A well respected luthier's comments on scale length...

[john turner]

Regardless of why Jerzy may have orginally posted his remarks, when they are copied and posted to a new thread in a completely different forum "out of the blue" with no context, they come across as "pronouncements"--more by RAM than by Jerzy, really. That, I think is why they are generating the response they are.



Do we really need yet another "34 inch vs. 35 inch scale" thread, or yet another "bolt-on vs. neck-through" thread? Is there really any doubt at this point that there are differing opinions, experiences, and preferences regarding those design choices?



Or is this thread merely intended to point out that people sometimes buy things because they seem "fashionable" or "the next big thing"?



Mike

i don't see a problem with a thread quoting a luthier stating that sometimes instrument options are motivated by the visual/fad element and not by the sound/need element, especially if this luthier is known for providing both options, and the luthier is attempting to discourage the practice.

i don't see ram saying anything contrary to that either, really. i also don't see this as a debate of the merits, so much as a reminder made by a very capable luthier to folks that some "Accepted facts" of the instrument world (neckthrough is better than bolton, 35"+ is better than 34") are not necessarily absolute.

 

[lamarjones]

Even in this thread, there are statements that combine truth and opinion in the same breath, and that is what Drozd's statement is touching on IMO.

' I have a 35" scale bass that yields a tighter (I agree) and better (I don't agree) B string'.

It usually does yield a tighter B string, but the actual sound qualities are different. I think some floppy B strings have a good sound quality to them and I think most people assume it's inferior just cause it doesn't have that piano like quality.

But where it really sucks is that EVERYONE starts using the word better when referring to a B string that has that different definition instead of just calling it different. Sure, you'll have some fanned fret fans talking about how superior the fanned fret thing is, but it's no different than a yankee's fan saying the same thing. The only issue is how I have watched people's opinions get shaped by what people regurgitate on this forum. I have been guilty as well.

 

[Darkstrike]

It usually does yield a tighter B string, but the actual sound qualities are different. I think some floppy B strings have a good sound quality to them and I think most people assume it's inferior just cause it doesn't have that piano like quality.

I just see it as a prefrence, some people like low tension strings, like a light set, so, they're not gonna want a huge stiff B string, or 35" scale, anyway. Some people do love hight tension, so the extra scale suits them.

A good B is possible at any scale(well, most), a high tension B, now thats trickier, and up to prefrence, not necessity.

 

[Supertanker]

I would like to know where I can get a Drozd for a few hundred dollars...

 

[john turner]

I would like to know where I can get a Drozd for a few hundred dollars...

yeah, i thought that too when i read that part of it. heh.

 

[Bass Viking]

the way i am reading his points, and i may be reading them incorrectly, is that he is just saying that a 35" or greater scale length is neither necessary, nor guarantees, a good sounding bass, and that the same can be said for neckthrough construction, as opposed to bolt on.

these are easily understood statments, and they may have been made in response to the common "net-wisdom" commentary on these topics, where folks that don't really know any better make such blanket statements as "a bolt on will never have as good a low b as a neck through" or "a 34" scale instrument will never have as good a low b as a 35" scale instrument".

in other words, i'd say these comments by JD should be taken more as "responses" to ways of thought than "pronouncements" about "the right way to do things".

That's exactly the impression I got too. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Flintc]

I have 33, 34, and 35 scale basses. The low B string sounds best on the 35 (a Modulus), OK on the 34 (Tobias), and kind of toneless on the 33 (Bee). These are not inexpensive basses! Yes, "better" is a matter of taste. And yes, there are plenty of other factors involved besides just scale length.

As for bolt on or neck through, if there's a difference I can't hear it. Same for the thin slice of "glamor wood" over the actual body. To me, it's cosmetic. But hey, I LIKE good cosmetics.

 

[Hilton Marsh]

At first I was pised off to read the luthers comments. Probably because my best bass is a KingBass Status with a body thru neck made of wooven graphite.

But what he said is true, the sound and feel of the bass should be the priority when buying an instrument and that means you may not have to pay a lot of money. However, most bass players buy and sell instruments throughout their career and that's when the 'marketing' items like long scale, and body thru neck concepts add value to your instrument.

 

[Jerzy Drozd]

Hi Guys,



Jerzy here.

First of all, I apologize for typos and my bad english, I try to check any spelling before
I post, but sometimes I´m too lazy and for direct forum response I do not ask for help of
any native english spoken person, so bear in mind.


OK, my post in my forum HAD some intention and hook, for some debate there
and guess what? I did not get it there....... I get it on TalkBass )))


Just let me clarify this once for all: I do NOT claim superiority of bolt on over neck thru
or set in, nor 34" over 35". I just say they are different and produces different results and
you should know these results and differences, that's ALL.

