Fodera: 34" w/ Extended B, or 35" Regular B???

[Chasarms]

Originally posted by Phil Smith
So, in summary, does the Extended B headstock make a difference to the B string all other things being equal?

I call on the rights granted to me as a U.S. citizen as stated in the 5th Amendment to the Constitution.



Chas

 

[Zoot H Rollo]

I don't think so, but I'll let someone else battle it

i believe my source.

they are. maybe not all, but some.

f

 

[vanselus]

Originally posted by Phil Smith
So, in summary, does the Extended B headstock make a difference to the B string all other things being equal?

no basses are equal. not even 2 extended peghead foderas.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by fhodshon


where's the logic in that statement?

f

It's not about logic, it's about bias

 

[Zoot H Rollo]

It's not about logic, it's about bias

accurate call there Bradley my son.

f

 

[Brad Johnson]

Hey, some people play products while others play processes

Put me down for product. As long as it does what I want, I could care less* how it's built. OTOH that seems to be very important to some folks, who I'd be will to bet couldn't pick the CNC (it's not always a complete build) part vs. an excellent handmade bass. Handmade usually strives for perfection, CNC, in the right hands (get it?) can get you there or close to it, consistently.


Of course if I had my druthers all of my basses would be made with elfin goodness... and you can't find that in no machine. Every Tollhouse cracker is a work of art, unique in it's own way. Bet it would be the same for basses.















*All right, all right... if Kathy Lee Gifford's involved all bets are off.

 

[Zoot H Rollo]

CNC can save a lot of time with the mundane cutting of "pre-shapes" (!?).

you can get as detailed as you like with CNC. or as rough.

i'm all for saving builders time with non-critical steps.

the elves are in the details!



f

 

[Brad Johnson]

Exactly.

 

[embellisher]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson
Every Tollhouse cracker is a work of art, unique in it's own way.[/SIZE]

Are you calling me a Tollhouse cracker?

 

[Peter McFerrin]

Originally posted by embellisher


Are you calling me a Tollhouse cracker?

No, you're a roadhouse cracker.

 

[embellisher]

Originally posted by Peter McFerrin


No, you're a roadhouse cracker.

I resemble that remark.

 

[Jerry J]

How did we get from Fodera's to crackers? Hmmm?

I've found that a 35" scale does not necessarily make a better sounding or feeling B string. The B on my Sadowsky and my F-BN5 sound awesome and feel great. And the B on my MTD535 and my old Lakland D-63 were in the same league. I'm certain that there is no disagreement on this. This all indicates, to me, that there is no given when it comes to discussing scale length. We can and it has been debated, till the cows come home, what makes a better B. Scientific or not, it still boils down to whether it works or not. I believe a bass needs to be judged on it's own merit.

I am curious about the folks that own or have tried the 34" scale Fodera's and what their opinions have been.

 

[Bass7755]

Well said Daniel!!

Dan

 

[pilotjones]

OK, here's some of the science. Quoted from another thread:

There is a too common misconception that extra string length beyond the nut will increase the string's tension. This is simply not true. For the last time this was covered, including equations, references, and another thought experiment explanation, see this thread.

If Fodera claims that the greater length affects the tonality- that is possible, for the open string notes only. If they claim it increases the string tension, it is simply untrue. Given the same bridge-to-nut distance and same string mass, raising the tension would raise the pitch- it wouldn't be a B note any more.

And while I'm on the soapbox, I'd like to note something else. Some people have pointed out that in going from a 34" scale length to 35", the speaking length only increases by a little under 3% [ 35/34 = 1.029, or 103% of 34" scale length]. They then conclude that this is too little to have any real effect on tone. But, given the same unit weight string (same gauge), since the tension is a second-order relationship, the tension to produce the same note would go up by 6% [ (35/34)^2 = 1.060 or 106% of 34" tension ]. This 6% increase in tension may indeed be the reason longer scale length instruments are more likely to have a better sounding B string.
Check the tension charts referenced in the above mentioned thread. You'll see that in your average set of strings, the B string tension is significantly lower than that of the others. That is why I'd like to try a Dingwall.

The equation:

T = UW x (2 x L x F)squared / 386.4

T = tension in string, lbs.
UW = unit weight of string, lbs. per linear inch (lbs/in)
L = speaking length of string, inches
F = vibration frequency of string, cycles/sec (Hz)

Any part of a string that is beyond the speaking portion plays no part in determining the resonant frequency.

IMO the 6% increase in tension that results from the 3% increase in scale length (given constant unit weight (gauge) and same pitch) is not insignificant.

One of my favorite quotes, from luthier Dave Pushic, from this thread:

It's amazing to me how basic Physics goes out the window when artistic impressions are involved, like in this discussion.

The distance from the nut to the tuning peg is entirely irrelevant to tone or tightness of the low B string. Headstocks with extended lengths in that area are just a sales gimmick. And that opinion is backed by two degrees in Physics.

Of course, I have and will build headstocks like that if the customer wants it..who am I to argue with a paying customer on something that doesn't really matter?

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Yeah, Jeff Rader had Dave build the extended B headstock on the haunted six-string. But like Daniel LeClaire said, if it's free, might as well go for it.