Stingray graphite neck?

[king_biscuit]

Having owned a graphite necked Stingray, I don't agree with your comment.

Well, if it's not going to change the tone, why waste the money on a graphite neck? Either way it's a bad idea.

 

[droppedurpocket]

Sweet I like the maple neck weight, if I get another sometime I recon i'll try the status necks.

Here's a pik of my ray..

That ***** is HOT!

 

[Sleepwalker42]

Musicman basses are already bright and compressed, why would you want to make one even brighter and more compressed with a graphite neck?

To take advantage of other benefits of graphite, like clarity, sustain, total absence of dead spots, neck stability (especially in cold climates like Chicago)?

 

[king_biscuit]

To take advantage of other benefits of graphite, like clarity, sustain, total absence of dead spots, neck stability (especially in cold climates like Chicago)?

The OP asked about tonal differences. IMO, the tone will be different with a graphite neck, and for me it would not be for the better.

 

[Sleepwalker42]

The OP asked about tonal differences. IMO, the tone will be different with a graphite neck, and for me it would not be for the better.

Exactly, in the OP I was asking opinions about the tone because I take for granted the other benefits I mentioned which are pretty much standard on all graphite necks, but if that means change dramatically THAT Stingray sound, I will think twice.
So you're saying it would make it too compressed and bright? Are you saying this having had one or listened to it live or...? I'm curious, tell me more.

 

[elgecko]

I own several graphite necked basses and I can tell you there is absolutely nothing compressed about the tone. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The tone is very open and unmuffled. They are bright. Whether or not theses qualities enhance or detract from the Stingray sound is apparently a subjective matter.

 

[king_biscuit]

I own several graphite necked basses and I can tell you there is absolutely nothing compressed about the tone. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The tone is very open and unmuffled. They are bright. Whether or not theses qualities enhance or detract from the Stingray sound is apparently a subjective matter.

I have had several graphite necked basses too, and I find the tone tight (compressed) and bright -- very hi-fi sounding. My graphite necked basses did not have the open chunky tone that my all wooden necked basses have.

 

[elgecko]

I have had several graphite necked basses too, and I find the tone tight (compressed) and bright -- very hi-fi sounding. My graphite necked basses did not have the open chunky tone that my all wooden necked basses have.

I guess we have a disagreement as to the definition of compression. To me, compression is the opposite of hi-fi.

 

[king_biscuit]

I guess we have a disagreement as to the definition of compression. To me, compression is the opposite of hi-fi.

I think so, because I don't mean muffled.

 

[bongomania]

I guess we have a disagreement as to the definition of compression. To me, compression is the opposite of hi-fi.

Related:
http://www.ovnilab.com/articles/dynamics.shtml

There's this jazz label, Chesky, that specializes in recording an entire band with just two mics and zero post-processing (including zero compression); the premise is to get the most naturalistic high-fidelity tone possible. Problem is, the albums sound like crap unless you turn the volume up very high, on a very high-quality listening system. Any other situation--moderate volume, listening in the car or while working, etc.--the recordings sound muffled, indistinct, weak.

Is that hifi? Depends.

 

[walterw]

look at the modulus "flea" basses, which were basically modulus stingray copies; they sounded really good, if not exactly like a 'ray (which might have been from the different pickup and electronics).

 

[elgecko]

Related:
http://www.ovnilab.com/articles/dynamics.shtml

There's this jazz label, Chesky, that specializes in recording an entire band with just two mics and zero post-processing (including zero compression); the premise is to get the most naturalistic high-fidelity tone possible. Problem is, the albums sound like crap unless you turn the volume up very high, on a very high-quality listening system. Any other situation--moderate volume, listening in the car or while working, etc.--the recordings sound muffled, indistinct, weak.

Is that hifi? Depends.

Rather than try to describe a highly subjective observation, here's my benchmark for someone going way over the top with the compression knob. It's the effect I used to get with the compression on my old Carvin PB500.

Invalid Link Removed

To my ears, that's not a pleasing sound and it's the opposite of what I get from graphite necks.

 

[bongomania]

Well, sure. This is my benchmark of the opposite I want from a dog:

Therefore, I don't want any dogs of any kind, or anything that could be described as a dog.

 

[Baird6869]

Musicman basses are already bright and compressed, why would you want to make one even brighter and more compressed with a graphite neck?

I completely agree.

The many Stingrays With wood necks i have owned had the right balance of brightness and compression. My Stingray with the Status neck was too over the top. Not sure the graphite added compression, but definitely too bright.

The guy I bought it from played crazy fusion with lots of slap (Dixie Dregs-ish) and it sounded great. Just not for me.

 

[Sleepwalker42]

I completely agree.

The many Stingrays With wood necks i have owned had the right balance of brightness and compression. My Stingray with the Status neck was too over the top. Not sure the graphite added compression, but definitely too bright.

The guy I bought it from played crazy fusion with lots of slap (Dixie Dregs-ish) and it sounded great. Just not for me.

This last statement, about the type of music played, is quite important to judge a bass and actually helps a lot.

 

[elgecko]

Well, sure. This is my benchmark of the opposite I want from a dog:

Therefore, I don't want any dogs of any kind, or anything that could be described as a dog.

Sure, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that dog has any "cute" qualities. I just don't hear any compressive qualities in graphite necks. Are you telling me I do?


EDIT: I may be listening for the wrong thing. Without using abstract descriptors, what are the objective qualities of a compressed tone? What are the diagnostic properties of a compressed tone?

 

[David Jayne]

Having a hard time understanding how a neck could apply 'compression.'

 

[David Jayne]

I see people describing certain strings that way too. Don't follow.

 

[king_biscuit]

The several graphite necked basses I have had were very even frequency wise up and down the neck (but very bright), and the dynamic range was squashed a bit compared to say an all wooden necked Stingray or Fender. Of course wood affects the tone and dynamics (why wouldn't graphite), and some woods are more compressed sounding (heavy ash more than light alder for example). Anyone who has played a heavy ash 70s Jazz compared to a light weight alder 60s jazz will know what I'm talking about.

 

[bongomania]

Sure, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that dog has any "cute" qualities. I just don't hear any compressive qualities in graphite necks. Are you telling me I do?


EDIT: I may be listening for the wrong thing. Without using abstract descriptors, what are the objective qualities of a compressed tone? What are the diagnostic properties of a compressed tone?

Honestly I'm not going so far as to tell you what you hear. I was only (first) pointing out that what sounds compressed to one person can sound hi-fi to the next person, and vice-versa. And then (second) saying that using an example of excessive compression as a benchmark for what compression sounds like is not actually constructive. I'd be willing to bet that nearly all of your favorite hi-fi recordings used some compression, but they don't "sound compressed". That's all I was getting at.