Dingwall Owners Club

[anton72]

The shorter upper horn also increases the reach. I didn't like it on a regular Spector, so I can imagine that's magnified on the multi scale model.

Exactly. I was fine playing 4 string Spector basses with 34" scale but as soon as I switched to their 5 string with 35" scale it became a noticeable problem.

 

[wvbass]

Exactly. I was fine playing 4 string Spector basses with 34" scale but as soon as I switched to their 5 string with 35" scale it became a noticeable problem.

Thank you. I keep wanting a Spector 5, and this is an interesting and valuable perspective.

 

[anton72]

Thank you. I keep wanting a Spector 5, and this is an interesting and valuable perspective.

You're welcome. The first NS-body shaped design Spector bass was NS-2 and it was thoroughly well engineered by Ned Steinberger. But their later take on the 5 string version happened without Ned's participation so they just "added" an extra string AND extra inch to the scale, but such "easy fix" approach doesn't work in all cases. Again, I must admit that I admire their 4 string design.

 

[NOLA Bass]

You're welcome. The first NS-body shaped design Spector bass was NS-2 and it was thoroughly well engineered by Ned Steinberger. But their later take on the 5 string version happened without Ned's participation so they just "added" an extra string AND extra inch to the scale, but such "easy fix" approach doesn't work in all cases. Again, I must admit that I admire their 4 string design.

When I played the Dimension a week or two ago at a local dealer, it was nice overall. However, something about it (and this may be very visually based) feels shoehorned. Like they just figured out the quickest way to make an existing Spector fanned. I love my regular NS 4 strings (and one of my main basses is a 35" scale 4 string Spector, which I find very comfortable still). The 5's always felt the same way to me. It lost the comfort of the original design. Dingwall, regardless of what you may think of the tone, just nailed the ergonomic design in conjunction with the fanned fret. Nothing is more ergonomically rough than a thunderbird, and the D-Bird/D-Roc fixed all of it.

 

[AB Nate]

Video honestly lost me within the first ~20 seconds. Just absolutely zero interest in wank-fests anymore. They don't at all represent any kind of real playing I do so it's just a total waste of time for me to sit through.

funny. Only, literally the first 20 seconds was wanky. The following 2.5 mins does a basic (simple baseline) sound comparison between the 3 models which I thought was quite an informative, flat, A/B/C comparison and then they discuss some pros and cons to each instruments, with out any further play.
If some one is curious about the 3 models it’s probably the best A/B/C I’ve seen yet. As far as the stickers go that’s just an opinion they were presenting while having a bit of fun with it. Nothing serious.

I grabbed the 1005MS for 1100 new, dropped $450 on an East pre and Nordstrand Big Rigs and love it and i'm in for $1550. I think the best thing they said about the Ibanez is that it's more subtle for us playing standard tuning. I stay beadg and it's a very fast and comfortable neck and body. I will say as well changing the strings ont he EHB to cobalt rounds made a big difference as well. I've seen them now used for 800-900 so you could get in with a killer bass for 1200 or so following the same formula. Some people just swapped out the pickups and left the ibanez pre in place, which is fair as it really is versatile.

That said... I'm saving up for a Dingwall 4 stringer so I can use it exclusively for low tuning. That spector sounded amazingly fat though with the fishmans. I still want a D-Roc or Combustion though, i don't like the spector bodies or headstocks.

I’m really curious how your liking those big rigs. If you have any sound or insight we should pick that convo back up.

Yeah, I would say that volume wise in the straight up sound tests has the EHB at a disadvantage, but that would be more evened out when EQ'd to taste.

They indicate that the EHB weight and balance is the best, but then don't pick it for that category which kind-of leaves me puzzled. It's like they are giving double points to the Spector because of the concave body back. That's fine for overall comfort, but you can't give it the extra points when the category is weight and balance! But believe you me, that 9.3 lbs Spector will make a huge difference between the other two on a 3 hour gig, especially with the neck dive. For me, that is huge and based on real life experience rather than having it strapped on in a studio for as minute or two.

And, of course the Dingwall is at a disadvantage on pricing through no fault of their own due to US import tariffs.

I too have noticed that a lot of these demos seem to be shred or slap-fests, which is not a very useful demo for me to form an opinion as that is not how I would play them. I am a little surprised at the emergence of slap in heavy music and metal as that is not a technique I associate with them. Maybe it's another way to get the speed up with the double thumb technique? I must be getting old...

I don’t think the rating system was a critical factor in the vid. More so just the fact they had all 3 side by each to compare for those that have never played any of them.

Exactly. I was fine playing 4 string Spector basses with 34" scale but as soon as I switched to their 5 string with 35" scale it became a noticeable problem.

