I got your drift. I was implying (but should have stated directly) that I have more than one shorty, so I can rotate. I was not reflecting badly on you.
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.
Let it be known by all
- Thread starter GretschWretch
- Start date
I got your drift. I was implying (but should have stated directly) that I have more than one shorty, so I can rotate. I was not reflecting badly on you.
No problem. I just thought it was funny you brought up the subject of playing only one bass (or scale of bass) right after I had to do just that due to the shoulder surgery. Like you, in "normal" times, I like to rotate them all!
Well, nearly all of my shorties are full hollowbodies so in total length they approach Fenders, but in fret-to-fret stretch they close the total distance by four inches. Depending on the nearness to the nut and/or the part I am trying to play, that makes a difference.
i'd like to be playing short scales at this point in my playing (old age stuff/limitations/pains/etc.), but i really don't want to derail what i'm used to (34" scale). the idea and the benefits of playing a SS ax are seductive. i just don't want to bother with a new learning curve.
but i wholeheartedly support your 'research' into the matter for yourself, @GretschWretch! looking forward to hearing about your experience(s) with it! good luck on your quest!
but i wholeheartedly support your 'research' into the matter for yourself, @GretschWretch! looking forward to hearing about your experience(s) with it! good luck on your quest!
i'd like to be playing short scales at this point in my playing (old age stuff/limitations/pains/etc.), but i really don't want to derail what i'm used to (34" scale). the idea and the benefits of playing a SS ax are seductive. i just don't want to bother with a new learning curve.
but i wholeheartedly support your 'research' into the matter for yourself, @GretschWretch! looking forward to hearing about your experience(s) with it! good luck on your quest!
Well, the old age stuff doesn't come into play for me (yet); I am approaching this more from an "on which scale bass am I a better player?" And up until a certain point the question is moot: I am equally good on either scale. But already I suspect that the "attainment ceiling" will be a little higher with the shorties.
This being said, I also already know there are some long-scales I will keep for their voices alone, like my circa 1990 parts PJ. It is a fretless, but the presence of that j pickup prevents me from cheating a bridge forward to make it into a short-scale.
@GretschWretch so after a month did you reach any conclusions?
I'm having the same sort of dilemma I've been having pain in my left hand around my third finger, & I'm not trying to put off seeing the doctor but more nervous what he may say that it is. I do find my '64 Hofner 500/1 easier on my left hand for longer periods, more than on my Fender P which I love playing as well.
Same here. 8 inch stretch. Maybe that's why I prefer long scale basses. 35" is my personal favorite.
I will say the jury is still out, although I did spend a lot of time last night perusing TB threads on the Gibson Les Paul jr DC bass. Leaving weight and neck dive out of the discussion for the moment, my issues are reach and stretch. Reach has always been within grasp, although sometimes awkward and uncomfortable. Strap is worse than lap. But stretch: my stretch is five inches, barely. Position my fingers around a neck and it goes to four. This is a compelling argument for moving away from the 34" scale.
Upon beginning my "experiment" my first reaction was, "Gee; I don't remember the strings being this close together when I was in high school." But then it got into matters of playing, and my ceiling simply is higher on a short-scale; I am a better player. Some things I can do more facilely on a short-scale than on a long-scale, while on a short-scale I can do some things that a I cannot do at all on a long.
There are other things in this mix, but I will save them for another post should this thread continue. This post is long enough already.
Well it's safe to say that if you play DB you CAN handle long scale. 
It's sometimes nice to change occasionally.
I still have short scale from the 60s that I never play.
While I an not a big guy, I do have some reach.
Used to freak out one of my keyboard friends by playing a basic block cord...with a 9th on top.
14 freakin' keys! He had to stretch to reach 12.
In the end you gotta play what works for you.
It's sometimes nice to change occasionally.
I still have short scale from the 60s that I never play.
While I an not a big guy, I do have some reach.
Used to freak out one of my keyboard friends by playing a basic block cord...with a 9th on top.
14 freakin' keys! He had to stretch to reach 12.
In the end you gotta play what works for you.
Well it's safe to say that if you play DB you CAN handle long scale.
True, but on DB I rarely would be required to play something I might on EB; for example this, where I would have to bar across three strings.
I just came upon this thread, and could relate. I went whole hog into short scale hollow bodies a few months ago. It started when I picked up a Harmony H22 and discovered that it fit really well sound-wise with the Americana band I was starting up. Then came a couple more short scales (I've got to have backups, y'know) and even a 25" scale fretless uke bass. I'm an average height guy with average hand size and no physical limitations (yet) to playing long scale basses (as well as uprights). Last night, after a few months of only playing shorties, I picked up one of my Fender Jazz basses and it felt like the neck went on forever! I've concluded that I do prefer short scale necks. Now I'm trying to decide if I should hang on to any of my long scale basses.
Yes; there *is* this. Decision time can be particularly excruciating when there is no short-scale equivalent to the long-scale bass.
