• 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

#7,381
Zoomie said:
Julian, I think the PF800 disparaged itself a little when it peed the bed after a whole three weeks. ;)

Setting aside its early DI failure on the first one I had, and its total lack of headroom, I could usually get some good tone out of it. So I don't think you're stone cold crazy in terms of enjoying the tone.

To be fair, I'm spoiled stinkin' rotten with the Reiner and 3000 watts.

So, to be clear, my problem with the PF (excluding the failure as new) is the same problem that I have with a lot of the micros. Underpowered, zero headroom, and many of them have a little too much baked in tone for my taste(my beloved Streamie included.) If I want hair/wool, I prefer to add it myself via the XD 1 or JohnK's Gamma.

I spend most of my time in a huge building on a 45 foot stage with 13 foot ceilings. And these (500-900 watt) micros are working awfully hard just to give me stage mix volume.

Some day, someone will build a monster that resolves some of these issues, without resorting to big iron.

I do understand the appeal though. Just havent found one that can hang in terms of tone with the Reiner.
Click to expand...

See I dont get it. Your unit must have been crazy faulty.

I run the compressor at noon, gain between 1-2 (it is still clean). Master around 11-12 is getting me CRAZY loud. That is with the PF-500.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zoomie
#7,382
Anyone have a good understanding of how the tone control works on the Super P? And no, I don't mean like "turn the knob" type understanding!:laugh:

My understanding is that it is passive tone control for half of the travel (I am assume this starts at the end where the bass is real thumpy), and then becomes a passive mid cut for the second half of the total travel. I found in my first rehearsal that to get good cut through the mix (the room is real hard to get a good tone in), I was well into the mid-cut portion of the circuit (if my assumption is correct, which seemed to have the effect of taking some bass out of the low end and continuing to add definition to the high end.

How do other Super P owners set the tone control?

Also, I assume my Super P came with Dingwall nickel steels. Is this true does anyone know?

I guess I could ask these questions of Sheldon over on the Dingwall forum, but I don't like to bug the man unless I have to.

Thanks!
 
#7,383
BuffaloBob4343 said:
Anyone have a good understanding of how the tone control works on the Super P? And no, I don't mean like "turn the knob" type understanding!:laugh:

My understanding is that it is passive tone control for half of the travel (I am assume this starts at the end where the bass is real thumpy), and then becomes a passive mid cut for the second half of the total travel. I found in my first rehearsal that to get good cut through the mix (the room is real hard to get a good tone in), I was well into the mid-cut portion of the circuit (if my assumption is correct, which seemed to have the effect of taking some bass out of the low end and continuing to add definition to the high end.

How do other Super P owners set the tone control?

Also, I assume my Super P came with Dingwall nickel steels. Is this true does anyone know?

I guess I could ask these questions of Sheldon over on the Dingwall forum, but I don't like to bug the man unless I have to.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

The mid-cut shouldn't take much of the bass away, at least I haven't noticed it. That's kind of the point of it, in theory it scoops the mids and leaves the bass and treble realitively intact. In general I find myself running the tone in the center position/wide open or sometimes I roll off a little treble since the pickup seems to have a bit more treble response than some other P's I've used. I don't use the mid cut much as in general its hurts cutting through rather than help. Definitely helpful for slapping though.
 
#7,384
Smallequestrian said:
The mid-cut shouldn't take much of the bass away, at least I haven't noticed it. That's kind of the point of it, in theory it scoops the mids and leaves the bass and treble realitively intact. In general I find myself running the tone in the center position/wide open or sometimes I roll off a little treble since the pickup seems to have a bit more treble response than some other P's I've used. I don't use the mid cut much as in general its hurts cutting through rather than help. Definitely helpful for slapping though.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Well, that's why I was a bit confused. It seemed that I heard myself better as I got into the mid-cut. It seemed the bass had more definition and I also heard the high end a bit better, which makes sense. Perhaps it was because the low mids were reduced, I don't know.

