Clarky Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Strangely for me I rather like the look of that. Would never buy one though - I'm sh*t enough with simple parallel frets. Give me those slanted ones, especially should I ever dare sneaking up the dusty end (oo err) and there would be cats wailing across the South of England Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 The fanned frets are easy. Even a very average player like me can cope with them after about 10-15 seconds. Actually from the playing position they make a lot more sense then when viewed from the front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RhysP Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1322590413' post='1453282'] ......I see it as a dilution of the things that made the Dingwall concept appealing to me in the first place. [/quote] That's pretty much how I felt when I saw it. Edited November 29, 2011 by RhysP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thodrik Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I don't mind it. At least it brings another aspect to the usual Precision bass discussions: 1) Do you like Precisions? 2) How much does it weigh? 3) Do you want slanty frets with that? I think complaining about another Fender clone is a bit strange, as so many of the boutique makers base their designs on Fenders. I would love it if Dingwall did a take on the Gibson EB3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Now that its established that it was just a mistake that the pic dissapeared from the Dingwall forum and that Sheldon Dingwall himself has put the pic back. I belive its ok to put the bass back on show here. [IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v212/DrSativa/Super20P20full20e.jpg[/IMG] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swanbrook Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Pretty cool, but hey if you dont like it don't buy it ! Just don't post a stupid long reply using every big word you know, managed to read the first two lines and went back to playing my bass Why is the neck 34 on the super J and P bass ? I have grown to love the 37" on the ABII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Wazoo Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 Dave the scale is 35" on the Super J / Super P. Not a lot of difference between that and an ABZ / ABII considering the Super series has 22 frets and not 24. The other difference on the 5 strings model is the spacing at the bridge where the Super J / P are have 19mm spacing vs the ABZ / ABII which have 18mm spacing. It all works out pretty comfortable and when you swap one for the other, you don't really notice a lot of difference but I must admit the 19mm spacing makes playing at the bridge a lot neater and cleaner with the strings a little bit further apart there is no risk of plucking the next string by mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 [quote name='Grand Wazoo' timestamp='1322612636' post='1453666'] Dave the scale is 35" on the Super J / Super P. Not a lot of difference between that and an ABZ / ABII considering the Super series has 22 frets and not 24. The other difference on the 5 strings model is the spacing at the bridge where the Super J / P are have 19mm spacing vs the ABZ / ABII which have 18mm spacing. It all works out pretty comfortable and when you swap one for the other, you don't really notice a lot of difference but I must admit the 19mm spacing makes playing at the bridge a lot neater and cleaner with the strings a little bit further apart there is no risk of plucking the next string by mistake. [/quote] Sounds about right. I have problems up near the dusty end, thats probably why its so dusty. Hopefully i'll be able to try one in the Spring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musicman20 Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 The trouble is, I like Sheldon's work and have a lot of respect for his basses, but in my eyes, a P is the most simple of basses ever. No fancy work, just a simple P pickup, 4 strings, (5 if you dare) and rock on. I still revert back to a P, and Ive tried loads of different variants. For me, The Fender nails it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musicman20 Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 The caveat to the above is basically alcohol and night out. I would still like to try a Super P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charic Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 I don't mind it but the Thunderbird sketches looked better IMO, complimented the styling more. The could try adding a little bit of a slant to the scratchplate to point out the angles a bit as well. As for saying the Dingwalls come across sterile, that is a very different experience to what I had! The SJ5 has a huge amount of balls to it and seemed to me to actually be quite comparable but preferable to a Stingray 5. I've not had a chance to try any of their other basses but first chance I get I will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Wazoo Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 These? [IMG]http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r200/xt660/Tbird.jpg[/IMG] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Wazoo Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 [quote name='Musicman20' timestamp='1322618984' post='1453690'] The caveat to the above is basically alcohol and night out. I would still like to try a Super P. [/quote] Oh and.... you're still a..... [IMG]http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r200/xt660/6abd9b20.jpg[/IMG] but we love u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charic Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 [quote name='Grand Wazoo' timestamp='1322634704' post='1453704'] These? [/quote] The top one of the two just compliments it all so well I'll have it in the brightest white you can find with a blank plate maple fretboard and black blocks please Do you have change for £100? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheldon Dingwall Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) [quote name='noelk27' timestamp='1322573382' post='1452804'] You didn't miss out on anything special - another Precision bass body rip-off, just with the as expected varying string length's Dingwall approach. Designed by someone with zero original thought. [/quote] I can agree on the P-bass body rip-off part. I'd argue the original thought comment though;) [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1322577817' post='1452971'] IMO the OP is being a little over-sensitive. I can also see where noel27k is coming from. I personally find it rather disappointing, that an otherwise interesting bass manufacturer like Dingwall feel that it is necessary to "dress up" their ideas in the rather dull and unimaginative J and P clone guises. [/quote] If you take a closer look I'm sure you'll find lots under the hood that's interesting too. The answer to the question of why is simple. More than building basses we're in the business of building tools for musicians to create music with. In that respect some tools just work better for certain applications than others. In the case of basses there are a lot of styles of music that call for a more traditional looking and sounding instrument like a P. Speaking of traditional vs original styles can anyone name me 10 violins that don't look like a Strad? Am I ever glad I don't build violins! [quote name='noelk27' timestamp='1322587795' post='1453214'] (and not view it as a cynical marketing ploy, or an exercise in pandering). But, does the bass-buying marketplace really need yet another Fender clone from Dingwall? Personally, while observing that the design concept is well executed, and the instruments built and finished to a high standard, I found the sound to be somewhat sterile, which left me wondering if the execution was one of those more science over substance achievements, and if it's not the inherent "dissonances" of the imperfect "tuning" of the traditional fretted design which makes it a more natural listening experience for the human ear. The claimed characteristics for the concept of varying scale length just didn't communicate to my ear, nor did the feel of the instrument offer back anything more to my touch than the other more traditional instruments I own, and play.