Stingray popularity decline?

[Gasman]

I love Stingrays. Currently own 3, have own many others. Also, I’m primarily a rock bassist (not professional however). Despite my personal affinity for them, I have never considered them a “go to” bass for rock, and despite sometimes playing them, I usually go back to Fender or my Thunderbird. Plus, getting a sound engineer who knows how to record them is pretty rare in my limited experience

 

[baddarryl]

I just upgraded from a Ray34 to this 99 Stingray. It might just be: “the one”. It is much more tonally diverse than it’s reputation. Does anyone really care about logos besides us ?

I demoed a whole bunch of basses at Sam Ash yesterday and an import Ray five string certainly had the best tone to my ears. Next was the new Yamaha broadbass, then a USA professional Jazz, than a USA Pro P. $ for $ the Yamaha was the best bass there. I hope the stingrays lose a little popularity I got this used for under a grand and would love to add a Five.

 

[Deleted member 271037]

Probably because the typical Stingray sound is by many associated with a particular era and not ideal for many popular genres of music today. Dare I use the word "outdated"? Probably a little harsh but a '62 P-bass actually feels more "modern" to me than a Stingray these days. But that's the way with music, things go out of fashion... and then they come back.

I just wish I had stockpiled analog synths and tube gear when they went out of fashion back in the 80s... I would have been a millionaire today!

 

[mindwell]

I have yet to play a five-string Jazz bass that works for me. Until that happens, and maybe even if it does, Stingray 5 it is and will be.

 

[MattZilla]

I always thought the one thing that hurt the Stingray more than anything else is the 'Music Man' company moniker and logo that looks like something off a kid's toy. And the overly busy (and straight out of the early 70s font) "Ernie Ball" they wedged on top of it doesn't help matters either. It seems hokey and out of place on that instrument.
... it’s totally unnecessary to have all that on it anyway. A Stingray is one of the most iconic looking basses out there. The body shape and oval pickguard immediately identify it. So why the need for all the verbiage on the headstock?

IMO, this is rather irrelevant to the op, but is something I've thought every time I've seen one. It's a small, iconic headstock onto which Leo knew well enough to ought to have stuck just a classy pair of "M"s out on the hook and "StingRay" near the nut. The big Ern should've just stuck EB in the serial numbers. Four word brand name? Dumb. It's not a multi-partner law or engineering firm. StingRay by Ernie, Ball, Music & Man Instruments LLC. Sheesh. It is so cluttered that covering the body in stickers is rather balancing.

Anyways, I think that they seem less popular now relative to '90-05 only due to the near absence of Fenders, Gibsons, and other 60's gear on stages and videos in those days. Back then, outside of punk rock, it seemed it was either a Ray, or some unobtanium coffee table thing until Laklands started popping up.

Rics seemed mythological. We just never saw them outside of 70's concert footage. Them dealing with GC has changed that a ton.

Fenders seemed as well built as Ibanezes while priced 1.5-2x as much.

Now Fenders are built pretty well, and Rics show up in almost every GC at least a few times a year.

 

[Joebone]

It's hard to see the StingRay not swinging back into popularity - and I'm not so sure that it's particularly "unpopular" at this time. The original design was a real step forward for its time, and over the years EBMM has done a great job of keeping quality control up and building on the brand's fundamentals. I would play one if they issued a 5-string with 19mm spacing [Epic fail, but that's another story...] The new run of basic Stingrays looks quite attractive, if they've managed to get the weight down but also maintain sonic punch. And as for popularity, all of the great classic designs ebb and flow in prominence over the years, but also maintain a solid core of users. The Sting Ray is no different. Final note - if the SR seems too much like a slapper's axe, install some flatwounds- happiness.

