Sadowsky Vs Roscoe Vs Dingwall?

[Infidelity]

I own a Sadowsky Tokyo RJ5(UV70) and while I love the bass I'm always thinking of getting a Roscoe/Dingwall to join my arsenal or even trade my Sadowsky for either one..

Any insights of the Roscoe/Dingwall tone?

[nostatic]

Roscoe is totally different than Sadowsky. More in the "modern" camp and the Barts will cut through a mix. You also have mid eq control that is really powerful at tweaking sound.

Here is a Roscoe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkKhW8NC-PY

By contrast here is a Lull, which is closer to the Sadowsky (if you're running the Sadowsky passive): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU1cCY71FD8

And this is the Roscoe doing the same tune (different gig): http://nostatic.com/mp3/ns-7nov10/ns-7nov10-mercy.mp3

[Infidelity]

Originally Posted by nostatic

Roscoe is totally different than Sadowsky. More in the "modern" camp and the Barts will cut through a mix. You also have mid eq control that is really powerful at tweaking sound.

Here is a Roscoe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkKhW8NC-PY

By contrast here is a Lull, which is closer to the Sadowsky (if you're running the Sadowsky passive): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU1cCY71FD8

And this is the Roscoe doing the same tune (different gig): http://nostatic.com/mp3/ns-7nov10/ns-7nov10-mercy.mp3

I dig both of the sounds! I agree the Roscoe is more modern sounding than the Sadowsky..

That Roscoe sounds is giving me GAS big time!

[Green1]

Which Dingwall models were you interested in?

[Infidelity]

The Z's or AB.

[kleingeld]

There's a Z for sale here:
FS: Dingwall Z1 (Zebra) 5-string bass

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by Infidelity

I dig both of the sounds! I agree the Roscoe is more modern sounding than the Sadowsky..

That Roscoe sounds is giving me GAS big time!

I've been spending a lot of time the last few weeks going back and forth between the Lull (passive PJ, traditional build/sound) and the Roscoe (active 3-band Bart soapbars). I've been using both on the same tunes to get a different feel for what I prefer. I'd have to say that the Lull sounds "sweeter" running full P. But the Roscoe tears a hole right through things if I want, and I have more flexibility with the sound. Also the B-string on the Roscoe is just freakin' sick. I use it a lot up above the 5th fret. And I just can't get the same nasty burp off the bridge pup of the Lull compared to the Roscoe. What is nice is that I can favor the bridge, dial in a bit of bass and mid onboard, and it burps and is fat.

I was trying to decide which to sell, but at this point I'm keeping both because they are very different beasts...

[quadrogong]

Those are the two brands I really swear by,
Sadowsky and Roscoe.
Sadowsky is sort of closer to a jazz bass with a really well designed preamp that allows the vintage jazz thing to kinda shine through, aling with a real nice thick low end boost.It's got top and bottom really covered nicely, active yet natural enough to feel like a Jazz,
The sadowsky neck feels a bit like a pre CBS jazz to me, although I consider it a totally different sound, "Jazz on steroids" is actually accurate.
I played all Sad until I discovered Roscoe.
Yes, my Roscoe is modern in a way, in the sense that it's not a P or J,
But modern sometimes suggests bright, twangy,or slap-sounds.
The LG-3000 with Bartolinis and Aguilar 3band u have does SMOOTH better than anything, it has the luxurious fretwork, neck and setup like Sadowsky,
but is inherently smooth, mellow with great sustain and buttery fingerstyle tones, if u dig into it, it does raunchy and aggressive..
It may not look as punky or have the coolness factor of a beat up Fender, but the performance, to me, is unmatched. I never tune up onstage,
she is the star if every session I go to, and producers never want to switch basses. The last 4 important sessions I had,I used the Roscoe for every song requiring electric bass.
Sadowsky is THE bass everyone regrets selling, I say keep both !

Dingwall?? I want one out of curiosity, and the combustion looks SO cool and hi tech
I still have a black Sadowsky RS-4 on my GAS list, I promised myself to order one for my next bass..

[Chasarms]

Originally Posted by Infidelity

The Z's or AB.

I just sold my ABII and went back to Sadowsky. I did like the bass very much. Tonally, it killed. The newer ones with the PU selector get this really dritty, driving tone in series mode. It is a very aggressive sound and cuts the mix really well. with parallel, you get a more typical modern tone.

Dingwalls are ultra clear sounding. very nice. I decided to go back to Sadowsky because I really prefer the feel of the wider necks with the traditional fret layout.

I also had a Roscoe. It was a fretless. Roscoes are very well made. I would describe them as a high-end modern bass. Very much like a MTD or Ken Smith. I think most a 35" scale if that matters to you.

If you are really interested in the more modern tone but like the fell of Sadowsky, you might also consider an M24. They are much more modern but feel like a Sadowsky.

[Green1]

I know the first thing people think about when they hear "Dingwall" is the B string.....and it is awesome, clearer and tighter sounding than anything I personally have heard. More than that though, the necks are incredible. I have an ABZ, which is the next step above the Combustion and the lowest of the Canadian handmade models. Everytime I play it, I sit back and think, if the necks are this good on the entry level, the Z series and higher end models must be amazing. Another point.....the string tension, you can really notice how even it is, especially in your right hand. I'm assuming this has something to do with each string having its own scale. I hope you get a chance to try one, of course Roscoe and Sadowsky make some fine instruments as well, you can't go wrong with either

[Chasarms]

Originally Posted by Green1

. . . More than that though, the necks are incredible. . . .

Dingwall is second to none in terms of quality and and execution of their design. Although, I would have say that your statement is a matter of preference. The neck is the exact reason I chose to get rid of my Dingwall ABII.

