• 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.

So why fanned frets?

#81
I totally get the idea that longer scale for low strings and shorter scale for high notes gives a more even tone and response (like the piano stringing noted at the beginning of this thread) And I get that a longer B string give a tighter less floppy B with more clarity. A check of the difficulty in getting a decent B string on a short scale bass proves that (though this does not say it cannot be done)

So Why don't I own a fanned fret bass yet? It's just some unanswered practical questions I still have. I almost bought a really nice Dingwall Combustion out of TB classifieds a while back. What stopped me? it was that I suddenly realized (at least back then) that there was an extremely limited selection of multi-scale string sets. I wasn't sure If I really wanted the bright round wound thing of the Strings you could buy from Dingwall, so I backed off. Since then I've been looking at the fanned fret basses from Rondo as a way to stick a toe in the fanned fret water without spending a ton of cash (though they are not as cheap as say SX basses etc). And then a second question arose. These Rondo basses come in two kinds one is fanned fret but the B string is only 35" and the strings get shorter. This I figure has the advantage that virtually any of the standard strings sets you buy for basses will fit the bass and that is a plus. The other kind of fan fret is the traditional with a 37" B string where string selection is more difficult. So then the question arises does reducing a B string to the usual 35" loose all advantage of fanned frets. So why learn to play with the fanned system if it has no real advantage? Or is string selection getting better and better for 37" fanned fret string sets?

So these were the questions going around my head, and one day I suppose I'll have to pick an answer and see if fanned frets are something or if they are nothing.
 
#86
String supply isn't usually an issue. Personally, I use Kalium on my fanned fret, and I can get very exact, as they have a great string calculator.

bassbenj said:
I totally get the idea that longer scale for low strings and shorter scale for high notes gives a more even tone and response (like the piano stringing noted at the beginning of this thread) And I get that a longer B string give a tighter less floppy B with more clarity. A check of the difficulty in getting a decent B string on a short scale bass proves that (though this does not say it cannot be done)

So Why don't I own a fanned fret bass yet? It's just some unanswered practical questions I still have. I almost bought a really nice Dingwall Combustion out of TB classifieds a while back. What stopped me? it was that I suddenly realized (at least back then) that there was an extremely limited selection of multi-scale string sets. I wasn't sure If I really wanted the bright round wound thing of the Strings you could buy from Dingwall, so I backed off. Since then I've been looking at the fanned fret basses from Rondo as a way to stick a toe in the fanned fret water without spending a ton of cash (though they are not as cheap as say SX basses etc). And then a second question arose. These Rondo basses come in two kinds one is fanned fret but the B string is only 35" and the strings get shorter. This I figure has the advantage that virtually any of the standard strings sets you buy for basses will fit the bass and that is a plus. The other kind of fan fret is the traditional with a 37" B string where string selection is more difficult. So then the question arises does reducing a B string to the usual 35" loose all advantage of fanned frets. So why learn to play with the fanned system if it has no real advantage? Or is string selection getting better and better for 37" fanned fret string sets?

So these were the questions going around my head, and one day I suppose I'll have to pick an answer and see if fanned frets are something or if they are nothing.
Click to expand...
 
#87
DiMarco said:
I am puzzled. No low B ever sounded tighter and more inline with the other strings then that of a Warwick Thumb NT or Dolphin Pro1, and those are 34" scale.

Please explain to me why fanned frets are an improvement for their purpose eludes me right now.
I want to experience GAS for a Dingwall.
Click to expand...
Basic physics. As others have said, look at a piano or harp. The lower notes have a longer scale to make the tones more even with the other strings. A B on a 34" scale works, but it isn't optimal. A 35" scale works better. Plus it allows you to reduce the gauge of the string a little, which helps since the increased mass hurts your articulation. I think on a 34" scale a B should be like a .135 or .140 to be "balanced" with the other strings tension wise, but a string that thick just doesn't feel or sound right.
Dingwall takes their design a little too far for my taste. 37" scale is a little out there, and their pickup design is unnatural sounding to my ears. I tried a few at NAMM and thought they were interesting, but I would never buy one. The frets weren't the issue, but the neck profile didn't feel right, and the general tone was artificial sounding. I like the feel and tone of the LTD or Ibanez multi-scale offerings more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pyrat
#88
Nev375 said:
Mine is a more subtle fan 34" treble, 35" bass. And I can attest that even at that slight of a difference the strings do sound more similar to one another tone-wise. I like rather bright sounding basses so it's really noticeable to me.
Click to expand...

