• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Does scale length really make a difference?

Huge

Huge

Hell is full of musical amateurs. Like me.
Dec 2, 2005
572
57
Edmonton
#1
A lot of people post about floppy B strings and want to know what they can do to overcome it. It seems as though the conventional wisdom is that a 35" scale bass will provide a tauter feeling string.

Now, I have a 34" 5 string and I noticed a rather large difference in feel when changing to different strings (XL's to Halfrounds in my case). My scale length didn't change but the construction of the strings did, and all of the strings feel much tauter. I decided to take a look at whether or not scale length really mattered in terms of how strings feel. I found this article:

http://www.liutaiomottola.com/myth/perception.htm

It's written by an engineer\luthier and has some interesting conclusions. I think it's an interesting read for anyone considering getting a 35" 5 banger only because they've read that it will offer a better feeling B string.

Now I'm not suggesting that those who have claim that a 35" scale makes a positive difference are wrong, I just wonder if there's more at play than the scale length.
EDIT: I need to reword the last part of this sentence. It should read: I wonder if scale length has anything to do with it at all.

Perhaps this should be in a different forum, but I see the question a lot in this one, I thought people might get some use out of it.
 
#2
Of course there's more in play than ONLY the scale length.

The weight and construction of the string plays a great role, as does the stiffness of the neck itself.

So for a good B string you should get the whole thing:
35" scale,
strings suited for the job,
solid neck construction.

In my opinion of course ;)
 
#3
Huge said:
... Now I'm not suggesting that those who have claim that a 35" scale makes a positive difference are wrong, I just wonder if there's more at play than the scale length...
Click to expand...

Yes scale length makes a difference but that doesn't mean all other factors such as string construction should be disregarded. I also play 30"-31" scale and there's a noticeable difference in feel depending upon make and/or manufacture of strings.
 
#5
Well, it makes the vibrating part of the string longer. And by doing so, makes the string tension higher, if same strings and same construction is used.

Physically? well provided the string tension rises linear with longer scale length the difference is 1/35th.
 
#6
I'm not a 5'er guy, but I know there's a huge difference between the tone and feel of the exact same gauge strings tuned to pitch on a 30" bass and 34.5" bass.

In my experince, longer scale == brighter (more definition), shorter scale == warmer (muddier, in a good way).

Gibson developed the RD Artist guitar (and bass) as a longer than usual scale to increase brightness, and baritone-necked guitars are longer-scaled so bass strings don't get muddy.

But yeah, there are probably 1000 factors in play with designing a pleasing B string on a 5'er.
 
#8
Huge said:
Not according to the article linked in the OP.
Click to expand...

Read it again:

"... Bob built two simple demonstration “necks”. The first had a number of identical strings but with different scale lengths, the scale lengths varying from 23” to 26”. All strings were tuned to the same pitch, so according to the relationship between tension, pitch, mass per unit length, and speaking length, the strings with the longer scale lengths will be under greater tension than the shorter ones. You can take it as fact that this must be so (they are called laws of physics after all) ... Again, let me make this clear. The issue here is not that the longer strings were under greater tension – that is a physical fact..."
 
#10
Huge said:
Not according to the article linked in the OP.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you re-read the article, the author states that the tension difference IS real- it's a simple matter of physics, but in Bob Bennedetto's experiments, people couldn't distinguish the difference in terms of how taught the strings FELT.

The tonal difference (brighter and faster attack with higher tension) is also well-documented and well-known, but Bennedetto was looking at feel, not tone.

Regardless, it seems to me that this thread is already illustrating the huge problems you face when looking at this issue. As musicians (as opposed to physicists) most of us use highly imprecise and subjective language to talk about sound. We're only a few posts in, and already we've got one conversation about the effects of scale length on tone, mingling with a separate one about scale length vs tension/feel...
 
#12
Diogenes said:
Read it again:

"... Bob built two simple demonstration “necks”. The first had a number of identical strings but with different scale lengths, the scale lengths varying from 23” to 26”. All strings were tuned to the same pitch, so according to the relationship between tension, pitch, mass per unit length, and speaking length, the strings with the longer scale lengths will be under greater tension than the shorter ones. You can take it as fact that this must be so (they are called laws of physics after all) ... Again, let me make this clear. The issue here is not that the longer strings were under greater tension – that is a physical fact..."
Click to expand...

