How much of a stretch difference is a 35 vs a 34 scale?

[Acrimonus]

Or about 3%.

It's a fairly obvious fact that if there's a particular between frets stretch you can JUST, but only just, make on a 34" scale, then you will not be able to make that same stretch on a longer scale, even if the extra distance is small. So, if your playing style and choice of music is such that you're absolutely stretched to the very, very max a lot of the time, then increasing scale length would be a bad move. For most of us, that isn't the case so it probably won't make a great deal of difference. Simples.

While the music I play does tend to involve a lot of same string up and down neck movement it's typically already farther than 4 frets causing me to need to jump positions or change the string I play on negating the issue of stretch anyway. My issues only tend to arise when I need to use my pinky and ring finger in succession often, my pinky tends to tire and not want to stretch as much at that point.

 

[spade2you]

With the right bridge placement and top horn length, 35" scale really isn't a huge deal. I think a lot of folks are under the impression that 35" scale basses simply extend the nut out 1", but most companies will also move the bridge back to split the difference.

As for fretting, as long as you're using 1-2-4 fingering and using the fingerboard responsibly, it's no biggie, either. Generally speaking, 35" scale tends to get a little problematic due to technique flaws. The hilarious thing is how much musicians get bent out of shape when someone questions their form when a good chunk of them have never invested time in form/technique.

 

[Acrimonus]

With the right bridge placement and top horn length, 35" scale really isn't a huge deal. I think a lot of folks are under the impression that 35" scale basses simply extend the nut out 1", but most companies will also move the bridge back to split the difference.

As for fretting, as long as you're using 1-2-4 fingering and using the fingerboard responsibly, it's no biggie, either. Generally speaking, 35" scale tends to get a little problematic due to technique flaws. The hilarious thing is how much musicians get bent out of shape when someone questions their form when a good chunk of them have never invested time in form/technique.

Makes sense, I had simply inquired because typically things are designed with the average person in mind and when you are below the average sometimes things are a little harder. My experiences with the piano are a little more extreme, anything that is a 10 note stretch or greater is absolutely unplayable for me, which is a little disheartening. Even 9 note stretches are very difficult for my right hand, my left hand due to additional stretching caused by bass playing actually has a pretty easy time with 9s in comparison, but 10s are still completely out of the question. It doesn't make songs with 10 note+ stretches outside of my repertoire I just have to make a few, stylistic, changes to th song. Some anal-retentive, conservatory players frown upon it but they can shove it.

Which is the root reason of my questioning really, previous experiences with another instrument.

 

[spade2you]

When you know the fingerboard well and play in position, there's little to no reason to ever really make huge stretches.

 

[PSPookie]

Or about 3%.

It's a fairly obvious fact that if there's a particular between frets stretch you can JUST, but only just, make on a 34" scale, then you will not be able to make that same stretch on a longer scale, even if the extra distance is small. So, if your playing style and choice of music is such that you're absolutely stretched to the very, very max a lot of the time, then increasing scale length would be a bad move. For most of us, that isn't the case so it probably won't make a great deal of difference. Simples.

I thought I had asked you to knock it off with this "logic and reason" stuff.

 

[VS]

Playing slowly, it's not a big difference. Playing upbeat, running scales and chord stretches can present a new challenge. -Luke

 

[Andy_D]

I have a BTB555 and A Cort B5. The two could not be more different. The Cort is 34" scale and has substantially smaller string spacing. It took me longer to get used to it than when I first got the BTB which has string spacing closer to my Jazz Bass. Both of my hands had much more trouble dealing with less real estate rather than more. The muscle memory from my four string basses was initially hard to adapt from.

You will probably be very happy with the BTB, I know I am. Bought mine mint used with a HS case of the Bay for $255. Definitely the best bang for the buck I've gotten in spite of scoring new basses for less. BTW A TB Member has had a Black BTB with Barts for sale in the classifieds that looks real sweet for $350. Didn't say what model it was though.

 

[AmadeusXeno]

I have larger hands but I notice the differance. I mostly notice when playing prog rock stuff like Dream Theater. For slower smoother playing it doesn't make much of a differance. The largest stretch in one hand position being from the first to the fourth fret is only a couple milimeters longer on a 35" scale. Overall it will be noticable but I don't think it'll be a problem. The longer scale will make for more tension on your strings, so you might switch to a thinner gauge on a longer scale.

 

[Fuzzbass]

NOTE: along with the very slight increase in scale length, there's a correspondingly slight increase in string tension... but even that might not matter.

Example: I have smallish hands. When I got my first 35", a new Modulus Quantum, my hands were fatigued after my first gig with it, so I assumed scale length was the cause. But after awhile I realized I was mistaken: the fatigue was due to the OEM D'Addario XL strings on the Quantum, which are stiffer than my usual brands (true even on 34"). When I switched to DR Hi Beams, a highly flexible set, I had no trouble with 35".

Eventually I got used to the stiff XLs because I preferred the tone. I can see how some players would be put off by stiff strings, but the point is that the XL's are stiff on both 34" and 35", and Hi Beams are flexible on both 34" and 35".

 

[StuartV]

As for fretting, as long as you're using 1-2-4 fingering and using the fingerboard responsibly, it's no biggie, either.

+1

When I started playing (just over a year ago), I got the idea somewhere that I needed to be able to span four frets with my fingers. I wear size L or XL (depending on the model) gloves, so I reckon my hands are big enough.

