• 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

#58,901
cfraz said:
When a bass string is plucked, it's not just the string that moves. An interesting experiment is to lightly rest fingers from your non-plucking hand on the tip of the headstock (or other places on your bass) as you pluck a string. When I do that, I can feel the wood vibrating, and it's different in character from bass to bass. Now the vibrating wood on a solid body bass doesn't produce a lot of sound acoustically, but if the wood is vibrating, the pickups, being screwed into the wood, are also moving in concert with the wood. Subtle to be sure, but I think still an important component of a bass's sound.
Click to expand...
oh for sure, that is what my 6 string with a 170 F# has a walnut body. i can feel the b in the aldre body of my 5. but also remember the headstock will amplify the vibrations as it is at the furthest point. the pickups are near the centre of mass and flex would be quite limited.

but we agree on the concept. i can feel it. but i bet if we did an experiment where a bass was strapped down for zero body or neck flex, there would be little change for what the pickup “sees”. again, i think with sufficient rigidity, the air bass would be pretty darn close.

said in other words, pickups sense left and right signals over the pickup poles from strinng vibration, but they are also sensing other planes of oscillation in the string, some contributed by body/neck flex. thus the sustain we see in neckthroughs vs bolt on.

but until someone does it, it is all “intellectual masturbation.”. i like my bases as they are so i dont get too fussed either way.
 
#58,902
thoughts on the pickup angling? the jazz follows the expected angling based on the bridge angle. the ab1 pickups are way closer to the bridge on the treble side.

is the super j trying to reproduce a more traditional sound (mathematically horizontal pickups), and the ab1 is doing it’s own thing (fuller bass, crisper highs)?

or

now that i think about it… these are reverse split coil pickups, so the ab1 pickups kind of are in position to compensate for that (they would still be tilted closer to the bridge on the treble side though). And maybe the super j running like a p bass with the pickups flipped.
IMG_4901.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Juice Box and KPopOnBass
#58,903
been_effected said:
Thank you kind sir. Do you remember what Sheldon's advice was re: roasted ash vs wenge and why his preference was one over the other?

I definitely think I'm sold on wenge - owned an early 90's Warwick for years that was a wenge neck-through, and a mate of mine has an ABZ with a wenge neck, and I love the feel of it. Just curious about the option.

I'm back on the design wagon again. Looking at:
- Super J, 5-String, 3x Config
- African Mahogany (Khaya) as body wood
- 3x Series/Parallel Toggles
- Wenge Neck (5-pc) (probably)
- Passive

Bits I'm still working out:
- Body finish
- Matching Headstock Finish - depends on my finish choice I think
- FD3 or Super-Fatty II Pickup Swap - considering FD3's but its been a while and will eventually get around to researching FD3 vs FD5's

The logic of the Khaya body was mainly I just finished having a long play with a vintageburst D-Roc Standard and while I quite enjoyed it tonally (particularly its warmth vs my Combustion), I couldn't get comfortable with the body shape. I wanted to, but I found myself fighting with it as I play sitting a lot now. And yeah, I do appreciate there'll be some difference in tone anyway due to the scale length changes.
Click to expand...
I thought about Mohagany for the body. I love the tone and look but there is typically a very heavy wood. I ended up going dual density.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AB Nate
#58,904
Great convo on wood vs electronics, etc. I'll throw out this comparison. I have two Canadian Dingwall, an ABZ and a DBird.

They have the same 3 FDV pickups, and I changed the DBird to the 3x switch because the two settings I like are the neck pickup only and the neck + bridge. The ABZ does have the Darkglass preamp; however, I never boost or cut any EQ and I've played it passive on numerous occasions.

Differences besides the body shape:

DBird: Mahogony body, maple neck with wenge fingerboard.

ABZ: Ash body, solid wenge neck.

Look, both sound like Dingwall's unmistakibly. So I say that the difference is nothing like say comparing my Spector neck through maple bass with active EMG + Haz preamp to a Fender P bass. Those are two entirely different beasts. That being said, I much prefer something in the ABZ sound that is different than the DBird (or for that matter, my NG3 that has been modded with a P tone, Canadian bridge, and 6 way switch). This is so much so, that I just put a deposit for an ABZ build with John Fox, as I just really want a 2nd ABZ (I used to have one and stupidly sold it before my band changed and the Dingwalls became my go-to basses for the new version).

