1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

30 1/2" scale vs 34"

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by ollielangfan, Dec 12, 2005.

  1. ollielangfan


    Apr 3, 2005
    Nampa, ID
    Well I was looking at the smaller scaled fretboards on some of the basses out there like the SG (30 1/2") or the Mustang (30") and I was wondering if anyone with experience would give me some input on the subject. It looks pretty intreaging having the frets closer together. To me at least it looks like I'd be able to play a lot faster and cleaner. Any advice would really help. thanks.
  2. Minger


    Mar 15, 2004
    Rochester, NY
    I don't mind playing either way, but some people will complain about the lack of tension - same thing with B strings on 34" basses I guess.
  3. StarMountainKid


    Nov 6, 2005
    I had a nice Mustang in the '80s. It was easier to play faster, but lacked the solid low frequencies of a 34" scale bass. I could never rattle windows with it, but it was fun to play.
  4. bongomania

    bongomania Gold Supporting Member Commercial User

    Oct 17, 2005
    PDX, OR
    owner, OVNIFX and OVNILabs
    If you search on "shortscale" or "short scale" here in the forums, there is a lot of discussion to read through. Personally I love the playability of shorter scales, but it's also true that the E-string can be a bit flabby sounding. Certain builders have done better than others. My favorite "production" (non-custom-made) shortscales are the old Guild JSII and the recent (but discontinued) Ampeg AMB-1. Lately I have preferred 32" scale as a good compromise between easier playing and tighter bass.