[/quote] I prefer to call it responding to our customers requests vs pandering. I can agree that viewed from the outside in, the marketplace overall doesn't need another P. However when viewed from the inside out, the Dingwall customer base does. We have several thousand customers who appreciate what we bring to the table, a good percentage of them would love a P but with our particular take on it. By the way, thanks for the kind words on concept, build quality and for at least giving us a test. The feel is a personal thing. It works for some and not others. Sorry the tone didn't work for you. I suspect the tone quality that you find "sterile" would be what we call "transparent" and "even". It's been our experience that all other things being equal a bass with these qualities is easier to fit in the mix and communicates more effectively to the audience than a bass with less balance and more let's say "personality". I'd be interested to see if your opinion changed once you played one at rehearsal or live. Someone was asking about scale. We shortened the scale of our Fender style basses to a. create a slightly faster decay compared to our long-scale basses, b. warm up the G-string tone and c. allow more string choices as we felt the Fender style basses would find there way into more rootsy styles of music where flats and nickel strings (that we don't currently offer) would be desired. Edited November 30, 2011 by Sheldon Dingwall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichF Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) what a generous and constructive response! This bass is not my thing but i think a Dingwall P is likely to be more interesting than a lot of the rest of the P-clones out there, for some of the reasons given. Let the market decide. Edited November 30, 2011 by RichF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Kudos on you Mr Dingwall for posting. I can understand the need of customers for a P type bass, pup placement and so on, something about your one doesn't suit it to my eye as much as your other models (Wazoo has some great photos), looking at it it's something to do with the ..... hold on.... ill try something The thunderbird type one however is almost perfect looking. But I would imagine harder to sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 [quote name='Sheldon Dingwall' timestamp='1322691030' post='1454679'] I can agree on the P-bass body rip-off part. I'd argue the original thought comment though;) If you take a closer look I'm sure you'll find lots under the hood that's interesting too. The answer to the question of why is simple. More than building basses we're in the business of building tools for musicians to create music with. In that respect some tools just work better for certain applications than others. In the case of basses there are a lot of styles of music that call for a more traditional looking and sounding instrument like a P. Speaking of traditional vs original styles can anyone name me 10 violins that don't look like a Strad? Am I ever glad I don't build violins! I prefer to call it responding to our customers requests vs pandering. I can agree that viewed from the outside in, the marketplace overall doesn't need another P. However when viewed from the inside out, the Dingwall customer base does. We have several thousand customers who appreciate what we bring to the table, a good percentage of them would love a P but with our particular take on it. By the way, thanks for the kind words on concept, build quality and for at least giving us a test. The feel is a personal thing. It works for some and not others. Sorry the tone didn't work for you. I suspect the tone quality that you find "sterile" would be what we call "transparent" and "even". It's been our experience that all other things being equal a bass with these qualities is easier to fit in the mix and communicates more effectively to the audience than a bass with less balance and more let's say "personality". I'd be interested to see if your opinion changed once you played one at rehearsal or live. Someone was asking about scale. We shortened the scale of our Fender style basses to a. create a slightly faster decay compared to our long-scale basses, b. warm up the G-string tone and c. allow more string choices as we felt the Fender style basses would find there way into more rootsy styles of music where flats and nickel strings (that we don't currently offer) would be desired. [/quote] the thing that looked odd to me was the back bit of the scratch plate. My two pence..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Grand Wazoo' timestamp='1322634704' post='1453704'] These? [IMG]http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r200/xt660/Tbird.jpg[/IMG] [/quote] Oh my Lord - this might be just what I've been looking for for a long time now. A four string version of the top one in a nice wood with two pups. Blimey. Edited November 30, 2011 by Muzz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charic Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 [quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1322697302' post='1454773'] the thing that looked odd to me was the back bit of the scratch plate. My two pence..... [/quote] Yeah, I agree this sits much better. Exactly what I was trying to get across Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFRC Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 [quote name='charic' timestamp='1322722928' post='1454828'] Yeah, I agree this sits much better. Exactly what I was trying to get across [/quote] woo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geddys nose Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 [quote name='Grand Wazoo' timestamp='1322634704' post='1453704'] These? [/quote] Top pic with 2 PU's in white- Put me down for one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charic Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 [quote name='Geddys nose' timestamp='1322737467' post='1455009'] Top pic with 2 PU's in white- Put me down for one! [/quote] A man of taste I see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geddys nose Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 [quote name='charic' timestamp='1322739798' post='1455074'] A man of taste I see [/quote] Great minds! Love offset bass guitars I'm up to 3 of them would love No 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swanbrook Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 [quote name='Geddys nose' timestamp='1322737467' post='1455009'] Top pic with 2 PU's in white- Put me down for one! [/quote] Dear god that is fvckin ace ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.