Dammit, I keep making that mistake!!! Yes, I meant Glockenklang, not Aguilar. Thanks. Fixed my previous post.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Dingwall Owners Club
- Thread starter FroggyOne2
- Start date
Dammit, I keep making that mistake!!! Yes, I meant Glockenklang, not Aguilar. Thanks. Fixed my previous post.
Hah no worries. I could write a bit of a book on this topic after work, if others don't beat me to it
While I have no DG experience in a Dingwall I’ll say that the Glock in my SJ is very neutral and polite. With the knobs at noon there’s no discernible difference between active and passive. There’s not even a level difference. When boosting or cutting it does things in a wide and polite manner. There’s not much aggression or character to the EQ. More like a problem solving EQ than one to establish a signature sound. The high EQ doubles as a passive tone control when in passive mode, which is a feature I think the DG lacks but others would have to confirm that. Having a passive tone control onboard is very helpful when you’re running without the preamp engaged. Ultimately I really like the Glock but could see it not being the right choice for some folks.
BurningSkies
CRAZY BALDHEAD
- Feb 20, 2005
- 27,956
- 20,348
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Dingwall Guitars
I can compare the DG to the Aggies though! I've got two Dingwalls with Aguilar preamps (OBP1, OBP1) and two with DGTC's!
The only Glock/Dingwall related thing I own is the old Dingwall T-Shirt...which Sheldon sent to me knowing fully that I didn't "have a Glockenklang in my Dingwall!?!"
The only Glock/Dingwall related thing I own is the old Dingwall T-Shirt...which Sheldon sent to me knowing fully that I didn't "have a Glockenklang in my Dingwall!?!"
I have the Darkglass in mine. Kinda wish I had the Glock preamp, for the passive treble if nothing else. The bass bumped up a bit on the Tone Capsule can be huge.
BurningSkies
CRAZY BALDHEAD
- Feb 20, 2005
- 27,956
- 20,348
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Dingwall Guitars
BurningSkies
CRAZY BALDHEAD
- Feb 20, 2005
- 27,956
- 20,348
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Dingwall Guitars
Attachments
My hot take on Glock via-a-vis Darkglass. Note, I have Glocks in: 3 Afterburners, 1 Prima Artist, and 1 Combusion. I have a Darkglass in on NG3. I actually don't even know what pre is in my old Z3... should probably figure that out someday. Ahem.
They're difficult to compare, as, imho, they're drastically different.
At "neutral" (i.e. on center detents on the pots), the Glocks (2 and 3 band versions) are, well, transparent. They do nothing to the tone, and only the 2-bands do anything to output (very small bump in output when engaged). However, at neutral, the darkglass adds a bit of color and bite to the tone. Not a ton, but, noticable amounts.
As you start turning knobs, things go from a little different, to a lot different. The venn diagram between the two would have only a small area of overlap between the pres.
The DG not only sonically does EQing, but either adds dirt, or the EQ points are so specific as to sound/feel like they are making things a bit hairy. This is not a bad thing, it just is. I like it sometimes, but, prefer to do that outboard in a pedal. It never gets into like, true grit/fuzz/distortion, but it certainly hints at it. The two bands are tight and well chosen, but not my cuppa overall.
The glock, to me, is more "musical" in the sense that I can use it as an engineer would. Not for "tone" or for "my sound" per se - hard to describe what I'm trying to get at, but, I think @silky smoove kinda nailed it -- it's a problem solver first. The EQ points read as if they should be horrible, but, in practice, work SO DANG WELL. A little goes a really long way with each EQ point. I rarely go past a 1/4 turn on anything.
Neither I would say "has" to be used in any setting, genre, or band type. I use my Glocks in prog and death metal, video game music, and anime covers. It's great in all of those settings. The DG can work well in them also, though naturally with it adding some more grind, would feel a bit more at home with the hard rock/metal heads. However, never discount what a little bit of grit will do in ANY recording for any genre. Having a little bit of edge in the tone can work wonders, and when set in a mix the edgyness is buried, but the flavor it brought with it remains and does something magical, too. I again just prefer to bring that with outboard gear rather than my bass's preamp, ymmv.