Not so much the fanned frets, but the general geometry. They are VERY thin as well as very narrow. If you want a very petite neck with tighter string spacing, you may really love the Dingwall. But, if something like the Sadowsky neck appeals to you, you may not care for it.

I also had a Super J5 for a brief time. They are very nice as well but have a bit more traditional feel.

[Green1]

Originally Posted by Chasarms

Dingwall is second to none in terms of quality and and execution of their design. Although, I would have say that your statement is a matter of preference. The neck is the exact reason I chose to get rid of my Dingwall ABII.

Not so much the fanned frets, but the general geometry. They are VERY thin as well as very narrow. If you want a very petite neck with tighter string spacing, you may really love the Dingwall. But, if something like the Sadowsky neck appeals to you, you may not care for it.

I also had a Super J5 for a brief time. They are very nice as well but have a bit more traditional feel.

Yes, necks are definately a preference thing.....and they are a thin neck for sure. I don't find the string spacing to be that tight. Before the Dingwall I had a Lakland and MTD, I didn't find that the necks seemed that much wider, although they probably were. So the spacing on the Dinger bothered you?

[Chasarms]

Originally Posted by Green1

. . . So the spacing on the Dinger bothered you?

Not so much the right hand. I have played a Modulus Q5, SR5, L2500 and a few others with the righter bridge spacing. But those basses still had quite a bit more mass to the neck than did the Dingwall. Granted, before the ABII, I had played several Fender 5s and then two Sadowskys, so I was pretty used to the wider necks, but the Dingwall was just tiny.

Tonally though, it just killed. I will miss it for sure.

[Green1]

Originally Posted by Chasarms

Not so much the right hand. I have played a Modulus Q5, SR5, L2500 and a few others with the righter bridge spacing. But those basses still had quite a bit more mass to the neck than did the Dingwall. Granted, before the ABII, I had played several Fender 5s and then two Sadowskys, so I was pretty used to the wider necks, but the Dingwall was just tiny.

Tonally though, it just killed. I will miss it for sure.

They do sound incredible, that's for sure....but there is a reason so many of the late night guys like Will Lee swear by Sadowsky....they sound pretty sweet as well.

[Zooberwerx]

I've owned all three...Dingwall ABI, Roscoe Century 5, and a couple of Sadowsky Metro's. Apples vs. oranges vs. grapes IMO. Finally settled in on a Dingwall Combustion and Roscoe Century 5 Std. Both are entry-level instruments per se but certainly representative of each builder's commitment.

Riis

[Chasarms]

Originally Posted by Zooberwerx

I've owned all three...Dingwall ABI, Roscoe Century 5, and a couple of Sadowsky Metro's. Apples vs. oranges vs. grapes IMO. . . .

The Sadowsky Metros are all based on the various "vintage" Sadowsky designs. Comparing those, I would agree that they are definitely appealing to a different audience altogether.

However, the Sadowsky that I bought to "replace" the Dingwall is an NYC M24-5. They are absolutely unlike the Metros in every way. They are a very modern sounding bass and do compare to the Roscoe and Dingwall basses in terms of what "silo" they might fall into.

The Dingwall ABII can be very "hi-fi" or modern sounding if you wish, but it can also be very rock/aggressive if you want that. It is amazingly versatile in that way.

[evilgus]

I currently own one of each - a Sadowsky Metro M5-24, Roscoe SKB 3005 and a Dingwall ABII-5 X-Top. The Sadowsky is just a blast to play and cuts through the mix pretty well, but the neck is slightly chunky. It's actually more versatile than I thought it would be and has a wicked slap-tone.

The Roscoe is pure class, tight and modern-sounding, but also very versatile. Mine has spanish-cedar body, Roscoe-spec Barts and standard Bart pre-amp, so generally warm and punchy. Reminds me of my pre-Gibson Tobias Classic, just not *quite* as warm and AWESOME!

The Dingwall is absolutely stunning and incredibly well made, with a tight, focussed sound. Probably cuts through a mix the easiest, but on the other side, probably not as versatile for all types of music. (I think the ABII models are generally more mid-strong than the Z models.) Yes, the low B is pretty great and the tone is very consistent across the board, but I wouldn't say that ends up being such a big factor, when up against basses of a similar quality.

All IMO, of course!

Cheers,

EG

[CrashClint]

I have played all three and all three make quality basses. I was at Bass Central and A/Bed three Roscoe basses to a Sadowsky NYC. For me, I just love the tone of the Roscoe. A local guy has one of the Dingwall basses that is from the pre-fire era at Sheldon's shop. It is a really nice bass, plays great and sounds great but the tone seems limited to me. Roscoe basses are very versatile with all the available body woods, preamp and pickup combination's you can order a bass to match the tone in your head. From there you can dial in all types of cool tone.

If the jazz tone is what you are looking for, then you need to try the new Roscoe basses with the available jazz pickups. I have one that gets the closest I have heard to a 60s Jazz bass. It has the Bartolini J pickups and Bartolini Preamp like came in the Pre-Gibson Tobias basses with an Alder body, Maple neck and Wenge Fretboard. I recently filled in at a church and after rehearsal the sound guy came up and told me the Roscoe CS-J was the absolute best sounding bass he has heard and easiest to mix, he just set the EQ flat. Everything was set flat on my bass except the bass which was set to 1 o'clock. I love it when the sound guy is happy especially when he/she doesn't have to play with my tone.

If I had to rank the three, for me it would be:

Roscoe
Sadowsky USA
Dingwall

Go to the Roscoe and Rocket Music Forums, you can find some really nice recordings of Roscoe Basses.