Having gone from playing long scale dingwalls I’ve found the 35” scale Spector to be a non issue. I actually prefer it.

 

[AB Nate]

When I played the Dimension a week or two ago at a local dealer, it was nice overall. However, something about it (and this may be very visually based) feels shoehorned. Like they just figured out the quickest way to make an existing Spector fanned. I love my regular NS 4 strings (and one of my main basses is a 35" scale 4 string Spector, which I find very comfortable still). The 5's always felt the same way to me. It lost the comfort of the original design. Dingwall, regardless of what you may think of the tone, just nailed the ergonomic design in conjunction with the fanned fret. Nothing is more ergonomically rough than a thunderbird, and the D-Bird/D-Roc fixed all of it.

Where you guys are saying the 5s are lacking compared to the 4s or 34” scale is the girth combined with the distance to zero what causes you the grief? I’ve considered a Spector 6 or even another 5 but I’m hesitant due to the traditionally chunkier necks. My 35” has the slim neck profile and it’s really a heavenly neck to play.... which I honestly didn’t expect.

 

[Selta]

I had a Spector, #027, NS-JH6. Built in 2005. I forget the exact specs on it and looking at the photos isn't ringing any bells haha.
It was a monster of a bass in terms of tone. It was also pretty neck-dive-y which ultimately was why I ended up selling it. I think it weighed in around mid or upper 9's, but honestly can't recall. I don't recall the neck feeling extra chunky, but that is certainly testing my memory so I wouldn't take that as any kind of fact. Was a beautiful bass, and other than the neck dive could've been a keeper - the electronics I fell out of love with, but that would've been simple to change. Probably played a hundred gigs with it, but eventually replaced it with EBMM Sterlings and Bongos... which were pretty quickly replaced with Dingwalls.

 

[Nuage420]

@AB Nate I've recorded a little demo using the East pre with the stock pickups. Unfortunately... I kinda broke my east pre while adjusting the internal gain trim... I'm not sure if I can buy that part separately or if I'll need to buy a whole new unit. The passive still works and sounds great though.

 

[spiritbass]

@AB Nate Unfortunately... I kinda broke my east pre while adjusting the internal gain trim...

Bummer! I've had East pre's in a couple of basses - good stuff.

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

I can usually predict how well a bass will balance to a certain degree. There are two main design factors I look at:
1) Does the upper horn align with or beyond the 12 fret?
2) How far forward is the bridge on the body (space between the bridge and the butt end of the body)?

If the upper horn is too short, it is a good candidate for neck dive. If the bridge is too far forward, the reach to the first frets is going to be longer. Add to that headstock size, length and the types of tuners (add an extra one for 5-strings) and that will all contribute to the balance.

I think that balance is that important that it is more important than the overall weight to a certain extent. There is the overall weight to consider on your back, but also I find that neck dive really contributes to the discomfort on your shoulder and focusses the weight to the point at the top. Whereas, if its well balanced the weight can be distributed better over your back as well.

My SJ5 is 9.2 lbs. Not the lightest, but it balances so well that I rarely notice it on long gigs. I have had some lighter basses with neck dive really make my shoulder hurt.

 

[Nuage420]

Bummer! I've had East pre's in a couple of basses - good stuff.

Love it, but the plastic they used for the gain trim is incredibly soft it stripped out while adjusting.

 

[BurningSkies]

When I played the Dimension a week or two ago at a local dealer, it was nice overall. However, something about it (and this may be very visually based) feels shoehorned. Like they just figured out the quickest way to make an existing Spector fanned. I love my regular NS 4 strings (and one of my main basses is a 35" scale 4 string Spector, which I find very comfortable still). The 5's always felt the same way to me. It lost the comfort of the original design. Dingwall, regardless of what you may think of the tone, just nailed the ergonomic design in conjunction with the fanned fret. Nothing is more ergonomically rough than a thunderbird, and the D-Bird/D-Roc fixed all of it.

As I watch other makers enter the multiscale bass market I keep watching people just slapping on necks with fanned frets and not addressing the overall design & ergonomic issues that need to be addressed. It makes me sad, because I think it leaves a lot of second-rate multi-scale basses in the world. Given that I obviously love the concept and find it valuable as a player, I hate that there's going to be a whole lot of people turned off by people who just haven't carried out the design work with due diligence.

I can usually predict how well a bass will balance to a certain degree. There are two main design factors I look at:
1) Does the upper horn align with or beyond the 12 fret?
2) How far forward is the bridge on the body (space between the bridge and the butt end of the body)?

If the upper horn is too short, it is a good candidate for neck dive. If the bridge is too far forward, the reach to the first frets is going to be longer. Add to that headstock size, length and the types of tuners (add an extra one for 5-strings) and that will all contribute to the balance.

