Friday, 22 August 2008
  0 Replies
  2.9K Visits
0
Votes
Undo
  Subscribe
Hey guys
13 years ago
·
#10996
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Jjango":2xyq1qlv]SPYD3R and FRB, is this what you meant? [img:2xyq1qlv]http://xs130.xs.to/xs130/08352/quilt_burst_fd3981.jpg[/img:2xyq1qlv] [/quote:2xyq1qlv] that's what i'm talkin' 'bout!! thanx Jjango... so Sheldon.... i guess you already have the next Dingwall model, [b:2xyq1qlv]The SP5[/b:2xyq1qlv]
13 years ago
·
#10997
0
Votes
Undo
Actually both pu's are the same. The FD3 is a reverse split P under the soapbar. So the last one has identical pu's w/a different look. Jango can post an SJP with the reverse split coil?
13 years ago
·
#10998
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Brim":3uu3n08p]Just had a thought Jjango, shouldn't the body of the SP5 be a bit more off-set. I know traditionally (Fender) the P-bass was symmetrical and the J-bass was offset. But, in keeping with Dingwall "design", shouldn't the body be at least a bit offset in order to catch the angle of the bridge more. Here is a reference of Smallmouthbass's new SJ5 - see the exaggerate offset: [b:3uu3n08p]OR[/b:3uu3n08p]....do you guys think the SP5 should have a symmetrical body shape??[/quote:3uu3n08p] Say whaaaa? I'm looking at four of my P basses now....it looks like Jj nailed it to me. If you change the shape at all, then it's not true to the original vibe. Mark
13 years ago
·
#10999
0
Votes
Undo
What would it look like offfset a bit the other way so the body fanned with the bridge? It would be lighter although maybe a little Fenderbirdish. Truthfully, the Pbass shape fits the Dingwall concept better than the J. I really dig the maple neck 5 strings.
13 years ago
·
#11000
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Joe Smithebrger":swi2e0m3]What would it look like offfset a bit the other way so the body fanned with the bridge? It would be lighter although maybe a little Fenderbirdish. Truthfully, the Pbass shape fits the Dingwall concept better than the J. I really dig the maple neck 5 strings.[/quote:swi2e0m3] +1 and the overall length from body to headstock tip would be more compact by a few inches with a traditional P Bass body too. :wink:
13 years ago
·
#11001
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Funkshwey":2i0x5523]Actually both pu's are the same. The FD3 is a reverse split P under the soapbar. So the last one has identical pu's w/a different look. Jango can post an SJP with the reverse split coil?[/quote:2i0x5523] Are you sure? If that is the case, what does this all matter? You'll get nearly identical tone with an AB with FD-3's.
13 years ago
·
#11002
0
Votes
Undo
Judging from my 10yrs experience with Dingwall basses, from all the custom basses I've had materializing through Sheldon's knowledge, expertize and commitment I am SURE that he will come up with a Super P5 pickup that will be even better than the (fantastic) P pickup for the Super PJ 4 I have already been thinking about the Super P5 and Sheldon will start receiving these ideas very very soon. If I could use photoshop it would really help but I have to publicly admit that my photoshop skills are non-existing; I wouldn't be able to save my life, if my life depended on that.
13 years ago
·
#11003
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Jjango"][size=75:21jjcc6e]BLACK = Dingwall [color=green:21jjcc6e]GREEN = Fender[/color:21jjcc6e][/size:21jjcc6e] [img:21jjcc6e]http://xs230.xs.to/xs230/08352/bodies412.jpg[/img:21jjcc6e] [size=75:21jjcc6e]In addition, the bottom cutaway is deeper to give better access to the additional two frets.[/size:21jjcc6e] This necessarily makes the body larger (and heavier), but it is necessary to keep the bridge from going over the edge. Since the P shape does not suffer from this obstacle, it seems (IMO) best to keep the body as close to the classic shape as possible. The P is always touted as the "smaller, lighter" bass when compared to the Jazz. Also
13 years ago
·
#11004
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="fullrangebass":4m81zc9b]I have already been thinking about the Super P5 and Sheldon will start receiving these ideas very very soon.[/quote:4m81zc9b] Aside from his inspiration in building the finest basses in the world, the thing I appreciate most about Sheldon is his willingness to take suggestions from players on how to improve his product. He was even up for a hot pink SJ :). Several forum members have had some of their wants make it to regular production (you know who you are :wink:, but we won't argue about who came up with what first). For Sheldon to do that demonstrates an amazing his comittment to, and trust in, his customers. Bravo, Dr. Wood!!!! As far as the SP, I can't see where there's much left to address. Jjango has just about nailed it. (But, that Fullie guy is a very demanding fellow, so there's no telling what he'll come up with :P) I think a bridge pickup option is a must, and I don't think the 37" B will make it as an option, but I wish it would. Mark
13 years ago
·
#11005
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Funkshwey":1425s3o5]Actually both pu's are the same. The FD3 is a reverse split P under the soapbar. So the last one has identical pu's w/a different look. [/quote:1425s3o5] actually, the humbucker that i mean is more like musicman pickup model, or reverse single coil, CMIIW :?
