SX Stingray

[tplyons]

I agree, but you'd think that if that really was their goal, they'd keep their OLP line up to that also since they do manufacture those, or at least watch over them since they license them. If they were doing that there wouldn't be so many complaints about them, and people would be more ready to buy them than an SX version. OLP QC seems to be held in even less regard than MIM Fenders, especially around here. That doesn't much inspire me to want to go out and support them for making products that a $150 SX is likely to surpass. If companies want us to buy original and not knock-offs they should be able to produce things of at least as good of quality, and they *should* be better if they're going to charge 2, 3, 4 times the price.

First of all, they do not manufacture them. They licence the use of the image. Obviously they are up to a high enough quality where they are acceptable as a beginner instrument. I've played a few, and they're okay, but certainly no Ernie Ball. Wouldn't expect 'em to be. But the point is, they're legal copies.

Like Jack, I was rather upset when the OLP's came out. I feel they, too, water down the image. But at least EB is seeing some of the benefits of this.

Honestly, if a MIM Fender was really worth 4 times the price of an SX, I would get one instead. When it's barely worth the same it makes it an easy choice for me. My old MIM Fender was out the door the same week I got my SX P, and my Fender P was the best one I had come across in a lengthy search of several Sam Ash's and Guitar Centers, as well as local shops. I was ready to buy an OLP for my second bass a while back until I was shocked by how crappy each and every one I tried was. I don't plan to buy the SX version, but I would definately get one before an OLP if I was still in the market for one.

Comparing Fenders and Music Men is apples to oranges. Neither has anything to do with each other in their current state. If you like an SX better than a Fender, but all means buy it, I'm not scorning you. I'm just pointing out that besides being illegal, unlicenced copies are immoral. It's like someone else using your name. It's identity theft.

If I wasn't a broke college student and had $1000 to buy a EBMM I would, but not everyone wants to spend that much when they want to play with something new. I've also found very few basses that I like out of the box. I'd rather start with a $150 bass than a $1000 bass if I'm going to gut it anyways.

First of all, you're not going to gut the $1000 EBMM anyway. I've played dozens and loved them all. If you want to gut it, then a Stingray simply isn't for you and you should move on.

Second of all, as a broke college student myself, it IS very possible to spend $1000 on an instrument if bass is a big enough part of your life. It is mine and I've saved pennies, eaten the $0.08 fake no-name Ramen instead of the "real" stuff. If there's a will, there's a way.

 

[tplyons]

Ahh...let them copy MM. I don't think they pose much of a threat. If you have ever tried the real thing you would know it's nothing like their copies. Like take the OLP for instance, it's even manufactured by MM, but there is still a very noticable difference in quality, just imagine what the sx is like. It's like a copy of an olp, which is a copy of a SUB, which is a copy of a Stingray. At least that's how i see it. Just my 2 cents. Rock on yall

OLP is NOT manufactured by Ernie Ball. OLP is simply licenced to use the headstock shape and image, with payments being made to Ernie Ball.

Also, the SUB is not a copy of a Stingray. It's an inexpensive alternative brought about by lesser options and less expensive finishing. Structurally and tonally, it's the same, but it's like a Sadowsky Metro to NYC. Less options.

 

[draginon]

Buying an SX Stingray is like bringing home a hooker with some extra parts. Surprise!

I guess it doesnt matter in the end as long as you get your nut off

 

[Luke73]

Like take the OLP for instance, it's even manufactured by MM

...ummm no it's not.

They simply license (sell) the design to OLP to allow them to legally copy the EBMM Stingray.

I played around half a dozen OLP basses when I was actually searching for one to buy.

They were all crap, so I gave up looking.

I understand the odd good one slips through, but they're not common.

I don't think EBMM give a toss about OLP's QC. After all, whilst they look the same from a distance (increases product recognition) the further apart quality - wise they are from the real thing, the easier they can justify a high price tage for the original EBMM.

 

[Luke73]

I guess it doesnt matter in the end as long as you get your nut off

I'll leave the hooker with the "extra bits" to you thanks.