Some of you got my idea. I mean If you love bolt on or neck thru and you know that by
your own experience then go with it. If you prefer 34" or 35" by your own experience then
go with it.

The problem is when certain claims like "35" give you better B string tone" or "neck thru
produces superior tone" are used as catching phrases to sell purpose and unfortunately
these were used for selling purpose.

Then you have it: young un experienced bass player or even experienced, go for his new
flashy bass guitar and he of course want the best of the best. So what is "the best" well,
35" will be better for B and neck thru for tone right?

He spends money on his new flashy bass just to realise that this is not the sound he was after, and in addition 35" kills his left hand, well so what?

You will ask: How do you know if this really happen? Actually I know that because it
happened to me, and if you put gun in my face i will tell you that it happened to at least
one of biggest bass builders on this planed I respect very much.

I mean I had customers asking for the most expensive, neck thru bass ( so to speak)
and then complaining it does not sound the way he would expect it should sound (yes, because
its expensive bass it just should sound just "the best" right? )

I think in some way we are ( as bass makers) responsible for at least part of education of
bass population, so bass players may become more aware of differences between many
building solutions and how these affect the sound of the bass.

OK, I agree, there is a lot of different factors than just bass construction, but these are
very important, right?

So, let say it this way, as one of you pointed already, that B on 35" is not better than on
34", it´s just different, and let´s say that neck thru is not better than bolt on or vice
versa, its just different. So if you are after bolt on or neck thru or 33" or 35" just go for it.


I just hate the HYPE of certain affirmation which still are validated as true producing
certain frustration in certain people.


All written above are my personal believes and I do not want to sound as if I have got absolute
truth, however what I have experienced and tested thru mostly 25 years
of bass building ( not 10 years fortunately) seems like correct statements to me.


So, personally I would rather advise to bass players different solutions based on the final
sound they want to achieve , whenever its 34 or 35 or bolt on or neck thru or
set in or ..... etc.........

As some of you knows I made many basses with all of these variations so I rather consider
myself capable to argument the way I did in my post. Bear in mind that I still make neck
thru and 35" basses and that´s fine with me. Hope it clarify some way my position.


I also understand that many of you probably will not agree with me, well I do not try
to be politically correct here, just to please everybody. I get my point and I share it with
you even if some of you may hate me from now on

Some of you asked for proofs rather than meaningless affirmations.
You will see: many of you knows and could feel all these differences so you have your
own opinion, however I do believe ( and I can be wrong) that nobody could explain these differences in some scientific way based on physical laws until now.

I could not find any books or articles regarding these subject but only one article Michael
Tobias ( whom I admire and respect very much). Again, if there is any book,
article or info then I apologize.

I just designed new bass where I just used some solutions based on final sound and
performance I want to achieve rather because it will help me sell it easier.



So what is my response?


OK, here it is:

it will be called "Sound Alchemy" or "The Alchemy of Sound" whichever sound better
in plain english. This will be my own very first book about the bass sound.

My explanation based on some physical laws will try to explain how different woods,
construction ( scales, neck attachment, etc.... ) affect sound of bass guitar.



Now, this information can be used in different ways, one of them is just to
educate "before buy" new bass. I do not try to sell my basses here,
this is not the point.

Any can use that information to just purchase any bass on the market.
Needles to say that will be gold mine for some new luthiers too.
I would love to get that information when I had started mostly 25 years
ago my bass building adventure.



Thank you all for your sincere opinion here. I do not pretend to say that black is always
black and white is always white, again it´s my personal point of view.



Hope it explains a bit that infamous statement I made in my forum

Talk later,

Jerzy Drozd

http://www.jerzydrozdbasses.com
http://www.electricbasssecrets.com/

 

[edubb]

So you'd trust Jerzy's opinion over, say, Michael Tobias, who chooses to use 35" scale and who's been building for a lot longer than 10 years?

I'm not trying to turn this into a battle of credentials, just pointing out that Jerzy's opinion is just one among many, and though he builds some very fine basses, he's by no means the only one doing so.

Mike

and Mike Tobias is a bad man, a very bad man.

 

[john turner]

Hi Guys,



Jerzy here.

First of all, I apologize for typos and my bad english, I try to check any spelling before
I post, but sometimes I´m too lazy and for direct forum response I do not ask for help of
any native english spoken person, so bear in mind.


OK, my post in my forum HAD some intention and hook, for some debate there
and guess what? I did not get it there....... I get it on TalkBass )))


Just let me clarify this once for all: I do NOT claim superiority of bolt on over neck thru
or set in, nor 34" over 35". I just say they are different and produces different results and
you should know these results and differences, that's ALL.

