I've always known that longer scale length guitars are better for tuning stability in order to increase tension on the strings if your tuning down. Other than the low tuning issue is there any other reason(or benefit) for longer scale?
regular or long scale?
- Thread starter fmbighair
- Start date
Help Support The Boogie Board:
In theory, slightly better sustain comes from the longer scale.
There is a disadvantage to long scale if you have short fingers like me. Those Johnny Smith long-stretch piano type chords are impossible to play, but I don't suppose you intend to play much jazz?
There is a disadvantage to long scale if you have short fingers like me. Those Johnny Smith long-stretch piano type chords are impossible to play, but I don't suppose you intend to play much jazz?
ylo said:
wow, i never even thought of that? (seriously) Not that it matters too much but I'm curious WHY it gets better sustain, like is it due to the fact that the string is stretched out longer accross the guitar or something like that?
Johnny who? :lol: just teasing hereylo said:
I actually never heard of Johnny Smith but I'm always open to ALL kinds of genres. For the most part I play hard rock and some pop but I always try to be tasteful about it. So I don't think the problem about the stretched out chords would affect me too much? :? what your saying about chords feeling stretched out because of the longer scale length does make sense because its the same amount of frets as the shorter guitars just spread out over a longer distance. But don't some guitars have more frets than others?...
I'm prolly just worrying about stuff that wont mean too much, but I'm very curious about this subject....
ylo, thanks so much for the reply, its really got me brainstorming. If you or anybody else has ANY ideas. pros or cons for scale length please feel free to jump in!
On longer scale guitars (if all else is equal), the string tension is higher for the same note, so it takes longer for the string to lose energy to the air when it vibrates. There is more mass (more string) vibrating as well.
If you find a guitar that feels good for the music you like to play, then stick with that scale length I guess. Another variable is neck width, 1 5/8" (original Telecaster) or 1 11/16" (original Gibson) at the nut. I like 1 5/8", but I've got fat fingers and have trouble playing adjacent strings without one finger touching more than one string, so I stick with wider necks.
Johnny Smith -- Check out Moonlight In Vermont with Stan Getz. Smith plays chords with 4 or 5 notes stacked on top of each other really close together, everything in the same octave. The fingerings for the chords are totally crazy, but they sound pretty cool.
If you find a guitar that feels good for the music you like to play, then stick with that scale length I guess. Another variable is neck width, 1 5/8" (original Telecaster) or 1 11/16" (original Gibson) at the nut. I like 1 5/8", but I've got fat fingers and have trouble playing adjacent strings without one finger touching more than one string, so I stick with wider necks.
Johnny Smith -- Check out Moonlight In Vermont with Stan Getz. Smith plays chords with 4 or 5 notes stacked on top of each other really close together, everything in the same octave. The fingerings for the chords are totally crazy, but they sound pretty cool.
hey ylo, thanks so much for some excellent points!
what do you mean by that, like if everything else is set up right?ylo said:
yeah, that really does make sense, never thought that it was the reason.ylo said:
yeah, ultimately thats the best philosophy i guess. Even if I do use a bit longer scale, its only gonna be an increase of 1 to 2 at the very most, so thats prolly gonna be significant in the grand scheme of things. Although, ya never know, i'm pretty perceptive but i have to try out two different ones side by side.
now THAT is a very good point I also did not think of. I've played many les pauls but haven't played a telecaster in a long time. So i'm trying to get an idea of how it would feel. its actually been a while for both.ylo said:
yeah, i will DEFINITLY check that out...i go on youtube a lot so many sumptin will be on there! 8) I love gettin hip to new stuff, especially when its directly from people that dig music!ylo said:
Machine Gun
Well-known member
I've heard before that the shorter stiffer neck will have better sustain than a longer neck.
Thoughts or comments anyone??
Thoughts or comments anyone??
