Who needs a cheap knock-off when you got S.U.B Series Basses?
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.
Why aren't there Stingray/Sterling clones?
- Thread starter taylor16
- Start date
Tobias .....Growler, Kingston Artist, Kingston Heir. Quite affordable as well. And they have that great assymetrical neck profile.
Lots of takes on the model but EBMM has trademark protection on the 3+1 headstock configuration which limits how similar clones could be without being in infringement. How that ever got protected has to be a matter of luck and no one paying attention but that is the way it is.
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Ummm...take note of the headstocks please...
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Stingray already is all but boutique and they already make the best cheap knock offs of their own basses.
Umm..
Do a google search on how many threats eBMM has leveled at folks producing 3+1 basses and necks. All parts, Rondo (SX) come to mind.
Post this on the MusicMan bass forum and watch how fast Big Poppa (Sterling Ball) publicly instructs his legal (forgot his forum handle) to "fire in em."
It has happened a few times and I have watched it unfold live.
Sure, as have I, but there are definitely basses out there with that headstock configuration that persist and not exactly "rare", so there must be some subtleties to the trademark that we aren't fully aware of.
Regardless, doesn't change my point that Sterlings and Stingrays are pretty much the epitome of perfection and don't need cloning.
Sure, as have I, but there are definitely basses out there with that headstock configuration that persist and not exactly "rare", so there must be some subtleties to the trademark that we aren't fully aware of.
Regardless, doesn't change my point that Sterlings and Stingrays are pretty much the epitome of perfection and don't need cloning.
Agreed on all points
Agreed on all points
To be clear I think there are great reinterpretations of the SR and Sterling but they are far from clones. I think of the Warwick FNA, the Ibanez atk etc. They borrow the single beefbucker in the spans spot but take it in their own direction from there. And they are great.
But sterling sand Rays have an undeniable magic. Especially older Rays. I have a 94 SR with a neck caked in Birdseye. It is pure magic.
- Aug 21, 2003
- 11,591
- 18,608
- Disclosures
- A-Designs Mike Lull GK Tsunami Cables GHS Strings RMI Basswitch Nordstrand Pickups Darkglass
I have played that exact bass and trumps any mm out there IMHOMaybe because it is extremely easy (and even necessary) to improve upon the Fender versions of the J and P, whereas the Stingray and Sterling were basically created perfect.
EDIT: There are those who try though, as noted above. Haven't seen this one posted yet - Nordy VM5
That is partly why Leo came out with the headstock design also George Fullerton had a hand in it..
Ernie Ball did not have Musicman at the time the design was arrived upon. . He bought it from George and Leo at a time when Leo was in poor health
Last edited:
I know what clone means ....but really does anybody really worry about the headstock, really. In spite of the fact I have about 8 Fenders I have them mainly cause I started on Fender. Not the headstock, I couldn't care less really. I use my ears and ergonomics to buy basses not the visuals. To me the neck and the sound matter most. More than headstock, finish, hardware types, wood, color etc.
G&L predates the Stingray? Dont think so. Ray around 76, G&L around 1980.
Last edited:
I know of a few clones - Samick, Turser, Maestro, SX, a number of Chinese knock offs.
Had one myself, a Dr. Tech that one was able to buy for $99- did it look like a Ray, yes - except the headstock. Did it sound like one...heck no. lol
You're just talking about basses that copied the appearance of the Ray, with the oval pickguard and metal control panel - even more copies came out that didn't have that specific look but had the pickup and electronics that made the bass sonically a clone of a Ray.
Had one myself, a Dr. Tech that one was able to buy for $99- did it look like a Ray, yes - except the headstock. Did it sound like one...heck no. lol
You're just talking about basses that copied the appearance of the Ray, with the oval pickguard and metal control panel - even more copies came out that didn't have that specific look but had the pickup and electronics that made the bass sonically a clone of a Ray.
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,939
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
It's due to legal issues. I forget the details, but if you go to the ernie ball forums and post the same question you'll get all your answers. A lot of MM bodies seem to slip by lately, but the 3/1 headstock along with that body is rare. And as soon as they find out about one, it's gone. I used to be up on all that, even ratted some ebayers out a while back , but I've been kind of out of the loop.
, but I've been kind of out of the loop.