Some of you got my idea. I mean If you love bolt on or neck thru and you know that by
your own experience then go with it. If you prefer 34" or 35" by your own experience then
go with it.

The problem is when certain claims like "35" give you better B string tone" or "neck thru
produces superior tone" are used as catching phrases to sell purpose and unfortunately
these were used for selling purpose.

Then you have it: young un experienced bass player or even experienced, go for his new
flashy bass guitar and he of course want the best of the best. So what is "the best" well,
35" will be better for B and neck thru for tone right?

He spends money on his new flashy bass just to realise that this is not the sound he was after, and in addition 35" kills his left hand, well so what?

You will ask: How do you know if this really happen? Actually I know that because it
happened to me, and if you put gun in my face i will tell you that it happened to at least
one of biggest bass builders on this planed I respect very much.

I mean I had customers asking for the most expensive, neck thru bass ( so to speak)
and then complaining it does not sound the way he would expect it should sound (yes, because
its expensive bass it just should sound just "the best" right? )

I think in some way we are ( as bass makers) responsible for at least part of education of
bass population, so bass players may become more aware of differences between many
building solutions and how these affect the sound of the bass.

OK, I agree, there is a lot of different factors than just bass construction, but these are
very important, right?

So, let say it this way, as one of you pointed already, that B on 35" is not better than on
34", it´s just different, and let´s say that neck thru is not better than bolt on or vice
versa, its just different. So if you are after bolt on or neck thru or 33" or 35" just go for it.


I just hate the HYPE of certain affirmation which still are validated as true producing
certain frustration in certain people.


All written above are my personal believes and I do not want to sound as if I have got absolute
truth, however what I have experienced and tested thru mostly 25 years
of bass building ( not 10 years fortunately) seems like correct statements to me.


So, personally I would rather advise to bass players different solutions based on the final
sound they want to achieve , whenever its 34 or 35 or bolt on or neck thru or
set in or ..... etc.........

As some of you knows I made many basses with all of these variations so I rather consider
myself capable to argument the way I did in my post. Bear in mind that I still make neck
thru and 35" basses and that´s fine with me. Hope it clarify some way my position.


I also understand that many of you probably will not agree with me, well I do not try
to be politically correct here, just to please everybody. I get my point and I share it with
you even if some of you may hate me from now on

Some of you asked for proofs rather than meaningless affirmations.
You will see: many of you knows and could feel all these differences so you have your
own opinion, however I do believe ( and I can be wrong) that nobody could explain these differences in some scientific way based on physical laws until now.

I could not find any books or articles regarding these subject but only one article Michael
Tobias ( whom I admire and respect very much). Again, if there is any book,
article or info then I apologize.

I just designed new bass where I just used some solutions based on final sound and
performance I want to achieve rather because it will help me sell it easier.



So what is my response?


OK, here it is:

it will be called "Sound Alchemy" or "The Alchemy of Sound" whichever sound better
in plain english. This will be my own very first book about the bass sound.

My explanation based on some physical laws will try to explain how different woods,
construction ( scales, neck attachment, etc.... ) affect sound of bass guitar.



Now, this information can be used in different ways, one of them is just to
educate "before buy" new bass. I do not try to sell my basses here,
this is not the point.

Any can use that information to just purchase any bass on the market.
Needles to say that will be gold mine for some new luthiers too.
I would love to get that information when I had started mostly 25 years
ago my bass building adventure.



Thank you all for your sincere opinion here. I do not pretend to say that black is always
black and white is always white, again it´s my personal point of view.



Hope it explains a bit that infamous statement I made in my forum

Talk later,

Jerzy Drozd

http://www.jerzydrozdbasses.com
http://www.electricbasssecrets.com/

hey jerzy

thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic. we all really appreciate you taking the time to post here.

 

[john turner]

again, it's plainly obvious that JD has not said anything negative about anyone's instrument design or design choice.

there's no reason to get indignant in this thread toward -anything-. this is a valid discussion aimed at encouraging folks to be educated about their instrument choices.

 

[pnchad]

I couldn't leave this thread before adding my 2 cents about one aspect that is not addressed, scale length.

I have been playing double & electric bass for over 40 years now and I've noticed something that is just plain physics.

Longer scale length = greater ratio of fundimental/overtones.

I have basses from 27", 30", 32", 34" 35" & 36" and double basses 41" - 42.5".

There is a reason (about 250y/o reason) why violin makers settled on 41"+ mensur for basses. It was THE longest playable/managable string length possible.

There was a double bass built 200 years ago that took 2 people to play - one to stop the strings (standing on a box)and one to bow.

