Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

a new dingwall model?

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by brian v2.0, Jan 28, 2005.


  1. i heard a rumour that dingwall is coming out with a new model... is anyone else as excited as me?

    anyone have any details on the truth of the rumour?
     
  2. Where'd you hear this? Did you hear anything about what differences there would be?

    Sheldon might post and confirm/deny if he spots the thread.
     
  3. Juneau

    Juneau

    Jul 15, 2004
    Dallas, TX.
    There is a new hollowbody. Here is a pic of the 4 prototype.

    I believe this will be called the ABO (organic?) I dont know if he's activly making one for anyone yet, or if he's still workin out the kinks and waiting for his strings to be made.

    He is having flatwound strings made for these, and Im sure you could get them for other Dingers as well. This pic is of the big body, he said they can also do a slim body version, still hollow and it keeps the weight way down. The plan for my fretless is a 6string one of these, slim body, with only the RMZ Piezo as shown in the pic. Note the cool wooden bridge as well :) The body style has a slightly different curve on the lower horn, I really dig it a lot.
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Sheldon D.

    Sheldon D.

    Oct 3, 2001
    We always have something new on the horizon - including the ABO2 that Juneau mentioned, but likely the model your thinking of is our version of a J bass. Frank is getting a highly modified version of the first one. The production version will be a lot simpler.

    I wouldn't mind a few opinions on some details that I'm considering though.

    On this model we are going with a much shorter scale length of 32" on the G, 34.25" on the E and 35" on the B. I'm looking for more of a shorter scale vibe on this one. As a designer, I'd like to go with a reverse headstock to get more length past the nut on the bass strings - not that it's a substitute for scale length, but it does help a bit. There's no point though if it's unpopular.

    Anyone have some thoughts on traditional bass (except for the fanned frets) with a reverse headstock? I've included a shot of Frank's headstock. If you're wondering what the darker, curvy section is, it's a 3D scallop that defines a flame on the edge of the headstock.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. DEVILMAN

    DEVILMAN

    Nov 24, 2001
    New York,NY
    ...the headstock totally ruins it...IMHO...

    ~S~
     
  6. Yvon

    Yvon Supporting Member

    Nov 2, 2000
    Montreal, Canada
    I like it but I not reverse. I just don't like reverse headstock.
     
  7. the news is out.
    I can't wait.... The superJ should have a vintage vibe melded w/ all things Dingwall. Big time playability, punch, and amazing craftmanship. No more putting up w/ deadspots, uneven string tension (and tone), and plinky G strings.
    if you want to hear what this bass should sound like, capo your 37" scale at the first fret, and retune to pitch.
    I personally think the reversed headstock nails the unique nature of a Dingwall, but still retains a vintage look. However, I also understand that more traditionalists will like a "normal" looking headstock, to each his own. This bass should be a cool option for vintage type players
    2 years in the making
    frank
     
  8. Mojo-Man

    Mojo-Man Supporting Member

    Feb 11, 2003
    :cool:
    Very Cool.
    I dig that 4-string.
    Any word on price?
     
  9. sargebaker

    sargebaker Commercial User

    May 2, 2004
    Montreal QC CA
    owner/builder, ISLAND Instrument Mfg.
    personally I'm not feeling the reverse headstock, it looks okay for Kirk Hammett (who? :p ) but I find it would look odd on a bass with the large tuners...I would presume your fanned frets more than compensate for scale length (more than longer string past the bridge ever would..) I'm no guitar tech and you are the professional, and I could very possibly be very wrong. aesthetically though I'd say go traditional headstock.

    Got any leaks of the body design? :cool:
     
  10. baji-naji

    baji-naji

    Jan 21, 2005
    Not too keen on the headstock Sheldon, I like your standard ones better.

    Any further details on the basses, and would you be able to tell us what sort of price range you're looking at for them?
     
  11. Thee

    Thee

    Feb 11, 2004
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    I think I like the reverse, but I think I would have to see it with the body to make a decision.
     
  12. Ryan L.

    Ryan L. Moderator Staff Member Supporting Member

    Aug 7, 2000
    West Fargo, ND
    I too would have to see it with the body to make up my mind as to whether or not I like it reversed.
     
  13. rusty

    rusty

    Mar 29, 2004
    Singapore
    I don't mind the reverse, but the scallop looks like a cross-section of some kinda gland to me... :bag:
    I love the shape of the ABO tho - it's way cool. :D
     
  14. ShantiCat

    ShantiCat Supporting Member

    A reverse to me looks like using an existing part that was not really meant to go the other way. It takes away from the design aspect and looks like a compromise of function rather than form. Your basses have too much artistic value to have this headstock.
     
  15. jock

    jock

    Jun 7, 2000
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Here is a Celinder with reversed headstock. Just to show a classic design with the debated headstock. Not my bag, but to each his own.
    [​IMG]
     
  16. Halftooth

    Halftooth Supporting Member

    Nov 24, 2002
    Tri-Valley, NorCal
    Not a fan of the reverse headstock on this bass, but a 2+2 reverse headstock to me is pretty cool.
     
  17. wow-
    I didn't figure there'd be that many negative towards the reversed headstock. i figured there'd be a few people who dug the reverse style esp in lite of Dingwalls being unique instruments (and the benefits a reversed headstock provides).
    IMO a typical modern-looking Dingwall headstock really didn't work w/in the vintage styling, so this was a good compromise and it kept w/in the feel
     
  18. quallabone

    quallabone

    Aug 2, 2003
    Add me to the list of not really digging the reversed headstock.

    It would look absolutely fantastic as a standard head
     
  19. Worshiper

    Worshiper

    Aug 13, 2004
    New York
    not to derail this thread but what is the purpose of fanned frets?
     
  20. Brendan

    Brendan

    Jun 18, 2000
    Austin, TX
    I dig the reverse headstock. A lot. Do not bow to these Philistines!

    I do now, however, dig a nut narrower than 1.85" or about 47mm.

    Make it wide, like, 2" wide. 2" on the 5er, and 1.75" on the 4 bangers. (Hell, I'm already in the minority with the headstock thing, might as well throw out an unpopular nut widths as well.)