• 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.

34" vs 35" scale. Can anyone really tell the difference?

#81
Yes. Definitely. I think I simply played 34" scale for so long that my muscle memory wiring is difficult to adjust. I'm sure I could. I play upright and regular guitar, but there I have a whole other set of neural pathways that are similarly wired.

Glad I guess I didn't start on an odd scale (because frankly I didn't know anything about it for years when I started). I imagine if I'd been playing a 35 for those formative years, I'd prefer 35s. I don't have any objective reason to think 34 is magical.
 
#82
tb-player said:
In all my years of selling basses, this happens most consistently:

I post a 35" scale bass. I get a comment saying, "If this bass was 34-inch scale, I'd be all over it." A little while later, I sell a 34" scale bass and get the comment, " Man! If this was 35-inch scale, we'd be talking."
Click to expand...

Ah, some of them have no intention of buying, they’re just making an excuse! Where I notice the difference is the stiffer strings on a 35” scale. I own both, scale length is not a deal breaker.
 
#83
lowfreqgeek said:
This is only an issue if the particular bass has a longer distance from where it hangs on your shoulder to the nut, forcing your arm to reach further. A well-designed 35" scale bass with the nut at the same position as a typical "Fender" will feel almost indistinguishable from a 34" with the nut in the exact same place. That's a design issue, not something inherent to the longer scale. There are 34" basses with the nut pushed out further from the body, resulting in a stretched out arm and a longer reach. They would be just as uncomfortable as any 35" with the nut at the same distance from the body.
Click to expand...

Yes, correct. but that doesn't seem to bother me. My Warwicks are way out there compared to my others. I have long ape arms though. Rather....

EagleMoon said:
I wasn’t really referring to arm reach but finger reach between frets. At least that’s what has bothered me the most. Though I agree with you about the design of the bass and how long the neck feels can be an issue as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is the distance of the frets for my muscle memory wiring.

I didn't find 35s uncomfortable when I played them, I just would put my hand in the wrong spot when I wasn't looking at the hand....which is most of the time as I'm singing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EagleMoon
#85
I definitely can feel the difference. I personally prefer a higher tension feel from my strings, so over the years, I’ve bought basses with 35” scale lengths.

But, IMHO there’s plenty of 34” 5 and 6-string basses that sound incredible. I was very happy with the B-string on my StingRay-5.


My first couple of 5-strings were 34” scale, and their B-strings felt too floppy. (Yes, I tried many different brands and types of strings. It didn’t help.)

I own three 6-strings, all have 35” scales.

I own two 5-strings, one is 35” and the other is 34”.

I believe that the low B-strings on my 35” scale basses sound slightly clearer too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jason Hollar
#87
Yes. I have a healed dislocated left thumb that still has tight tendons. I have the start of arthritis and my left pinky is curved in and my index finger is curved in, reducing my hand span. I have sold all my basses that have a 34-inch scale. My main gig bass is a 33-inch scale to ease the left hand. I have a couple of 32's and a 30. Yes, especially after a 3-hour gig, I can most definitely tell the difference: with the 34-inch scale basses, my left hand would hurt at the end of a gig. With a 33-inch scale bass, (or shorter) my left hand is merely fatigued. I don't want to even think about what a 35-inch scale bass would do to my hand. I sold my double bass years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jason Hollar
#88
tb-player said:
In all my years of selling basses, this happens most consistently:

I post a 35" scale bass. I get a comment saying, "If this bass was 34-inch scale, I'd be all over it." A little while later, I sell a 34" scale bass and get the comment, " Man! If this was 35-inch scale, we'd be talking."

I own both. I play both... in 4-string and 5-string. Scale-length has never crossed my mind when switching from a 34" to a 35". I've never noticed any need to adjust. For me, scale length isn't even in my top-10 of things I look for in a bass.

Can anyone REALLY tell the difference between 34" scale and 35" scale? If so, what's the deal? Does it affect your playing? Is it all about how the low-B sounds?

