Multi-Scale

[BurningSkies]

I’m in the market for a MS 5-er, and I think there’s still room for a good, well-speced, well-designed, and mid-priced model. Particularly from a reputable maker like Peavey. I think a MS4 would go well along with it.

Dingwall obviously is the benchmark, but the relatively high price of the Combustion creates some room right underneath. ESP almost got it right, but has a few design issues.

there’s also no models in what I consider the sweet spot - keep the A string at or around 34-34.5”, extend the B to 35.5-36”, and shorten the G to 32.5-33”. From my experience, the fan on the Dingwall seems about right; one thing ESP got wrong is that the angle is slightly too much at the nut. It seems really important to determine which fret is parallel.

I wouldn’t bother with a 35” 4 bass, but it might be interesting to do a 36” 4 and 5, tho it would probably be a very niche bass.

I have both 32-35" and 34-37" fans and you're probably right on the money. I think a 33-36" scale would be a great place for a production multi-scale bass to be.

 

[Sid the Kid]

Thanks for considering our collective opinions!

I think there is a sweet spot for multi scale length. 36” for the B side and 34” for the G side. This would allow you to use normal strings, which is worth considering. A 36” B is still huge sounding.

37” puts you in direct competition with Dingwall. Until the release of Spector Dimension they have dominated all opponents. Also the Dingwall style 3 inch fan seems to cause me some issues in the first position. I always manage to mash my index finger into the nut trying to grab a low C. The Ibanez 35-32” fan feels perfect, but could be a little longer. Kiesel does a 35-33.5” fan and it is not bad, but the Ibanez is more comfortable.

Please do not fall prey to the ultra modern electronics. Most of us would be more happy with a good sounding passive setup. Cheap sounding active electronics are not a selling point any longer.

Also please consider the price point. There aren’t any quality multi scale offerings at or under $1K. If you have an entry model coming in at $999 it would sell on price alone. Think about a Grind bass multi scale with name brand pickups.

 

[Nuage420]

Thanks for considering our collective opinions!

I think there is a sweet spot for multi scale length. 36” for the B side and 34” for the G side. This would allow you to use normal strings, which is worth considering. A 36” B is still huge sounding.

37” puts you in direct competition with Dingwall. Until the release of Spector Dimension they have dominated all opponents. Also the Dingwall style 3 inch fan seems to cause me some issues in the first position. I always manage to mash my index finger into the nut trying to grab a low C. The Ibanez 35-32” fan feels perfect, but could be a little longer. Kiesel does a 35-33.5” fan and it is not bad, but the Ibanez is more comfortable.

Please do not fall prey to the ultra modern electronics. Most of us would be more happy with a good sounding passive setup. Cheap sounding active electronics are not a selling point any longer.

Also please consider the price point. There aren’t any quality multi scale offerings at or under $1K. If you have an entry model coming in at $999 it would sell on price alone. Think about a Grind bass multi scale with name brand pickups.

Agreed

 

[Jon Moody]

Two thoughts.

One, as mentioned, take the time to make the bass look and sound GOOD. That means make sure it has a wider visual appeal than just to the progressive/metal guys, and also a more traditional tone. It'll catch on if the average cover band bassist says "Yeah, I'd play that onstage."

Second, take into consideration your customers' concerns for consumables. That means no odd-sized proprietary pickups (that you can't swap out with the large ocean of aftermarket parts) and preamp, and making sure strings are easily available. And no, even though Dingwalls have been out for a while, their string selection is not easy to find, nor is it comparable to a typical 34 or 35 bass.

Ibanez, Kiesel, et al. use a 33-35" fan which sounds more manageable to the regular player, but also much easier to grab existing strings off the rack.

If you DO decide to go the 34-37 route, consider offering your own string line again, as your players are going to need/want another option aside from the small handful available.

I've never felt the need to shorten a bass's G and D strings, so I kind of wondered why they didn't go 34-36" instead of 33-35", but it did feel good and actually i didn't realise what the exact scale lengths were until I got home and looked it up online.

There are probably a lot of reasons, but I'd also guess string availability? A 33-35 fan can use existing strings out there, whereas you run into needing special ones for a 34-36.

 

[Rabidhamster]

I wouldn’t be interested in a 35” 4, or a multi scale at all.

 

[Challanger2]

Few thoughts as an owner of 3 Dingwalls.

