• 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.

Music Man Stingray w/ weak G string

#61
bassybill said:
Same problem here with my Ray - and I don't give a hoot what the folks on the EBMM forum say.

It's not so noticeable when playing solo at home, but in a live band mix it's almost like having someone ducking your gain every time you play a note on the G string. It just disappears. It's such an issue that I've only ever used the bass on one gig! Shame, because in most other respects (especially the playing feel) I love the instrument.

Maybe I should check out swapping the pickup and electronics at some point.
Click to expand...

This was the issue with my '94 Sterling and it drove me crazy. Never mind pulling the string - it just went away. Now, my wife bought the bass for me so there was no getting rid of it - besides I love everything else about it.

First I tried a Duncan CS alnico replacement - this was before they started mass producing them and was the first outboard MM replacement, and it was $$$. It did not work because the problem is the string is not centered directly over the polepiece (see first pic - a generic shot, not my bass though it was just like that), so a standard configuration did nothing.
Next was a Bart - better but I hated the tone.

Finally, I got a Lane Poor (direct from him at that time) and that was the ticket! Full strength G and tone that doesn't quit. BTW, I also pulled the pre and dropped in an OBP-3 @18v. Can't say enough about it - it went from gathering dust to one of my top 3. I also added the thumb rail - it totally opened up the tonal versatility letting me play in a more trditional position.

At this point there are excellent bar magnet alternatives that will make a marked improvement in response and sound great.
 
#63
scraig said:
I would have my designers, techs, & engineers working feverously to solve this dead G string problem, if I was pres at MM.
Click to expand...
The first step towards solving a problem is admitting that it exists!
Unfortunately martini-glass inlays and multiple-pickup models (with mis-aligned polepieces) are higher priorities. :smug:

It's especially baffling since EB/MM upholds incredibly high standards of design/quality/craftsmanship in most other respects.
 
#65
Mine has that problem too. it's down to the preamp, but i think EBMM changed it a couple of years ago so it's less noticeable or completely gone. I think you can even exchange your old preamp with a new one, but then i don't really know how that will affect the sound.

sterlings are not affected by this as the pickup and preamp are different anyways.
 
#66
mindbass said:
Mine has that problem too. it's down to the preamp, but i think EBMM changed it a couple of years ago so it's less noticeable or completely gone. I think you can even exchange your old preamp with a new one, but then i don't really know how that will affect the sound.

sterlings are not affected by this as the pickup and preamp are different anyways.
Click to expand...

Cool thanks. I have a 02 Sterling & an 08 HH Sterling & they are great. Surprisingly I love the 02 H much better.
 
#68
scraig said:
Is it true all Finder style necks have this same issue (weak G string)?
Click to expand...

Fender's typically have a deadspot on the G string between the 5-7 frets. The note tends to not sustain or be as loud as the others.

It's different than the issue with MM basses, who's entire G string seems to disappear when in the mix.

For the record, I love how MM basses play and feel and sound, however I sold all of mine because they all had weak G strings.
 
#69
thisSNsucks said:
Fender's typically have a deadspot on the G string between the 5-7 frets. The note tends to not sustain or be as loud as the others.

It's different than the issue with MM basses, who's entire G string seems to disappear when in the mix.

For the record, I love how MM basses play and feel and sound, however I sold all of mine because they all had weak G strings.
Click to expand...

Same here - I own a Stingray 5 and love the sound but this is turning me off. I was looking at a Roasted SR5 HH but now having second thoughts about it. The Human Roxy 5 bass sounds awsome.
 
#70
thisSNsucks said:
Fender's typically have a deadspot on the G string between the 5-7 frets. The note tends to not sustain or be as loud as the others.

It's different than the issue with MM basses, who's entire G string seems to disappear when in the mix.

For the record, I love how MM basses play and feel and sound, however I sold all of mine because they all had weak G strings.
Click to expand...

so what bass(s) are you playing now?
 
