Scott Whitley SWB-1

[chowny]

Yes, I would have thought there'd be more reviews too.

I'm currently waiting on a passive from the latest batch of Signature series that were due out at the end of June. Two week delay is now being followed up by another delay. So I hope to have it by the end of July. Apparently there were ten on the list, so we should see some more feedback soon.

I hate being the delays guy

By the end of July should be doable though.

 

[Kerplunk]

Delays are inevitable. I waited this long and a month isn't make nor break in the scheme of things. It's more how it's handled. Being notified and kept in the loop reinvigorates my confidence. When you think of what could go wrong and doesn't, that's a miracle in itself.

 

[Les Fret]

I have the passive SWB-1 natural ash for two weeks now. Here is my review:

Construction/looks: The bass is very well made. Purely from the looks you can't tell it is a budget bass. Finish is great. Hardware great. Frets great. All details are right. Bass balances great. No neckdive. No complaints whatsoever. Looks Alembic-ish. I don't like the looks of the Rickenbacker style headstock though. Doesn't fit with the rest of the design I think and the white Chowny logo makes it look more cheap (at least to me).

Sound: I like the sound from the neck and bridge pickup soloed. It is a good sound but not a very exclusive sound. It doesn't have it's own voice so to say like an Alembic for example. Not that this is necessary. It's the first short scale that I have tried that has a tight and good E string sound.
I don't like the sound of both pickups together. The volume seems to be a bit lower when having the switch in middle position and also it is less bright in this position. That's strange....Maybe because the pickups are so close together? Also the overall output of the bass is quite low even for a passive bass. Could be much higher.

Playability: It plays great. Very fast neck. String spacing is pretty small but not too small for me. Also great for slapping. It feels like a short scale Alembic I think. Think they made it to the exact specifications of a Stanley Clarke model? (scale wise and string spacing en neck width etc.)

Conclusion: for this money you have a great short scale bass. They could easily ask more for this bass. Plays great and very well build. Sound of both pickups together can be better though and also the output is too low. This is a great poor mans Alembic (although the sound is very different).

Although it is a great bass I think I am going to sell it because I don't like short scales that much after all. This is my fourth short scale but somehow they still feel a bit toyish to me. Gone stick with my long scales (and one medium scale).

 

[loopee]

then you should get a Birdsong or a Landing....nothing toyish about those 2....of course, more $$

 

[MrWalker]

I think the feeling of "toyish" is very subjective I just received my SWB-1 a couple of days ago (I did write a NBD-thread today). Mine is the mahogany version. I also got the EMG preamp in mine. The output is not low with the preamp, and the design for me removes the "miniature" feeling that I have always had with shortscale basses.

As the reviewer above said, the quality is very good! I refer to my review in my other thread for more details. I will not sell this bass. Fantastic value for money!

 

[Chicago Al]

Hooray and thanks guys for posting! Now I don't feel so alone! ;- )

I will agree with Les Fret about most everything, except I don't find the 'both' position is lower in volume, but it does have a very different, 'scooped' sound, due to the pickups being out of phase, which is typical of J-style basses. (And Stratocasters, where I love that 'in between' sound.) The output on my passive bass is certainly low, lower than the SS Jaguar it's replacing, however the sound is more defined...as well as the pickups matching far better than they do on the Jag.

Appreciate your comments MrWalker, here and in the other thead. The frets are particularly nice, aren't they? Also interested in your comment that the bass is a bit heavy for a small one, as mine is too. My buddy at the shop wasn't surprised though, due to what a chunk of mahogany it is. Let me know if you measure yours!

 

[Les Fret]

I think the feeling of "toyish" is very subjective I just received my SWB-1 a couple of days ago (I did write a NBD-thread today). Mine is the mahogany version.

Just to be clear: with "toyish" I didn't mean the quality of the bass. It is just that the short scale feels toyish to me. More guitar than bass like. I tend to play more fast and high guitar like stuff and less bottom lines on a short scale. I think medium scale and long scale are more to my liking.

Hooray and thanks guys for posting! Now I don't feel so alone! ;- )

I will agree with Les Fret about most everything, except I don't find the 'both' position is lower in volume, but it does have a very different, 'scooped' sound, due to the pickups being out of phase, which is typical of J-style basses. (And Stratocasters, where I love that 'in between' sound.)

Yes you are right it is more scooped. But on jazz basses I never noticed such a big difference in impact in the middle position (both pickups engaged). In fact on most jazz basses I prefer the sound of both pickups together but not on the SWB. Somehow the sound doesn't match the sound of the pickups soloed (position 1 and 3 of switch). Also it seems to be less clear and more dull.

Also want to add two things. I have the natural ash version but I don't find the bass heavy as someone said before. I don't see the option natural mahogany on their site by the way.

And I noticed when changing strings that the black bridge saddles are not fixed in the bridge. So they fall out when changing strings. Be careful not to loose the saddles when changing strings.

