34 or 35 scale 5 string?

[twangchief]

Yep! In the past, I believed that you couldn't get a tight, focused B string on a 34" and wasn't comfortable on a 35"

I've now found 34" scale 5 strings that have nice B strings that I'm happy with for my style.

Are there some of you that avoid 34 scale 5 string and believe that to have a good "B" string it has to be a 35? Conversely are there some that have tried 35 scale and it just doesn't feel "right" to them and you can't adapt and switch easily between your 34 scale 4 strings to a 35 scale 5 string? Thanks ..tom

 

[KJung]

My favorite is 34.5 scale.
Tight B, no stiffness on the G string.
Best of both worlds.

I chuckle a bit when I think about 34.5 scale. IMO, PURE marketing... the percent difference in scale length versus a 34 or a 35 is trivial.

 

[knuckle_head]

A good B is generally addressed best with better string selection.

A 35" scale length is most likely to feel 'wrong' because that extra inch is tacked on to the end of a 34"-designed instrument and it is at that point - well - wrong.

That said, a B string is better served by scale lengths beyond 35". This is mostly to take advantage of thinner gauges so the string can speak well. Some .130s and most .135s a re a 4 wrap string and this chokes the voice of a B string far worse than any other factor. Mine aside, I don't know of any string manufacturer making a .140+ string that is less than a 4 wrap.

It is becoming easier to come by a 36" scale length bass that is designed/balanced to be this size - this is a better answer than a 35" scale length for B as it it a natural half step tonally and keeps the string gauge in the 3 wrap range.

 

[FromTheBassMent]

Neither scenario you describe applies to me. I prefer a 34" 5-string with a good solid B simply because I dislike the sound of the G string on every 35" I've owned or played. The upper register on 35" basses sounds a bit thin and ganky to me.

That's why I play EBMM.

 

[Jim Carr]

Here's another way to think about it. Roger Sadowsky (who REALLY knows how to build a great instrument for the working bass player) has the 5 string thing really worked out.

He uses ROCK hard flat sawn maple necks... they are like iron... and hand fit/carved tight neck pockets. So, that stiffness of the neck and rock solid attachment to the body results in just great punch, sustain and low end to my ear.

Then... he uses a slightly asymmetrical string gauge combination for his 5 string sets 45-105 (even increments), but then a 130 B string. That increase in diameter of the B string (versus the symmetrical 125) results in a very similar percentage increase in 'tension' versus the 34" to 35" scale.

Nice!

Edit: The 'myth' of the 35" scale IMO came from many of us back in the day experiencing their first 35" scale B string via the Modulus basses. Amazing, big, clear B strings. What we didnt' realize was that (IMO) had MUCH more to do with that uber stiff graphite neck than the tiny percentage increase in scale length.

+1

Ken's right about this. Yet since I can't afford a 5-string Sadowsky (yet), I am happy to have both a 35" scale 55-01D and an old passive MTD Kinsgston. Both have terrific B strings.

I am wondering about strings for a 5 string 34" Valenti fretless I have. I am considering switching it over to BEADG from EADGC for a while. I wonder if the .045-.105, .130 Sadowsky flats would work as you describe?

 

[MNAirHead]

depends on teh manufactureer.. I'm a nut for "feel" 34 or 35 doesn't make a difference compared to bridge position etc.

 

[Archaeobass]

I have two 35" scale 5 strings, a Modulus Q5 and a Zon 5/2 (incidentally, both are graphite necked instruments). The Q5 has a thunderous B string and sounds super even across its full range. However, when I strung it E to C, everything I had heard about the inverse of this discussion - that high pitched strings should be shorter to speak well - was confirmed. The C just couldn't keep up with the rest of the strings.

Not to be deterred, I strung the Zon E to C and it sounds amazing, with full clarity and even response across all the strings. It has a 35" scale length, like the Modulus, but just takes to C string better. Fine by me, because I'm still not convinced there is a better B string than on a Modulus.

