Not country, per se, but I believe Gary Tallent from E Street used one for a while, too.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Stingray-the most divisive bass sound?
- Thread starter Vanheusen77
- Start date
The only bass I need after the ray is the j.
I haven't experienced anyone in real life say they hate the ray. I do know quite a few bass players who want the quality, durability, playability and look of the ray but just can't manage the sound.
Explanation:
It was the 3-band preamp that I didn't like, but I felt the first two basses were too expensive, too nice to mod.
The Sterling Sterling is passive, but it keeps the part of the Stingray distinctive tone that I wanted to keep, due to the location and type of pickup. But, for the record, I would try a 2-band clone preamp someday. It's also an effect, you know.
While the following isn't a secret as in "vast conspiracy", I think very few people know it:
In the beginning (I don't know how long this continued) they chose an op amp (the active amplifying device in the preamp) whose slew rate (how fast it can move the waveform up and down) was variable, and could be set with a single resistor. This resistor also strongly affected battery life, and I guess they set that for long battery life, and low slew rate.
I wonder at what point they noticed that the slew rate was so low (so slow), that with treble and volume high enough the op amp couldn't keep up, and gradually transformed the highs into triangle waves, which have a distinctive nasality. This is one factor in the "love-hate". It could be increased or decreased with a single resistor change (but you'd have to consult a real expert, not me).
For me it wasn't that; it was the inescapable spike at about 4KHz that I didn't like about the 3-band.
Oh, and the permanent non-adjustable HPF included at no extra charge.
Both of those could have been changed, but then I would no longer have what I spent so much money for, thus the passive.
I guess you don't really need an explanation.
In the beginning (I don't know how long this continued) they chose an op amp (the active amplifying device in the preamp) whose slew rate (how fast it can move the waveform up and down) was variable, and could be set with a single resistor. This resistor also strongly affected battery life, and I guess they set that for long battery life, and low slew rate.
I wonder at what point they noticed that the slew rate was so low (so slow), that with treble and volume high enough the op amp couldn't keep up, and gradually transformed the highs into triangle waves, which have a distinctive nasality. This is one factor in the "love-hate". It could be increased or decreased with a single resistor change (but you'd have to consult a real expert, not me).
For me it wasn't that; it was the inescapable spike at about 4KHz that I didn't like about the 3-band.
Oh, and the permanent non-adjustable HPF included at no extra charge.
Both of those could have been changed, but then I would no longer have what I spent so much money for, thus the passive.
I guess you don't really need an explanation.
IMO A ray will tend to sit on top of the mix more, be more distinct and clear. While a P can blend in better?
What's HPF?While the following isn't a secret as in "vast conspiracy", I think very few people know it:
In the beginning (I don't know how long this continued) they chose an op amp (the active amplifying device in the preamp) whose slew rate (how fast it can move the waveform up and down) was variable, and could be set with a single resistor. This resistor also strongly affected battery life, and I guess they set that for long battery life, and low slew rate.
I wonder at what point they noticed that the slew rate was so low (so slow), that with treble and volume high enough the op amp couldn't keep up, and gradually transformed the highs into triangle waves, which have a distinctive nasality. This is one factor in the "love-hate". It could be increased or decreased with a single resistor change (but you'd have to consult a real expert, not me).
For me it wasn't that; it was the inescapable spike at about 4KHz that I didn't like about the 3-band.
Oh, and the permanent non-adjustable HPF included at no extra charge.
Both of those could have been changed, but then I would no longer have what I spent so much money for, thus the passive.
I guess you don't really need an explanation.
Rays can blend just fine. Now, if you set your amp like you would for a P and then plug the Ray in, and expect it to sit in the exact same way, you might find it doesn't work. But that's gonna be the same going to or from many kinds of basses. Expecting to be able to just have a "magic setting" for your amp that any different bass would sound equally good just doesn't tend to be how it works.
aside from this, my opinion on the Stingray sound is that I actually greatly prefer what I hear out of passive stingrays.
aside from this, my opinion on the Stingray sound is that I actually greatly prefer what I hear out of passive stingrays.
My StingRay Specials are pretty much "do-all" basses. I'd agree with you concerning pre-Special Rays.
On the 3 band, what happens when you roll the treble and mids down but leave the bass maxed?
It would have a lot of lows but wouldn't go *deep*. I didn't like that so I always left bass centered, myself.
After that HPF cuts off the low bass, this bass control isn't set low enough to pick that back up. Wasn't intended to.
Last edited:
I pretty much keep all three centered almost all the time. Even on the 2 band I try to approximate the center.
When I first got into playing the bass, I went with a P bass, and then a 5 string J, but was always intrigued by the Ray. When I got back into bass, my second bass purchase was a passive Stingray clone kit. I dig the Stingray, but it's not the first bass I grab now that I've got P and J basses again.
I think I like the idea of the Stingray more than I like playing the Stingray.
I think I like the idea of the Stingray more than I like playing the Stingray.
Pretty much most any bass can work for most any music. The downstream processing has a lot to do with the final tonal result.
Stingrays do have a distinct tonality, but if one sculpts the onboard EQ and/or amp/preamp to achieve that goal, it can most likely happen. Bernard Edwards of Chic and Cliff Williams of AC/DC are examples of Rays not sounding like what most think a Ray sounds like (which is more along the lines of Flea). Their tones sit in and fill out the mix.
I play 2EQ circuits, which are inherently more colorful and not really able to get 'flat' like the 3EQ can. However, Running the bass control around 1-2 and the treble control around 4-5 is about as flat as it can get. That setting balances well with many of my other basses of different platforms, both active and passive. Plus, that setting still has room to get more low end and cut more highs if needed for the 'support' vs 'overtake the mix' choice.
Stingrays do have a distinct tonality, but if one sculpts the onboard EQ and/or amp/preamp to achieve that goal, it can most likely happen. Bernard Edwards of Chic and Cliff Williams of AC/DC are examples of Rays not sounding like what most think a Ray sounds like (which is more along the lines of Flea). Their tones sit in and fill out the mix.
I play 2EQ circuits, which are inherently more colorful and not really able to get 'flat' like the 3EQ can. However, Running the bass control around 1-2 and the treble control around 4-5 is about as flat as it can get. That setting balances well with many of my other basses of different platforms, both active and passive. Plus, that setting still has room to get more low end and cut more highs if needed for the 'support' vs 'overtake the mix' choice.
Are you saying you run the bass on the amp at 1-2 "o'clock," treble at 4-5? Or the eq on the bass?
I think the sound most people associate Stingrays with has a good bit of high end, which definitely isn't for everyone. I really like hearing them in an R&B setting where the lows are pretty cranked and the highs are cut. You still end up feeling the punch and it somehow seems to maintain clarity even with the highs dialed back. On the Stingray 5 I used to have I almost always had the highs rolled off a bit, mids boosted a bit and lows boosted a little more. Sounded great on recordings.
It's the 2EQ on the instrument. Bass control is around 1-2, like nearly turned all the way CCW. Treble control is just under halfway up.