 

[MrWalker]

Hooray and thanks guys for posting! Now I don't feel so alone! ;- )

I will agree with Les Fret about most everything, except I don't find the 'both' position is lower in volume, but it does have a very different, 'scooped' sound, due to the pickups being out of phase, which is typical of J-style basses. (And Stratocasters, where I love that 'in between' sound.) The output on my passive bass is certainly low, lower than the SS Jaguar it's replacing, however the sound is more defined...as well as the pickups matching far better than they do on the Jag.

Appreciate your comments MrWalker, here and in the other thead. The frets are particularly nice, aren't they? Also interested in your comment that the bass is a bit heavy for a small one, as mine is too. My buddy at the shop wasn't surprised though, due to what a chunk of mahogany it is. Let me know if you measure yours!

Yes, the fretwork is very, very good! And the bass is on the heavy side, but I love it! Feels substantial!

Just to be clear: with "toyish" I didn't mean the quality of the bass. It is just that the short scale feels toyish to me. More guitar than bass like. I tend to play more fast and high guitar like stuff and less bottom lines on a short scale. I think medium scale and long scale are more to my liking.



Yes you are right it is more scooped. But on jazz basses I never noticed such a big difference in impact in the middle position (both pickups engaged). In fact on most jazz basses I prefer the sound of both pickups together but not on the SWB. Somehow the sound doesn't match the sound of the pickups soloed (position 1 and 3 of switch). Also it seems to be less clear and more dull.

Also want to add two things. I have the natural ash version but I don't find the bass heavy as someone said before. I don't see the option natural mahogany on their site by the way.

And I noticed when changing strings that the black bridge saddles are not fixed in the bridge. So they fall out when changing strings. Be careful not to loose the saddles when changing strings.

Ah, I understand what you mean about toyish, then. That is what I refer to as miniature. this is the first shortscale the doesn't feel that way to me. I had a friend visit the other day, and he had the same reaction. It feels like a full size bass.

The weight may be one of the reasons, and the smaller body size, too... I don't know. I just know I feel different about playing this than any other shortscale I've tried before.

There should be a set screw on the front of the saddle to lock down the black saddle piece. In my opinion, the bridge units are the biggest (and almost only) bad thing about this bass. I had to swap out the front screws for screws with a flat head to be able to get the intonation right without messing up the action.

 

[MrWalker]

Hmmm... Under "additional information" it says that body wood is either mahogany or ash, but it's not possible to select mahogany anywhere, as you point out. Usually I'd trust the ordering selection more than the text, though, so maybe the mahogany is discontinued??
Saw on their web site that there is a deluxe version coming, though. Trans finishes on quilt tops, or matt walnut it says, and emg pickups! So may be more good things coming along??

 

[Les Fret]

ok, cool!

One other thing I forgot to mention in my review: when you don't have the volume control fully open or closed there is an increase in hum. I have the passive version. When you dial the volume a bit (or more) back it's not as quiet as the fully open position. Do you notice this as well?

 

[MrWalker]

Will check later on

 

[Bunk McNulty]

I put up a separate review.

I took it out for its second gig Friday night. One thing that became abundantly clear: This is a tone monster. I had a hard time getting my head wrapped around the idea that relatively low-output pickups could deliver such a huge sound, but the proof was in the playing. Our #2 sound guy, who is also a bass player, went outside the club, came back in and said "I can hear the drums, the vocals, and you!" He's one of these guys who thinks short-scales must be toys. He was subbing for my the next night, and at the end of the gig asked "Can I take your micro-bass home with me tonight and use it tomorrow?" I pointed out that it had only 4 strings (He plays a Lakland 5).

I was also a bit nonplussed at the weight--mine is also 9 lbs.--but it's no different from my 34" so I'm not particularly upset about that. I still love my Lakland 44-64 custom, but this little guy has a lot to love. I still have to get used to the ergonomics. I got a Reunion Blues wool strap, which takes care of the slight case of neck-dive. And while this may sound odd, I'm still a bit disoriented at having 24 frets instead of 20. There are a few times when I need to go above the 12th, and for the moment, anyway, each time is an adventure.

 

[Chicago Al]

Awesome!

On the weight...Bunk says his is 9 lbs and it's an ash body. Are you sure about that, Bunk? I only ask because I initially asked for an black one, which was a special request for the early-2017 batch, and later changed my mind; Stephen Chown said no problem as the painted ones were mahogany anyway.

In any case we've got 2 or 3 basses that are all 'heavier' than expected (though by no means boat anchors), while the website says 7 1/2 lbs, and I was wondering about that discrepancy.

But then I realized--those are British pounds and of course the British pound has lost value since the Brexit vote. That must be it!

 

[Bunk McNulty]

Awesome!

On the weight...Bunk says his is 9 lbs and it's an ash body. Are you sure about that, Bunk? I only ask because I initially asked for an black one, which was a special request for the early-2017 batch, and later changed my mind; Stephen Chown said no problem as the painted ones were mahogany anyway.