I'm starting to think that a lot of the scale length argument is in our heads. Practically speaking, it can effect string tension, but so can any number of other variables. If anything, I wish there were a greater number of quality (and available) 33" and 32" scale basses out there, as I think bass players would derive physical benefits from having shorter instruments in general.

 

[tjclem]

Interesting you mention 32 scale 5's I enjoy them but unless custom ordered I don't make them because they would be tough to sell without the potential buyer playing them. Tom

 

[spade2you]

I have two 35" scale 5 strings, a Modulus Q5 and a Zon 5/2 (incidentally, both are graphite necked instruments). The Q5 has a thunderous B string and sounds super even across its full range. However, when I strung it E to C, everything I had heard about the inverse of this discussion - that high pitched strings should be shorter to speak well - was confirmed. The C just couldn't keep up with the rest of the strings.

Not to be deterred, I strung the Zon E to C and it sounds amazing, with full clarity and even response across all the strings. It has a 35" scale length, like the Modulus, but just takes to C string better. Fine by me, because I'm still not convinced there is a better B string than on a Modulus.

I'm starting to think that a lot of the scale length argument is in our heads. Practically speaking, it can effect string tension, but so can any number of other variables. If anything, I wish there were a greater number of quality (and available) 33" and 32" scale basses out there, as I think bass players would derive physical benefits from having shorter instruments in general.

Very interesting that the Modulus and Zon had different results. I'm not implying they're the same, but it's interesting you noticed a significant difference.

My two 35" scale fretli both have a nice G and C string. My 34" scale 6 has a good B, although I can't say that I'm finding the G and C much better, although they're all entirely different basses all around.

In regards to 32" and 33" scale basses, smaller luthiers seem to be capitalizing on this. I doubt these will be readily available for a long time, but they're available nonetheless. My only 33" scale bass is a 4 string, so no B, but I can't say that the G is much better than my 34-35" scale basses.

 

[capnsandwich]

I feel that my hands can move faster on a 34, yet I haven't found a 34 that feels as good as my current Cirrus 6'er with a 35" scale length. I've owned a Valenti, Lakland, Tobias, Ibanez, Elrick, etc., but when it comes to getting the action as low as I like none of the 34's have done it like my Cirrus. I've played Foderas that felt as good but they were both 35's. My Valenti was the closest bass I had to feel that good with a 34" scale length. If I could get a 34 to feel as good as my Cirrus, I would sell everything to own it.

 

[NKBassman]

If I would ever get another 5 string, it would definitely be a 35". Didn't like the 34" one I had for a while. It just didn't work for me and wasn't comfortable for me to play the low B string.

 

[Kwesi]

There are great sounding basses at both 34" and 35" scales I just happen to be most comfortable on 34" and so I find great 5 strings with that scale in mind. Contrary to what some might think they're not that difficult to find at decent prices if you look.

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

about 10 years ago, I got my first 35" five string, which I played all the time... But when I picked up my 34" fretless, my playing went to hell! So, I thought, I'd switch all my basses to 35" - mostly to keep my intonation on fretless good.

I ran that way for about 7 years until two things happened: I decided I *really* wanted a 4 string (good luck finding a 35" four string) and my left hand started really bugging me...

On a lark, I picked up a '90s Jazz bass and started gigging with it a bit - suddenly, the hand pain was gone and playing felt SO much better. I borrowed a buddy's 34" five string, noodled a bit - - and concluded that I had to go back to 34" - which is where I'm at today. I know, some guys have no problem switching between the two... well, I'm not one of those guys. - given that I play a fair amount of fretless, I need to feel nice & confident on the neck... So this is something to consider.

Of course, some VERY nice fives are only available in 35" (Lakland/Allen/ect). Too bad, so sad. But many nice ones ARE 34" (Sadowsky/many zons/MM)

good luck

 

[Archaeobass]

Very interesting that the Modulus and Zon had different results. I'm not implying they're the same, but it's interesting you noticed a significant difference.

