Dingwall Owners Club

[CL400Peavey]

The Dingwall will never sound EXACTLY like any Leo Fender creation, but you have a better chance of getting in that ballpark with an all-maple neck (which Leo used often).

Julian, we're gonna have to "agree to disagree" on the effect that wood has on tone.
I'm not saying that wood outweighs strings or pickups in the overall tone, but all else being equal, many people can clearly hear a difference in a bass with a maple fretboard from the same bass with a rosewood fretboard.
Same thing with body woods -- the cellular structures and oil content are different, which affects how the waves propagate through the medium.
That's basic physics.

It may not be an observable difference to everyone once the whole band has kicked in, but it's an ingredient in the "soup".

I dont disagree that those things can make a difference in acoustic instruments. In solid body, fretted, amplified instruments, the level of perturbations contributed to the vibration of the string by the qualities you mention are so minimal, they dont matter.

Now in a acoustic instrument, where you rely on the vibrational qualities of the body to produce your sound it is a different story. The modes of vibration of the top or back of an acoustic guitar will effect the voicing, and thusly the composition of that panel will come in to play to a degree, but I would say that the bracing plays a bigger role. In a fretless instrument the material of the fingerboard will matter, as it will partly determine the dampening on the string. But in a fretted instrument the string makes no contact with the board. The interaction between the fret, the board, the body, and back again to the string are going to be minimal. The way you fret the string is going to matter much more.

The feel of the neck and fingerboard may change how you play, which will change how you sound. But I do not buy that there is noticeable tonal differences.

 

[BurningSkies]

Part of the point of a Dingwall bass is that it won't sound exactly like a P/J/MM. Thus the design choices that have been implemented in the instruments. They may sound 'similar' in many ways, but if you're trying to nail the tone of a 1963 Jazz bass (for example), you're going to hear something different out of Sheldon's instruments. The pickups are different, the construction is different and obviously the scale length is different.

 

[groovaholic]

In solid body, fretted, amplified instruments, the level of perturbations contributed to the vibration of the string by the qualities you mention are so minimal, they dont matter.

If the difference isn't worthwhile to you, then you don't HAVE TO buy it.
Lots of people don't believe that fEarful and fEarless cabinets are actually better -- despite the science used to design a cabinet that is efficient and accurate.

But I have experimented with finishes and body resonance (not on purpose) and the results were striking:
I bought a MusicMan style bass with a Moses graphite neck and Bartolini electronics.
The bass sounded dead when I bought it, but based on the components, it seemed like a steal.
So, I got it home and changed the strings, but it was still stiff and "dead" feeling.

Meanwhile, the bass was finished in a really ugly metallic baby blue, so I decided to strip it.

As I did so, I was shocked at how thick the finish was -- it took FOREVER to remove it.

But finally it was all gone, and I had a nice piece of alder to which I applied a thin oil finish.
Then, I reinstalled the hardware, the electronics and the (recently changed) strings and was amazed at how different the bass sounded.

The only variables changed in that experiment were on the body of the bass.

Circling back to Dingwall, long before I ever bought my first Afterburner, back in the days of "The Bottom Line" (an ASCII precursor to TalkBass) Sheldon Dingwall commented on the tone of vintage basses and gave the anecdote of filling a glass with water and tapping the edge of the glass on the counter and hearing that sound.
THEN, fill the same glass with a milkshake and tap it on the counter again -- different sound, and one that is perceived as more "euphonic".

His belief was that as the wood on vintage basses dries, it develops air pockets like those in the milkshake.
The resulting sound is more rich and lively.
He also talked about "plate size" vs. thickness -- and his belief that a bass with a large "face" relative to its thickness was more lively.

Dingwall basses are a meeting of science and art, and my guess is that chambered-body Dingwall basses represent his belief that the body is, in fact, a big part of the tone of his instruments.

 

[J Posega]

Also not a tonewood = tone believer here.