1) Make sure it is designed as a multi-scale bass and not just extending the neck of an existing model by a couple inches. I'm pretty sure spector did that for their latest multi-scale release and I've seen a lot of reports of neck-dive, as they failed to consider how extending the neck would affect balance.

2) Don't go overboard with features, or if you do, offer a no frills base model. It seems like a lot of companies try to jam a bunch of features on to their multi-scale in an attempt to be modern, such as active preamps, fancy top woods, unique body shapes, or other features such as headless. To my knowledge, dingwall is one of the only bass makers where I could get something akin to a P or J bass via their super P/J lines. There's a lack in the market of multi-scale options that are well-made simple models. I would be much more excited about you guys releasing a P, J or PJ model, or maybe a T-40/T-45 model with natural, white and black finishes instead of having some crazy electronics system and a top-wood layer of some tree thats impossible to pronounce. I would suggest ensuring that the product line has at least one passive model.

3) 4 string multi-scale is totally worth it. It makes it easier to get a fully tension balanced string set, which leads to a much more enjoyable playing experience over typical 4 strings.

 

[Challanger2]

Second, take into consideration your customers' concerns for consumables. That means no odd-sized proprietary pickups (that you can't swap out with the large ocean of aftermarket parts) and preamp, and making sure strings are easily available. .

This is hugely important and cannot be overstated. Regular size pickups will make the bass line much more attractive.

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

Multi-scale makes sense on a 5-string.

I have never liked the playability of 35" scale basses and for what you gain in extra length on the bass strings, it ends up making the treble strings sound tinny.

I'll also add that reach, weight and balance are all very important too. You can get away with a little more weight if the bass is extremely well balanced, but ultimately, they are all important.

 

[chris_b]

Hi @Fred from Peavey my suggestion would be use a longer scale. A 37" B sounds good. I'd also ask that you make these basses weigh in at 9lbs or less.

 

[NKBassman]

Looking for some input -

Getting ready to re-introduce some bass guitars and wondered what y'all prefer. I was thinking for a 5 String a multi-scale bass might be cool, but at the same time I don't think there is a need for it on a 4 string. What would y'all think about a series where the 4 is standard 35" and the 5 is Multi?

Or what do you think about multi-scale in general

-Fred

I think a 35" 4-string and a multi-scale 5-string is a great idea, but I wouldn't hesitate to do a 35-32" (or something) multiscale 4-string. I just got my first multiscale in a Dingwall Super P5. A 35" B string is the bare minimum for my taste, but the shorter scale upper strings sound fantastic.

 

[5StringPocket]

Thanks for considering our collective opinions!

I think there is a sweet spot for multi scale length. 36” for the B side and 34” for the G side. This would allow you to use normal strings, which is worth considering. A 36” B is still huge sounding.

37” puts you in direct competition with Dingwall. Until the release of Spector Dimension they have dominated all opponents. Also the Dingwall style 3 inch fan seems to cause me some issues in the first position. I always manage to mash my index finger into the nut trying to grab a low C. The Ibanez 35-32” fan feels perfect, but could be a little longer. Kiesel does a 35-33.5” fan and it is not bad, but the Ibanez is more comfortable.

Please do not fall prey to the ultra modern electronics. Most of us would be more happy with a good sounding passive setup. Cheap sounding active electronics are not a selling point any longer.

Also please consider the price point. There aren’t any quality multi scale offerings at or under $1K. If you have an entry model coming in at $999 it would sell on price alone. Think about a Grind bass multi scale with name brand pickups.

Another vote here for the 34”-36” multiscale five. I’ve owned several Dingwalls and found the 3” fan with 19mm bridge spacing a bit extreme for my hands. A 2” fan with 18mm bridge spacing would be comfortable to play, retain the sweetness of a 34” G string, and have the improved focus of a 36” B.

 

[Jefenator]

After years of searching and trying stuff, my Dingwall Afterburner I remains *the* reference for what a low B string is really supposed to feel & sound like.
That instrument is 37" and there are a lot of 35" B-strings out there that are pretty good. I don't see a lot of 36" B-strings, though. Would be cool to see someone offer that in a multi-scale. (Little less drastic than the 37-34 spread without being noticeably floppier.)