My two 35" scale fretli both have a nice G and C string. My 34" scale 6 has a good B, although I can't say that I'm finding the G and C much better, although they're all entirely different basses all around.

In regards to 32" and 33" scale basses, smaller luthiers seem to be capitalizing on this. I doubt these will be readily available for a long time, but they're available nonetheless. My only 33" scale bass is a 4 string, so no B, but I can't say that the G is much better than my 34-35" scale basses.

I've played Q6's, for instance, with totally even response from the open B to the 2nd octave of the C string. Not to get to animistic about it, but perhaps my Q5 prefers to be strung B to G - it certainly speaks best in that range.

There are other confounding variables, of course, from pickups and preamps to neck mass and profile. In truth, I think scale length variations in the range of 1 inch are probably a very minor factor.

 

[capnsandwich]

I've played Q6's, for instance, with totally even response from the open B to the 2nd octave of the C string. Not to get to animistic about it, but perhaps my Q5 prefers to be strung B to G - it certainly speaks best in that range.

There are other confounding variables, of course, from pickups and preamps to neck mass and profile. In truth, I think scale length variations in the range of 1 inch are probably a very minor factor.

So, maybe Dingwall is on to something?

 

[Anthbass]

It all comes down to taste, I suppose. I prefer 35" or longer scale instruments because I like the string tension and the extra reach is not a problem for me. I only own one bass that has a scale length of less than 35" these days and I don't play it often.

 

[baddarryl]

Doesn't the Carvin XB75 supposedly address this? Anyone tried one? As always Carvins seem like a good deal. Years ago I had a DC200 stereo guitar and I would put that thing up against anything! Thinking of ordering an XB75. How is the B on those?

 

[nostatic]

depends on teh manufactureer.. I'm a nut for "feel" 34 or 35 doesn't make a difference compared to bridge position etc.

+1

Like some others I have tried to keep basses with a similar, if not identical feel. When I switched to a Zon fretless 5 a decade ago (34" scale, 17mm spacing) I sold everything else and got a Zon fretted 5 with the same scale/spacing. Then when I started gassing around about a year ago I switched things up and bought a Sadowsky 5. Still 34" scale, but the 19mm spacing threw me off. Then I added a Rob Allen 5 (35" scale, 18mm spacing) and that really mucked with the works. And it wasn't the 35" scale - it was the bridge position and neck/body design. A Rob Allen 35" scale feels more like about a 33" scale bass. So right now, I've got the RA 35" scale and Zon 34" scale, and frankly the Zon feels "longer" wrt where my left hand falls.

So to summarize my own experience, scale length doesn't have much to do with the quality of the B string - that is up to the builder. And it is only one variable in how an instrument ends up feeling to the player - with other factors (string spacing, bridge placement) often being ignored by the buyer. For some players it doesn't make a difference, for others it does.

 

[kjpollo]

I've only owned 3 5ers since I started playing. My first one is a 34" Carvin that I've had since 92. I feel REALLY comfortable on it when I need to use it. Doesnt have a phenomenal B, but its good enough for me and my bandmates.
Then I got a Schecter Riot 35". I really liked the bass but I ended up trading it for a 34" Warmoth. But it wasnt the scale length that turned me off, I found no significant problems with the longer scale. I traded it because I hated the electronics and didnt have the $$ to swap them out.
If I ever buy another 5er, my choice wont be impacted by scale length. It'll just come down to a bass that I really like.

 

[dave64o]

IME, 35"+ users like clear, defined notes. 34" users just haven't discovered their favorite 35" yet.

This is a completely ridiculous statement. I simply can't understand why so many people who prefer 35" basses are unable to accept that there are just as many people who prefer 34" basses. But I guess I'm only kidding myself about 34"s being noticeably more comfortable for me to play, huh? I should finally just admit to myself that I'm really on a misguided quest for muddy, indistinct notes?

I like 34" basses. So do a lot of other people. Deal with it already.