If the dude wants more traditional tones, I'd bet that one of the fancy new Super J's with 3 FD3s would be closer. My ABZ can sound J or P'ish, but so much clearer. I think the shorter scale would get one closer to the sound of a P or J.

 

[CL400Peavey]

If the difference isn't worthwhile to you, then you don't HAVE TO buy it.
Lots of people don't believe that fEarful and fEarless cabinets are actually better -- despite the science used to design a cabinet that is efficient and accurate.

But I have experimented with finishes and body resonance (not on purpose) and the results were striking:
I bought a MusicMan style bass with a Moses graphite neck and Bartolini electronics.
The bass sounded dead when I bought it, but based on the components, it seemed like a steal.
So, I got it home and changed the strings, but it was still stiff and "dead" feeling.

Meanwhile, the bass was finished in a really ugly metallic baby blue, so I decided to strip it.

As I did so, I was shocked at how thick the finish was -- it took FOREVER to remove it.

But finally it was all gone, and I had a nice piece of alder to which I applied a thin oil finish.
Then, I reinstalled the hardware, the electronics and the (recently changed) strings and was amazed at how different the bass sounded.

The only variables changed in that experiment were on the body of the bass.

Circling back to Dingwall, long before I ever bought my first Afterburner, back in the days of "The Bottom Line" (an ASCII precursor to TalkBass) Sheldon Dingwall commented on the tone of vintage basses and gave the anecdote of filling a glass with water and tapping the edge of the glass on the counter and hearing that sound.
THEN, fill the same glass with a milkshake and tap it on the counter again -- different sound, and one that is perceived as more "euphonic".

His belief was that as the wood on vintage basses dries, it develops air pockets like those in the milkshake.
The resulting sound is more rich and lively.
He also talked about "plate size" vs. thickness -- and his belief that a bass with a large "face" relative to its thickness was more lively.

Dingwall basses are a meeting of science and art, and my guess is that chambered-body Dingwall basses represent his belief that the body is, in fact, a big part of the tone of his instruments.

John if you say there is a difference, I believe that there was. I trust your ears and experience to know that if you heard it, then it was there. I would still want to dig in to the "why" on the tonal change. I would suspect that your attention to detail putting the bass back together exceeded who ever built/modified it in the first place. And in that sense, I think we can agree that Sheldon's attention to detail surpasses the vast majority of other bass offerings, and it does make a difference in the sound of his finished product.

 

[groovaholic]

I would still want to dig in to the "why" on the tonal change.

Well, part of it is anecdotal "evidence" (which really isn't evidence so much as observation) based on well-informed opinions of folks like Mike Tobias, Geoff Gould, Ken Smith, Roger Sadowsky, Sheldon Dingwall, Rick Turner et al.
If they say that the body wood makes a difference, and I trust their opinions, well then it probably does.

The physics behind it (taken from the Wiki page on the speed of sound) says:
"Sound waves in solids are composed of compression waves (just as in gases and liquids), but there is also a different type of sound wave called a shear wave, which occurs only in solids. These different types of waves in solids usually travel at different speeds, as exhibited in seismology. The speed of a compression sound wave in solids is determined by the medium's compressibility, shear modulus and density. The speed of shear waves is determined only by the solid material's shear modulus and density."

and also...
"All other things being equal (ceteris paribus), sound will travel more slowly in spongy materials, and faster in stiffer ones. For instance, sound will travel 1.59 times faster in nickel than in bronze, due to the greater stiffness of nickel at about the same density. Similarly, sound travels about 1.41 times faster in light hydrogen (protium) gas than in heavy hydrogen (Invalid Link Removed) gas, since deuterium has similar properties but twice the density. At the same time, "compression-type" sound will travel faster in solids than in liquids, and faster in liquids than in gases, because the solids are more difficult to compress than liquids, while liquids in turn are more difficult to compress than gases."

 

[groovaholic]

Also, check out the "dual core" Dingwall basses -- he uses lighter, more resonant woods on the treble side of the body, and more dense "bassy" woods on the bass side.

