• 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.

Steinberger discussion.

Suntory

Suntory

Jun 8, 2012
735
795
#1
Have a few questions on the Steinberger XT line. Actually, a few questions on basses in general.

How important is wood/ size of the body/ neck materials etc... when a company like Steinberger can produce a bass so small that sounds reasonably good. I say reasonably good because personally I find them a bit thin sounding, they really lack oomph!. But I have little experience with them. Back in the 80's, Sting and Getty used so did so many others.

A second topic of discussion. Are 80's basses underrated? I love em! I love my F/Jazz but the small body of streamers and Spectors (my Lado medallion) are so nice and light.

Lets discuss.
 
#2
I've owned a few '80's Steinies and currently have an early L2. Thin is the very last word I'd use to describe the tone.

They aren't thick sounding in a wooly way, but they have a huge fat and clear tone that is very articulate and still clear even with the tone knob rolled off. But never thin.

Sorry but I can't help with the XT, never tried one.
 
#3
I apologize, hope I didn't offend. So why so much goes into the wood and size if you can get so much out of such a small bass?

A friend of mine was telling me that the instrument was was almost indestructible. Stein had it run over by a car, put new strings on it and it was good to go - albeit, a little rough around the edges.
 
#4
Suntory said:
I apologize, hope I didn't offend. So why so much goes into the wood and size if you can get so much out of such a small bass?

A friend of mine was telling me that the instrument was was almost indestructible. Stein had it run over by a car, put new strings on it and it was good to go - albeit, a little rough around the edges.
Click to expand...

The original Steinbergers that Sting, Geddy Lee, and others played (L2 and XL2) weren't made of wood. They were molded out of a graphite composite, in all one piece. That's why they had the tone and sustain that they did, and why they were nearly indescructible.

The wood-bodied XT has the same shape as the originals, and similar bridge/tuner hardware, but that's pretty much where the resemblence ends.
 
#6
I have an L2 that I bought in NYC I the early 80's. Low 1500's serial number which were the last before moving to the Newburgh factory from Brooklyn if memory serves. They are very durable, but I'd you drop one on the corner, they will chip (have seen it, but did't happen to mine yet). Very mid-range tone, but adequate sustain and articulate. Very fast neck and a pleasure to travel with.

image-2745968223.jpg
 
#7
Whoa! 9 pounds? I did not know that, I played something else than, sure it was a Stein but it was years ago. The dense graphite would explain why they sound like a bass.
Cheers, questions answered.

I'm predicting a comeback of 80's basses. Right now the hipsters are playing old fenders and ricks but it's just a matter of time that one of their most admired cult like heroes plays a white Spector or a stein(very 80's) I guess it'll be ironic but they'll discover how easy they are to play and they sound sweet. So watch your classics jump in value.
 
#8
I had this very discussion with a session friend of mine recently. He doesn't agree, but I'm sure you're right Suntory


Mass is why the originals sound so good,. the wooden copies can't hold a candle to them. They're a toy, really, I've had an XT and its rebadged Hohner, the very same instrument.

I bought my old wood-bodied XM back yesterday, and it sounded amazing, but the ergonmics were poor. It must've killed Ned Steinberger to have to produce stuff like that when the L series was so perfect
 
#9
I have owned all the Newburgh and TN Steinies, and also Hohner licensed copies.

the L2 and XL2 were in fact heavier then they looked, because Ned's carbon blend was dense. And I never found it thin in tone, but it is a much different tone. If you are looking P or vintage J, you will never get it.

My XQ2v1 is the best of all worlds, although she tops out at nearly 10 lbs. Rock Maple body, Newburgh carbon neck, and wow. I get Steinbergery sound with some wood warmth.

My Gibson 20/20, although all rock maple, is earily very similar to my old L2. Not sure how or why, but "m guessing its the general electronics, body size and pickup config.

Not thin at all.
 
#10
TRichardsbass said:
I have owned all the Newburgh and TN Steinies, and also Hohner licensed copies.

the L2 and XL2 were in fact heavier then they looked, because Ned's carbon blend was dense. And I never found it thin in tone, but it is a much different tone. If you are looking P or vintage J, you will never get it.

My XQ2v1 is the best of all worlds, although she tops out at nearly 10 lbs. Rock Maple body, Newburgh carbon neck, and wow. I get Steinbergery sound with some wood warmth.

My Gibson 20/20, although all rock maple, is earily very similar to my old L2. Not sure how or why, but "m guessing its the general electronics, body size and pickup config.

Not thin at all.
Click to expand...

As a new owner of a XL2, I would NOT describe the tone as thin in any way. Its huge IMO...but very "clear". If you have bad technique, it will show with the EMGs because you hear everything. Also, the (X)L2's are not light for their size, but not heavy either (IMO) and the way they sit on you, its one of the most comfortable basses I have ever owned.
 
#11
In a recorded situation, it was very difficult to tell which tracks I had recorded with my L and which with one of my XMs. The difference was very subtle, but overall, for me the tone of the L tops it. I really wouldn't describe it as lacking in warmth either.

But thats such a subjective thing
 
#12
My L2 sounds as thick and "woody" as any wooden bass I've heard. Not "thin" or "sterile" at all. On the higher strings or upper registers, actually considerably less thin than wooden basses. Those often lose some "oomph" in high passages and the notes can get lost in a mix. The L2 sounds like it has a built in expander by comparison. Those high notes sound clear, full, and satisfying.

The 80's had some amazing basses. The decade saw Alembic's quality and innovations of the 70's influence conventional luthiers. Visionaries like Ned Steinberger came at the instrument from a new angle. Companies such as B.C. Rich explored new frontiers of Pointy, but these were also quality basses with neck through construction and active electronics. The boutique bass industry left its infancy and developed into adventurous young adulthood, becoming more "mainstream" every year.
 
#13
NOt sure if you want to listen, and it may not be representative of the Steinberger sound so much (like Journey, or Rush, etc) but I have been screwing around with my L2, Zoom B3 and Garage Band recently. The first two are mostly bass tracks, the last is just total noise.

Invalid Link Removed
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back