I don't get it. Enlighten me. :meh:

(don't get me started on multi-scale... lol)
Click to expand...
Members here may be able to comment on this as well.
The 'Official' 4 string extended scale bass club
 
#90
Yes. As someone with not-so-big hands, there’s a little bit of added challenge in those first five frets on a 35”, and there’s a tighter feel to the string tension too. Even though that 35” B string has seemed a little yummier on the few 35” scaled basses I’ve tried, They’ve also had a mid-range scoop that doesn’t speak me. For a while, I figured it was either just my imagination or just how those particular 35” inch basses sounded, but then I found a TalkBass post that Mr. Roger Sadowsky-pants made about a 35” scale prototype he’d made. While I can’t paraphrase him perfectly, he said he liked the 34” better.

Maybe if I hadn’t grown up listening to 34” scale Fenders, I’d think the 35” scale sounded better. Honestly, I’m probably not the kind of person who can appreciate modern innovations the way they deserve to be appreciated. Looking at fanned frets makes me seasick and I envy those who can get their fingers around a 6 string well.

Everybody has some kind of magic that is supposed to make a better B string- Neck stiffness, scale length, neck through vs. bolt-on, whether or not there’s vintage Lisa Frank stickers with dolphins shooting rainbow lasers, the wishes of the tree before it was cut down, etc. I never would have thought about any of it until I had a bass built and had to deal with these questions. And you know what I’ve realized? I know nothing. I have more questions now than I did when I started.
 
Last edited:
#91
34" vs 35" scale. Can anyone really tell the difference?
(don't get me started on multi-scale... lol)

Enlighten you? Ha ha ha About the only thing I can enlighten is a bottle of beer!

OK, I have on 30" scale bass. Several 34" scales. And, one Carvin XB75 35.25" scale 5 string bass.

Difference? Well of course, the 30" is the easiest to play with less stretching.

Difference with 34 vs 35? Very little difference. In actuality, from the nut to the 12 fret is only 1/2 inch longer. Divide that 1/2 inch by 12 frets and we get about .04166 of an inch longer distance with each fret. (I am generalizing because it is farther apart at #1 fret and not so far apart @ fret #12. Of course, I am skipping frets #13 to #24. Using an example with 0 to 12 fret.

What difference do I experience 34 vs 35? The 35 is a wee bit more effort to stretch from note to note in the lower register and I also notice that the strings are a bit more taunt with the 35" scale. Not much but a little bit. So, the strings seem tighter. And the notes seem cleaner, clearer, a tighter sustain. But not much difference.

That is my mileage. YMMV.

Those folks who are turning down your basses for sale based on 34" or 35" actually have no intentions of buying anything. They are wasting your time.

(All in all, different strings and their different gauges make the biggest difference. More so than scale length.)

 
Last edited:
#92
tb-player said:
In all my years of selling basses, this happens most consistently:

I post a 35" scale bass. I get a comment saying, "If this bass was 34-inch scale, I'd be all over it." A little while later, I sell a 34" scale bass and get the comment, " Man! If this was 35-inch scale, we'd be talking."

I own both. I play both... in 4-string and 5-string. Scale-length has never crossed my mind when switching from a 34" to a 35". I've never noticed any need to adjust. For me, scale length isn't even in my top-10 of things I look for in a bass.

Can anyone REALLY tell the difference between 34" scale and 35" scale? If so, what's the deal? Does it affect your playing? Is it all about how the low-B sounds?

I don't get it. Enlighten me. :meh:

(don't get me started on multi-scale... lol)
Click to expand...

100% important to me, but only for the low B. I have played 34" 5-strings and never found a low-B that felt right to me. Switching to Lakland 5-strings (35" w/ 19mm string spacing at the bridge) was a revelation, and my newish Dingwall Super P5 is even better yet since it shortens up the higher strings back to where they sound best. I have no trouble switching back and forth between my 30" Mustang, 34" Fenders, and the 35"-32" multiscale Dingwall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bassdude51
#92
NKBassman said:
100% important to me, but only for the low B. I have played 34" 5-strings and never found a low-B that felt right to me. Switching to Lakland 5-strings (35" w/ 19mm string spacing at the bridge) was a revelation, and my newish Dingwall Super P5 is even better yet since it shortens up the higher strings back to where they sound best. I have no trouble switching back and forth between my 30" Mustang, 34" Fenders, and the 35"-32" multiscale Dingwall.
Click to expand...