Whoops. My bad.

Sorry, I was think of tension as compliance, not actual tension.

steve_rolfeca said:
Actually, if you re-read the article, the author states that the tension difference IS real- it's a simple matter of physics, but in Bob Bennedetto's experiments, people couldn't distinguish the difference in terms of how taught the strings FELT.

The tonal difference (brighter and faster attack with higher tension) is also well-documented and well-known, but Bennedetto was looking at feel, not tone.

Regardless, it seems to me that this thread is already illustrating the huge problems you face when looking at this issue. As musicians (as opposed to physicists) most of us use highly imprecise and subjective language to talk about sound. We're only a few posts in, and already we've got one conversation about the effects of scale length on tone, mingling with a separate one about scale length vs tension/feel...
Click to expand...

What I bolded there is what I'm talking about. It is often stated that a 35" scale will have a tauter, less floppy feeling B string than a 34" scale. So if a player can't feel the difference, why suggest a longer scale as a solution to a floppy string?
 
#13
Huge said:
... What I bolded there is what I'm talking about. It is often stated that a 35" scale will have a tauter, less floppy feeling B string than a 34" scale. So if a player can't feel the difference, why suggest a longer scale as a solution to a floppy string?
Click to expand...

Yea, that's a can of worms alright especially when the difference in scale length is only 1" and you include the imperfect "human factor". That's probably why so many discussions regarding "the 34" vs 35" B string matter" end in "agreeing to disagree" or "YMMV" summations... well among the more adult of the posters anyway. ;)
 
#14
Huge said:
Whoops. My bad.
What I bolded there is what I'm talking about. It is often stated that a 35" scale will have a tauter, less floppy feeling B string than a 34" scale. So if a player can't feel the difference, why suggest a longer scale as a solution to a floppy string?
Click to expand...

I'd say the reason one suggests it is because if you have a longer scale there is less CHANCE the B will be floppy than other wise. I've got a herd of pretty decent basses. Some have 34" scales. Some 35". And from that I can say with some assurance, that anyone who says there is a HUGE difference between them is grossly exaggerating. I've got great B strings on BOTH 34" and 35" scales. I can't feel any difference due to scale length. There ARE however HUGE differences between basses. A great B string seems to come on a great bass. Scale length doesn't seem to make much difference. And certainly not for "feel".

And another thing. I've heard guys going on and on about "I've got small hands and can't play a 35" bass." Nonsense. The difference of that one inch spread over all the frets is totally unnoticeable! What you WILL notice with a 35" scale, however, is the big hassle in trying to buy long strings to fit your bass in the brand/gauge you want! People do tell me that with a fretless the extra inch throws them off, but I don't own any 35" fretless basses so I can't say about that.
 
#15
If you want a taut feel, headless basses do approximate the first ideal scenario covered in the article, where there is little string beyond the nut and bridge to stretch.

I'm not sure if the article is correct, though. 34" and 35" Bs don't feel drastically different but I can certainly feel the compliance difference...
 
#16
I'm not a 5'er guy either, but I play 30" and 34" scale bases interchangeably...and my new Gretsch is a 32". To me there's no significant difference in sound based on scale length - I can get what I want out of either scale.

I think everyone makes too big a deal out of this. My feeling is that there's more difference between basses than between scale lengths.
 
#18
Pilgrim said:
I'm not a 5'er guy either, but I play 30" and 34" scale bases interchangeably...and my new Gretsch is a 32". To me there's no significant difference in sound based on scale length - I can get what I want out of either scale.

I think everyone makes too big a deal out of this. My feeling is that there's more difference between basses than between scale lengths.
Click to expand...

+1 I have a standard 34" scale Jazz bass and a CIJ 32" scale Jazz with the same strings you can not hear any difference in tone.
 
#20
hdracer said:
+1 I have a standard 34" scale Jazz bass and a CIJ 32" scale Jazz with the same strings you can not hear any difference in tone.
Click to expand...

No offense, but this kind of generalization irks me.

There are lots of valid reasons why YOU might not hear any difference between dissimilar instruments, but regardless of the cause, you can't generalize your experience onto other people.

I can walk into a music store, and hear noticeable differences between a wall full of supposedly identical Fenders.

Not saying that my ears are better than yours, just that I've seen enough examples over the years, to know that things that are near-inaudible to one person, can be a big deal to someone else.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back