But then I started taking lessons. My current teacher was an LA studio bass player for many, many years. Played with Herbie Hancock, Roberta Flack, Frank Sinatra, and many others. In other words, he is a world-class bassist. One of the first things he suggested (but didn't require) was that I use 1-2-4 fingering and don't try to span 4 frets when I'm playing out there. Turns out, that works much better - at least for me (and him).

And, actually, my first teacher (last Summer) had just graduated from Florida State with a degree in music, playing bass (upright and electric). He also recommended the same thing, but also didn't require it and it just didn't sink in the first time around.

 

[Acrimonus]

+1

When I started playing (just over a year ago), I got the idea somewhere that I needed to be able to span four frets with my fingers. I wear size L or XL (depending on the model) gloves, so I reckon my hands are big enough.

But then I started taking lessons. My current teacher was an LA studio bass player for many, many years. Played with Herbie Hancock, Roberta Flack, Frank Sinatra, and many others. In other words, he is a world-class bassist. One of the first things he suggested (but didn't require) was that I use 1-2-4 fingering and don't try to span 4 frets when I'm playing out there. Turns out, that works much better - at least for me (and him).

And, actually, my first teacher (last Summer) had just graduated from Florida State with a degree in music, playing bass (upright and electric). He also recommended the same thing, but also didn't require it and it just didn't sink in the first time around.

Wait what? 1-2-4 not one finger per fret? Clearly I'm uninformed here, not surprised due to no formal lessons. So I use my index, middle and pinky to span three frets? What about my ring finger?

And I lot of the music I play does require 4 fret reaches which while not a difficult stretch at a low pace are much more difficult at the speeds that the music I play tends to go at.

 

[StuartV]

Yes, 1-2-4 means the ring finger and pinky go together on the "third" fret.

If you think you're playing music that REQUIRES a 4 fret reach, maybe you should take a fresh look at it. Ask yourself, "could a good upright bass player play this part on an upright bass?" If the answer is yes, then it must not require a 4 fret reach, because no normal human can span 4 frets up by the nut on an upright.

I am absolutely a novice on bass, so take my opinion with a boulder of salt, but my opinion is that no music REQUIRES a 4 fret reach. I say that simply based on taking lessons from two very good bass players who both use 1-2-4 fingering and who I believe could play any piece of music you put in front of them.

 

[Kael]

The difference bothers some and doesn't bother others. I've used both over the years and have come to realize that 34" is preferable to me. I find the extra stretch for 35" annoying and dislike needing to adjust from one scale to the next. I play a lot of fretless and am a right-on-the-fret guy when I do play fretted. If you are just hitting the area anywhere behind the fret, the extra difference is probably less noticeable given your larger target area. Honestly the "benefits" of that extra inch can easily be achieved through string choice on 34" scale.

I still have an extremely nice 35" scale Larkin. I've waffled back and forth about moving it for the past year or so. It's easily the nicest bass I've ever owned, but I just don't use it do to the scale.

 

[CH Design]

I have smallish hands and actually prefer a 33" scale.

I have owned basses with both 34" and 35" scale. I think the extra inch is more noticeable on basses where the neck is simply made longer and the nut is 1" further away from the bass. I find the stretch to reach the lower positions more uncomfortable than the actual distances between the frets. Basses that are designed to keep the nut in about the same spot and move the bridge back 1" tend to feel a lot more like a typical 34" scale, IMO.

 

[Craigster]

I recently switched and I honestly couldn't tell a difference..

+1

 

[Tom Howland]

I've owned both, I always can tell difference.
I prefer 34" scale, it's just home to me.

 

[R. Laevinus]

Hey Acrimonous - I find that going from a 34 to a 35 is quick and effortless, it's a comeplete non-issue for me. However, going from a 35 to a 34 is amazingly awkward, and I tend to fumble around like a fool for a couple of days until I get used to it again. (I own both a 34 and a 35.)

However, that said, I think that the neck width and shape is much more important in terms of feel and reach than the scale length. Just my 2 cents.

 

[lowendfriend]

I have hands that are on the low-end of medium. I can feel the difference going from my 34" Warwick to the 35" fretless Lakland. It seems to hit me right where I'd like to be fingering a chord with my index and ring finger, but on the 35", I tend to pop over to the little finger on the reach.

I agree that it's more awkward adjusting to the 34 after playing the 35 a while. That is also going from fretless to fretted for me as well.

Bstring sounds better on the lakland for that extra inch....I have chromes on both. My acid test song is "Born Under a Bad Sign" by Albert King. The two lowest notes are on the Bstring and it sounds thunderous.

 

[southgabass]

I've always played on 34" (Ibanez EDC and Fender Jazz) but recently picked up a USA Cirrus and I actually felt more comfortable... I have small hands compared to most of the bassists I know and the 35" felt great (so much so that I'm getting a USA Cirrus now)

Oh I'm aware of the increased string spacing as well, though as a finger player I would probably enjoy the extra play room and it doesn't seem like a large difference, I'm assuming the values they have listed on the ibanez site of 16.5mm vs 19mm are at the bridge, the fret spacing even at the highest frets will probably be quite a bit less. I already have few issues travelling up and down the fret board already and any difficulties I have are usually positioning or technique related, I don't think the additional 2.5mm per string at the bridge will cause me any difficulty outside of re-training muscle memory.

a difference from 16.5mm to 19mm is a world of difference... that 2.5mm will be noticed... I tend to enjoy a 19mm spacing makes me feel like I have room to move... if you play a lot of chords however the 19mm will make that a little tougher...

 

[KingRazor]

From the 6th fret on upward, 1-2-3-4 is quite easy for me. I'm sure once you get up to the 10th fret area, just about anyone can do 1-2-3-4.