 

[dave120]

First of all, they do not manufacture them. They licence the use of the image. Obviously they are up to a high enough quality where they are acceptable as a beginner instrument. I've played a few, and they're okay, but certainly no Ernie Ball. Wouldn't expect 'em to be. But the point is, they're legal copies.

Like Jack, I was rather upset when the OLP's came out. I feel they, too, water down the image. But at least EB is seeing some of the benefits of this.Comparing Fenders and Music Men is apples to oranges. Neither has anything to do with each other in their current state. If you like an SX better than a Fender, but all means buy it, I'm not scorning you. I'm just pointing out that besides being illegal, unlicenced copies are immoral. It's like someone else using your name. It's identity theft.First of all, you're not going to gut the $1000 EBMM anyway. I've played dozens and loved them all. If you want to gut it, then a Stingray simply isn't for you and you should move on.

Second of all, as a broke college student myself, it IS very possible to spend $1000 on an instrument if bass is a big enough part of your life. It is mine and I've saved pennies, eaten the $0.08 fake no-name Ramen instead of the "real" stuff. If there's a will, there's a way.

You're right on several points. However, I've played plenty of EBMMs and I'm indeed not satisfied with the stock sound. A friend of mine has one with the SD pickup and it did sound pretty good though. If I did get a MM that would be something I would change. That's just personal preference, but like I said, if I can start with a much cheaper bass and change parts rather than an expensive one, I'm for that. Coming with better stuff does me no good if I'm taking it out anyways.

Bass is a big part of my life, but I have less than $700 in all 3 of my current basses (My Fender being the bulk of that number at $450). Why limit myself to one? I like variety, and no one bass has ever come across as being good enough for me to get rid of them all and just have one.

It's not like I'm saying copies are better than the real thing, but to me, the cost of the name just isn't worth it a lot of the time. If it was, I'd be more inclined to buy it.

Copies exist in every corner of the consumer market. People just need to accept that fact and move on with their lives. If the name companies supplied such a good product then they wouldn't have to worry about cheap copies stealing their profits. A $150 SX is NOT going to steal any consumer away from buying a real Stingray if that's what they're after. It might keep them from buying an OLP, and with what I've seen from OLP it serves them right.

 

[Fong249]

People people people. Theres alot of redundancy in what you all have been saying. You're not buying a Musicman. There is a heck of a lot of disregard for the casual player right here. Sure, when you can own a 1000 dollar MM you're gonna get that mean, full bodied stingray tone. I have it, i love it every day. Then there are the casual players who say hey, that bass looks kinda like that high end one, its made of similar stuff, it cant be half bad. And even if its 1/10th as good sounding and 1/10th as playable, well, this man is gonna be happy.

Do not expect MIA quality from a bass built in factories in foreign countries, such as China, Korea, Japan, Indonesia. Sure, there will be a diamond in the rough occasionally. Bless the man who gets that one. But people, SX is bass on a budget. Gotta look at that aspect of this whole SX Stingray situation.

 

[draginon]

I'll leave the hooker with the "extra bits" to you thanks.

I'm sorry but it is all opinion.....

I had an opportunity to play a friend's sadowsky 5 string and I hated it. HATED with all caps. For one I dont like most jazz basses (only a few with different pickup combinations). and two it wasnt what I expected it to be.. I would have rather gone with an MIM that i could have properly setup myself... it just didnt sound good or should I say "i didnt prefer the sound" and i didnt like the way it felt in my hands

If i was going to get one of these rays, it would have to feel comfortable. If it did, I already know the one piece ash body, and all maple neck would float my boat. Id throw a basslines duncan MM in there and an AGuilar Ob3 and I wouldnt even have spent $400 total. It would have the pickup of my choice with the preamp of my choice with the body wood of my choice with the neck of my choice. Sx tuners are decent and the bridges are decent so it seems like a win\win situation if its comfortable and sounds good. period

 

[tplyons]

People people people. Theres alot of redundancy in what you all have been saying. You're not buying a Musicman. There is a heck of a lot of disregard for the casual player right here. Sure, when you can own a 1000 dollar MM you're gonna get that mean, full bodied stingray tone. I have it, i love it every day. Then there are the casual players who say hey, that bass looks kinda like that high end one, its made of similar stuff, it cant be half bad. And even if its 1/10th as good sounding and 1/10th as playable, well, this man is gonna be happy.

