Scale length between 34 and 35

[HogieWan]

A lot of guys swear by a 35" scale length for a low B (I'm one of them), but others claim it to be too much of a stretch. Is no one making a 34.5" scale? Guitars come in "half sizes", why should basses be even? I know carvin uses 35.25" for their longer scale

 

[KJung]

A lot of guys swear by a 35" scale length for a low B (I'm one of them), but others claim it to be too much of a stretch. Is no one making a 34.5" scale? Guitars come in "half sizes", why should basses be even? I know carvin uses 35.25" for their longer scale

The Nordy's and the FBass's are 34.5. Silly, if you ask me. As has been posted many times, while scale length obviously impacts tension, all other things being equal, the point is all other things are never equal. The tiny percentage increase from 34" to 35" scale seems to have a trivial impact on B string tension when compared to other issues, like the string design, the mass of the bass body, the stiffness and quality of neck construction, and the ability of the pickup to translate those low fundamentals, etc., etc.

Also, many times, that very, very, very slightly wider spacing of the frets with that 35" scale is not so much the scale length, but the upper horn design that moves the neck away from the body a bit in some basses. For example, most would not even identify the Lakland 55-94 as 35" scale, since first position sits pretty much where a classic Fender puts it. With the MTD's, which move the neck pretty far out from the body due to the body design, it feels quite wide. The FBass standard basses are just the opposite. While 34.5, the neck is moved WAY in toward the body in standing position due to the body and horn design, and it's very comfortable at the first position, etc., etc.

IMO and IME! The best B strings I've heard (by best, I mean tight feeling, plenty of fundamental, but also a full range of overtones, etc., etc.) is on either the original Modulus, and the Sadowsky Modern basses. The Modulus was 35", but it was really that ultra stiff neck that IMO drove that beautiful, piano like B string. With the Sadowsky (34"), it seems to be a combination of a rock hard uber stable neck and those big soapbars crammed close together at the bridge. Amazing if you dig the 'B string as a piano like sound' sort of thing.

 

[Thunderitter]

My KRG has a 35" E with Xtender and a 34" G: the best of both worlds?

 

[Eublet]

I believe that there are plenty of great sounding 34" B strings out there, but I think the 35" does sound and feel better over a 34", all other things equal. I understand what Ken is saying, that might not mean much comparing one bass to another, but there are lots of luthiers out there who've done the comparisons and refuse to build 34" 5+ string instruments because of the noticeable difference. Those guys stake their living on their opinion that 35" is better for the Low B.

Silly as it might seem, if 35 to 34 didn't matter, then 34 to 33 wouldn't matter, nor would 33 to 32, and ultimately we'd all be playing short scale instruments.

I am one who seems to notice fairly consistant advantages on 35" scale instruments, even on those that I don't necessarily care for, such as an Ibanez BTB or MTD. Those have good B strings, but I just don't care for them. I also seem to consistantly notice fairly poor characteristics on most all 34" scale 5 strings , even on instruments that I otherwise really dig, like the G&L L2500 and Stingray5. Those last two instruments I really like, but gosh that B string just feels floppy compared to most any 35" instrument I've owned. But they both sounded great in the mix and weren't necessarily a problem. But they did feel much different such that I had to alter my playing style a bit to compensate, specifically by not fingering that string to hard in the low register compared to how I finger the others. Otherwise it would really rattle against the board too much. I don't seem to have that problem on 35" basses. Yes, the other strings are tighter too, but that seems to be less of an issue for me than a flimsy B string. I can see how others would be on the polar opposite.

I will give Ken props on the Modulus thing. My Q6 had a heavenly B string. Even the 5 string Flea bass has a very solid low B, but I have to say it's still not as tight feeling as most of my 35" basses.

 

[HogieWan]

I know that a lot of things influence tension, but most string makers don't provide high enough tension on the lower tuned strings.

I found this calculator a while back:
http://www.pacificsites.net/~dog/StringTensionApplet.html

It calculates tension for each string and the low end of bass strings always ends up super slack compared to the G and D strings - even with standard string gauges.

 

[KJung]

I believe that there are plenty of great sounding 34" B strings out there, but I think the 35" does sound and feel better over a 34", all other things equal. I understand what Ken is saying, that might not mean much comparing one bass to another, but there are lots of luthiers out there who've done the comparisons and refuse to build 34" 5+ string instruments because of the noticeable difference. Those guys stake their living on their opinion that 35" is better for the Low B.

