Scale Length and Sound

[RClegg]

Anyone care to opine about the effects of scale length on tone? I have 2 guitars (a tele and a jumbo) with 25.5 scale, but in my search for an archtop I have played some 24.75 necks that felt more comfortable to my 50 year old hands. They next were wide, but shorter.

All else being equal, how does this affect the sound in an archtop? What I have played sounded good, but my exposure to shorter scale has been limited. Is it different for carved vs. laminate? Does it "thunk"(jk--I assume that scale doesn't impact "thunk")? Any and all thoughts appreciated.

Thanks!

Russ

[marcwhy]

Regarding your first question, here's a technical discussion by a master: Novax Guitars: Information: Technical Lecture

[Alder Statesman]

IMO Longer scaled guitars are easier to tune, easier to set intonation and easier to play harmonics on. I also prefer the general feel of the long scale. YMMV

[Herbie]

Longer scale often means longer guitar, more neck and more body. So there will be more sound.

I played many years with Epiphone Emperor Regent (Korean made). I always felt there is something weird in my playing public with it. Then I learned that it is longer scale guitar than my Les Pauls with which I had played decades longer. After this revelation I went to Gibson ES-165, ES-137 and ES-175 and playing alive is lot easier.

I know that with shorter scale guitars I can't reach sound of classic Kenny Burrell nor Wes etc. But it also means that I don't have to dream about long scale guitars like L5 nor Wes M. model that are the priciest of all! My flagship dreams (L4) is a lot cheaper!

[hans halmackenreuter]

I prefer a long scale all though 2 of my guitars have 24.75 neck. The main reason why I prefer the longer scale is that I like playing heavy strings, but the low e string of a common 13 gauge string set sounds undefined to me if it is strung up on short scale. So a 13 set of string sounds better on a longer scale. Therefore I play 12s on my short scales.

[vintagelove]

I have never played a 25.5 that I truly thought played great. For years I thought the individual guitars just were not as good as the ones I liked. Fast forward a few years and it dawned on me, the extra tension due to the scale length is what caused them to play "sluggish" (in relation to other guitars).

i also prefer the darker fatter sound, think es175 and a polytone.

[jzucker]

I know that with shorter scale guitars I can't reach sound of classic Kenny Burrell nor Wes etc. But it also means that I don't have to dream about long scale guitars like L5 nor Wes M. model that are the priciest of all! My flagship dreams (L4) is a lot cheaper!

i don't think that's true. Listen to benson play wes-like stuff with his thumb on the X-500 or his GB200 or even the GB10

[oldane]

The difference in scale length between 24.75" and 25.50" is 0.75" ~ just 3% difference.

I have never been able to feel any percertable difference in fretting resistance between my 25.50" guitars and my 24.75" ES175. Besides, everything else is never equal. A perfectly identical setup of two guitars is highly unlikely, so it would be hard to determine if a felt difference was due to a scale length difference or to a slight difference in setup. Just a difference in the shape of the relief upbow or a slight difference in the cut of the nut string slots could mean a difference in feel. As for the tone, there are so many other factors than scale length which can also mean a difference - again, everything else is never equal - so I would not be able to identify a difference in tone as being due to scale length alone.

As for the sound of Wes, on some of his early records, he used a 175 and a 125 which both has 24.75" scale. On the "Incredible Guitar" album, he used a 175. Both sounded much brighter on the records than the L5 he used early on with its "Alnico" single coil PUs and wood bridge saddle.

But that's just MHO. I know there are many who are convinced that they can both feel and hear a difference.

[jzucker]

i agree oldane. I always read people complaining that their hands are small and that the tension is too great on a 25.5" instrument and for years I convinced myself of the same thing but I regularly go between the 2 scale lengths and have no issues and I don't feel there's any perceivable difference in tension or strength necessary. The only place where i notice any diff is playing closed-voiced johnny smith chords in 1st or 2nd position.

I have small hands too. I used to watch Danny Gatton from up close. My hands dwarfed his. He had no problem playing an L5 or tele!

[barrymclark]

The only thing I really notice on the 25.5 over the 24.75 is that my fingers don't feel as bunched up on certain chords closer to the body. Other than that... nothing huge that I notice.

[vintagelove]

i agree oldane. I always read people complaining that their hands are small and that the tension is too great on a 25.5" instrument and for years I convinced myself of the same thing but I regularly go between the 2 scale lengths and have no issues and I don't feel there's any perceivable difference in tension or strength necessary. The only place where i notice any diff is playing closed-voiced johnny smith chords in 1st or 2nd position.

While i respect your opinion, it is a fact that 25.5 scale length has higher tension than than a shorter scale guitar. It's not an opinion, it's physics. Whether or not you can tell the difference depends entirely on your playing style, setup preference, etc etc.

i never said they played badly mind you, just that in comparison to a guitar with a similar setup, the difference in tension is noticeable.

[oldane]

While i respect your opinion, it is a fact that 25.5 scale length has higher tension than than a shorter scale guitar. It's not an opinion, it's physics. Whether or not you can tell the difference depends entirely on your playing style, setup preference, etc etc.

Actually I think we agree. I didn't question that there is a physical difference in tension between different scale lengths.There is. What I questioned was if the difference can be felt and heard in real life - considering the small difference between 24.75" and 25.5" and all the other subtle and less subtle differences there will always be between two individual instruments (for that matter even of the same make and model) despite attempts to set them up identically.

[vintagelove]

Actually I think we agree. I didn't question that there is a physical difference in tension between different scale lengths.There is. What I questioned was if the difference can be felt and heard in real life - considering the small difference between 24.75" and 25.5" and all the other subtle and less subtle differences there will always be between two individual instruments (for that matter even of the same make and model) despite attempts to set them up identically.