Both are great choices, and I'm glad for me it's "easy" to make the choice for Glocks. I like the DG pre as well, but, there's a reason I only have one Dingwall with it. For me. For what I do. But I'm not you
They're difficult to compare, as, imho, they're drastically different.
At "neutral" (i.e. on center detents on the pots), the Glocks (2 and 3 band versions) are, well, transparent. They do nothing to the tone, and only the 2-bands do anything to output (very small bump in output when engaged). However, at neutral, the darkglass adds a bit of color and bite to the tone. Not a ton, but, noticable amounts.
As you start turning knobs, things go from a little different, to a lot different. The venn diagram between the two would have only a small area of overlap between the pres.
The DG not only sonically does EQing, but either adds dirt, or the EQ points are so specific as to sound/feel like they are making things a bit hairy. This is not a bad thing, it just is. I like it sometimes, but, prefer to do that outboard in a pedal. It never gets into like, true grit/fuzz/distortion, but it certainly hints at it. The two bands are tight and well chosen, but not my cuppa overall.
The glock, to me, is more "musical" in the sense that I can use it as an engineer would. Not for "tone" or for "my sound" per se - hard to describe what I'm trying to get at, but, I think @silky smoove kinda nailed it -- it's a problem solver first. The EQ points read as if they should be horrible, but, in practice, work SO DANG WELL. A little goes a really long way with each EQ point. I rarely go past a 1/4 turn on anything.
Neither I would say "has" to be used in any setting, genre, or band type. I use my Glocks in prog and death metal, video game music, and anime covers. It's great in all of those settings. The DG can work well in them also, though naturally with it adding some more grind, would feel a bit more at home with the hard rock/metal heads. However, never discount what a little bit of grit will do in ANY recording for any genre. Having a little bit of edge in the tone can work wonders, and when set in a mix the edgyness is buried, but the flavor it brought with it remains and does something magical, too. I again just prefer to bring that with outboard gear rather than my bass's preamp, ymmv.
Both are great choices, and I'm glad for me it's "easy" to make the choice for Glocks. I like the DG pre as well, but, there's a reason I only have one Dingwall with it. For me. For what I do. But I'm not you
Ok, ok. I'll give you $2200 for the shirt, send the bass as a free gift.
BurningSkies
CRAZY BALDHEAD
- Feb 20, 2005
- 27,956
- 20,348
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Dingwall Guitars
$2200? Ouch. That would make it $1100 for the shirt and $1100 for the bass. I feel both are worth more.
To be fair, I've no idea what used Super PJ's go for now a days 
. I just want the shirt anyway haha
. I just want the shirt anyway haha
The high band especially sticks out at me as being weird way up at 18khz. It must be a bell with a very wide Q as opposed to a typical high shelf.
As far as I am aware they are direct replacements and the Dingwall bridges are based off of them/built by them.
Woah that is weird that it's that high.. Do they have any eq charts/graphs out there for their stuff?
@Bob_Ross I don't have experience with the Glock but do with Darkglass and EMG. I've been preferring the EMG over Darkglass for the treble section alone. The EMG treble is way more usable and musical to me and how I play. The DG has a lot of capability and I like the idea of low/mid/high mid but it always feels like the treble isn't high enough if I want it glassy and the mid has only been useful for cutting vs boosting. My tone shaping is either handled via preamps or post recording.
I will say I really like just having the DG prea. P turned on but left flat (@BurningSkies I know I know, but I'm not one of THOSE people) Gives my NG a little sparkle the passive mode doesn't have.
@Bob_Ross I don't have experience with the Glock but do with Darkglass and EMG. I've been preferring the EMG over Darkglass for the treble section alone. The EMG treble is way more usable and musical to me and how I play. The DG has a lot of capability and I like the idea of low/mid/high mid but it always feels like the treble isn't high enough if I want it glassy and the mid has only been useful for cutting vs boosting. My tone shaping is either handled via preamps or post recording.
I will say I really like just having the DG prea. P turned on but left flat (@BurningSkies I know I know, but I'm not one of THOSE people) Gives my NG a little sparkle the passive mode doesn't have.
My musing of the day: a multi-scale fretless bass cannot be called a fanned-fret bass (obvious). So, would it be a fanned-fretless bass? If so, what is it that is “fanned”, the intonation?