Silly as it might seem, if 35 to 34 didn't matter, then 34 to 33 wouldn't matter, nor would 33 to 32, and ultimately we'd all be playing short scale instruments.

I am one who seems to notice fairly consistant advantages on 35" scale instruments, even on those that I don't necessarily care for, such as an Ibanez BTB or MTD. Those have good B strings, but I just don't care for them. I also seem to consistantly notice fairly poor characteristics on most all 34" scale 5 strings , even on instruments that I otherwise really dig, like the G&L L2500 and Stingray5. Those last two instruments I really like, but gosh that B string just feels floppy compared to most any 35" instrument I've owned. But they both sounded great in the mix and weren't necessarily a problem. But they did feel much different such that I had to alter my playing style a bit to compensate, specifically by not fingering that string to hard in the low register compared to how I finger the others. Otherwise it would really rattle against the board too much. I don't seem to have that problem on 35" basses. Yes, the other strings are tighter too, but that seems to be less of an issue for me than a flimsy B string. I can see how others would be on the polar opposite.

I will give Ken props on the Modulus thing. My Q6 had a heavenly B string. Even the 5 string Flea bass has a very solid low B, but I have to say it's still not as tight feeling as most of my 35" basses.

+1 to all the above. Again, all things being equal, longer scale length results in higher tension, that can possibly lead to a 'better sounding' B string in some cases. That being said, I've played a 33" scale Fodera that had among the tightest, best sounding and feeling B strings I've ever played.

I guess what I'm saying is that I would not automatically eliminate a 34" scale 5 string from consideration, and would also not necessarily assume a 35" scale will result in a B that feels and sounds good

 

[73jbass]

I believe that there are plenty of great sounding 34" B strings out there, but I think the 35" does sound and feel better over a 34", all other things equal. I understand what Ken is saying, that might not mean much comparing one bass to another, but there are lots of luthiers out there who've done the comparisons and refuse to build 34" 5+ string instruments because of the noticeable difference. Those guys stake their living on their opinion that 35" is better for the Low B.

Silly as it might seem, if 35 to 34 didn't matter, then 34 to 33 wouldn't matter, nor would 33 to 32, and ultimately we'd all be playing short scale instruments.

I am one who seems to notice fairly consistant advantages on 35" scale instruments, even on those that I don't necessarily care for, such as an Ibanez BTB or MTD. Those have good B strings, but I just don't care for them. I also seem to consistantly notice fairly poor characteristics on most all 34" scale 5 strings , even on instruments that I otherwise really dig, like the G&L L2500 and Stingray5. Those last two instruments I really like, but gosh that B string just feels floppy compared to most any 35" instrument I've owned. But they both sounded great in the mix and weren't necessarily a problem. But they did feel much different such that I had to alter my playing style a bit to compensate, specifically by not fingering that string to hard in the low register compared to how I finger the others. Otherwise it would really rattle against the board too much. I don't seem to have that problem on 35" basses. Yes, the other strings are tighter too, but that seems to be less of an issue for me than a flimsy B string. I can see how others would be on the polar opposite.

I will give Ken props on the Modulus thing. My Q6 had a heavenly B string. Even the 5 string Flea bass has a very solid low B, but I have to say it's still not as tight feeling as most of my 35" basses.

I'd like you to check out a SR5 or Sterling 5 with a .135 B string.It's really nice! I'd put my Sterling 5 against any 35" scale for clarity.The challenge on a 34" is selecting the right string.

 

[Chef]

In my experience over the years-and I been around since back to when there weren't 5 strings-scale length has no bearing on sonic anything.

Wood type, quality, density, thickness...neck truss/support rod and/or rods and what they're made out of, trueness and quality of neck pocket/fitment...these things all play much more of a factor than scale length.

If you're noticing consistant differences of some 34, or some 35 instruments being better than others; these will be among the reasons why...not scale length.

YMMV, etc.

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

I played 35"s for years...

I started playing a lot more fretless...

Then I picked up a 4 string bass. Of course, it was 34".

My intonation on my fretless went to hell.

I then sold all my 35" basses and have re-geared with all 34"s.

I am happy and do not miss the 35" basses at all. Okay, I miss my Ken Lawrence, but not because it was 35" - because I'll never own a bass that nice again.

Sooooo - my advice?

If you are planning on playing fretless and also want to have a 4 string bass around, either you should be a better player than me (not all that hard, trust me) or stick to 34" basses.

 

[mr.hughes]

My Gibson Ripper had a 34.5 inch scale yet, depending on the string gauge, could feel tight or loose.