I like this idea! I've had 35" scale ERBs and I did have a Dingwall 5 at one point, but especially as I get older I'm finding that I'm most comfortable at about 32 or so with 35" scale being the absolute limit for my hand spread. I'd love to try a 35-32 or even a 34-30 fan just to see, but it's not like you can find those lying around.
 
#89
DDXdesign said:
I like this idea! I've had 35" scale ERBs and I did have a Dingwall 5 at one point, but especially as I get older I'm finding that I'm most comfortable at about 32 or so with 35" scale being the absolute limit for my hand spread. I'd love to try a 35-32 or even a 34-30 fan just to see, but it's not like you can find those lying around.
Click to expand...

Since you haven't tried a 35-32" multi-scale, I guess your Dingwall was a full-scale model. Sheldon's medium-scale "Super series" have been my 'home basses' since I received my first Super J in 2009. If you lived closer, I'd let you test drive my favorite five:

aRjNqcw.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: DiabolicLow B
#90
spiritbass said:
Since you haven't tried a 35-32" multi-scale, I guess your Dingwall was a full-scale model. Sheldon's medium-scale "Super series" have been my 'home basses' since I received my first Super J in 2009. If you lived closer, I'd let you test drive my favorite five:

View attachment 3003549
Click to expand...
Yeah man - mine was a.... hmmm, an Afterburner I think? We're talking like 14 years ago. Don't think the mediums had come around yet (I didn't know they existed until your post just now), but I will definitely see if I can find one to try!
 
#95
I had a Dingwall ABZ5, and I've currently got a Spector Euro 5. I wouldn't say the ABZ5 was better. If given a choice, I'd stick with the Spector. I still look at Dingwall basses, since I don't dislike them, though I won't likely own another ABZ5, since the tone wasn't interesting to me (for that matter, the Super P that I briefly tried didn't move me, either). I have heard other players do wonderful things with those basses, though.

The extended scale and fanned frets isn't an all-else-equal thing. There are so many other variables involved, I wouldn't judge on the fan alone. The general idea makes sense to me, but the execution of the design, and the final build is ultimately what matters. I've heard terrible strings or pickups ruin an otherwise fine instrument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim Skaggs and ajkula66
#97
Runlikegregg said:
#5 seems like a bit of a stretch
Click to expand...

That comment frequently rubs people the wrong way. I should either delete it or figure out a better way to articulate it.

What we're getting at is tighter bottom end vs huge/thick bottom end. The most noticeable difference extended scale length makes on lower strings in a live context is how much the bottom end tightens up. Huge, thick bottom end gets out of control fast and is really hard to mix live (ask any FOH guy). Tight bottom with harmonics that line up nicely can be more upfront in the mix without masking the other instruments because it's more transparent and doesn't seem to roll around the room as much.

It may sound like marketing hype but the statement is based on comments we've been getting over and over for decades. The most common feedback we get from live and studio engineers is how easy the bass is to mix. The most common feedback we get from drummers is how much better they can hear the bass. The most common feedback we get from singers is how well they can distinguish pitch from our basses. The most common feedback from metal guys is how well the bass cuts through a wall of distorted guitars.

In our experience it's a real thing.

Edit: Quote from another thread today. "I took my passive 5-string PJ to rehearsal on Wednesday, thinking I’d give FOH a treat.

Sound gal pulled me aside, and asked if I could bring my “special” bass, because it’s so much easier to mix the low end.

That would be my Roscoe-like Dingwall...."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pugosaurus, Jefenator, DrMole and 4 others
#98
A revisit to this thread with a little time thinking about multi scale basses.

Variation in string tension due to pitch is not a new issue, but the problem became more apparent with the ubiquity of five & six string basses. A string vibrating back & forth 31 times a second has its challenges. Even 41.5" scale 5 string upright basses can't utilize a low B string acoustically because it can't be heard acoustically. Amplification resolves this problem, but the floppy feel is still an issue.

The challenge was initially met with advances in string design. That has obviously been extremely successful based on the number of single-scale B-string equipped basses in the world, however there is still enough of a problem with tension / feel to some that new solutions are still being pursued.

One of the next solutions, 35" & 36" scale basses. That was a natural progression toward a solution, but it wasn't widely accepted as "the" solution as evidenced by all the 34" scale basses with B strings still in production and still popular. Longer scale basses come with some additional production costs & some increased difficulty to play. A lot of builders and players weighed those trade-offs against the gains and decided 34" scale performance was good enough for them.

