Does scale length really make a difference?

[lucas vigor]

I would like to hear Jaquo 3X's opinion on this...he plays a bass tuned down to low C# (two strings lower then a B) and uses a regular 34" scale, I believe.

 

[Beej]

After setting up hundreds of guitars and basses, my opinion is that the strings and setup make the biggest difference to a low B. You need the right thickness to get the right tension. Most often when someone brings me a bass to setup and is complaining about the low B, I immediately do three things; I check the gauge of the string (going up a shade often helps), I check the height of the pickup below the B (its almost always too high - put there by someone trying to "improve" the tone) and I check the action (quite often its a bit too low for good playability). I can almost always set it up to get a good tension, feel and tone from a B. The scale length doesn't usually matter, IME, its all about the right strings and setup...

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

What I find funny when reading that article is that extended B headstock designs ala Bryan Tyler's Elricks actually would be more likely to have a "looser" B than standard.

Yep, they have the same tension, but could have a looser feel. Glad I didn't buy them thinking they'd make it tighter

 

[Kwesi]

In my experience scale length is meaningless beyond decide which you are more comfortable on. Granted, I've only played 34 and 35 scale basses so take that as you may. There are so many factors that go into building a bass that I think people look for easily indentifiable, seemingly quantifiable measurements or specs on which to base their decision. I play 34 scale because they are comfortable to me (though I have played numerous 35 scales that i would happily own given the cash). Don't place too much stock in one aspect of a bass when there are so many others to consider .

 

[mongo2]

I can walk into a music store, and hear noticeable differences between a wall full of supposedly identical Fenders.

Over the years, that fact has made for many a pleasant afternoon checking out their differences.

 

[Jim Dep]

In a span of a couple decades, I had one lady ask me if I had previous complaints. I thought that was rather insulting and I asked in return " Why is this MY problem?."

 

[LaklandBass]

Stingray... Nuff' said.


For real tho.... I had heard plenty about the scale length/B string thing and I considered it when trying out basses a couple months back.
I know that a lot of people bring up Modulus when talking about a huge low B with great tension..... I cant help but think that its a terrible example when talking about the low B... the things have wonderfully solid necks made of graphite and most use composite fingerboards as well..... add top of the line electronics, nut, tuners and one hell of a bridge and I think you have your reasons behind an epic low B. The fact is that if you grabbed a 34" modulus the B would be just as awesome.

Dingwall is the other brand commonly mentioned in this discussion.... to that I must say Dingwall is also a poor example because the scale length isnt 35 on the B string... if it takes 37" to bring the "best B in the business" I dont think the 34/35 debate is even worth having.

My Stingray 5 has a DR Lo-Rider .130 tuned to G# and its pretty sweet... tuned up to B its freaking awesome.
Personally I think that everything on a bass goes into making the B string good and at the end of the day when you have two identical basses with great construction, materials and hardware....... you have two good sounding B's

 

[JAUQO III-X]

All I'm going to say on this topic is. It does not take 34 or more to have a great B string.

Music Man and Pedulla have some of the best sounding none 34" scale 5 strings. I've played 5 string basses that were 33" and 32 " scale basses. And they sounded awesome.


The biggest factor is the person who's playing the bass. It has a lot to do with the physics of touch

 

[darkstorm]

There is a small feeling of tighter strings with 35 scale and most 35 scale versions have a more articulate low B for the fivers. Its similiar to that small yet noticeable diff between fender and gibson scale for guitars. Its not a big diff, just a small tweak. One doesnt need articles to read, as most can feel and hear the diff when they pay attention imo.

I will agree that the more expensive basses in 34 scale can sound just as good for fivers. But for the mid price ($600 or thereabouts) and under, I think the 35 scale offerings do better for low B strings.

 

[JAUQO III-X]

I use a .110 gauge low B. And one stage no one knows that the string is that light unless they ask me the gauge.

 

[Munjibunga]

A lot of people post about floppy B strings and want to know what they can do to overcome it. It seems as though the conventional wisdom is that a 35" scale bass will provide a tauter feeling string.

Now, I have a 34" 5 string and I noticed a rather large difference in feel when changing to different strings (XL's to Halfrounds in my case). My scale length didn't change but the construction of the strings did, and all of the strings feel much tauter. I decided to take a look at whether or not scale length really mattered in terms of how strings feel. I found this article:

http://www.liutaiomottola.com/myth/perception.htm

It's written by an engineer\luthier and has some interesting conclusions. I think it's an interesting read for anyone considering getting a 35" 5 banger only because they've read that it will offer a better feeling B string.

Now I'm not suggesting that those who have claim that a 35" scale makes a positive difference are wrong, I just wonder if there's more at play than the scale length.
EDIT: I need to reword the last part of this sentence. It should read: I wonder if scale length has anything to do with it at all.

Perhaps this should be in a different forum, but I see the question a lot in this one, I thought people might get some use out of it.

This thread and link should be stickied.

Scale length positively affects string tension (a law of physics), but distance from nut to peg and distance from saddle to point of fixity do not. Your perception that going to stiffer strings made a difference is exactly right. Stiffer strings respond differently to plucking, and feel "less floppy" than slinky strings.

I have repeatedly stated that string construction is the largest consideration aside from scale length to remedy the mythical "floppy B." String length beyond the nut or saddle have no effect on the tension of the string.

 

[moonshinegtrs]

You people are making my head hurt.

Moonshine

 

[Munjibunga]

Actually, if you re-read the article, the author states that the tension difference IS real- it's a simple matter of physics, but in Bob Bennedetto's experiments, people couldn't distinguish the difference in terms of how taught the strings FELT.

The tonal difference (brighter and faster attack with higher tension) is also well-documented and well-known, but Bennedetto was looking at feel, not tone.

Regardless, it seems to me that this thread is already illustrating the huge problems you face when looking at this issue. As musicians (as opposed to physicists) most of us use highly imprecise and subjective language to talk about sound. We're only a few posts in, and already we've got one conversation about the effects of scale length on tone, mingling with a separate one about scale length vs tension/feel...

My Sadowskys are 34-inch, my F Basses are 34.5-inch, and my Laklands are 35-inch scales. I can't really tell the difference in tension while playing them, mostly because the strings are all of comparable construction. However, when I pick up my 34-inch-scale Fender Roscoe Beck V, the B string (and the rest of them) feels much "floppier." Why? Because it's got TI Power Bass strings on it, which have a much more slinky construction than the strings on the other basses. The tonal variations are certainly more dependent on wood, construction and, most of all, electronics.

So I agree that the difference in playability is insignificant between scale lengths in that range. I still believe most of those who complain of the floppy B are four-string converts who haven't gotten used to the looseness of any B string with respect to an E string.

 

[Huge]

There is a small feeling of tighter strings with 35 scale and most 35 scale versions have a more articulate low B for the fivers. Its similiar to that small yet noticeable diff between fender and gibson scale for guitars. Its not a big diff, just a small tweak. One doesnt need articles to read, as most can feel and hear the diff when they pay attention imo.

I will agree that the more expensive basses in 34 scale can sound just as good for fivers. But for the mid price ($600 or thereabouts) and under, I think the 35 scale offerings do better for low B strings.

The article suggests that most can't feel the difference.

EDIT: It's what prompted me to start the thread in the first place.

 

[kevteop]

If you think an extra 3% of string length is going to make a big difference then there are plenty of luthiers who will take your money.