The fact that the neck sat out quite far from the body put first position into an uncomfortable reach for my short arms, whereas I had a 36inch 6 string built that feels easy to get around due to the neck/body/strap lock relationship.

As far as sound/tone goes, there are too many variables to get hung up on and think that scale length alone is the answer/cure to ones tone jones.

 

[Eublet]

I'd like you to check out a SR5 or Sterling 5 with a .135 B string.It's really nice! I'd put my Sterling 5 against any 35" scale for clarity.The challenge on a 34" is selecting the right string.

I've used all kinds of strings on 34" 5 strings. I used to use GHS Progressives which have a .135. A 34" is still a 34" bass, and a 35" bass with a well suited string will still be tighter and have more clarity, all other things being equal. I don't mean to slam folks who like 34" instruments cause I like lots of them too. But you can't cheat physics. In the end all that matters is what's comfortable to you. I prefer 35" scale basses for 5 string instruments. I used to think they were uncomfortable also, and sold them off to get 34" scale 5 strings. I have learned that it's the design that is important in any scale length. I just prefer a well designed 35" over a 34".

 

[stflbn]

Personally I feel no distinguishable difference between 34 and 35" scale basses. I can easily go between either with no grief. However, I'm 5' 11" with long arms.

The custom 5-string '51 TelePbass i'm having built however 'is' going to be 34" scale just to make things easier as my shoulders and my body gets older. I've already had some rotator cup issues thanks to injuries due to home improvement lifting and such, and I'm assured that the B-string on this custom will be stellar.

.

 

[Chef]

I often switch b/t 34, 35 and 42.5" scale during the same job.

 

[Mr. Ray]

I have owned a few F Basses (34.5) the B and E is great but found I didn't really like the feel of the G and D string...it's a trade off. Everybody talks about the "B" string on a longer scale...what about the feel and sound of the other strings. I still find 34" to be the best overall scale length for feel and sound, it all depends on your own playing and music.

 

[Shy Guy]

Pelosi offers 34.5 scale, his stuff seems pretty good.

 

[MIJ-VI]

I've read that on a 35" 6-string, the C sounds tinny & strident.

So I'm thinking, why not lose the C in favour of (hi-->low) G, D, A, E, B, and a fat F#!

Has anyone done this on a 35" six?

If so, how's the F#'s intonation?

Thanks.

 

[GrindYourMind]

Well, those taught strings can be good or bad and there is more to it than just the tension of the strings. Do you rely on lots of percussive techniques, tapping and double thumbing? Because I do and I've found that while a 35" (Usually) has a clearer lower end,higher tension and the real estate high up on the neck is also more spacious, pulling off extended techniques becomes more laborious due to the aformentioned high tension. I find that my 34" instrument is a damn EASY to play, which is my first choice in choosing a bass and that's that.

 

[stretchcat]

IMO and IME! The best B strings I've heard (by best, I mean tight feeling, plenty of fundamental, but also a full range of overtones, etc., etc.) is on either the original Modulus, and the Sadowsky Modern basses. The Modulus was 35", but it was really that ultra stiff neck that IMO drove that beautiful, piano like B string. With the Sadowsky (34"), it seems to be a combination of a rock hard uber stable neck and those big soapbars crammed close together at the bridge. Amazing if you dig the 'B string as a piano like sound' sort of thing.

Having owned a Modulus Q5 and currently playing a Sadowsky Modern 5, I can say I agree with this completely.

Also, I fall into the camp of not really noticing the difference between 34 and 35 inch scale. My two main basses these days are the Modern 5 (34") and a Lakland DJ5 (35") and I regularly switch between them.

Now a shortscale bass, that's a different story.....

 

[Solarmist]

I have owned a few F Basses (34.5) the B and E is great but found I didn't really like the feel of the G and D string...it's a trade off. Everybody talks about the "B" string on a longer scale...what about the feel and sound of the other strings. I still find 34" to be the best overall scale length for feel and sound, it all depends on your own playing and music.

+1 - My sentiments exactly, and like everything else it's all about personal preference.

No matter what scale - unless your bass/neck is junk - the string type & gauge is what's dependant on tension for the most part.

 

[sixway]

Back in 2001 when I was ordering my custom-built bass, I was told that 36" was the way to go. The person I was talking to said to go either with 34" or 36", that 35" was a not a good length for the B string.

Although I like the feel and sound of my bass, and it has a longer upper horn so the first fret is in a very playable position, it seem that 35" has become the de facto standard for almost all five string basses.