-way switch on the Sterling lets you get further away from that if you want to.
Ernie Ball sure didn't do us any favors with their confusing nomenclature of reusing the same names for different things. I've got a Sterling (the model, not the brand) that is also a SUB (the early discontinued USA-made SUB, not the later Asian-made SUB). If I ever attempt to sell it on Reverb or TB I'll have to begin the listing with a taxonomic tutorial.
It's a clusterf*#£ for sure.
That said, they're entirely different companies - the Sterling brand is owned by Praxis (though EBMM didn't do anybody any favours by not objecting to / intervening in Praxis naming the brand out of respect for Sterling Ball).
Setting aside the pick-up switching options, the primary difference comes from the ceramic pickup. I played and nearly bought a Sterling. I prevaricated and in the few days I spent thinking about it someone else took it away. As it happened, the same store also had a USA Sterling pickup (with phantom coil) in the bargain bin for a steal. So the Alnico came out and the Ceramic went in and everything I heard from the Sterling was there in the Ray - clarity, transparency, transients, mid presence, extended highs and dynamic sensitivity. Any sense that the Sterling sounds compressed and synthetic is nonsense IME. I removed the 3rd coil and wired it permanently in parallel, and it's been there ever since.
Maybe for a time. They’re making/selling them now in two color options according to their website.
I’m glad to hear that. The Sterling always spoke to me in ways the Ray didn’t. Plus I really always felt it was more comfortable to play, smaller body, slimmer, narrower neck.
I've had many examples of both over the years. And they are both fantastic basses with sound qualities that are very useful and somewhat similar in the grand scheme.
The Sterlings have the ceramic pickup (until later iterations of the Classic, I think? Or the US SUB Sterlings, no switch and alnico pickup) and the 3 way switch. So you're gonna get a little crispier attack on the high end. And the switching allows for 2 different, "Definitely not a Stingray!" sounds.
They are smaller with the thinner neck, so quite easy to play and very comfy.
Comparable eras of the Stingray would typically use the alnico pickup (unless you mean the Stingray 5, which started with 2 coil alnico, switched to 3 coil ceramic in the mid 90s), which I found to have a little more of a "raw" tonality, compared to that crispier tonality of the Sterling. But that seemed to lend itself to being "angrier" in a way. And we all know that Musicman can do well in both kinds of sound. So if one were after that more edgy tone when pushed, it's truly baked into the Stingray.
And they certainly compare closer with the 3B eq option. The 2B really does change some of the response in a way that deviates further from what the Sterling would be at it's "middle," if you will.
Oh, and while a Stingray has that slightly wider nut (1.625"), the neck always felt slim in a way that still makes it fast. The Sterlings I've had, seemed to be a rounded profile in the back. It wasn't like it was fat - possibly the exact thickness of the Stingray? - but it felt rounder in my rather large hands. Super fast playing, mind you, just a different feel from its 1.5" nut to the 1.625" nut of the Stingray (until the SLO neck came to pass, that is).
My own personal preference tends to be for the Stingray, as the smaller body of the Sterling looks even smaller against my fatness. And as of late, I've been doing more aggressive sounding playing, so it would have a very tiny edge in that regard...
But if ego weren't at play though, I'd probably be just as happy playing either one. And they are close enough for me that I wouldn't feel compelled to have one of each, as they are far closer in function than, say, a P and a J would be.
The Sterlings have the ceramic pickup (until later iterations of the Classic, I think? Or the US SUB Sterlings, no switch and alnico pickup) and the 3 way switch. So you're gonna get a little crispier attack on the high end. And the switching allows for 2 different, "Definitely not a Stingray!" sounds.
They are smaller with the thinner neck, so quite easy to play and very comfy.
Comparable eras of the Stingray would typically use the alnico pickup (unless you mean the Stingray 5, which started with 2 coil alnico, switched to 3 coil ceramic in the mid 90s), which I found to have a little more of a "raw" tonality, compared to that crispier tonality of the Sterling. But that seemed to lend itself to being "angrier" in a way. And we all know that Musicman can do well in both kinds of sound. So if one were after that more edgy tone when pushed, it's truly baked into the Stingray.
And they certainly compare closer with the 3B eq option. The 2B really does change some of the response in a way that deviates further from what the Sterling would be at it's "middle," if you will.
Oh, and while a Stingray has that slightly wider nut (1.625"), the neck always felt slim in a way that still makes it fast. The Sterlings I've had, seemed to be a rounded profile in the back. It wasn't like it was fat - possibly the exact thickness of the Stingray? - but it felt rounder in my rather large hands. Super fast playing, mind you, just a different feel from its 1.5" nut to the 1.625" nut of the Stingray (until the SLO neck came to pass, that is).
My own personal preference tends to be for the Stingray, as the smaller body of the Sterling looks even smaller against my fatness. And as of late, I've been doing more aggressive sounding playing, so it would have a very tiny edge in that regard...
But if ego weren't at play though, I'd probably be just as happy playing either one. And they are close enough for me that I wouldn't feel compelled to have one of each, as they are far closer in function than, say, a P and a J would be.
My personal intro to Stingrays was a Ray24. It was really good. So good that it made me start looking at the real deal soon afterwards. I quickly realized it's basically a different animal. The Ray24 has a thinner, Jazz-style neck with a rounded C profile and is overall a smaller instrument, while the EBMM Stingray is a luxury item with the most fantastic D-shaped roasted maple neck that I have ever held in my life. I'd previously played a few other roasted necks, like those in the Reverend line, but whatever Ernie Ball does to them before installation is on another level.
Weight-wise, the Sterling was far heavier.
Both the SBMM and EBMM were made really well but the EBMM bass was flawless when I finally got it. Weeks in, I still can't find a single thing to complain about; not even the smallest of issues exist on this bass.
Weight-wise, the Sterling was far heavier.
Both the SBMM and EBMM were made really well but the EBMM bass was flawless when I finally got it. Weeks in, I still can't find a single thing to complain about; not even the smallest of issues exist on this bass.
Get off my lawn!
Seriously, it's just a tool to use. Calling someone "lazy" for using the tools available is a cheap insult from a lazy mind (see what i did there). Also, considering that the ChatGPT summary is more useful and applicable to the OP than many of the user responses here, I'd say it's pretty useful and actually has expanded the knowledge of the community.
And quite frankly, way more useful than the drivel in your response
I saw this, and yes found it informative. Thanks for pointing to it, it is a pretty good answer to the question.
That's been up there for a few years. It has shown both colors as discontinued and there has been no update so, no, they don't still make them or sell them as standard models.
Interesting... I did not know that. I assumed the Sterling brand was a subsidiary of Ernie Ball.
MusicMan doesn’t help matters using a model in their the US line as the name for their import brand.