Agree!!! The B does sound better with 35" and longer scale. But, I have noticed that a B string with the tapered end at the bridge sounds pretty darn good on a 34" scale too.

I have a Carvin XB75, 35.25 scale with TI Flats and the B string sounds soooooo delicious!
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKBassman
#93
Even with big hands I find it somewhat difficult playing a boogie-woogie |Root-3-5-6|b7(or 8)-6-5-3| in G, or worse F#, and I seem to have to play that a lot in our band, so even though I don't have one, I can see that extra ~1/4" of stretch on a 35" being a pain. Literally
 
#96
Yes I can tell a difference, and relatively rapidly. I mostly play fretless when I am plunking around on a bass guitar at home so my hands are pretty accustomed to notes being where they are on a 34" scale. A 35" scale throws off that muscle memory. No instrument is worth jacking with that ingrained interaction.

I used to buy fully into the myth of the 35" scale B string until I realized that 35" scale is snake oil. The only reason I have seen put forth is that a 35" scale tightens up a B string. If you have an issue with a floppy B string on a 34" scale instrument, you are using a B string that is too light a gauge. That's a string issue. Making the entire instrument marginally harder to play and also changing the way that every other string vibrates, feels, and sounds by changing their tension due to the string length change of the entire instrument does not make sense. Just fix the problem of the floppy B string at the actual string and move on without messing with the entire instrument.
 
#98
I've been using 35" inch scale basses as my main instruments for majority of my time playing. I can definitely tell the difference (in a number of areas), but I do feel that the idea of a 35" inch scale bass having a better SOUNDING B really depends on the builder or manufacturer. However, where the difference is incredible clear for me is the feel of the strings, and ESPECIALLY the amount of space between each fret.

In the lower register, the space between each fret feels considerably larger when compared to a 34" inch scale. You would think that an extra inch wouldn't really make a difference, but you do notice it. Being a 6 string player, it can also be difficult to play certain chords around the first five frets. I have relatively large hands, so for me a 35" inch scale bass feels JUST right when playing anything past the 12th fret. On 34" and 33" inch scale basses with 24 frets, it always feels incredibly cramped in the higher register for me.

You will also notice that the strings feel very different between scale lengths (G string and higher especially), but I would even go as far as to say the same is true for the B string as well. It will just really vary from instrument to instrument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Williethump
#99
Kael said:
Yes I can tell a difference, and relatively rapidly. I mostly play fretless when I am plunking around on a bass guitar at home so my hands are pretty accustomed to notes being where they are on a 34" scale. A 35" scale throws off that muscle memory. No instrument is worth jacking with that ingrained interaction.

I used to buy fully into the myth of the 35" scale B string until I realized that 35" scale is snake oil. The only reason I have seen put forth is that a 35" scale tightens up a B string. If you have an issue with a floppy B string on a 34" scale instrument, you are using a B string that is too light a gauge. That's a string issue. Making the entire instrument marginally harder to play and also changing the way that every other string vibrates, feels, and sounds by changing their tension due to the string length change of the entire instrument does not make sense. Just fix the problem of the floppy B string at the actual string and move on without messing with the entire instrument.
Click to expand...

By fundamental principals of how strings work, 35" scale length is not "snake oil". String tension at pitch is defined by a combination of both gauge and scale length (and string construction methods). You can vary the tension on the string by modifying either or both parameters. Changing one is no more or less appropriate than changing the other.

For me, having to order custom string sets to accommodate a a 34" 5-string doesn't make sense. A 35" scale 5er just works better for me all around. Multiscale has been better yet, for my personal preferences. For a fretless player I definitely understand that changing scale length would have a much bigger impact to playability though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Williethump

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back