The idea of increasing the scale length of only the floppy feeling string(s) became one of the next solutions (multi-scale). Once again, production costs by builders & purchase price by consumers are weighed against the gains of multi scale. Some believe it's worth the cost & some don't. If prices come down, more players will likely give it a try, but with the unknown millions of single scale basses still out there & still being produced, it's not likely multi-scale basses will become ubiquitous anytime soon.

String technology is still advancing, and electronic solutions (octave devices) are also becoming more common in different applications. Completely new ideas like LaBella Silverback strings for 23" & 25" scale microbass instruments are still in early stages. Floppy string solutions will be implemented in direct proportion to how bad the problem is considered by players.

Is multi-scale the best solution? Who knows? It is definitely a solution that works, but other solutions exist. Beta was the far better solution to portable video media vs. VHS, but technology made both completely obsolete. Multi-scale vs. single scale might reach a similar point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrMole and Sheldon D.
#99
What has dawned on me very slowly during the 10+ years I have been into fanned frets, is that it is mainly on the low end things starting to happen. The lowest strings. Now since more and more brands are jumping into the multiscale bandwagon there are a lot more to do comparison to, and not just the Dingwall cream of the crop things. For example LTD/ESP and Ibanez makes great FF/Multiscale basses too. But still, I have trouble with the very same idiosyncrasies that plagues all other basses. Neck diving, dead spots here and there, and a number of other things.

1. If one now has to reach 37" string length on the low B, before they sound any good, and those basses, why not doing them headless from the start on? Then I think ALL string sets would fit, since you have to stop the strings and cut them short, just right after the zero fret, or the nut, and clamp them down. No excess waste length. At the headpiece. Then one would not have to hunt around for super extra long scale sets, of a few brands, just to make the low B fit. I can very well understand that double ball end sets wouldn't be produced for this.

2. I have had always problems, with right hand (picking hand) dampening of any string of thicker gauge and lower pitch. Especially the low B, and it is - actually - exacerbated on any bass with fanned frets. The thing that is happening is that you happen to land your fingers (with rest stroke) on a harmonic node. With loud volumes, and if compressor used, it will still ring afterwards, at a certain harmonic node pitch. Not so on the g-string and much lesser on all the others. I e the fingers aren't broad or thick enough to stop that harmonic from lingering. Not to speak of the open B-string rumbling around when playing other strings, since it mechanically resonates. At that low B frequency.

On some other basses I have with zero fret (metal) and metal nut (very few), there's a tendency to make upper harmonics to ping out more loud at the 3-4th frets. On any other bass with bone, plastic, graphite nut, these "harmonic pings" are not as pronounced. Even impossible to "chime". I think it works the same back at the bridge side of things. Near the bridge, those harmonics are more pronounced, and could be mitigated if the low B string bridge where made of other material, or had a larger dampening surface at the witness point. All other harmonics up the neck 12th,7th,5th fret would still sound good. I think it's the same with too small and narrow frets, like the banjo frets used on Dingwall basses. All of them. Basically, I don't think thick gauge strings combined with their low pitch should reside on the same small surface that Dingwall bridges has, as well as the small surface like the banjo frets has. The LTD/ESP I owned had larger frets and wider. It was less harmonics there.

So I don't know if a bone/plastic/micarta solution back at the bridge would mitigate this somehow. My solution now, is that I have 4 string FF basses tuned BEAD, and the low B ends at 36.25" which I think is enough for a good low B. More string sets will fit, and not so narrow range of brands to choose from, and I do have changed out the bridge saddle for something else to be able to end the ringing harmonics when trying to dampen the low B while playing. Let's just say it's the same material as the nut.

And if I have to play in regular tuning, I'll put a capo on 5th fret, and off I go. Tune down half a step to play SRV, Hendrix, and brass/horn tunes? Just move it down to 4th fret. No retuning to alter tension. Works a charm.

Something to chew on, sir Sheldon? ;)
 
#100
1. When you're bloody good at building a bass with a low B, you can make it work on 34".
The low B on my Le Fay that has 34" and weighs 8,25lbs is tighter and has a quicker attack than the low B on my Ibanez that is an inch longer and three pounds heavier. One is hand crafted to the highest standards known to mankind while the other is mass produced.

2. When you increase the length of the string, the tension goes up. AFAIK Dingwall uses their 37"-34" scale because all strings have exactly the same tension in standard tuning (and using the Dingwall strings).

3. When you're bloody good at building a bass with a low B AND you incorporate multiscale, the resulting low B should be even better.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back