Author Topic: Dingwall T bird  (Read 3061 times)

gweimer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
    • My BandMix Site
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2009, 12:12:53 AM »
To each his own. I'll take normal scale length any day.

If I hadn't done the Bettie Page fanfret project, I would agree with you.  It really has been an amazing bass.  It may look like a Fender, but with the mahogany body, it has a lot of Gibson personality.  Imagine a bass with the low end of a Thunderbird, and the high end of an EB-3.
Telling tales of drunkenness and cruelty

FrankieTbird

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 537
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #16 on: March 27, 2009, 02:51:33 AM »
What's the point? ???

uwe

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21514
  • Enabler ...
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #17 on: March 27, 2009, 03:19:39 AM »
The point is that each string has a in theory a different optimal scale though what is optimal is of course also a matter of taste. Me, I like short scale on D and G, but a relatively tight E, hence my preference there for either long or even extra long scale (from my personal experience, however, the D string on an extra long scale suffers because it becomes too tight). The slanted or fanned frets on a Dingwall are not for show, they are a consequence from the fact that each string has a different scale on them. Those instruments should be more accurately referred to as "multi-scale".

It's not the novelty look that intrigues me, it's the combo of a tight E with a very bendable G string.
We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

Barklessdog

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4473
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #18 on: March 27, 2009, 04:41:20 AM »
As Uwe pointed out the fan fret design actually works pretty well for the tbird upper access issues without compromising the body design.

Nice to see you here Jim, hope things are picking up for you.

FrankieTbird

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 537
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #19 on: March 27, 2009, 05:36:14 AM »
Why not just tailor each individual sting guage to your preference?

uwe

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 21514
  • Enabler ...
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #20 on: March 27, 2009, 06:30:18 AM »
It's not the same thing (to me). I prefer a soft thick string to a soft thin one. The sound of a thin string just isn't the same. The harmonics change too with a different scale (not with a different gauge).
We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

bassvirtuoso

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 346
  • My God, it's full of chrome!
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #21 on: March 27, 2009, 07:02:37 AM »
Think anyone could talk Sheldon into using Lull's pickups instead of his own? I'm doubting it since he makes all of his own pickups, but then again he does use Aguilar preamps (albeit modified).
-Dave

German-American Chrome Fan Club Member #666

Barklessdog

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4473
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #22 on: March 27, 2009, 07:20:31 AM »
I dont see why not since they are basically custom instruments anyway

Dave W

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 22259
  • Got time to breathe, got time for music
    • View Profile
Re: Dingwall T bird
« Reply #23 on: March 27, 2009, 09:03:52 AM »
I understand the point of it, I just like things better with every string the same scale length. I don't buy into the notion that there's an optimum scale length for each string tuning. And I don't like the aesthetics either.

That's why I'm glad we have choices.