Do not expect MIA quality from a bass built in factories in foreign countries, such as China, Korea, Japan, Indonesia. Sure, there will be a diamond in the rough occasionally. Bless the man who gets that one. But people, SX is bass on a budget. Gotta look at that aspect of this whole SX Stingray situation.

That's not the point.

There's a legal copy - the OLP, and an illegal copy - the SX.

There should only be one copy. If you want the cheap, faux Stingray, the OLP is right for you.

 

[Mach1FT]

It is mine and I've saved pennies, eaten the $0.08 fake no-name Ramen instead of the "real" stuff. If there's a will, there's a way.

Wouldn't that be taking money away from Ramen?

 

[draginon]

Wouldn't that be taking money away from Ramen?

" THATS HURTING RAMEN'S IMAGE BY THESE CHEAP KNOCKOFF COPIES OF IT "

 

[tplyons]

Wouldn't that be taking money away from Ramen?

Touche. However, this no name ramen happens to be regular pasta

 

[Luke73]

I'm sorry but it is all opinion.....

I had an opportunity to play a friend's sadowsky 5 string and I hated it. HATED with all caps. For one I dont like most jazz basses (only a few with different pickup combinations). and two it wasnt what I expected it to be.. I would have rather gone with an MIM that i could have properly setup myself... it just didnt sound good or should I say "i didnt prefer the sound" and i didnt like the way it felt in my hands

If i was going to get one of these rays, it would have to feel comfortable. If it did, I already know the one piece ash body, and all maple neck would float my boat. Id throw a basslines duncan MM in there and an AGuilar Ob3 and I wouldnt even have spent $400 total. It would have the pickup of my choice with the preamp of my choice with the body wood of my choice with the neck of my choice. Sx tuners are decent and the bridges are decent so it seems like a win\win situation if its comfortable and sounds good. period

Hey dude, that's cool - do whatever you want with your bass...that wasn't my point - I was really saying I'd leave the hooker with the extra bits to you!

There ain't no way I want to take a hooker home and find she's got bits she shouldn't!

 

[dave120]

That's not the point.

There's a legal copy - the OLP, and an illegal copy - the SX.

There should only be one copy. If you want the cheap, faux Stingray, the OLP is right for you.

Ok, but assuming OLP pays EBMM the ~$100 price difference between it and the SX copy, why is the OLP probably of inferior quality (once again, assuming SX MM is along their usual quality)? That's my big issue. I wouldn't have a problem paying $250 if it was indeed worth $100 more. You think we should just be stuck with what OLP offers because it's the "legit" copy? If that was the case companies would never be forced to produce decent products due to competition.

How "original" can someone be when producing a bass anyways? People are driven towards what's familiar to them and they always will be. There's a certain recipe for what most people think a bass should look like and the 2 Fender shapes, along with the MM shape, are among the top ones. How often does someone see some custom bass on here and think it's the ugliest thing ever? Quite often, more people think it's ugly than people that like it. It's the same idea for cars or anything else. If someone started producing a car with 6 wheels and an outrageous body style, people wouldnt be very inclined to buy it most likely. ESPECIALLY if it's a no-name company.

There is no company that could start producing original looking basses today that would EVER be able to compete toe to toe with Fender or EBMM. They can however offer lower cost alternatives in a price range that those companies don't compete in. If SX can produce a bass for $150 that's of decent quality, there's no excuse why OLP can't do the same at twice the price.

 

[bovinehost]

People people people. Theres alot of redundancy in what you all have been saying. You're not buying a Musicman. There is a heck of a lot of disregard for the casual player right here.