It might be the room. I have a Sadowsky P as well and in that room, I find myself using the vintage tone control (I also believe it is a mid-cut) to hear myself. I have also noticed that I can hear big differences in tone when adjusting tone controls on both basses in pretty much any other setting but that living room! LOL! It may just be the room. They have heavy curtains and baffling around the windows to keep sound from escaping and bothering the neighbors.
 
#7,385
CL400Peavey said:
See I dont get it. Your unit must have been crazy faulty.

I run the compressor at noon, gain between 1-2 (it is still clean). Master around 11-12 is getting me CRAZY loud. That is with the PF-500.
Click to expand...

Im on my second unit and they were both the same. Frankly, I'm kind of surprised myself as I know you play at much louder volumes than I do.

1-2 PM on Gain with the 800 introduces distortion and NOT the good kind. And Im playing nothing but passives.

I guess that why we have gear choices !
 
#7,387
eloann said:
I sold 2 parallel basses last week.

So, quite logically, I got in touch with Barry and ordered the bass we had been planning earlier this year.
It will have something that's not on the option list. Not telling you what that is but I can tell you it will be awesome. I'd be surprised if it doesn't get featured as "bass of the week" or something !
Click to expand...

Teaser! ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmad_bass and BuffaloBob4343
#7,388
Smallequestrian said:
The mid-cut shouldn't take much of the bass away, at least I haven't noticed it. That's kind of the point of it, in theory it scoops the mids and leaves the bass and treble realitively intact. In general I find myself running the tone in the center position/wide open or sometimes I roll off a little treble since the pickup seems to have a bit more treble response than some other P's I've used. I don't use the mid cut much as in general its hurts cutting through rather than help. Definitely helpful for slapping though.
Click to expand...

This sums up my Super P experience exactly; the mid cut definitely doesn't reduce bottom end at all for me, and I'm generally running it flat or with just a touch of treble roll-off, unless I'm slapping in which case I'll roll the mids off a bit.
 
#7,389
I have an alder/rosewood "parallel" reverse-P/J5 which I'm quite fond of. It has that classic P grunt with enough J blended in to give it some bite but I find the solo J pickup sound (even in the 60's position) too thin to be useful. In determining the Dingwall Super PJ bridge pickup position, I read that the bridge FD-3 was moved up toward the neck until it balanced and blended properly with the P pickup and that this distance was farther away from the bridge than expected. I like this approach and with the FD-3, I would think when soloed it would have a more balanced and substantial tone than a traditional bridge J pickup. Do any of you Super PJ owners find this to be true?

I am really enjoying my ash/maple ABZ-5. The tone, harmonics, and playability are amazing. I have someone who might be interested in my PJ5 and I was thinking of ordering a Dingwall Reverse-P/J5 with alder body and wenge/wenge neck/fretboard to replace it. My ABZ-5 has the bridge FD-3 pickup wired series and series/parallel switching for the neck pickup. Would the difference in wood and pickups for the Super P/J5 be tonally diverse enough from the ABZ-5 so there is not too much overlap (not quite as bright, different mid character, etc)?
 
Last edited:
#7,390
5StringPocket said:
I have an alder/rosewood "parallel" reverse-P/J5 which I'm quite fond of. It has that classic P grunt with enough J blended in to give it some bite but I find the solo J pickup sound (even in the 60's position) too thin to be useful. In determining the Dingwall Super PJ bridge pickup position, I read that the bridge FD-3 was moved up toward the neck until it balanced and blended properly with the P pickup and that this distance was farther away from the bridge than expected. I like this approach and with the FD-3, I would think when soloed it would have a more balanced and substantial tone than a traditional bridge J pickup. Do any of you Super PJ owners find this to be true?

