I was watching Sterling Ball present the 30th anniversary SR5 in a YouTube segment recently. He was explaining how the preamp had been revoiced to better reflect the tones sought for modern music. For example, the highs not being so bright in what people want in a bass tone today as compared to the 70's. It really sounds like a great step forward and I'm wondering if it will be extended to the entire Stingray line?
- Thread starter GregP
- Start date
JayDawg
Well-known member
I have a 30th Anniversary SR5 and a stand SR5 single H model. I love the new pre amp in the 30th. It's not as hot as a Bongo pre amp but it definitely is louder than a standard SR5. When I A/B the two basses side by side, the 30th Anniversary one sounds a lot better in my opinion.
nhbassguitar
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2015
- Messages
- 127
There can be problems with making such a mid-stream change.
First of all, a first-time buyer of a SR (for example) is probably going to want it to sound like the ones he's already heard. Repeat buyers -- ditto for them, unless they're buying specifically for the new preamp. Phasing over to a differently-voiced preamp would frustrate those buyers, and might even generate a higher return rate.
Second, a generational change would be created -- for good or for worse. How to manage that? Fender has made so many pickup changes in their PB line over the years that a PB is no longer a PB. It's one big fn mess. You have to know exactly when it was made and where it was made to have even a long shot at predicting what it'll sound like, assuming stock of course.
Third, if The Company were to create an alternate model that uses the new preamp, but also keep the old models and sell them side by side, that creates a huge amount of overhead at their end. Parts lists, numbering schemes, revision control, new documentation, manufacturing/warehousing logistics, all kinds of more crap to have to deal with, none of which could ever be forecast to improve profit. (Not sales -- profit. Big difference.)
The SR (with the 3-band, anyway) can be set not to sound much like a SR. Or, I should say, less-so in the historical sense. Treble at minimum (full CCW). Mids 20% up from full CCW. No more than that. Bass 20% up from full CCW. No more than that. By "20% up," I mean if you were to replace the knob with a Fender-style knob, the setting would be at "2," with "0" being full CCW. Want more bass than what those settings provide? Don't boost the bass. Instead, do it with an outboard device that operates in the 80-100 Hz range, peaking rather than shelving (that's crucial), with a nice broad (low) Q. A Sansamp BDDI with Blend set at minimum will do exactly that, and with its treble fully rolled off, will provide an additional trap for the SR's default zinginess.
Those are my settings for my HS, with all coils in, and I use those settings everywhere I play. In one particular room which is configured sub-heavy, I roll the BDDI's bass control back to 10:00. But the SR's tone controls never change. Got an H model and want more bass? Use the BDDI's bass control, not the SR's. Run it up to 1:00, but no more, so the Q stays nice and broad.
Before I figured all this out (took me months!), I would've been first in line for Preamp V2.0, so I agree with Greg 100% re. what he's after. But I've got what I need now, which is why the PBs spend a lot of time at home these days.
First of all, a first-time buyer of a SR (for example) is probably going to want it to sound like the ones he's already heard. Repeat buyers -- ditto for them, unless they're buying specifically for the new preamp. Phasing over to a differently-voiced preamp would frustrate those buyers, and might even generate a higher return rate.
Second, a generational change would be created -- for good or for worse. How to manage that? Fender has made so many pickup changes in their PB line over the years that a PB is no longer a PB. It's one big fn mess. You have to know exactly when it was made and where it was made to have even a long shot at predicting what it'll sound like, assuming stock of course.
Third, if The Company were to create an alternate model that uses the new preamp, but also keep the old models and sell them side by side, that creates a huge amount of overhead at their end. Parts lists, numbering schemes, revision control, new documentation, manufacturing/warehousing logistics, all kinds of more crap to have to deal with, none of which could ever be forecast to improve profit. (Not sales -- profit. Big difference.)
The SR (with the 3-band, anyway) can be set not to sound much like a SR. Or, I should say, less-so in the historical sense. Treble at minimum (full CCW). Mids 20% up from full CCW. No more than that. Bass 20% up from full CCW. No more than that. By "20% up," I mean if you were to replace the knob with a Fender-style knob, the setting would be at "2," with "0" being full CCW. Want more bass than what those settings provide? Don't boost the bass. Instead, do it with an outboard device that operates in the 80-100 Hz range, peaking rather than shelving (that's crucial), with a nice broad (low) Q. A Sansamp BDDI with Blend set at minimum will do exactly that, and with its treble fully rolled off, will provide an additional trap for the SR's default zinginess.
Those are my settings for my HS, with all coils in, and I use those settings everywhere I play. In one particular room which is configured sub-heavy, I roll the BDDI's bass control back to 10:00. But the SR's tone controls never change. Got an H model and want more bass? Use the BDDI's bass control, not the SR's. Run it up to 1:00, but no more, so the Q stays nice and broad.
Before I figured all this out (took me months!), I would've been first in line for Preamp V2.0, so I agree with Greg 100% re. what he's after. But I've got what I need now, which is why the PBs spend a lot of time at home these days.
Last edited:
There're 3 generations of normal SR5's: early alnico, ceramic, later alnico.
There was no problem switching to ceramic. I recall players switching to
the [ceramic] SR5s from their SR4s, saying they didn't really need a 5 but
the 5 just sounded better. For the most part they seemed unaware of any
alnico vs ceramic situation. They just accepted that something mysterious
but real was making the SR5 sound better.
Acoarst it was no mystery for EBMM which led to the ceramic version of
the SR4, christened the "Sterling 4" .... so those who resisted 5-strings,
but had encountered that sonic difference, could buy into "SR5 sound".
What about any players who favored the SR4 sound, but for some reason
they need a 5-string ? Okaaaayyy .... just return the SR5 [ceramic] back
to alnico ... and add a string to the Sterling 4, thus replacing the [ceramic]
SR5 with an identical [ceramic] bass ! And ... edumacate buyers that the
revered and respected but now unavailable ceramic SR5 is still available
but has a new name, called "Sterling 5".
EBMM survived all that and more ... "survived" is waaaay understating it.
They grew. All in all, while all your concerns seem valid taken individually,
your total picture is too pessimistic [and complicated]. Change is normal.
The show goes on !
Last edited:
If a preamp has been revoiced on one model to better reflect the tones sought in modern music...then it makes sense to me that it would be carried on to the entire line. Why would one update the sound based on current needs for one model only? I hope the preamp will be instslled in the entire model range. Seems like a good step forward to me. 
