• 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.

Why DON'T you play a short-scale?

#222
3234718 said:
They are indeed d'addario nickels, and they sounded great but not the sound I wanted out of the bass. Now I have GHS precision flats and I'm very happy.
Click to expand...

mtsens1 said:
Stock strings sounded great, but I prefer GHS pressure wound for the RW sound and a little less noise. I cringe when I hear people 'slapping on flat's', and then hear others claim it sounds muddy. I love that flat's will give you a lower possible action w/o noise, but cant see sacrificing the sound, so it's preasure or RW's for me.
Click to expand...

I've tried chromes and 88s on my SG bass. It was all right, but the flats sound just doesn't work for me and I've always found myself returning to the stock strings. I also tried Rotosound 66s, but they didn't have quite the same magic in short scale form. Some of that might be the lighter gauge on a nut cut for bigger gauges, but for now I'm sticking with the D'Addario rounds.

Maybe sometime I'll give the 66s another go. I liked how easy they felt to play.
 
#223
without reading this entire thread, I have to add (probably duplicating other's sentiments here) that I don't play short scale basses because most great basses don't happen to be short scale. I also happen to like low B strings which don't commonly appear on short scale basses, at least not those I can afford these days.

I do own a hag hb-8 which is short scale, but with a rather specific reason/feature that obviously sets it apart aside from being short scale. I would have been fine with it being 34" scale - they just make 'em in 30" scale or whatever it is.

If my BTBs and musicmans were 30" scale and sounded/played at least as well as they do now then I'd love it! I'm a guitarist as well (and other things like violin) so shorter scale lengths are always fine with me.

I did learn bass on 34" though (fender pre) in the 80s so it's second nature for me to play a precision with low action light roundwounds, and I always have to think more on anything else.

Of course I don't own anything like a 4 string 34" bass any more, so.... I guess I like thinking a lot.
 
#224
I first started out on a short scale bass because the music store people said it would be better for me because of my height 5'5" on a good day.

So off I went before even trying a long scale, the guy teaching me bass even thought this was good idea. Well to make a long story longer after awhile I asked if I could try his beloved old beat up and worn sixty something Jazz bass. All of a sudden my technique, scales and lessons came snap into place. He was shocked, then he noticed my fingers seemed to be longer than most people my size. Now I play long scales, moral is try the two scales out and don't let your height determine which is more comfortable.
 
#231
I find short-scales to be quaint and interesting, but most do not qualify as a real Bass to me. Overall it comes down to one important factor, as one poster noted most short scales lack low end clarity. What are you doing with a Bass when you cannot summon clear low pitch tones. I get that you might want a fuzzy or muddy low end for certain tunes, but you can make a 34 or 35 do that too when you need it - not the other way around tho.
 
#233
alienstarguest said:
I find short-scales to be quaint and interesting, but most do not qualify as a real Bass to me. Overall it comes down to one important factor, as one poster noted most short scales lack low end clarity. What are you doing with a Bass when you cannot summon clear low pitch tones. I get that you might want a fuzzy or muddy low end for certain tunes, but you can make a 34 or 35 do that too when you need it - not the other way around tho.
Click to expand...

I disagree, I get plenty of low end clarity just playing a $150 bronco with a SD pickup. its all a matter of finding the right strings. To me that's the only real disadvantage to SS bass. They seem to be finnicky about string choice.
 
#234
DrSpunkwater said:
Ah, the smell of ignorance in the morning.
Click to expand...
Ignorance ?, yes perhaps. Mostly my opinion based on my personal exp. I suppose some of us mite be able to hold down the low end with a Uke tuned appropriately. Our basses are descendants of double basses, the instrument was large and had a long scale for reason. The farther we get from that formula , the less effective becomes the role of the instrument. If we make due with a 30 scale, why not a 24 then or an 18. And while a 30 might not be just a novelty, its getting closer.
 
#237
topo morto said:
The better your technique, the more you can do on a given instrument. But with a given level of ability, couldn't you do more on a smaller instrument with the same range?[/QUOTE
No, generally not. Even some small guys feel really clostraphobic working a short scale. I like to see people playing short scales tho, it would be dull to have everyone playing cookie cutter sizes. In actuallity , i think you can do less on the smaller instrument. Just as less can be done on a ukalele. But by all means, keep rockin the short scales.
Click to expand...
 
#238
Trayster2 said:
I wanted a short scale so badly and when I finally got one, I find I mostly play full scale. I think it's because I don't want to lose the ability to play a full scale.
Click to expand...

I used to worry about that, but actually, why would you lose any ability (As long as you play the 34 sometimes)? Adapting to different fret spacing is something you have to do even on the same instrument, at different positions on the neck.
 
#239
topo morto said:
The reason was that there was no amplification available. There is now.
Click to expand...
Na, thats not it at all. There was no amplification for guitars either, and they were relegated to the rhythm section of swing bands until they could be heard. The bands got smaller and the guitar moved up front when people could hear them. A lot of this is physics and Leo Fender became a physicist thru trail and error. He would have happily build a 25" (or 30 for that matter), if the low pitched instrument sounded any good. But it didnt sound that good. I realize he went onto to build Broncos and MM basses. But that was for a student market....to eventually be graduated from. Sure now some of those are cool to own. I have a 73 MM myself that had a humbucker from an early Tele bass that someone rigged up. Leo may have even opted for scaling beyond 34, but other problems arose, so 34 was his best compromise.
 
#240
alienstarguest said:
topo morto said:
The better your technique, the more you can do on a given instrument. But with a given level of ability, couldn't you do more on a smaller instrument with the same range?
Click to expand...
No, generally not. Even some small guys feel really clostraphobic working a short scale. I like to see people playing short scales tho, it would be dull to have everyone playing cookie cutter sizes. In actuallity , i think you can do less on the smaller instrument. Just as less can be done on a ukalele. But by all means, keep rockin the short scales.
Click to expand...

I am surprised to hear people say that they feel cramped on a 30" bass. I don't think a competent player (who isn't a giant) should feel cramped on a 30, or a u-bass for that matter - or feel stretched on a 35 (or a 42" upright) - you should be able to adapt your technique to anything, within reason. But I'm still not really seeing why the majority of non-giant people wouldn't be able to cover more musical ground on the 30 scale than a 34. One thing I have found with my current shorty though is that it's not so forgiving of poor slap tecchnique (though it could be the flats..?)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back