 

[NetRngr]

While mine isn't an actual MM Stingray, it is very similar and the pickup placement is the same. I have this bass, a P, a J, a Yamaha P/J, Two EBs and several others. That said I find the P and the J fit a wider variety of songs I play where as if I'm playing more vintage rock I go with the EB models.
It all really depends on what type of music is being played. Every one of my basses sounds different on some level and that difference and the music being played dictates what bass i use more than anything.

 

[jim nolte]

I actually had a chance to play a stingray special this week. The body maybe lighter but the neck isnt. Terrible neck dive and the bad easily was over 9lbs. Not terribly different than any other stingray I've played except it now has neck dive

One positive thing about my 12 lbs. alder SR5 was it didn't have much neck dive

 

[Bass4LifeRS]

It's a non-topic thread topic without any evidence. Just wasted some minutes reading it

 

[dbsfgyd1]

It seems like Music Man Stingrays aren't as popular with working bassists (especially rock bassists) as they were 15-20 years ago, while on the other hand, P basses, J basses and Rics seem more popular than ever in this niche.

Any thoughts on why this may be? The desire for passive grind is the only explanation that I can think of, since the Stingray is otherwise a marvelous instrument.

You would never notice that hanging around in these parts. IMO, they are a fine instrument, but then again, there are a lot of fine instrument manufacturers, with a lot more models and price points today as opposed to 20 years ago. That might explain your opinion that they are not as popular. It’s just there are more options out there.

 

[svlilioukalani]

This thread seems nuts to me. The reality is Music Man is production has not slowed down. Yes their prices are up, but so is everybody else. It's the cost of doing business in California these days.

I could care less how the font on a bass looks. Basses are tools for making music. What matters is how they feel in your hands and how they sound. Ya can't see the font when you are playing your bass. So, as I see it; people worried about how their bass looks, really should spend more time playing the bass, rather than staring at it in your bedrooms.

I have 3 MM basses. 2 Sterlings and a 5 string stingray. They are now my main gigging basses. To me, they sound and play the best. I have 40 other basses these days, including Fenders and Alembic basses. The Sterling bass is on of the best playing bass I have found out there, light weight and fast with a great tone.

 

[jd56hawk]

Just my theory....

For decades, a Sting Ray was about as good a mass-produced bass that you could get, under $1500.

Recently, other brands have increased quality control and the Sting Ray is no longer under $1500 (not all of them). Before I drop two grand on one instrument, I am going to compare the hell out of whatever-else-is-available near the same price range, and there is much more competition than before. More choices generally equal some lost sales. It is still a very good instrument, but others are comparable - perhaps better? - at that price range.

You might be interested in this.
$999 and worth every penny!

SPLIT BRICK NECK
Strong lows and highs, open mids. Like a vintage P bass pickup but with more beef, yet retains clarity. 43 gauge wire, ceramic magnet, 8.5K ohms.

THICK BRICK BRIDGE
Warm and thick with strong mids. Output and punch like an active, but more organic sounding. 42 gauge wire, ceramic magnet, 7K ohms.

 

[nomaj]

IMO, this is rather irrelevant to the op, but is something I've thought every time I've seen one. It's a small, iconic headstock onto which Leo knew well enough to ought to have stuck just a classy pair of "M"s out on the hook and "StingRay" near the nut. The big Ern should've just stuck EB in the serial numbers. Four word brand name? Dumb. It's not a multi-partner law or engineering firm. StingRay by Ernie, Ball, Music & Man Instruments LLC. Sheesh. It is so cluttered that covering the body in stickers is rather balancing.

Anyways, I think that they seem less popular now relative to '90-05 only due to the near absence of Fenders, Gibsons, and other 60's gear on stages and videos in those days. Back then, outside of punk rock, it seemed it was either a Ray, or some unobtanium coffee table thing until Laklands started popping up.

Rics seemed mythological. We just never saw them outside of 70's concert footage. Them dealing with GC has changed that a ton.

Fenders seemed as well built as Ibanezes while priced 1.5-2x as much.