I think he explains his reasoning on the Dingwall website...
Invalid Link Removed

 

[CL400Peavey]

Oh I understand the science behind it. I just dont see any evidence that it imparts much of a tonal shift to change the dominant contribution of sound from the frets, strings, and pick ups. Once you change the acoustic composition of the body structure via chambering, there may be a greater interaction of the vibration of the pick up, but you are still amplifying via the interaction of the string and pick up. Include a piezo in the body cavity, or on the bridge, or under the fret/finger board, and then I would agree there is a larger acoustic contribution to the sound.

If there is some discernible contribution to the tone via the composition of wood used, it is small. I think the sum of quality parts has more to do with the excellence of Sheldon's builds, over the actual wood used. Meaning I would rather play one of Sheldon's basses, regardless of what wood is used, than another bass strictly based on the inclusion of a tone wood.

 

[BuffaloBob4343]

From the club gig that Metal Assault came out to review a week or two back...MONSTER bass tones that night

View attachment 443439

Nice Pic dude!!

 

[BuffaloBob4343]

Oh I understand the science behind it. I just dont see any evidence that it imparts much of a tonal shift to change the dominant contribution of sound from the frets, strings, and pick ups. Once you change the acoustic composition of the body structure via chambering, there may be a greater interaction of the vibration of the pick up, but you are still amplifying via the interaction of the string and pick up. Include a piezo in the body cavity, or on the bridge, or under the fret/finger board, and then I would agree there is a larger acoustic contribution to the sound.

If there is some discernible contribution to the tone via the composition of wood used, it is small. I think the sum of quality parts has more to do with the excellence of Sheldon's builds, over the actual wood used. Meaning I would rather play one of Sheldon's basses, regardless of what wood is used, than another bass strictly based on the inclusion of a tone wood.

I pretty much agree with this. I don't doubt that things like really thick finishes on the body, high versus low water content, or even wood versus composite have some reasonably significant contributions to tone. But as soon as you start talking about differences in one wood versus another, especially when the density and structure of those woods are similar, I think the minute differences in tone are simply swamped by strings, pickups, pre-amps, tone circuits, amplifiers and speakers.

Wenge and maple are very similar in density and rigidity as far as what I've read. I like to think that there is a bit of a compression to wenge versus maple, but I've been to a lot of open mics recently with my wenge necked, ash bodied Super P4, and playing it through the same amp, cab, and same strings as my alder, maple, rosewood Sadowsky P, and they sound really similar, and very P-bassy. And when you toss them in the mix, they both sound like awesome P's that play fabulously. We even compared them to a Fender P of somewhat recent vintage alder, maple, maple, and the tone variations were not huge. The fender was a but less aggressive tonally, the Dingwall had a bit more growl and a sweeter upper end, but by and large, the differences were not huge to me or anyone else present (at least to those who actually gave a crap about a couple of bass geeks doing the experimenting). I suspect the primary difference between the fender and my other Ps was the pickups more than anything else.

BUT, if a person perceives a difference that is meaningful, regardless of whether that difference is real or in the person's head, it's all good. Play what sounds good to you and enjoy!

 

[CL400Peavey]

BUT, if a person perceives a difference that is meaningful, regardless of whether that difference is real or in the person's head, it's all good. Play what sounds good to you and enjoy!

This I will agree with 1000%. If the perceived feel/tone makes you happy playing, you will play and sound better.

I like the feel of a rosewood or darker wood board over a maple board. Maybe I just like being able to feel where the maple and wenge meet. Either way, it is almost always my preference to have a dark wood board aesthetically.

 

[BuffaloBob4343]

That's understandable. I just wanted the sound of wenge on the classic p shape. Also I love the feel and the open grain pattern.

If another shipment gets scrapped I'll probably go with maple on maple with white pearl blocks and pg.

I also experienced a delay due too bad wenge. It added about 6 weeks to my time.