So all that incredible detail aside, the wood has to have some impact because of the difference in sound between those two basses with the same electronics. The DBird shape is different, but I can't imagine that is having a big impact vs the differences in wood.

To say I'm overthinking this with a build in the pipeline is of course what is happening as well. However, that ABZ has something that the others just can't quite get to in tone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cfraz
#58,905
Bassheart365 said:
I thought about Mohagany for the body. I love the tone and look but there is typically a very heavy wood. I ended up going dual density.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but considering how light the D-Rock Standard was (relatively speaking, it felt about roughly as heavy as my Combustion) I had some hopes it might have been doable. Plus, I have a history of playing Warwicks (Thumb, especially) so...no Dingwall has been *too* heavy compared to that.
 
#58,907
With all this tone talk I don't see people mentioning scale length. IMO this is major factor, especially comparing dingwalls to standard 34" scales. My take on the tone wood video "air guitar" is that it's a perfectly rigid/stiff system. Build the strings onto any kind of wood or progressively softer material and it will start mechanically damping frequencies. Rest your chin on your bass body when you pluck a string. Do you feel it? That means mechanical energy that a pickup detects is leaving the strings.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SemiDriven and MascisMan
#58,908
MascisMan said:
On the subject of body/neck weight. What would be the lightest, on average, of wood choices? Ash body, Maple neck/fretboard?

Are the dual density bodies heavier than alder or ash in general?

Where do walnut bodies line up in the spectrum?
Click to expand...
My Dual density SJ is heavier than my swamp ash super p.
With that being said, i think the SJ’s body is slightly bigger, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MascisMan
#58,909
MascisMan said:
On the subject of body/neck weight. What would be the lightest, on average, of wood choices? Ash body, Maple neck/fretboard?

Are the dual density bodies heavier than alder or ash in general?

Where do walnut bodies line up in the spectrum?
Click to expand...
Dingwall offers two kinds of ash: northern ash and swamp ash. Swamp ash and alder are relatively light weight. Northern ash is dense and heavy. That’s why the offer the dual density option. Northern ash on one side and alder or swamp ash on the other to keep the weight down . Baseball bats are typically made of Northern ash. It has better sustain than swamp ash or alder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TTA and SemiDriven
#58,914
KPopOnBass said:
Just curious, why not the Strandberg Prog? I've never tried one or even seen one in person, but on paper they look great to me...

(Of course if Dingwall did a headless I probably couldn't resist putting down a deposit)
Click to expand...
There’s a prototype for one. Sheldon mentioned it in a video
 
  • Like
Reactions: KPopOnBass and MultiScaleMale
#58,915
KPopOnBass said:
Just curious, why not the Strandberg Prog? I've never tried one or even seen one in person, but on paper they look great to me...

(Of course if Dingwall did a headless I probably couldn't resist putting down a deposit)
Click to expand...
because I have tried it and it sounds very boring, almost lifeless compared to a Dingwall and it's a shame cause I've got a Strandberg guitar which is awesome instead
MK4_5275.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: KPopOnBass
#58,919
KPopOnBass said:
Just curious, why not the Strandberg Prog? I've never tried one or even seen one in person, but on paper they look great to me...

(Of course if Dingwall did a headless I probably couldn't resist putting down a deposit)
Click to expand...
I had a Strandberg Prog 5 for a year or so. Great on paper but wasn’t for me. Despite being headless, mine had significant neck dive. Neck is simply too thick and weighty.

Tone was…small? I don’t want to get into the debate chambered vs. non-chambered, but the bass was so light it sounded light. It didn’t have heft and attack, IMO.

The B string was terrible. Totally unbalanced with the rest of the strings. Lacked the same attack and output. I played around with the pickup height forever and could never get it balanced.

The position of the knobs also made it difficult for my preferred style of playing which these days is mostly thumping (double thumb and fingers). The knob under the neck pickup was always in the way, and it was a very loose knob so the slightest touch would change the setting.

I couldn’t take it any more. Sold it and got a DW. All problems solved. Just my experience. Others’ may vary.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KPopOnBass, 5StringPocket, MikoFX and 3 others

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back