24 frets vs. 21 frets

[beelzelboss]

I am a little confused by this, so maybe someone can clarify, but when you have a neck, lets say its a 34". On one bass it will have 21 frets, but on another bass it will have 24 frets, while both being on the same 34" neck. The 21 fretted bass must have wider frets then, because there are less frets per space.
Am I right in thinking this way? Or am I missing something?

[Jim Nazium]

No. 34" is the scale length, which is the distance from the nut to the bridge.

[pin_head_47]

With all standard basses, the fret distances will be the same regardless of the number of frets it has. If they weren't, your notes would be all out intonation (out of tune). On a 34" scale bass, the distance from the bridge saddle to the fret determines the pitch, and will always be the same on any bass. The reason that one bass can have more frets is because the neck and fingerboard is longer. You could, in theory, put a longer, 24 fret neck on a bass made for a 21 fret neck, but then you would have to move the bridge to compensate, since the distance between the nut and bridge would have to stay the same.

[slyjoe]

Not true - see Warmoth extended fingerboards for example. You can put a 24 fret, 34" scale neck on a standard 34" scale bass. The neck isn't longer - the fingerboard just extends past the end of the neck.

[beelzelboss]

Ohh, I get it now! Thankyou guys! It makes sense, the 34" part was throwing me off. Thanks

[pin_head_47]

Yeah, I meant to include the part about about extended fingerboards, I guess I either forgot or got lazy... Probably the latter. Thanks for bringing it up.

[MyWifeBoris]

I myself don't really see the difference as you usually don't go that far. D:

[epy]

Same scale length means that the frets are all the same spacing and such. The 24 fret neck just has more wood coming further down into the body or closer to the bridge to allow for three more frets to be placed.

[mulambo]

but the distance of the bridge saddle is not fixed. It changes from string to string, to proper tuning. So, am i wrong, or there is not a "34", or any fixed scales, and this meausure changes a litlle from the "B" string, to the "G" String, for example? There is any ideal lenght to the string saddles according to the strings?

[FunkMetalBass]

Originally Posted by mulambo

but the distance of the bridge saddle is not fixed. It changes from string to string, to proper tuning. So, am i wrong, or there is not a "34", or any fixed scales, and this meausure changes a litlle from the "B" string, to the "G" String, for example? There is any ideal lenght to the string saddles according to the strings?

Your strings all behave differently as they vibrate. This is why the bridge saddles are moved back farther for the low strings and closer for the high strings - even though the nut and frets are perfectly parallel.

"Ideal length" is subjective to the player. Some players prefer the fanned frets (like Dingwall Basses) because it has a more consistent tone and tension, others like the wide tonal differences parallel frets and non-balanced strings have to offer. There is no "ideal" length, except the one that allows your string to be perfectly intonated.

[jfortune]

I sometimes find myself wishing for a 25th fret. I'm not what you call a "pocket player"

[walterw]

Originally Posted by mulambo

but the distance of the bridge saddle is not fixed. It changes from string to string, to proper tuning. So, am i wrong, or there is not a "34", or any fixed scales, and this meausure changes a litlle from the "B" string, to the "G" String, for example? There is any ideal lenght to the string saddles according to the strings?

the distance from the front edge of the nut to the center of the 12th fret on a "regular" bass is 17". double that and you get 34", the theoretical scale length.

the strings will all intonate at slightly longer than 34", with the skinniest and tightest strings coming the closest to 34" and the bigger, looser strings needing more length to compensate for the pitch rise due to their being stretched while pressing them down to a fret.

[Tusec]

I think the main reason you have to compensate the saddles of the lower strings more is that thicker strings don't conform as well to the ideal string model. An ideal string is perfectly flexible and can "hinge" perfectly at the takeoff point. But fatter strings resist flexing, so the vibration arc actually begins a little ways out from the takeoff point, which shortens the effective string length. You compensate for this by moving the saddle back, lengthening the string. Even if you have super low action and a super light touch so that your fretting pressure doesn't affect the pitch, you'll still need to move your saddles back more on the lower strings.

[walterw]

Originally Posted by Tusec

...fatter strings resist flexing, so the vibration arc actually begins a little ways out from the takeoff point, which shortens the effective string length. You compensate for this by moving the saddle back, lengthening the string...

hmmm...

i like it!