That's why I said "all other things being equal." Sure, there are other variables that can affect sustain like headstock mass, nut material, neck rigidity, type of bridge, type of wood, string gauge, magnetic pull from pickups, whether the guitar has a bolt-on or neck-through design etc. I'm no expert on all of these. All I know is that they can make a difference.
In my experience, most mid to high end guitars by the major manufacturers have great sustain, and I can't really tell much difference when I play them. Some of the inexpensive Chinese-made instruments -- that's another story.
In my experience, most mid to high end guitars by the major manufacturers have great sustain, and I can't really tell much difference when I play them. Some of the inexpensive Chinese-made instruments -- that's another story.
I actually prefer the shorter scale because it is easier to bend your strings. After having switched form strat bodied guitars to Gibsons, I now find 25 1/2 a little awkward at times. I prefer the 50's profile neck also so that just shows you that I am more into comfort. Neck thickness doesn't bother me because I have big palms. I have a harder time with thinner necks because I have more palm to have to fold. String tension will change depending upon the string gauge you use too. I can tell you that I found better tone with medium strings on a fixed bridge neckthrough guitar that happened to be 24 3/4 scale than I ever did even with heavier strings on a floating bridge bolt-on neck guitar that had a 25 1/2 scale.
If you think about things in a physical science kind of way, longer string span will result in less stability as the metal fatigue will be greater over a longer span thus creating less tuning stability regardless of tension. That would be how an engineer might think about it.
If you are looking for sustain, yes, a longer scale might be advantageous because there is a longer span for there to be more flexibility of the string for deflection that is proportionately related to the vibrations of the string itself. There is also more surface area for the string to be affected by the vibrations (resonance) of the guitar and the air surrounding the string that is too affected by the sound that the string is creating.
I can tell you that I have found that my Les Paul sustains better than my Strat. I feel that the neckthrough fixed bridge design as well as the tone woods and humbuckers are key factors in this observation. I also feel that the loss of sustain from the floating bridge and bolt-on neck further hinder the Strats ability to sustain in addition to the single coils due to their lower output signal. In the case represented here it is a simple mechanical advantage that the Les Paul has over the Strat in design though the Strat has the longer scale advantage.
I would assume that a Telecaster v. SG comparison might be more in line provided that the Telecaster had dual humbuckers or that the SG had P-90s. I don't have humbuckers in my Tele nor do I have P-90s in my SG so I cannot share those findings. I can say that my Tele sustains better than my Strat for the mere fact that it is fixed bridge unlike the Strat.
If you were not referring to the 24 3/4 v. 25 1/2 difference and were referring to the standard v. baritone I cannot help you there because I do not play baritone guitars.
If you think about things in a physical science kind of way, longer string span will result in less stability as the metal fatigue will be greater over a longer span thus creating less tuning stability regardless of tension. That would be how an engineer might think about it.
If you are looking for sustain, yes, a longer scale might be advantageous because there is a longer span for there to be more flexibility of the string for deflection that is proportionately related to the vibrations of the string itself. There is also more surface area for the string to be affected by the vibrations (resonance) of the guitar and the air surrounding the string that is too affected by the sound that the string is creating.
I can tell you that I have found that my Les Paul sustains better than my Strat. I feel that the neckthrough fixed bridge design as well as the tone woods and humbuckers are key factors in this observation. I also feel that the loss of sustain from the floating bridge and bolt-on neck further hinder the Strats ability to sustain in addition to the single coils due to their lower output signal. In the case represented here it is a simple mechanical advantage that the Les Paul has over the Strat in design though the Strat has the longer scale advantage.
I would assume that a Telecaster v. SG comparison might be more in line provided that the Telecaster had dual humbuckers or that the SG had P-90s. I don't have humbuckers in my Tele nor do I have P-90s in my SG so I cannot share those findings. I can say that my Tele sustains better than my Strat for the mere fact that it is fixed bridge unlike the Strat.
If you were not referring to the 24 3/4 v. 25 1/2 difference and were referring to the standard v. baritone I cannot help you there because I do not play baritone guitars.
Similar threads
