- Thread starter Ox Boris
- Start date
MrMusashi
Well-known member
1. the 25th isnt redwood. it has a figured maple top (quilt or flame option if i remember correctly, i might be thinking of the 20th sr5 but i cant say for sure) 
2. if you want diversity the 25th will give you more options than buying what essentially is another sr4hh with different woods
3. the redwood has a mahogany neck. keep that in mind if you are using it on stage. it will be a little less solid than a maple neck. i presume you have seen gibson guitars with the usual glue seem at the back of the headstock
4. no matter which one of them you get you will have an awesome instrument.
hth!
MrM
2. if you want diversity the 25th will give you more options than buying what essentially is another sr4hh with different woods
3. the redwood has a mahogany neck. keep that in mind if you are using it on stage. it will be a little less solid than a maple neck. i presume you have seen gibson guitars with the usual glue seem at the back of the headstock
4. no matter which one of them you get you will have an awesome instrument.
hth!
MrM
Ox Boris
Well-known member
Thanks for the info about the 25th not being redwood. I'm leaning towards it, partly because of the variety you mention, but also because I'll probably be able to trade a Bass for it. The BFR is cash only.
EDIT: I got this the wrong way around.
EDIT: I got this the wrong way around.
Last edited:
Bert
Well-known member
I like the look of the redwood one better.
It's used and no case queen. The barcode sticker is missing.
Cool that someone played such a collectors item.
Only the binding have to be glued back on.
View attachment 31639
(I could be wrong, just the picture I see).
It's used and no case queen. The barcode sticker is missing.
Cool that someone played such a collectors item.
Only the binding have to be glued back on.
View attachment 31639
(I could be wrong, just the picture I see).
Last edited:
Wood shrinks more than plastic, so it's not rare
that a binding needs some attention. As to the
strength of a 'hog neck, the Gibson example is
worst case. EBMM necks have a some meat at
the volute. Gibsons do not, and so are famously
weak there. Gibsons have a tilt-back headstock
which is part of the problem. Acoarst one might
find that "MM vs Gibson" is kinda like comparing
watercress to watermellons .... but, I wouldn't
worry about gigging a 'hog necked EBMM
-----------------------------------------------------
Funny thing encountered was a GC "associate"
wailing away on a used Gibson bass. I asked if
he was checking out a trade-in and he replied
that he was. So I suggested he'd be better of
looking for telltale cracks near the nut than be
slapping and riffing.
Sooooo ..... he says "Yeah, I know about that
probem, but this one has never been smacked
.... look here!" And he showed me the back of
the headstock joint. What we both saw at one
quick glance was a gaping crack :-(
Just a typical visit to the local GC ......
Kinda weird that someone brought that in for
a trade-in. Deducting for the damage, unless
it's a reeeeal cold winter, there's no value in it.
that a binding needs some attention. As to the
strength of a 'hog neck, the Gibson example is
worst case. EBMM necks have a some meat at
the volute. Gibsons do not, and so are famously
weak there. Gibsons have a tilt-back headstock
which is part of the problem. Acoarst one might
find that "MM vs Gibson" is kinda like comparing
watercress to watermellons .... but, I wouldn't
worry about gigging a 'hog necked EBMM
-----------------------------------------------------
Funny thing encountered was a GC "associate"
wailing away on a used Gibson bass. I asked if
he was checking out a trade-in and he replied
that he was. So I suggested he'd be better of
looking for telltale cracks near the nut than be
slapping and riffing.
Sooooo ..... he says "Yeah, I know about that
probem, but this one has never been smacked
.... look here!" And he showed me the back of
the headstock joint. What we both saw at one
quick glance was a gaping crack :-(
Just a typical visit to the local GC ......
Kinda weird that someone brought that in for
a trade-in. Deducting for the damage, unless
it's a reeeeal cold winter, there's no value in it.
Last edited:
the explode man
Well-known member
Oh my God that second one is absolutely gorgeous. I would love it if EBMM used more woods/stains for their finishes on their basses.
stu42
Well-known member
Just curious....how did you filter it down to just these two basses that you're considering? What makes you interested in these 2?
They're both limited editions and both nice for sure. Probably the Redwood model is more rare - not sure if that is a factor.
Are the electronics different in that Redwood SR?
From my experience, the sound of the Reflex will be quite a bit different than the SR - it will have a much more flexible, powerful EQ and pickup combination and is more "hi-fi" sounding.
They're somewhat difficult to compare tone-wise as they're a fair bit different from each other.
Based on appearance alone I'd go with the Redwood SR.
They're both limited editions and both nice for sure. Probably the Redwood model is more rare - not sure if that is a factor.
Are the electronics different in that Redwood SR?
From my experience, the sound of the Reflex will be quite a bit different than the SR - it will have a much more flexible, powerful EQ and pickup combination and is more "hi-fi" sounding.
They're somewhat difficult to compare tone-wise as they're a fair bit different from each other.
Based on appearance alone I'd go with the Redwood SR.
Ox Boris
Well-known member
Reply from shop: "I had a look at the bass and the binding is perfect, its not lifting. I think it is just the way the light is hitting the bass in the photo."I like the look of the redwood one better.
It's used and no case queen. The barcode sticker is missing.
Cool that someone played such a collectors item.
Only the binding have to be glued back on.
View attachment 31639
(I could be wrong, just the picture I see).
They didn't include another photo. I'd've taken more photos of the exact spot and included them in the email. In a world almost entirely driven by image, it must surely have occurred to them to disprove the accusation and enhance the prospect of a sale. I hope it's simple incompetence. If it's skullduggery, I'm bound to find out sooner or later
But I won't be convinced until I see it in person, which may punt this one in to touch.
Last edited:
Ox Boris
Well-known member
Good tips, thanks.
I haven't really narrowed it down so much as decided I'd like a real looker as my back up bass.
Because I live, as far as testing basses is concerned, somewhere just outside of Whoop Whoop I have to buy things unplayed. I fancied a Ric4003 but was very strongly advised to play one first, virtually impossible for me. However, I'm very happy with my StingRay, so I figured I'd stick closer to home for my show-pony bass.
Last edited:
Personally, I like the look of the 25th. But everyone has different taste. Also as mentioned previously, it will have more tonal options that are different from your current stingray.
You haven't mentioned price. Are they priced similarly or is there a big difference?
You haven't mentioned price. Are they priced similarly or is there a big difference?
Ox Boris
Well-known member
They're both about two grand Aussie.
One allows a trade with my Sandberg (and not a particularly good price offered for it) and is about $AU970 changeover (the BFR). The other is flatout cash and I'd have to sell mine first.
One allows a trade with my Sandberg (and not a particularly good price offered for it) and is about $AU970 changeover (the BFR). The other is flatout cash and I'd have to sell mine first.
Ox Boris
Well-known member
Just bought the BFR.
Bert
Well-known member