I think I’m fairly representative of the average bass player in size, skill and sound preferences. If so, I can see a future where 30” and 32” scales are considered ideal for E-standard tuning by the majority of players and builders, and 34” scale basses are specifically set up and sold for D-standard and Eb-standard tuning, with capos used to get them to E-standard if appropriate. The only question in my mind is why is this not already the case? I think it is just because bass strings (and maybe pickups) in the past weren’t as good as they are now, and it is taking everyone a while to realize that with today’s strings on today’s guitar’s we can back off on tension and/or shorten the length without losing any clarity.
I know SS has been around a long time, and it had plenty of influential proponents, but it clearly lost the battle for the heart of the average player. The average player went with 34” as the standard, tuned in E. To me that’s crazy. It must be that on cheap basses with cheap strings they needed that extra length or tension back in the 60s, because in my experience there’s no way the average player could find a 34” E-standard with standard gauge 45-100 strings the best compromise. 30” sounds perfectly fine and is so much more comfortable. Extra stretch beyond that is rewarded with extra notes.
Again, I’m talking about the average player: deep in the bulge of the bell-curve. And I’m not sure I’m right, and I’m sure it’s not important, I guess I just want to participate in the conversation.
I know SS has been around a long time, and it had plenty of influential proponents, but it clearly lost the battle for the heart of the average player. The average player went with 34” as the standard, tuned in E. To me that’s crazy. It must be that on cheap basses with cheap strings they needed that extra length or tension back in the 60s, because in my experience there’s no way the average player could find a 34” E-standard with standard gauge 45-100 strings the best compromise. 30” sounds perfectly fine and is so much more comfortable. Extra stretch beyond that is rewarded with extra notes.
Again, I’m talking about the average player: deep in the bulge of the bell-curve. And I’m not sure I’m right, and I’m sure it’s not important, I guess I just want to participate in the conversation.
Tradition/convention is a very powerful thing, and it tends to be self-perpetuating. So my guess is that 34" scale basses will be in the majority for as long as there are electric basses. I think, going back to the 60's and 70's, short scale basses became--to a large degree--associated in player's minds with budget instruments (Harmony, Kay, Danelectro, Japanese imports) and/or a particular sound (thump) and/or for beginners (Fender Mustang/Musicmaster) and/or for players of small stature (Bill Wyman, Alan Lancaster of Status Quo, etc.).
I think part of that tradition/convention also has to do with looks. I admit, this was a hard one for me to get past. Bass is supposed to be big and long; that's how people spot the bassist! I remember when Steinbergers (not short scale, but very compact) made a big splash in the 80's and tons of bassists (who could afford them) were playing them. They were all over MTV. But nowadays you don't see them (or the many imitations of them) being played very often. Tradition won out and Sting and Geddy (and the like) went back to playing old Fender basses, which caused the next generation to likewise want P's and J's (and the like). What's made it easier for me to go short scale now is that I'm old and less concerned with coolness, and I play in a band where we all sit down (so we've already lost the aesthetic battle).
It's great that nowadays short scale basses are not uncommon, and there are so many to choose from: old and odd, or new and "normal". Also, the proliferation in recent decades of really good female musicians (yay!) has brought more short scale basses into the spotlight as a practical alternative.
I think part of that tradition/convention also has to do with looks. I admit, this was a hard one for me to get past. Bass is supposed to be big and long; that's how people spot the bassist! I remember when Steinbergers (not short scale, but very compact) made a big splash in the 80's and tons of bassists (who could afford them) were playing them. They were all over MTV. But nowadays you don't see them (or the many imitations of them) being played very often. Tradition won out and Sting and Geddy (and the like) went back to playing old Fender basses, which caused the next generation to likewise want P's and J's (and the like). What's made it easier for me to go short scale now is that I'm old and less concerned with coolness, and I play in a band where we all sit down (so we've already lost the aesthetic battle).
It's great that nowadays short scale basses are not uncommon, and there are so many to choose from: old and odd, or new and "normal". Also, the proliferation in recent decades of really good female musicians (yay!) has brought more short scale basses into the spotlight as a practical alternative.
Last edited:
I’ve played long scale basses exclusively for 20+ years. But since Covid I’ve been playing a whole lot of guitar. Now I’m balancing the 2 instruments. Very recently I got curious about short scales.
I don’t have a ton of issue with reach, but the finger stretch on short scale basses is super comfortable on the lower 4 frets.
I picked up a used shorty, but it’s very neck heavy. I got a shorty coming in the big brown truck now, and a plan B bass in mind to try if that one doesn’t work. I’m planning on December being my shorty month!
I don’t have a ton of issue with reach, but the finger stretch on short scale basses is super comfortable on the lower 4 frets.
I picked up a used shorty, but it’s very neck heavy. I got a shorty coming in the big brown truck now, and a plan B bass in mind to try if that one doesn’t work. I’m planning on December being my shorty month!
I believe the standard opinion, at least on TalkBass, is that 32" is "medium." Anything shorter is short-scale until we get down to the uber-short 28" or so basses. I would say 33" puts you in the long-scale camp, which shows a lot of variation. Fender's 34" scale is considered the standard, but also we have 33.25 (Rickenbacker), 33 7/8 (Multivox Marvel), 33.5 (Epiphone/Gibson/Supro). I would say the 35" Daions and above are "super-long scale."
And the name of your band is . . .what? Gluteus Maximus?