I think that balance is that important that it is more important than the overall weight to a certain extent. There is the overall weight to consider on your back, but also I find that neck dive really contributes to the discomfort on your shoulder and focusses the weight to the point at the top. Whereas, if its well balanced the weight can be distributed better over your back as well.

My SJ5 is 9.2 lbs. Not the lightest, but it balances so well that I rarely notice it on long gigs. I have had some lighter basses with neck dive really make my shoulder hurt.

I agree with all of this. All of it.

 

[AB Nate]

I had a Spector, #027, NS-JH6. Built in 2005. I forget the exact specs on it and looking at the photos isn't ringing any bells haha.
It was a monster of a bass in terms of tone. It was also pretty neck-dive-y which ultimately was why I ended up selling it. I think it weighed in around mid or upper 9's, but honestly can't recall. I don't recall the neck feeling extra chunky, but that is certainly testing my memory so I wouldn't take that as any kind of fact. Was a beautiful bass, and other than the neck dive could've been a keeper - the electronics I fell out of love with, but that would've been simple to change. Probably played a hundred gigs with it, but eventually replaced it with EBMM Sterlings and Bongos... which were pretty quickly replaced with Dingwalls.

do you have any photos of that old beast? They seem to be a bit of a rarity.

 

[AB Nate]

@AB Nate I've recorded a little demo using the East pre with the stock pickups. Unfortunately... I kinda broke my east pre while adjusting the internal gain trim... I'm not sure if I can buy that part separately or if I'll need to buy a whole new unit. The passive still works and sounds great though.

Ah. Crappy. Hopefully you get that sorted with minimal issue.

I’m really hoping to get a good representation of those big rigs in case I keep this thing or stumble on an older Ab

 

[Selta]

do you have any photos of that old beast? They seem to be a bit of a rarity.

Yeah, I didn't want to clutter up this thread. They're not great photos at all:

 

[Nuage420]

Ah. Crappy. Hopefully you get that sorted with minimal issue.

I’m really hoping to get a good representation of those big rigs in case I keep this thing or stumble on an older Ab

The best I can describe it is that big Nordstrand sound, but refined. The big singles were rowdy and loud. These are loud, can growl and bite but seem to have a bit more bottom end while doing it. I think coming from the BH2s to this was a good transition for me. I think the best stock pairing ibanez puts out that embodies their "sound" is the big singles in a premium 5er. They're all pretty much gonna sound the same. This set up took it a step further, with the internal adjustments I can mimic tones from very pricy stuff that's out there.
As I'm thinking about this the only complaint I have is that the adjustments are internal and not durable enough for constant tweaking. I'm looking at options of sticking with the East and replacing the broken part or it seems one of these might be next...
Products – Flexcore Preamps

TCM 3 P / noll electronic
the parametric eq is really intriguing to me.

 

[dirkhh]

As I watch other makers enter the multiscale bass market I keep watching people just slapping on necks with fanned frets and not addressing the overall design & ergonomic issues that need to be addressed. It makes me sad, because I think it leaves a lot of second-rate multi-scale basses in the world. Given that I obviously love the concept and find it valuable as a player, I hate that there's going to be a whole lot of people turned off by people who just haven't carried out the design work with due diligence.

This is such a common issue. Not just in basses, but everywhere.
People who imitate the specs, the check box features, but don't pay attention to what it means to do that thing (whatever it is) well. And they often create brutal price pressure on the people who do do things well - because doing things well often is slightly more expensive. Or it's a smaller vendor vs a large mass market producer.

 

[NOLA Bass]

Where you guys are saying the 5s are lacking compared to the 4s or 34” scale is the girth combined with the distance to zero what causes you the grief? I’ve considered a Spector 6 or even another 5 but I’m hesitant due to the traditionally chunkier necks. My 35” has the slim neck profile and it’s really a heavenly neck to play.... which I honestly didn’t expect.

I wasn't clear. On 5 strings it was never reach for me, but the bigger bodies and headstocks. Most were pretty darn heavy. I just feel it lacks a little of the sleekness of the original NS-2 4 string design. All the changes from that for 5's and 6's kinda required some compromise away from that design.

 

[NOLA Bass]

I will add that take my opinion on that with a grain of salt. I don't care for 5 string basses for me, so that may completely bias my opinion. My main band tunes to C standard. Plenty of people have suggested I use a 5, but my 35" scale 4 string Spector Euro (about to have a second one that is getting refinished) and my Dingwall ABZ-4 are just what I personally like to play for downtuned music. If I had a gig where I needed a low B, I'd probably just tune one of them BEAD.

 

[AB Nate]

Yeah, I didn't want to clutter up this thread. They're not great photos at all:
View attachment 4175843
View attachment 4175844
View attachment 4175845

Sweet! Thanks for the clutter !