Now Fenders are built pretty well, and Rics show up in almost every GC at least a few times a year.

+1

Your reply seems right on target re my original question.

And, ha, the "toy" logo and clashing fonts hadn't crossed my mind - at least consciously - until 40HZ (excellent observation!) and you (spot on) others (pro and con) brought it up.

 

[JohnnyChatter]

I personally own or have owned about one of every bass in the last 5 years no joke. I’m always on the hunt for the one and I bust my ass at work and like to treat myself. I wasnt a huge fan of Stingrays because I never had played one with features I liked. I don’t like painted necks and they all seemed heavy. The new one is my go to bass now. I haven’t even touched my other basses since I got it and I got it for 1800 because guitar center honored a coupon I had. The necks are amazing and after reading the neck dive comment I walked in the living room and put it on and than compared to my jazz, precision’s, aerodynes, thunderbird, Rick 4003, Coronado, Hofner, and mustang and have no idea what anyone is talking about? I even took off my nice leather old man strap and put my old skinny black strap on. I think if they aren’t as popular it’s because the indie rock scene isn’t using them as much.

 

[mindwell]

What this thread needs is a picture of Carl Radle playing an early Stingray in the late-1970s.

 

[Captain Chaos]

They were a lot more present in the 90’s and early 00’s. I suppose some of it has to do with the genre of music. Most Stingray players I see these days have them slung around their knees and covered in stickers, playing for “Three name band” at the warped tour.

I attended Warped Tour last year and didn’t notice that many stingrays like previous years.

 

[Bassosaurus]

I see just as many if not more nowadays than I did 20 years ago. They’re very popular in country music here in Texas. I see more 5-string StingRays than P basses.

That's interesting!

I had a 5-string fretless Sting Ray I played in the 90's. It was pretty great and was a unique bass to have as a fretless. When I got back into playing bass about 20 years later I looked at Sting Rays and they were all super heavy. Perhaps some of that is my ageing but MM move toward a lighter weight tool seems like a great idea. I think the (un)popularity of it has a lot to do with flavor of the day though. Flea did a lot for them in the 90's for example.

 

[ugly_bassplayer]

For.me it sounds good but always lacked the bottom of a well balanced neck pickup. And imo high output is not really useful, more of a in store marketing type thing. It makes everything in the signal chain clip...pedals.... amp.....di....foh

 

[mcnach]

It seems like Music Man Stingrays aren't as popular with working bassists (especially rock bassists) as they were 15-20 years ago, while on the other hand, P basses, J basses and Rics seem more popular than ever in this niche.

Any thoughts on why this may be? The desire for passive grind is the only explanation that I can think of, since the Stingray is otherwise a marvelous instrument.

How did you measure that?

I never saw the Stingray prominently in any genre... but it was always there, and to me it seems it still is. But Precision and Jazz basses outnumber it for sure. As always.

The 'passive grind' is a funny concept to me, for most active basses are just a passive bass with a preamp onboard... and any passive bass does get plugged into some kind of preamp too, the difference is the location and the effect that a long cable (loss/no loss of treble) may have...
Bogus, in one word.

 

[mcnach]

I always thought the one thing that hurt the Stingray more than anything else is the 'Music Man' company moniker and logo that looks like something off a kid's toy. And the overly busy (and straight out of the early 70s font) "Ernie Ball" they wedged on top of it doesn't help matters either. It seems hokey and out of place on that instrument.

Three different and totally clashing fonts? That mess would earn you an immediate F in any school of design that was worthy of the name.

View attachment 3097196

And it’s totally unnecessary to have all that on it anyway. A Stingray is one of the most iconic looking basses out there. The body shape and oval pickguard immediately identify it. So why the need for all the verbiage on the headstock?

I agree that the logo is pretty... ugly. BUt I can't imagine someone trying a bass and saying "I love it, it sounds great, feels great... but I'm sorry, I can't stand the logo" and putting it back on the rack