• 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.

Talk to me about 32" scale compared to 34"(alembic content)

ledyard

ledyard

Jan 31, 2010
1,655
46
Upstate NY
www.elephant-mountain.com
#1
Namely 32" Alembics. Heres an example:

Take a 32" Alembic Spolier and a 34" Spoiler. same basses, same years, same electronics, everything identical except the scale.
Now plug each into a SVT with a 810 cab. Play each with a pick and finger style and switch back and forth bass to bass.

What will you notice that the 32" has or doesnt have or is different than the 34" Besides the obvious reach difference.

I have owned a 73" EB3, and 2 of the reissues of them. Obviously these are 30" basses. not 32". Big difference in tones and the Gibsons, while being fantastic basses have a limited application IMHO. Fortunatley I was using them playing Mule covers and Mule influenced origionals.
When I think short scale I think short, stubby thumpy sound. Wooly and not alot of sustain. But then my origional question is about an Alembic. Big difference gibson to Alembic.
 
#2
i can't comment on a 32", but my first alembic series I that i bought brand new in 1975 was a long scale, and my subsquent series I's were short scales (30"). my current '85 distillate (30") actually sounds and sustains like anyone else's standard long scale bass (nowhere near as thumpy like an EB3, a mustang, or a musicmaster bass), but the alembic long scale did have a bit more sustain to the notes than my short scale alembics. i just couldn't get used to the reach (first position) of a LS alembic due to how they mount the neck in respect to where it meets the body, so on alembics, i prefer SS ones.

2 cents............
 
#7
Jeff Scott said:
Having had two different 32" scale Alembics in the past, I'd say the only issue is a smaller choice in strings.
Click to expand...

Your saying lighter strings? Like 40-100 instead of 45-105? I tune to Eb so my concern would be not having enough tension. I have no tension issues with 34" basses and Eb. But I've never played a 32". I'm not worried about being cramped or anything. I loved my 30" gibsons but because of their sound they had their specific applications.
I also have to tune in drop for 2 songs in the set. So this would worry me with lighter strings.

Basically I'm wondering if the bass is going to sound short and stubby (if that makes sense). I know the fact that it would be an Alembic is a huge factor.
 
#8
when i string a shorter scale (30" or 32") i actually prefer to go a little up in string gauge to maintain the same tension as a 34". so if you're tuning to Eb, i'd go with a 105-110 on the low E, an .050" for the G (and an .065 & .085 for the ones in between).

when i had a ric 325 (john lennon type guitar) that thing had such a short scale (it was tiny), i ran .013"-.056" on it and it still felt slinky.

i think that the above post regarding string choices was saying that you have a much more limited selection available from the string makers of 32" scale strings. much less than 34"s, and even less choices than 30"s.
 
#10
I think the reason EB3s sound dead and thumpy has more to do with their wood and electronic choices than the scale length. My shortscale Starfire reissue with darkstars has a great attack and a quick decay compared to a Fender, but it's very lively and responsive.

For your specific question, try the Alembic forum. They'll have the exact answer you need. [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#11
I had a 32 scale 5 string spoiler that was one of my main basses for a couple of years. Sadly I let it go, but I'll have another alembic down the line. Sustain and clarity were excellent and a pleasure to play. I strung it with sadowsky black label long scale strings and had no problems with tension. In fact it was probably tighter feeling than most 5 strings out there. Better than all the fender and peavey 5s I'd try and about par for the course against my stingrays... it was that good. I haven't had a chance to A/B it with other 34 scale alembics though.
 
#12
I use R.Cocco 50-70-90-110 on all my basses, except the fretless which gets R.Cocco 45-65-85-105 strings (130 A/B on the down tuned four string and on the fiver.)
I don't really have a preference for medium/longscale, though there are some differences.
Overall I think medium scale sounds sweeter, longscale is tighter with faster attack.

32 Inch can certainly do tight, but when it gets real fast - like the second part in “One” (I’m in a Metallica tribute band) I prefer the long scale, there’s a bit too much movement in the strings on a medium scale bass.
Note: That’s based on a comparison between Alembics, I prefer the medium scale Alembics over any long/X-long scale of other brands I’ve played. (also for the fast tight parts)
Overall I use the medium scale basses for finger style and the longscale basses for pick style, medium scale is a bit easier for my lazy fingers. :-)

Check out this pic for the visual difference, the nuts are (about) at same height:

80262.jpg


Playability is superb on the medium scales, though the longscale five string is starting to get pretty comfortable for me also.

Alembic also have two standard types of neck profiles, the fretless in the pic has the newer “comfort taper” - Narrow at the nut, wide at the bridge.
The other basses have the “Classic taper” - Wide nut, narrow bridge.
When I’ve played my “comfort taper” longscale five string for a while, it’s funny to go back to a “classic taper” medium scale Spoiler. Looks like a toy! :-) (that’s until you start to play though)

Side note: Best sounding bass (imho) I’ve ever played, was a short scale Series I Stanley Clarke model.
Extremely sweet and bold sound, but it did get a bit scary between the 12th and 24th fret (frets close to each other)

Basically: If it says “Alembic” on the headstock (or at least has the cloud/hand/prism/dragon logo), you can’t go wrong

Some Youtube links to some Alembic sounds:

Medium scale ’83 Spoiler: Invalid Link Removed and: Invalid Link Removed
Medium scale ’88 Spoiler, tuned ADGC (130-110-90-70): Sad but true
Long scale ’10 five string Elan: Solo

Ride the lightning is played with fingers, all others with a pick.