I am really enjoying my ash/maple ABZ-5. The tone, harmonics, and playability are amazing. I have someone who might be interested in my PJ5 and I was thinking of ordering a Dingwall Reverse-P/J5 with alder body and wenge/wenge neck/fretboard to replace it. My ABZ-5 has the bridge FD-3 pickup wired series and series/parallel switching for the neck pickup. Would the difference in wood and pickups for the Super P/J5 be tonally diverse from the ABZ-5 so there is not too much overlap (not quite as bright, different mid character, etc)?
Click to expand...

I know I might take some heat on this, but I dont believe in tone woods. In a 100% acoustic instrument (quality of construction probably has more to do with tone than the actual wood), or something equipped with a piezo on the body it might make a difference.

In a magnetically amplified instrument here is what I think makes the difference in tone. Frets, strings, pick ups, pick up placement, bridge. Your signal is generated by the motion of a string through the field generated by the pick up. The frets, and bridge touch the string and can effect how it vibrates, and the composition of the string of course. The small additions of body vibration, if perceptible, are not going to dominated your sound as much as your actual playing and the composition of the components I mentioned will.

So what does the difference in woods change? Aesthetics of course, which are not unimportant. More importantly, for me, is the feel and playability. I prefer the look and feel of anything buy a maple fret board. Personal preference. When my hands are happy playing, I play in a more appealing manner to my ear. That can make the difference in tone.
 
#7,391
I'm not quite the "wood nazi" I used to be, but years of modding and swapping parts between bolt-ons has taught me that at the very least, neck wood and construction definitely make a significant contribution.

I am very anal about setups, using micrometers and feeler gauges to set string and pickup height. For that reason, I don't believe that my experiences can be passed off as instrument-to-instrument variations in setup.

IME, if you exchange maple/rosewood or maple/maple neck for a wenge/ebony or wenge/wenge neck on a Fender-style bass (or guitar); even though you order the same truss rod type, neck contour, frets and fingerboard radius, and take care to match the setup before and after, you had still better be prepared for some pretty prominent tonal differences.

Regardless of whether they love it or hate it, my tech customers and friends all seem to give similar feedback about the change in both the character of the sustain and the midrange response.

I don't see why it would be any different with a Dingwall. According to past comments I've read from both Barry and Sheldon, I suspect that they would agree.
 
#7,392
steve_rolfeca said:
I'm not quite the "wood nazi" I used to be, but years of modding and swapping parts between bolt-ons has taught me that at the very least, neck wood and construction definitely make a significant contribution.

I am very anal about setups, using micrometers and feeler gauges to set string and pickup height. For that reason, I don't believe that my experiences can be passed off as instrument-to-instrument variations in setup.

IME, if you exchange maple/rosewood or maple/maple neck for a wenge/ebony or wenge/wenge neck on a Fender-style bass (or guitar); even though you order the same truss rod type, neck contour, frets and fingerboard radius, and take care to match the setup before and after, you had still better be prepared for some pretty prominent tonal differences.

Regardless of whether they love it or hate it, my tech customers and friends all seem to give similar feedback about the change in both the character of the sustain and the midrange response.

I don't see why it would be any different with a Dingwall. According to past comments I've read from both Barry and Sheldon, I suspect that they would agree.
Click to expand...

What sort of differences in tone have you encountered in your experience, Steve? I am interested in your perception between a maple neck and wenge one to compare to my own. I agree there is a difference and I am curious to see if our perceptions are similar. I don't find the difference to be overwhelming, but that is a relative assessment that can vary between listeners. But, I do perceive differences as well.
 
#7,394
eloann said:
I sold 2 parallel basses last week.

So, quite logically, I got in touch with Barry and ordered the bass we had been planning earlier this year.
It will have something that's not on the option list. Not telling you what that is but I can tell you it will be awesome. I'd be surprised if it doesn't get featured as "bass of the week" or something !
Click to expand...

Nice! I did something similar with my SP5 order. Not a huge deal but it is not on the option list :) can't wait. About 2 months left.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back