Wanted to ask what drawbacks, if any, you find in playing a 35" scale bass as opposed to 34 or less?
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.
35" Scale - Drawbacks?
- Thread starter ehinkley
- Start date
The obvious one is the extra stretch in the lower positions. The extra inch also doesn't always sound good on the higher strings. Extra tension on the low B also means extra tension on the G.
- says the dingwall user.
J/k bro. I think the added tension on the B is worth it. Depending on how the 5 or 6 is made the whole ergonomics can be shifted so that a reach is not so bad. Both mine are 35" I have played uncomfortable 35" basses before but they were uncomfortable for more reasons than just the scale.
- Jun 19, 2004
- 4,782
- 83
- 42
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist, Schroeder Cabinets
I have rather large hands and don't have a problem reaching the extra inch on a 35", but still find certain passages more difficult to play. And, IME, 34" scale basses can have awesome low B strings. Thus, I simply don't see the added benefit of the extra inch, providing a bass is well constructed.
I've played basses that were nearly identical to each other, made by the same luthier, same body style, electronics, and even the woods used, where the lone exception was the scale length. I've found there IS a difference between the lengths, but not enough to convert me to a 35" player.
I've played basses that were nearly identical to each other, made by the same luthier, same body style, electronics, and even the woods used, where the lone exception was the scale length. I've found there IS a difference between the lengths, but not enough to convert me to a 35" player.
I play a US Lakland 55-94 with a 35" and the neck shape is so comfortable you'd never notice the scale was different. I have small hands but with proper technique and a thin oval neck shape anybody can get away with the 35" scale. The sonic differences are definately worth it to my ear.
A narrow nut can make a 35" feel comfortable, whereas a wide nut can make it feel uncomfortable. A 35" results to a better B (35,5" and 36" makes B even better, but worsens the G tightness scenario). That's why I go fanned: Dingwall (37"-34"). This way I get even tension across the strings
I now own my first 34" scale 5 string. Every fiver with a 34" scale I ever tried before this one had a sucky B. But Zon has this one figured out. The tension on this bass feels much lighter than fivers with 35" scales (and I've owned a few).
Since most of my fingers have been broken at one time or another, I am really sensitive to tension. I can play my Zon for hours without feeling the pain that I used to feel. Of course I'm sure the overall ergonomics of this bass have something to do with it as well (balance, neck radius, etc).
I can't say for sure that there is any real advantage to owning a specific scale length (dingwalls excluded). It depends on how the bass feels and sounds to you.
Since most of my fingers have been broken at one time or another, I am really sensitive to tension. I can play my Zon for hours without feeling the pain that I used to feel. Of course I'm sure the overall ergonomics of this bass have something to do with it as well (balance, neck radius, etc).
I can't say for sure that there is any real advantage to owning a specific scale length (dingwalls excluded). It depends on how the bass feels and sounds to you.
35" four strings seem noticeably longer to me, but that is no problem, IMO. I think 35" is great for detuned four strings, especially Hipshot D-tuners. I think 35" B strings sound great, but 34" B strings sound just fine to me too.
I think that if I'd switched to 35" from a fender-style bass, I'd have noticed the change a lot more. As it is, switching from my long-assed Godin 5ver actually felt like the Lakland was *smaller*. The Godin's a 34, but because of where the bridge is and neck starts, it's a bit of a stretch for a little guy like me to reach the end of the fingerboard.
Yeah, there's a bit more finger-stretch involved with the bottom frets of the 35" bass, but because I'm not reaching as far to get there, I'm still coming out on top.
Yeah, there's a bit more finger-stretch involved with the bottom frets of the 35" bass, but because I'm not reaching as far to get there, I'm still coming out on top.
I have small hands and don't have any trouble playing 35" scale basses. My first bass was a 35" scale Peavey Cirrus 4. I'll agree that the G is a bit stiff, so I switched to a 40G many years ago. Really, when it's all said and done, the only real disadvantage of a 35" scale bass is some strings are too short, although there are usually alternatives somewhere.
Advantages include lower action due to a tighter vibrational pattern and it's much harder to have a wimpy low B.
There are plenty of companies that have a killer low B in 34" scale, but they're not cheap.
Advantages include lower action due to a tighter vibrational pattern and it's much harder to have a wimpy low B.
There are plenty of companies that have a killer low B in 34" scale, but they're not cheap.
I learnt bass on 34". It's home to me, can play it blind. On a 35" I always have to look at my fretting hand especially on long slides. Otherwise I hit the wrong note every now and then. Other than that I did not find anything wrong with 35". I guess if you learn directly on a 35" that would not be a problem.
- Jul 30, 2006
- 2,315
- 453
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist:Regenerate Guitar Works Carvin, Micheal Kelly Guitars
The only thing I see as a drawback in a 35" scale bass is that it's not 36", which I prefer. Most 34" scale 5'ers have a floppy loose B string that is not much use unless you play it very lightly. Fenders are notorious for that IMHO. I like distinct notes on the B string below E. My 36" Elrick provides them without sounding mushy.