13 years ago
·
#11006
0
Votes
Undo
I am imagining that the scale length of a potential future SP5 would be the same as the SJ5: 35" to 32". I'm not sure there would be any value in having it the same as the "standard" Dingwalls other than aesthetics. In my opinion, the whole point of having an SJ5 and SP5 is to have a more traditional sound and look, while keeping the added benefit of the fanned frets (and other minor upgrades).
13 years ago
·
#11008
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Smallmouth_Bass":9pm3rjg0]I am imagining that the scale length of a potential future SP5 would be the same as the SJ5: 35" to 32". I'm not sure there would be any value in having it the same as the "standard" Dingwalls other than aesthetics. In my opinion, the whole point of having an SJ5 and SP5 is to have a more traditional sound and look, while keeping the added benefit of the fanned frets (and other minor upgrades).[/quote:9pm3rjg0] Well, the desire for a longer scale is certainly more than asthetical, but I agree it would not be as traditional in spirit. It would be nice to have the option, though. Mark
13 years ago
·
#11009
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Funkshwey":mbl6fwmp][quote="Joe Smithebrger":mbl6fwmp]What would it look like offfset a bit the other way so the body fanned with the bridge? It would be lighter although maybe a little Fenderbirdish. Truthfully, the Pbass shape fits the Dingwall concept better than the J. I really dig the maple neck 5 strings.[/quote:mbl6fwmp] +1 and the overall length from body to headstock tip would be more compact by a few inches with a traditional P Bass body too. :wink:[/quote:mbl6fwmp] Just a quick & dirty mockup: [img:mbl6fwmp]http://xs230.xs.to/xs230/08353/dali_sm511.jpg[/img:mbl6fwmp] In my opinion, it looks like Salvador Dali was given access to the CNC machine. :lol: I don't really care for it.
13 years ago
·
#11010
0
Votes
Undo
Yeah, it looks like it was dropped out of the sixth story window and suffered a big impact. I much prefer the rounded body.
13 years ago
·
#11011
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Smallmouth_Bass":24i8qu01]Yeah, it looks like it was dropped out of the sixth story window and suffered a big impact. I much prefer the rounded body.[/quote:24i8qu01] +1000
13 years ago
·
#11012
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="SPYD3R #9":ax3w93if][quote="Funkshwey":ax3w93if]Actually both pu's are the same. The FD3 is a reverse split P under the soapbar. So the last one has identical pu's w/a different look. [/quote:ax3w93if] actually, the humbucker that i mean is more like musicman pickup model, or reverse single coil, CMIIW :?[/quote:ax3w93if] Something along these lines, perhaps? [img:ax3w93if]http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/3538/quiltburstmmxs6.jpg[/img:ax3w93if]
13 years ago
·
#11013
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="fullrangebass":g8az6n0b]I have already been thinking about the Super P5 and Sheldon will start receiving these ideas very very soon. If I could use photoshop it would really help but I have to publicly admit that my photoshop skills are non-existing; I wouldn't be able to save my life, if my life depended on that.[/quote:g8az6n0b] If you need help ironing out any of the visual details, let me know if I can be of help, FRB.
13 years ago
·
#11014
0
Votes
Undo
Man, I've got to just take a minute to say thanks to Jjango for being so generous with his time and expertise. Hard for me to believe that these fine basses don't really exist (yet :D ). John
13 years ago
·
#11015
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Jjango":1qh6bdkc]Something along these lines, perhaps?[/quote:1qh6bdkc] That is too good.
13 years ago
·
#11016
0
Votes
Undo
[quote="Jjango":1n948j49][quote="Funkshwey":1n948j49][quote="Joe Smithebrger":1n948j49]What would it look like offfset a bit the other way so the body fanned with the bridge? It would be lighter although maybe a little Fenderbirdish. Truthfully, the Pbass shape fits the Dingwall concept better than the J. I really dig the maple neck 5 strings.[/quote:1n948j49] +1 and the overall length from body to headstock tip would be more compact by a few inches with a traditional P Bass body too. :wink:[/quote:1n948j49] Just a quick & dirty mockup: In my opinion, it looks like Salvador Dali was given access to the CNC machine. :lol: I don't really care for it.[/quote:1n948j49] Ugggh, not pretty. Hey, Jj, since were in reverse mode, what would a D-Bird look like, you know, with the neck end of the body also done like a Tbird? Might be a cool model for young rock warriors. Mark
There are no replies made for this post yet.
Be one of the first to reply to this post!