#71
I own four StingRays in various styles (4 and 5 string, 3-band, 2-band, H, HH, Classic, original flavor) and honestly I have no idea what a "weak" G is. Mine are all fine. Lucky? Bad ears? I have my EQ pretty much flat on both the basses and amp, just a little bass bump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: villis
#72
johnk_10 said:
actually, mine were magnet .032" 'shims' that were glued on top of the magnet poles.
Click to expand...

Been meaning to send you a PM about this issue. As I remember your shims (as well as the shims Leo had given you many years ago) were just an OK fix.
So for a guy who has shimmed the stock pup, tried both Dimarzio and Nordy's, built a hand made light-weight SR body, and built a Fluffy pre, did any offer a solid fix? If not, what offered the biggest improvement?

In regards to allignment, the strings on my 83' are reasonably well centered over the pole pieces but if blade pups fixed the problem (while maintaining something close to the stock tone) I'd be all over it. Love the bass but am frustrated that I have to compromise overall amp EQ to cover for a thin sounding G string.

My opinion on why the factory doesn't want to get involved is that they are much more intereseted in working on new designs rather than supporting something they inherited that was designed by others. Ironicaly, I bet the SR is still a huge seller purely based on what is in stock at my local GC.
The 1 1/2" nut on the Sterling is a deal killer for me; clearly I'm in the minority as you can order a SR with both width necks but not a Sterling.
 
#73
IMO, the original three band preamp made the g string louder, but it also made the whole bass more harsh sounding (to me), and the 2 band just sounded more like a vintage stingray, and is much smoother.

also the lighter weight swamp ash body just made the whole bass sound fuller, thicker, richer and rounder, which also helped the G string.

i don't think that the G will ever really be as thick and punchy as the A & D strings, but having the split coil option also made it a bit less scooped (because of the phase effect of having two coils on). and the series mode also made the g fuller, thicker and more punchy.
 
#76
Jim C said:
This has been a hot topic on and off for ages although most complain that the G string is quiet.
I have a 1983 Stingray and have found that with many amp / on board EQ settings, the G is thin while the others sound full.

My suggestion is to run the treble at 50-60% on the bass and roll off the extreme highs on the amp; use upper mids at the amp to brighten the sound if necessary.

Lastly, right hand position (moving toward the neck) will also help with weak Mr. G.

BTW, DO NOT post this on the MM bass forum as this has never occured and all the fan boys will call you names regardless of any sound clips, measurements etc, as this makes Sterling fussy.
Odd since Leo designed this instrument and not any of the Ball family.
Click to expand...

I just read your post over at that forum, and it really isn't terrible or unwarranted at all. What I found fully disheartening were the comments in response, and the obvious a**-kissing.
 
#77
vincenzomauer88 said:
EASY FIX! I've had this issue. Raise the screws on the G string side of the pickup. Forceable EQ should never be the answer.
Click to expand...

Thanks but most of us here are way past the set up and string choice possibilities (Sunbeam's currently).
The thin G can be made tollerable even for the discriminating player; it's just so weird and frustrating compared to all of the passive Fender basses and copies I've owned over the years that never had a hint of this issue (other than the classic ghost C or C#)
 
#79
The weak G is the reason that I've just sold my second Stingray. I sold the first a few years back for this reason but talked myself into another. After months of kidding myself I gave in and sold it. My Fenders (51P, 78P, 62J) all have a strong, even output. I love the Stingray tone but the G gets buried in a band mix no matter what I've tried.
 
#80
Jim C said:
Are you saying to set a steel washer on the tops of the pole pieces? I'm assuming the magnets held it in place?

I remember John K mentioning something similar although it might have been putting a washer under the magnet.

Anybody else have a positive experience with this mod?
Was thinking that I'd make some magnet "caps" with my lathe and some cold rolled steel bar stock.
Click to expand...


Yes, thats exactly it - the washer was held in place by the magnet in the pole piece.

E.Q. will NOT fix this problem, though E.Q can exacerbate it to the point that when you roll off the bass end, it sounds better. This is because the bass frequencies boosted by the E.Q aren't there to be amplified in the higher strings.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back