 

[Chewy_B_i_T_s]

These are the features that really appeal to me:

Angled headstock like the Cirrus, heel truss adjust wheel like the Millennium. Easy access battery metal flip door like ESP Japan basses. Passive mode with traditional tone control knob when engaged. Standard pickup sizes. Less than 8 lbs for 5 string. Well shielded and grounded from the factory

 

[BurningSkies]

Few thoughts as an owner of 3 Dingwalls.

1) Make sure it is designed as a multi-scale bass and not just extending the neck of an existing model by a couple inches. I'm pretty sure spector did that for their latest multi-scale release and I've seen a lot of reports of neck-dive, as they failed to consider how extending the neck would affect balance.

3) 4 string multi-scale is totally worth it. It makes it easier to get a fully tension balanced string set, which leads to a much more enjoyable playing experience over typical 4 strings.

^ The design factor is important. The Spector bass to my eyes and from all reports has a few problems by grafting a MS neck to their SOP body/headstock. Especially at the headstock where the distance from the nut on the G-string to the string post is just a long haul...but I assume that they didn't want to mess with the dimensions on their trademark headstock shape.

When it comes to the overall playing ergonomics...you're really looking for a bass that doesn't hang too far to the left, that the neck FEELS to the player like it's a standard 34" bass rather than feeling like the neck is hugely long. That means bridge pretty far back on the body, good top horn location and the neck-joint placement should be scrutinized.

I feel like the low B obviously gets all the glory and comment but the fanning is totally worth it across the whole neck. None of us play B-string exclusively, so those other strings are important too.

To me the fan is all about two things...evenness of timbre across the neck as well as evenness of feel across the neck.

After years of searching and trying stuff, my Dingwall Afterburner I remains *the* reference for what a low B string is really supposed to feel & sound like.
That instrument is 37" and there are a lot of 35" B-strings out there that are pretty good. I don't see a lot of 36" B-strings, though. Would be cool to see someone offer that in a multi-scale. (Little less drastic than the 37-34 spread without being noticeably floppier.)

A 36" fan just seems like a good idea to me. It has more of the clarity and upper harmonic content than a 34 or 35 and the tension but sits in a place tonally & feel wise that isn't quite as modern, which should keep the traditionalists happy.

I do think that long strings don't make up for lackluster neck construction though. Soooo...a great truss rod implementation and a neck construction that has good stiffness/rigidity should be on the table as well.

 

[Modulus 96]

I've been on the hunt for a cirrus 5 string tiger eye with the metal plate behind the headstock.... But not multiscale, regular frets will do fine in 35" scale

 

[kodiakblair]

I've been on the hunt for a cirrus 5 string tiger eye with the metal plate behind the headstock.... But not multiscale, regular frets will do fine in 35" scale

Those are being built over in the Czech Republic ATM so you shouldn't have trouble finding one.

 

[Modulus 96]

Those are being built over in the Czech Republic ATM so you shouldn't have trouble finding one.

How do I look into acquiring one of those?

 

[GlassToMouth]

41 years old, life long Peavey fan. Just bought a Mini Mega and love it. I own two 4 string multiscale basses (Kiesel) and absolutely love the comfort, look, and even string tension of multiscale. One is 35.5", the other is 34.5". I understand if the decision to NOT produce a 4 string multiscale is the consensus. But I love me some 4 string multiscale goodness. I don't even play in drop tuning. They just sound and feel "right" in my hands.

 

[Dynacord]

I own a Dingwall 5 and multi scale and before owning it I would have argued against a multi scale 4 string. But based on the E string on the Dingwall, I would have to say it’s useful. Really tight fundamental.

I agree. Also I generally don't like the G string on most 35" scale basses I've tried.

On the 5 strings, the one multi-scale I have currently is 34-36'. At first I would have preferred 34-37" like Dingwall (I've owned previously) but actually really like the 36" B as it opens up a lot more (and less expensive) string options as many stock long scale sets fit (just barely).

I like what Peavy is doing right now. Have the ELF head and two of the 2x8 cabs. Innovative and quality stuff.

 

[Jon Moody]

do think that long strings don't make up for lackluster neck construction though. Soooo...a great truss rod implementation and a neck construction that has good stiffness/rigidity should be on the table as well.

The neck is EVERYTHING on an instrument. Too many companies just make a neck wider, throw in some stiffening rods and call it good. My Hilton is a 32" with a B string that outperforms most 35" scale basses, because the neck was designed as such.