Sorry for the high 'tallica content... :hiding:
 
#13
FC Bass said:
I use R.Cocco 50-70-90-110 on all my basses, except the fretless which gets R.Cocco 45-65-85-105 strings (130 A/B on the down tuned four string and on the fiver.)
I don't really have a preference for medium/longscale, though there are some differences.
Overall I think medium scale sounds sweeter, longscale is tighter with faster attack.

32 Inch can certainly do tight, but when it gets real fast - like the second part in “One” (I’m in a Metallica tribute band) I prefer the long scale, there’s a bit too much movement in the strings on a medium scale bass.
Note: That’s based on a comparison between Alembics, I prefer the medium scale Alembics over any long/X-long scale of other brands I’ve played. (also for the fast tight parts)
Overall I use the medium scale basses for finger style and the longscale basses for pick style, medium scale is a bit easier for my lazy fingers. :-)

Check out this pic for the visible difference, the nuts are (about) at same height:

80262.jpg


Playability is superb on the medium scales, though the longscale five string is starting to get pretty comfortable for me also.

Alembic also have two standard types of neck profiles, the fretless in the pic has the newer “comfort taper” - Narrow at the nut, wide at the bridge.
The other basses have the “Classic taper” - Wide nut, narrow bridge.
When I’ve played my “comfort taper” longscale five string for a while, it’s funny to go back to a “classic taper” medium scale Spoiler. Looks like a toy! :-) (that’s until you start to play though)

Side note: Best sounding bass (imho) I’ve ever played, was a short scale Series I Stanley Clarke model.
Extremely sweet and bold sound, but it did get a bit scary between the 12th and 24th fret (frets close to each other)

Basically: If it says “Alembic” on the headstock (or at least has the cloud/hand/prism/dragon logo), you can’t go wrong

Some Youtube links to some Alembic sounds:

Medium scale ’83 Spoiler: Invalid Link Removed and: Invalid Link Removed
Medium scale ’88 Spoiler, tuned ADGC (130-110-90-70): Sad but true
Long scale ’10 five string Elan:
Solo


Ride the lightning is played with fingers, all others with a pick.

Sorry for the high 'tallica content... :hiding:
Click to expand...

Sick sound. You got the Jason thing nailed. The "hetfield" voice is 95% spot on. Thats awsome. 99.9% of Metallica tribute bands suck hard core. You guys care about details, instruments, sounds, gear, ect. Bravo.
 
#15
To the OP: keep in mind the original Alembic was 32" and that scale length is totally consistent with that company's designs.

Like JohnK, my first Alembic bought in '76 was a Long Scale. I only recently traded that bass off to Brian Barrett at the Low End. It was certainly a Bosendorfer of basses, but I also had trouble with the ergonomics. I still have a short scale; it is cool, but I find that scale length to be a tad "chokey." My brother has a medium scale Series I, and that bass is perfect. It rules. IMO, that medium scale is perfect for Alembics with the original body shape. The 34" scale really wants an alternative body that shifts the action into the players wheelhouse. I believe the newer Balance K body accomplishes this (Gasp! check out the current Custom build on the website for reference: [Invalid or Expired Link Removed])
 
#16
Thanx ledyard, we try to do our best :D :bassist:

@ Jeff Scott: I don't see any problems with string choice for medium/short scale basses...
It's more likely to run into problems with long and extra longscale basses (especially Alembics with their tailpiece/bridge design) or when you're using medium/short scale strings on medium/short scale Alembics ([Invalid or Expired Link Removed])
 
#18
Haven't owned the same model in 2 scales, but have had 2 Alembic though with very different electronics.

Epic: 34," with EQ set "flat" aggressive and twangy, lots of bite and sustain. Not woofy, wooly, or any of that.

Exploiter/Spoiler: 32," with EQ set "flat" aggressive and twangy, lots of bite and sustain. Not woofy, wooly, or any of that.

I've never bought special strings in my life, for any medium or short scale bass I've owned. Going with a thicker string makes sense, as mentioned above, but I've been happy with the same gauge on my 32" as I like on my 34" so felt no need to experiment. My basses both had Stainless round wounds, at various times 85 to 95.
 
#19
FC Bass said:
Thanx ledyard, we try to do our best :D :bassist:

@ Jeff Scott: I don't see any problems with string choice for medium/short scale basses...
It's more likely to run into problems with long and extra longscale basses (especially Alembics with their tailpiece/bridge design) or when you're using medium/short scale strings on medium/short scale Alembics ([Invalid or Expired Link Removed])
Click to expand...

Back in the early '90s, when I had mine, most stores had to order in medium scale strings; I am sure these days it is far easier to get them, especially, online, something that only became available to me long after the Alembics were gone.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back