If it's worth anything, I am extremely happy with Sheldon's wenge neck. It is so damn smooth and like satin. And the wood is absolutely gorgeous!! When I first got the bass, I was tuning quite a bit, but over time, the neck has stabilized really nicely. I find myself pulling the bass out of a gig bag several days after last playing it, and it is pretty much dead nuts still in tune every time now.

 

[BuffaloBob4343]

This I will agree with 1000%. If the perceived feel/tone makes you happy playing, you will play and sound better.

I like the feel of a rosewood or darker wood board over a maple board. Maybe I just like being able to feel where the maple and wenge meet. Either way, it is almost always my preference to have a dark wood board aesthetically.

+ 1!! I like maple necks a lot, maple boards not so much. But I LOVE LOVE LOVE my wenge neck on my Super P4, because it's like having a maple neck and board, only CHOCOLATIZED!!

 

[cusar5]

I think mine was about to begin the build process. When was your order placed?

About 3 weeks after yours, so it probably won't be at the build stage until the end of the month at least.

Seems like a few of us will be getting our Ding on around the same time. It'll be interesting to compare and contrast.

 

[singlemalt]

When I finished installing the p pup in my SJ- 5, I took it over to practice and did a head to head test with a stock 72 Fender P. In passive mode, it nailed the tone, somewhere in the middle of the passive tone control.

Then it proceeded to do tons of things the Fender couldn't even think about doing.

To me, the Fender P neck was way to chunky, both width and thickness. The Fender string balance sucked, with the E & A bring much louder than the treble side.

Both basses where natural with a gloss finish, maple necks with dark fingerboards .

Time for Brazil and Germany. Any predictions? I'm picking Germany.

 

[groovaholic]

Our basses are the product of a guy who questioned EVERYTHING about how basses are designed and built.
In that process, he has tested the variables in ways that none of us ever could.

One of those variables was body wood; on the Dingwall forum, there are shop photos of all sorts of different body blanks -- different woods, different densities, different thicknesses...
(One of those pics showed some of them in a bonfire.)

That testing has resulted in instruments that are so amazing, we feel compelled to talk about them daily.

And his testing led to dual-density bodied basses, and chambered basses, and (at the most recent NAMM show) the HS "Heavy Solid".
These are all variations on the body of the bass, creating differences in tone.

Again, if you don't hear those differences, or the differences doesn't matter to you, no problem.

But let's state opinions as opinion.

 

[wawawawa]

Hello All

I am now the *extremely* happy owner of a Super JP5... It is wonderful. I prefer it to my ABII (now sold) - it just feels "right". It has the vintage feel that I was looking for.

Very, very impressed. The build quality is flawless as I would expect and now I have both P, J and the series and parallel options so I have no need for another bass.... Ever.... (we'll see hehe).

Now back to the shed...

 

[reddavid]

Hello All

I am now the *extremely* happy owner of a Super JP5... It is wonderful. I prefer it to my ABII (now sold) - it just feels "right". It has the vintage feel that I was looking for.

Very, very impressed. The build quality is flawless as I would expect and now I have both P, J and the series and parallel options so I have no need for another bass.... Ever.... (we'll see hehe).

Now back to the shed...

Very nice bass. Congrats! Don't rule out the Super P. It has it's own charm and vintage tones.

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

Time for Brazil and Germany. Any predictions? I'm picking Germany.

You called it! I wasn't expecting that. Not at that score anyway.

 

[singlemalt]

That was hard to watch. We were sitting there with our mouths hanging open at the third goal. What a sorry implosion for the Brazilians. The hack on Neymar was the low point of the Cup,they really needed him. (The biting was pretty crazy too...)

We have a great little pizza place in town that has developed a sizable group of soccer fans. They even opened early for the nine am games. The only big screen in town.
Nothing like drinking beer and watching soccer with your neighbors at lunch time on workdays. And it's walking distance from the house! I need to talk them into having some music at night.

Tomorrow's Argentina/ Netherlands match might be the highlight of the World Cup. It has to be better than today's game!

On the Dingwall front, I'm sold on the alcohol soak for strings. String changes will happen more often now that the sets are already cut, wound, and broken in.