You're certainly correct about not buying a Musicman. But you're wrong about 'disregard for the casual player'. There are all kinds of great basses out there at great price points for the beginner or casual player. Hell, I'm 49; when I was a kid, the cheap basses were really and seriously horrible.

But that still doesn't mean it's okay to steal. Even if you view instrument manufacturers as big, faceless, uncaring corporations (and in some cases, you're right), it's not okay to steal.

Stealing. It's bad. Isn't it?

Jack

 

[dave120]

Stealing? What about cover bands that play no original music of their own? They're making more money than most people that are being original by using something other people made famous. How is it really much different?

You learn how to play songs other people write, or you learn how to build something someone else builds...someone please show me what I'm missing here.

Cover bands are good because it gives people music they want to hear, because they know the songs. Knockoff basses give people what they want also, because the things look familiar to them. Are most cover bands as good as the real bands? No...but people accept them. Are knockoff basses as good as the real ones they resemble? Usually that answer is nope also...

 

[tplyons]

Stealing? What about cover bands that play no original music of their own? They're making more money than most people that are being original by using something other people made famous. How is it really much different?

You learn how to play songs other people write, or you learn how to build something someone else builds...someone please show me what I'm missing here.

Nobody ever said that was moral either. They should be paid their royalties.

 

[truckin88]

breathe just breathe......in all honesty who gives a $hit

 

[srxplayer]

I don't really care that they are making a knock off Stingray. I don't even own a Stingray so I'm not offended by SX for doing it. Even if I did own a Ray I'm positive that there would be a significant difference in tone, playability and construction between the knock off and the the real thing.

I just like to make fun of the marketing genious who writes up the stupid ads to sell these things to the public.

If they want to build them fine. I don't think EB will be too worried about the real thing being replaced by the SX.

 

[tplyons]

Ok, but assuming OLP pays EBMM the ~$100 price difference between it and the SX copy, why is the OLP probably of inferior quality (once again, assuming SX MM is along their usual quality)? That's my big issue. I wouldn't have a problem paying $250 if it was indeed worth $100 more. You think we should just be stuck with what OLP offers because it's the "legit" copy? If that was the case companies would never be forced to produce decent products due to competition.

Companies are forced to create decent products due to competition. If you don't like the OLP, buy an Ibanez. Buy a Squier. Obviously the OLP's are good enough quality where they are large sellers, and I've seen many more OLP's out there than Squiers. If you don't like 'em, doesn't make bootlegging any more legal.

How "original" can someone be when producing a bass anyways? People are driven towards what's familiar to them and they always will be. There's a certain recipe for what most people think a bass should look like and the 2 Fender shapes, along with the MM shape, are among the top ones. How often does someone see some custom bass on here and think it's the ugliest thing ever? Quite often, more people think it's ugly than people that like it. It's the same idea for cars or anything else. If someone started producing a car with 6 wheels and an outrageous body style, people wouldnt be very inclined to buy it most likely. ESPECIALLY if it's a no-name company.

Companies can be very original. If not, feel free to pay a licencing fee. That's why there are laws, to protect the companies who do the research and development of these products. Notice that the Warwick Streamer looks a lot like a Spector? It's a licenced copy and Spector gets money each time a Streamer is sold. Sure, they look the same, but they're very different animals.

How often does a custom bass come along that people hate? Very often. But many new designs become successful: Warwicks are original. No mistaking them for Fender or Ernie Ball. Ibanez Soundgears, Ergodynes, even ATK's (the "poor man's Stingray" -- which looks nothing like a Stingray, doesn't inflict any sort of copyright infringement in design, only having a similar tone based on a similar construction and pickup placement).

There is no company that could start producing original looking basses today that would EVER be able to compete toe to toe with Fender or EBMM. They can however offer lower cost alternatives in a price range that those companies don't compete in. If SX can produce a bass for $150 that's of decent quality, there's no excuse why OLP can't do the same at twice the price.

Why don't you see new designs? Because people are too busy copying old ones. If people actually respected copyrights, there would be much more initiative to produce something new and unique. Look at Carey Nordstrand, Bud LeCompte, our very own Hambone. Plenty of new stuff out there.