• 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.

SR 5 Vs. Sterling 5

G

G RICH 5

Dec 19, 2006
2,361
950
Detroit
#1
I have owned about 6 SR 5's over the years, and love them!
I end up selling them eventually due to the weight, and my bad back. I know that the body of a sterling 5 is smaller, so I am to assume that it is lighter. Does anyone know if this is indeed true, and if so how much? I also heard the nut width of the sterling is narrower. True, or not?
Thanks for the help.
 
#4
#6
I sympathize with you. I just got rid of a Bongo that was well over 11 pounds, although that is not the norm. I have a Stingray 5 that weighs in at exactly 9 pounds. You just have to try as many as you can and get the lightest one. I think this is the biggest drawback for EBMM basses, because they are otherwise top notch if that's your thing.
 
#9
Double Agent said:
The Perfect Bass weighs every bass that they get in stock individually. Based on some research I did at their website, the Sterling 5 does not actually seem to be any lighter than the Stingray 5. See for yourself:

Sterling 5 basses:
http://www.theperfectbass.com/explo...&W=STORE&P=N&S=1001081&U=1&SS=1&CR=N&modify=0

Stingray 5 basses:
http://www.theperfectbass.com/explo...&W=STORE&P=N&S=1001081&U=1&SS=1&CR=N&modify=0

You'll probably have to go with a Bongo to get a lighter EBMM 5-string.
Click to expand...

Nice sleuthing, DA!

Interesting that no one ever seems to pick on Lakland Skyline 55-02s for being heavy... but if you check their weights at PB, the lightest one is 9.4 (same as the lightest Stingray), and the heaviest at 11 lbs appears to be the heaviest bass in their store!
 
#11
king_biscuit said:
Sterling 5s don't seem to be any lighter than Ray 5s. Too bad :( EB really needs to start chambering the bodies or something, because some of their basses are just too heavy.
Click to expand...

Remember, MIA EBMM basses are already some of the most expensive mass productions basses being made. Chambering the bodies would certainly raise their prices at least $200.

Bovinehost mentioned that they have a policy of rejecting any wood that weighs more than 12 lbs. (I think.) I just think they need to be a bit more selective and put the limit at10.5lbs. Rejecting more wood would increase their prices somewhat, but probably not as much as chambering.

What would really made EBMM shape up about heavy basses would be if they had some strong competition from makers other manufacturers making similar sounding basses at the same price but lighter.:smug:
 
#13
FromTheBassMent said:
Nice sleuthing, DA!

Interesting that no one ever seems to pick on Lakland Skyline 55-02s for being heavy... but if you check their weights at PB, the lightest one is 9.4 (same as the lightest Stingray), and the heaviest at 11 lbs appears to be the heaviest bass in their store!
Click to expand...

I don't think DA was "picking on EBMM, but rather stating a fact. btw, Lakland Skylines are too heavy too :)
 
#14
Dr. Cheese said:
Remember, MIA EBMM basses are already some of the most expensive mass productions basses being made. Chambering the bodies would certainly raise their prices at least $200.

Bovinehost mentioned that they have a policy of rejecting any wood that weighs more than 12 lbs. (I think.) I just think they need to be a bit more selective and put the limit at10.5lbs. Rejecting more wood would increase their prices somewhat, but probably not as much as chambering.

What would really made EBMM shape up about heavy basses would be if they had some strong competition from makers other manufacturers making similar sounding basses at the same price but lighter.:smug:
Click to expand...


Good point Doc. Maybe EB could just start trying different woods for the Rays/Sterlings. I'd rather have a SR5 made out of Basswood if EB could bring it in at 8.5 pounds.
 
#16
trowaclown said:
How about switching out the tuners to ultralites? It might cut some weight and reduce neckdive, which IME is quite an important aspect, since poor balance can make a bass seem heavier than it is.
Click to expand...

Yup, that would certainly help bring the total weight down. But there's no neck dive problem with EBMMs that I've ever experienced, even with the five strings. The poundage is in the bodies.
 
#17
The body on the Sterling 5 is a little smaller than the SR5 so in theory it can be lighter, in practice it usually isn't. I've seen Sterling 5's as light as 9 pounds but that's as good as it gets and those are rare.

I'm in the camp that loves MM basses but I've completely given up on them due to the ridiculous weight. I have a neck and shoulder condition that makes it really uncomfortable to gig anything over 9 pounds so that's where I draw the line.

If I ever run across a 9 pound SR5 I would snap that bad boy up, but they are really hard to find.
 
#19
Thanks for all the feedback. I pulled the trigger today on a sterling 5 and I am not sure of the exact weight, but it feels lighter then my prievious sr5's. Olive gold, malpe board, black p.g. Will post pix when my camers becomes functional.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back