I posed this question in the Jaw Dropping Basses thread regarding a 11 string Conklin, but to avoid derailing that thread it, I've started this one. First off, PLEASE, do not turn this into a flame war. I think the 11 string is pretty amazing. One day I may even summon up the finances to get one for myself and tackle the daunting task of learning to play it. I'm not trying to start an argument; this is not about opinions and what we think is better. This is a legitimate question and merits discussion. That said, here's my question: How do we define bass guitar? With innovations in deisgn, what we consider a bass today is vastly different than what was considered a bass forty years ago. A 11 string bass is certainly constructed with the same underlying principles as a 4 string, but to say they are are the same instrument is to ignore the fact that they have obvious structural differences and vastly different sonic capabilities. The example I used in the other thread was along the lines of "What about a 15 string bass? 20? What it's got 30 strings and needs a stand to be supported?" When do innovations and changes in design require that we establish a new way of classifying these instruments? When does the bass/bassist becoming something else? Not better, just different. So, what do you think?