So, while I don't give a crap about scale length for B string response unless it's sloppy, I do want my 36" Fodera Imperial 5 fretless when I want to fill a room. And, it literally eats up the bandwidth when recording, almost too much.

Listen to Anthony Jackson or Steve Swallow's tone. That ain't the EQ. Clarity of a grand piano!

 

[(b)Assman]

I've been interested in short scale basses for playability and length especially as someone who does a lot of vocals. The downsides as I heard them were that you can't downtune them as much without the strings being really floppy and that their sound lacks fundamental and is more muddy. I guess this is sorta a question lol.

 

[Stempelloos]

I've been interested in short scale basses for playability and length especially as someone who does a lot of vocals. The downsides as I heard them were that you can't downtune them as much without the strings being really floppy and that their sound lacks fundamental and is more muddy. I guess this is sorta a question lol.

I guess you're asking what is true about those statements regarding to the sound of shortscales.
I learnt to play on a hollowbody 30" shortscale. After that I played 34" & 34'5" fretted and fretless basses.
Then I went back to a 30" shortscale hollowbody (and a 30" EB3 body) because I like the sound and playability of that scale.

In my opinion any bass that is downtuned sounds floppy or somewhere halfway down the line.
I don't think shortscales sound more muddy, that's more of a pickup tone thing combined with the type of wood you're playing.
There is more of a difference in tone character depending on which string you play a note. For example, low C on E string has more of a 'character' difference with low C on A string than it would have on a 34" scale. The G string generally sounds more lively on shortscales.

(I'm having second thoughts about a possible thread called the psychology of scale. These thoughts are inspired by a discussion with a female psychology student that gave a funny explanation of stage behavior of rock musicians in comparison with the scale of their axes.)

 

[tombowlus]

hey jerzy

thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic. we all really appreciate you taking the time to post here.

+1 That was a great post! Thanks for sharing, Jerzy.

 

[emjazz]

Listen to Anthony Jackson or Steve Swallow's tone. That ain't the EQ. Clarity of a grand piano!

You're right, clarity like a grand piano...but not everyone wants that tone. I got to play a Steve Swallow Citron bass recently. It was one of the most beautiful basses that I've ever had the pleasure to play....however, I didn't like the stiffness of the strings and the length of the neck. The feel and tone of the bass, because of the scale length, was not what I prefer from a bass. I'm somone who has gone from 36" scale basses to my soon to be 33" scale bass. There are far too many elements at play with a bass to say that one scale is better than the other, or one construction method is better than the other. I'm not a big guy, and I have smaller hands....and so a smaller bass is what I've gravitated towards. It just so happens that I also like the sound of a shorter scale length. Because of these things I've investigated for some time what it takes in a bass (6 string in my case) to get a smaller scale length to work for the sound that I want to get, and that includes a good sounding B when I need it. I'm not a builder but I'm very interested in every aspect of what goes into building a bass. What I've noticed is that every part is as important as the others. The wood choices, stiffness of the neck, the pickup type, where the pickups are placed, the angle of the headstock (this is one that I've read about more than been able to research myself), the bridge material....even a specific preamp can help change the characteristic of the tone and help tighten up certain frequencies with a shorter scale length, although the constructin of the bass should yield as close to the desired tone as you want before electronics are chosen. Every aspect is a factor. An experienced, intelligent luthier knows this and, if you trust them, will help guide you to get exactly what you're looking for in a bass.

edit: Also, you can't play a shorter scale bass the same way that you do a longer scale. Your touch needs to be lighter and you have to be even more aware of how to control the string. I actually feel that a shorter scale, because of the way the strings vibrate, can sound bigger and sweeter than a longer scale.

 

[mat666]

+1 That was a great post! Thanks for sharing, Jerzy.

again thank you mr Drozd for posting here

I've been fortunate enough to share time with a great luthier in montreal who thaught me more about woods resonance, scale lenght, pickups etc...in the 26 months it took to make my bass than in my whole 15 years of playing experience.

Jerzy is right all the way - if you find something to argue about it means you didnt read carefully

 

[lamarjones]

You're right, clarity like a grand piano...but not everyone wants that tone.

Most of the discussion, if you want to call it that, in this thread is because people simply can't understand this.

 

[Greevus]

jerzy is a way cool dude for sure. i posted on his forum about playing the washburn taurus as i had no idea of who jerzy was at the time. he didn't even hate on washburn and was very gentlemanly about it. his opinions and ideas are always presented with respect. with due respect to him, i have basses from 32" to 35" scale. the B string sounds best and easiest to play on the longer scale guitars. i have tuned from open B to standard, so i am familiar with floppiness. just my opinion. i'm a shorter guy with little hands too. the physics of the longer scale seems to give more overtones and ringing to me. and that's the sound i want.