Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
32 vs 34
- Thread starter elteye
- Start date
The problem is, I make everything right here in the USA, in my back yard, with a team of highly skilled luthiers. I use American-made boutique pick-ups. I make my own bridge and tailpiece. I finish the guitars using an old classical/flamenco guitar technique. Use hand-selected woods and prime components. There is simply no way that these instruments would ever be wallet-friendly. I have tried, and learned the hard way that that is not where I can compete.
And for the moment, I will only make four-stringed instruments. The 5 simply will have to wait a while.
You said it. I love a shorter scale because of the way you can reach things you can't on a longer scale (double stops, chords etc.) But the down side is I'm not gonna buy a 4 string anymore.
And a 5 in a shorter scale is going to be a problem. Even the E on my short scale is certainly a lesser tone than my long scale basses.
Which leads me to make this comment: If EVER there was a place where fanned fret was needed is it on a 32" 5 string bass! Decent B and yet close spacing for high notes. Best of both worlds!
IS ANYBODY OUT THERE LISTENING?
I would go with the 32 if it sounded better to you. Your choice though
Oh yea you should have added carrots to the poll, did not vote because carrots was not an option. I really have no personal preferance in scale length. All in how it sounds, feels for me.
I would go for the 32" just because I've wanted one and already have a 34" and specially if it sounded better.
I also prefer the shorter scale. There is definitely a market for a shorter scale, well made, bass guitar. As to tone, shorter scale basses need to include a neck pickup to enable the bassist to get a beefy tone.
My favorite configuration (so far) is a neck humbucker + p-positioned humbucker with separate series/parallel tapping for each. I personally don't really need singlecoil settings.
That configuration will allow for a whole lot of different sounds.
My favorite configuration (so far) is a neck humbucker + p-positioned humbucker with separate series/parallel tapping for each. I personally don't really need singlecoil settings.
That configuration will allow for a whole lot of different sounds.
I'd likely go 34 as I've been pretty happy w/it for 35 years now. I'll admit that part of it would be *grumpy old man, I like 34 so I like 34 BS-ism*
I don't know, is Chris willing to lend me his for a while so I can give you an answer?
Ken
Right in that sweat sub $500 Squier range would be the perfect blend of price and quality for me. If I could find something under a grand I'd be tempted.
I'll give him a callI don't know, is Chris willing to lend me his for a while so I can give you an answer?
Ken
I had a shorty once, and it was easier to play than my 34's", but I felt like I was cheating using it, and it felt like a toy anyway.
All things being equal I'd take the 32" because they fit my build perfectly. I was weaned on 34" so it's not like it's an issue, but 32" is like a hand in glove.
I totally respect what your doing but I'm a hobbyist. What I really need is for someone to send a Cliff Bordwell or a Birdsong to China so it can be reverse engineered and then sold through Rondo.
I like the medium scales. I'm a hobbyist too and I have basses in a spectrum of scales: 26, 30, 32 & 34. My 32 happens to be my main practice bass and I keep the action on it high. It also happens to be a big archtop, so I don't even have to plug her in. She's amplified naturally through her vivacious curves and rather ample bottom. This 32 has a good balance of low register and woody boominess.
Keeping the action high on my 32 has worked out well. That way when I go up to the 34 (with lower action), I'm still pretty comfortable. When I drop down to 30, I feel like I'm flyin'.
Playing on the 26 is more of a novelty, but it's fun too.
Keeping the action high on my 32 has worked out well. That way when I go up to the 34 (with lower action), I'm still pretty comfortable. When I drop down to 30, I feel like I'm flyin'.
Playing on the 26 is more of a novelty, but it's fun too.
I've browsed your website and looked at your basses (and guitars). I think with your singlecut, Les Paul styled bodies, the shorter the scale the better. In fact, I think you could pull off a 30" scale just fine. Flat wounds and maybe a touch wider spacing between the pickups might be cool. I think it would make a killer little bass. Your style isn't my particular cup of tea, but I can certainly see your niche.
I know someone mentioned the Dingwall Super J, but have you seen one? The body is HUGE. I'm attracted to shorter scales in part because ergonomically, large necks and large bodies are a problem for me. It's like when department stores put the small sized shirts and coats on the top racks, far out of my 5' 5" reach.
Now I understand the Super J was probably not designed with my needs in mind, and was likely done to appease Dingwall fans looking for a Jazz bass. But I would certainly be down with a fanned fret 32" - 34" if it were thoughtfully designed with my needs in mind.
I have experimented a fair amount over the last few years with various short and medium scales. IME, I have found:
33" is the sweet spot for the low B if the neck is stable. The low E can be fine on scales down to 30" (about as short as I have experimented), but the shorter your scale, the more important that neck stability is. String brand and gauge become also important in achieving even tone and are very instrument specific (what works on one bass might not work on another). Finally, I know there are plenty of people that will refute this and even the physics will too, but string-thru body helps with shorter scales as well. Again, all of this is my opinion based on my experiences. YMMV.