In any case we've got 2 or 3 basses that are all 'heavier' than expected (though by no means boat anchors), while the website says 7 1/2 lbs, and I was wondering about that discrepancy.

But then I realized--those are British pounds and of course the British pound has lost value since the Brexit vote. That must be it!

It's painted, so I don't know!

 

[Kerplunk]

I have the natural ash version but I don't find the bass heavy as someone said before. I don't see the option natural mahogany on their site by the way.

Hmmm... Under "additional information" it says that body wood is either mahogany or ash, but it's not possible to select mahogany anywhere, as you point out. Usually I'd trust the ordering selection more than the text, though, so maybe the mahogany is discontinued??
Saw on their web site that there is a deluxe version coming, though. Trans finishes on quilt tops, or matt walnut it says, and emg pickups! So may be more good things coming along??

I've ordered the Ash version, so I'm hoping it comes in around that 7-5 pound mark.

I would summise that the mohogany versions are coming in overweight as one reason for their discontinuance, and I have seen a couple of mahoganies where, the join was so obvious, Scott sold them on at a discount. Perhaps another reason.

 

[chowny]

I would summise that the mohogany versions are coming in overweight as one reason for their discontinuance, and I have seen a couple of mahoganies where, the join was so obvious, Scott sold them on at a discount. Perhaps another reason.

This mismatched ones were made when they were still being made in China. This isn't so much a problem any more with the new production facilities in India.

The main reason mahogany was offered was to offer a different finish to the Ash. (Originally only Mahogany and Ash natural finishes were available).

We don't have an issue with different finishes any more - offering a few painted and natural finishes.

So with that in mind the primary reason it's not currently available was a difficulty getting a timely and reliable supply of Mahogany to our production facilities in India.

We will probably still offer Mahogany periodically when it's available - but will do it as limited runs.

It was far more important that we established a regular and reliable flow of stock so that people wouldn't have to wait too long for their instruments.

There should be a set screw on the front of the saddle to lock down the black saddle piece. In my opinion, the bridge units are the biggest (and almost only) bad thing about this bass. I had to swap out the front screws for screws with a flat head to be able to get the intonation right without messing up the action.

There's a few reason for the choice of bridge - first is that they allow us to set the string spacing to anything we want - instead of being locked to 19/20mm like most OEM bridges. They allow both through - and to bridge - stringing. Which is nice to give people the choice. And they also reduce sympathetic vibration by being seperate - and this means for example that chords sound really clearly defined.

I've taken your comments about the screws on board and will talk to the factory about this. Although we setup each and every bass - we don't set the action super low. So this wasn't something we'd come across yet.

There's always a million decisions to make about parts, wood, specs, strings, maths, economics and so forth. It's exhausting. We try and get the most of of it, squeeze the prices as hard as we can. And eventually you just have to stick a flag in the ground and head into production.

I keep meaning to blog or vlog about what it's like running a small bass company. But I never seem to get time.

On that note - Thanks to everybody for the largely positive comments. It's an amazing feeling pouring so much effort into something, stepping back and discovering that people really love what you've made.

Feedback is of course always welcome - good or bad.

Take it easy.

 

[MrWalker]

There's a few reason for the choice of bridge - first is that they allow us to set the string spacing to anything we want - instead of being locked to 19/20mm like most OEM bridges. They allow both through - and to bridge - stringing. Which is nice to give people the choice. And they also reduce sympathetic vibration by being seperate - and this means for example that chords sound really clearly defined.

I've taken your comments about the screws on board and will talk to the factory about this. Although we setup each and every bass - we don't set the action super low. So this wasn't something we'd come across yet.

There's always a million decisions to make about parts, wood, specs, strings, maths, economics and so forth. It's exhausting. We try and get the most of of it, squeeze the prices as hard as we can. And eventually you just have to stick a flag in the ground and head into production.

I keep meaning to blog or vlog about what it's like running a small bass company. But I never seem to get time.

On that note - Thanks to everybody for the largely positive comments. It's an amazing feeling pouring so much effort into something, stepping back and discovering that people really love what you've made.

Feedback is of course always welcome - good or bad.

Take it easy.

I guess not having the time to make a vlog or blog is an indication about what it is like to run a small bass company By all measures, you are doing an excellent job! Thanks for the answer!

The bridge selection makes sense, and for the price it's hardly anyone who blames you for going for a solution like these. The screw issue is definitely an easy fix, so that shouldn't throw anyone off. And the only thing I don't like with the bridge design are the two set screws and the accuracy of setting the intonation. But once things are set, they are set. So it shouldn't be a major issue. And since we are individualists, we can always swap the bridge for an aftermarket one should we be so inclined.

The bass is awesome as is. No discussion about that. Thanks for your work!!!

 

[chowny]

I can give you a sneaky preview of the SWB Pro if you like ;-)

 

[MrWalker]

Of course we like!

 

[Kerplunk]

I don't know if I want to know. Will it give me buyers remorse? Orlrighty then, give us the sneaky.