I can feel it, but I play light and fast. If your heavy handed in your picking, chances are you wouldn't even be able to have your action set like mine in the first place.

So just because player x can not feel it, doesn't mean player y can't.

As as far as sound, there are too many variables to paint to clear a picture beyond the most general statements.

[destinytot]

As for the sound of Wes, on some of his early records, he used a 175 and a 125 which both has 24.75" scale. On the "Incredible Guitar" album, he used a 175. Both sounded much brighter on the records than the L5 he used early on with its "Alnico" single coil PUs and wood bridge saddle.

So this is Wes playing a 24.75" scale? Wow - thanks!

[Archie]

Actually I think we agree. I didn't question that there is a physical difference in tension between different scale lengths.There is. What I questioned was if the difference can be felt and heard in real life - considering the small difference between 24.75" and 25.5" and all the other subtle and less subtle differences there will always be between two individual instruments (for that matter even of the same make and model) despite attempts to set them up identically.

I dont know, I'd like to think I feel a noticeable difference between the two
I also think that on average they have a different sound but then I could just be doing what Jack has been doing all these years.

You could argue that those differences are heard in the Wes albums mentioned.

[Groyniad]

there are so many differences that matter even within a type of guitar - say the 175 (so you would die for a given 175 and have little interest in another)

but dimensions really do make a difference - even though those differences easily get obscured by the variations just mentioned

i never used to notice these things - i'm sure i played for years without even realizing that different instruments had different scale lengths. but more and more i think they are the only differences you can really rely on (along with body size)

shorter scale guitars (tend to) have a softer feel and a warmer thicker sound. longer scale guitars tend to feel harder and tighter and have a brighter clearer sound. the bridland is obviously the clearest example of what a really short scale length does for you (and of what it takes from you).

whilst the materials are obviously different too i'm sure that the most important difference between a 175 and an L5 is the scale length. tal farlows sound more like L5s than they sound like 175s (i think) - they're laminates like 175s but they are the same basic dimensions as L5s.

certainly i want both - because i love the feel and sound of both scale-lengths (and of both types of material too - but that's a different thing). my settled view is that if you're in love with archtops you need a great example of both types.

[fumblefingers]

more overtones on the longer scale? sounds a bit more... alive?

[fumblefingers]

I dont know, I'd like to think I feel a noticeable difference between the two
I also think that on average they have a different sound but then I could just be doing what Jack has been doing all these years.

You could argue that those differences are heard in the Wes albums mentioned.

yes you could, because it is. me no likey.

[Archie]

So this is Wes playing a 24.75" scale? Wow - thanks!

You sure, Wes was playing a Gibson L5 in 1960 the same time the album was recorded/released.

[jzucker]

I can feel it, but I play light and fast. If your heavy handed in your picking, chances are you wouldn't even be able to have your action set like mine in the first place.

So just because player x can not feel it, doesn't mean player y can't.

As as far as sound, there are too many variables to paint to clear a picture beyond the most general statements.

lighten up! I'm just saying it's not noticeable to me. I think that's implied with everything we write on these forums. To me, there is some difference that is noticeable but it's mostly on playing stretch chords in lower positions. For everything else it's not very noticeable *TO ME*. Ymmv. Not saying anyone's an idiot for saying they do notice. But when giving general advice, I will say that to me, the interwebs exaggerate the differences IMO.

[destinytot]

You sure, Wes was playing a Gibson L5 in 1960 the same time the album was recorded/released.

No, I'm not - and I'm intrigued to know more after reading this:

On the "Incredible Guitar" album, he used a 175.

[jzucker]

i always heard he used an L4 for those early albums.

[wintermoon]

I do notice the diff.
I never got along w/my '59 ES-175 or the Ibanez 2460's I've had, even though they were set up great.
The heavy rounds I use were a bit easier to bend, but I don't do a lot of that.
Probably the only guitars that I like to play w/a short scale are 1920's Gibson L-5's and some D'Angelicos

[wintermoon]

i always heard he used an L4 for those early albums.

Wes used the 175 on the first Riverside lp. Not sure if it's the recording or the guitar or both, but you can hear a big difference in sound from that album to the next where he used an L-5

[oldane]

You sure, Wes was playing a Gibson L5 in 1960 the same time the album was recorded/released.

Wes lived in Indianapolis, but recorded first in LA (the Pacific records) and then in NY (the Riverside records). There are photos from a recording session in LA where he used a 125. Reportedly he borrowed a guitar from Barney Kessel (who lived in LA) for one of those LA sessions and that 125 might have been the one. The sound of the "fingerpickin'" album is somewhat different from much of his other work. The strings slap a good deal more than usual for him and it may be because he didn't use his own instrument with his own setup. He is said to have borrowed a 175 from Kenny Burrell for at least one recording session i NY. Maybe he simply choose not to bring his own L5 with him from Indianapolis and relied on borrowing a guitar in LA/NY.

Wes was not very interested in guitar customization. He was quoted saying the he preferred to use a guitar with ordinary standard specs because that way he could always borrow and play somebody elses instrument if needed.

BTW, he had a number of L5s through the years. One was a 1950s edition with "Alnico" single coil PUs and a wood bridge saddle which can be seen on photos from the Missile Room in Indianapolis where he gigged regularly with Mel Rhyne before rising to big fame. Another was a two PU with sharp cutaway. A third was a blonde with round cutaway (used on the live Full House album with Johnny Griffin). And then he had the two "trademark" L5s with one PU which later became the model for the present Gibson WesMo model.