Does Anyone Besides Me Get Tired of...

[Chris C]

Try a bongo if you want to hear a wide range of tones.

But that's not the point. I can name at least a dozen basses from a dozen companies that have a dozen knobs and a hundred dozen different sounds coming from those knobs. And again, there is nothing wrong with that. I've owned many of them. In fact, I've owned around five hundred basses over my lifetime, from cheapies to $5000 plus boutique basses. From Music Man, the Reflex wins (in my book) for the "I can sound like anything" bass design. Obviously there are many basses that have wide variations of electronic-induced tones beyond that of the Stingray. All I'm really getting at is that the Stingray can (and does) do more than it is typically given credit for--which is the tired old cliché... bright, aggressive "slap sound" (which is a good sound but not one that the Stingray should be boxed into exclusively).

I'm at a point in my playing that I want sufficient versatility, but at the same time, absolute simplicity as far as knobs on the bass and onboard preamps. The Stingray fits the bill for me better than other basses--it doesn't get much simpler than a volume, low, and high knob, other than a straight passive volume & tone setup, like a P-bass. I'll admit I'm a bit biased because the "Stingray tone" is probably my favorite, overall. Yeah, I like Louis Johnson, Bernard Edwards, so on... and my favorite bassist is Paul Denman. He plays a stingray most of the time, but most folks would never guess just by hearing his ultra-smooth tone.

I've gotten to the point that I rely on attack, plucking position/technique, and simple volume/tone adjustments more than the way I used to do it with heavy-duty boutique preamps in the basses, pedals, compressors, graphic EQs, parametric EQs, blah blah blah... I don't even own any of that stuff any more. My goal these days is to be versatile enough for the style of music I'm playing at any given time and sound good, but to also keep the controls to at most what the Stingray has... volume, bass, treble. My other main bass is an early 50's style (F****r custom shop) P-bass. That bass can do more than it's given credit for too, besides straight up slap/finger funk or metalish sorts of aggressive stuff--it has too soft an attack for that to sound really good. But, the Stingray on the other hand... well I can make it work and sound good for anything that I'm able to play and interested in playing in a band setting.

So, back to the original thought... down with putting the Stingray in a pigeonhole!!!

 

[lpdeluxe]

There's a long thread at talkbass.com titled "Is the StingRay a one-trick pony?" You can guess the content. You also might be interested to learn that a lot of forum members stepped up to defend the SR.

Oddly enough, yesterday evening I ran some Youtube videos of Ed Friedland demoing various MM basses, and some of them sounded like REAL one-trick ponies, much more so than the sound I get out of my 'Ray 5.

 

[Chris C]

There's a long thread at talkbass.com titled "Is the StingRay a one-trick pony?" You can guess the content. You also might be interested to learn that a lot of forum members stepped up to defend the SR.

Oddly enough, yesterday evening I ran some Youtube videos of Ed Friedland demoing various MM basses, and some of them sounded like REAL one-trick ponies, much more so than the sound I get out of my 'Ray 5.

I've watched pretty much all of Ed's reviews with the Music Man stuff. On some of them, yes, he doesn't really demonstrate the variation in tone very well. On one of them, though (can't remember which one it was), he mentions the "one trick pony" thing and defends against it pretty well. In fact, he sounds a bit annoyed by it and says something like, "Now YOU TELL ME how that's a one trick pony!!!" I think it may have been his Stingray Classic review. Maybe? Don't know... I've seen so many of them.

 

[tbonesullivan]

That was the stingray classic review. It's a great review, and shows how much tonal variety you can get just with the bass and treble EQ, one pickup, and changing playing style, position, and using the mutes.

 

[tkarter]

Ask them to try the Bongo.
tk

 

[Chris C]

Ask them to try the Bongo.
tk

Although I've never been able to get past the asthetics (even after all these years), I'll be the first to herald that the Bongo is a fine instrument. But... telling someone to try a Bongo after that person has just told you that the Stingray is a "one trick pony" is more-or-less agreeing with him.

 

[tkarter]

Well then you are all stuffed up and need to open your mind to what a real bass player can do.
I love all my EB basses. Never played a 4 string one as I got past play 4 strings while playing a fender.
who really cares what other people think if you are doing your own thing?

tk

 

[Chris C]

Well then you are all stuffed up and need to open your mind to what a real bass player can do.
I love all my EB basses. Never played a 4 string one as I got past play 4 strings while playing a fender.
who really cares what other people think if you are doing your own thing?

tk

No need to call me names or imply that I'm not a "real" bass player solely because something does not appeal to me aesthetically. What looks good to you or me or anyone else is a very personal and subjective matter. Tell me you have never avoided playing or owning a bass because it didn't look good to you. Just as with cars or houses or whatever, much of the appeal is based on looks. It's no different with guitars. Otherwise, they'd all look the same. There would be no need to design new body styles because that aspect wouldn't matter to anyone.

 

[Hotrodred]

Here's what Ed has to say. Short and sweet!

 

[Chris C]

Here's what Ed has to say. Short and sweet!

Ah-ha... that's the one I remember.

 

[Golem]

`

No need to call me names or imply that I'm not a "real" bass player
solely because something does not appeal to me aesthetically. What
looks good to you or me or anyone else is a very personal and
subjective matter. .........

+1.

Boingo aesthetics, visually ? The 2nd-best thing about playing
my Boingo is that, being BEHIND it, I don't hafta look directly,
squarely AT it ! [OK, so "squarely" may not apply, Boingo-wise].

And, bass visuals broadly speaking-wise, I've walked away from
a coupla great deals on great basses cuz they were GREEN, and
thaz 100% perzanill, not borrowed from BP's marketing acumen.

I'll stand behind my Boingo, eyes wide open, but I won't wear a
green bass even with my eyes wide shut.

 

[7broccos]

It's a bad carpenter who blames his tools.

Thats a keeper Jack

 

[pudgychef]

Well then you are all stuffed up and need to open your mind to what a real bass player can do.
I love all my EB basses. Never played a 4 string one as I got past play 4 strings while playing a fender.
who really cares what other people think if you are doing your own thing?

tk

funny that in a thread intended to de-bunk a stereotype - this stereotype shows up....that playing 5 or 6 strings is somehow 'moving beyond' simply playing fours - I am sure Geddy, Victor, Marcus, Les, Pino etc would love some lessons and mentoring to help them move beyond their favorite fours

 

[Golem]

`

In standard tuning there's nothing earth shaking about
a 5-string. 4 extra semi-tones ... larrrrge deeeeal, no ?
Really takes a player into "The Beyond". Aftrawl, TK did
NOT say he moved UP from 4, just that he moved PAST
4. I play both, and the way I tune them, there's only
2 extra semi-tones on the 5-string vs the 4, yet I play
both types. The 5's have narrower string spacing and
much higher tension, so they feel very different and the
tension offers a different tone. Sometimes I think the
extra mass of wood in the bigger neck contributes a bit
of body, tonewise. But I can't "move past" the 4-strings
cuz they are just so freakin perfick. Whaddamn sane ?

`