Jump to content

Questions about guitar scale length?


Fiend

Recommended Posts

Hey guys sorta of new to playing guitar and I know more about how to play than I do about guitar specs and what they are suppose to mean. So can I ask you gents what does the scale affect the sound of the guitar? I thought choosing the higher gauges of strings would help with lower tunning, does the scale help as well or does if have some other affect like better harmonics, etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

It's no matter really. Usually, the shorter the scale, the thicker your strings to have similar tension. But that's about it. Most guitars today are 25.5" (Fender standard) and have 9-42 strings, but in the past they used much heavier strings. Gibson standard is 24.75" and they usually come with 10-46. You can easily use thicker or thinner strings for either. In theory, for downtuning you want longer necks (that's why baritones have long necks, typically 27"), but again, the difference between standard 24.75" to 25.5" guitars is so small that it hardly matters. Using heavier strings makes your sound slightly fatter, and if you want to use heavier strings, a shorter scale is a bit better because of slightly lower string tension. But the difference is so small that it doesn't matter. I don't see why fretboard radius would affect sound in any way, it is only about playability. I think smaller fretboard radiuses are more comfortable for chords while larger ones/flatter necks are better for soloing. Traditionally you'll have rather small radiuses, but these days, radius will typically vary between 12" and 16". The much-lauded Jackson and Charvel necks have compound radius necks, that is, 12" on 1st fret for more chord comfort and 16" on upper frets for better solobility. But again, that's a very minor difference. More important than scale length or fretboard radius is fret size. If you're a heavy shredder/bender, the bigger the better (and here we are at Jackson and Charvel again). The more traditional/tame your playing style, the better lower/smaller frets may be, those that you have on your traditional Fender or Gibson guitar. Long story short, don't care too much about scale length or fretboard radius. edit: another thing that's more important than length or radius is neck thickness and width. Soloists usually want their neck flatter and wider, but that's much personal preference. Ibanez has some extremely flat and fast "Wizard" necks, too flat for many. Jackson/Charvel are slightly tamer, sweet spot for many. Schecter tend to be thicker and narrower than those, which I personally don't like, but that's really individual preference. Gibson necks on the other hand can be brutally thick (most notably their 50s necks), the term "tree trunk" is often used. That may be good for grabbing chords, but I find them awfully uncomfortable. Then again, there's no general rule about Gibson. A Gibson SG can have a tree trunk neck or a flimsy thin one, depending on year and model. That's really something you have to try out. Personally, for faster palying, I want flatter necks. Doesn't have to be as flat as the more extreme Ibanez Wizard necks, but personally I find the Gibson tree trunks hardly playable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's no matter really. Usually, the shorter the scale, the thicker your strings to have similar tension. But that's about it. Most guitars today are 25.5" (Fender standard) and have 9-42 strings, but in the past they used much heavier strings. Gibson standard is 24.75" and they usually come with 10-46. You can easily use thicker or thinner strings for either. In theory, for downtuning you want longer necks (that's why baritones have long necks, typically 27"), but again, the difference between standard 24.75" to 25.5" guitars is so small that it hardly matters. Using heavier strings makes your sound slightly fatter, and if you want to use heavier strings, a shorter scale is a bit better because of slightly lower string tension. But the difference is so small that it doesn't matter. I don't see why fretboard radius would affect sound in any way, it is only about playability. I think smaller fretboard radiuses are more comfortable for chords while larger ones/flatter necks are better for soloing. Traditionally you'll have rather small radiuses, but these days, radius will typically vary between 12" and 16". The much-lauded Jackson and Charvel necks have compound radius necks, that is, 12" on 1st fret for more chord comfort and 16" on upper frets for better solobility. But again, that's a very minor difference. More important than scale length or fretboard radius is fret size. If you're a heavy shredder/bender, the bigger the better (and here we are at Jackson and Charvel again). The more traditional/tame your playing style, the better lower/smaller frets may be, those that you have on your traditional Fender or Gibson guitar. Long story short, don't care too much about scale length or fretboard radius. edit: another thing that's more important than length or radius is neck thickness and width. Soloists usually want their neck flatter and wider, but that's much personal preference. Ibanez has some extremely flat and fast "Wizard" necks, too flat for many. Jackson/Charvel are slightly tamer, sweet spot for many. Schecter tend to be thicker and narrower than those, which I personally don't like, but that's really individual preference. Gibson necks on the other hand can be brutally thick (most notably their 50s necks), the term "tree trunk" is often used. That may be good for grabbing chords, but I find them awfully uncomfortable. Then again, there's no general rule about Gibson. A Gibson SG can have a tree trunk neck or a flimsy thin one, depending on year and model. That's really something you have to try out. Personally, for faster palying, I want flatter necks. Doesn't have to be as flat as the more extreme Ibanez Wizard necks, but personally I find the Gibson tree trunks hardly playable.
I'd hope the OP got this figured out sometime in the past two years. But, he was asking about tone; most of your post seems to be about playability. I'd say scale length is a bigger factor than fret height on both counts. The 3/4" difference between a standard Gibson and Fender scale isn't much, but it's noticeable, and there's a much wider range available now with all of the baritones on the market. My Steinberger's scale is 28 5/8" - essentially two low frets longer than my Gibson - and I've had the same pickup in both guitars, as well as testing lots of different string gauges in many tunings between D standard and drop G. The differences are remarkable. A guitar with a longer scale length will have longer, tighter strings (at the same gauge and pitch). Other things being equal, they'll tend to sustain better, and their pitch will be more stable. You can make up tension on a shorter guitar by using thicker strings, but it's still easier to go off pitch by hitting the string too hard or bending while fretting. Regarding thicker strings, up to a point you can say they make your tone "fatter" by having a stronger fundamental, but another big difference I've noticed is in output. Thicker strings have more metal in them and actually offer a noticeable increase in gain, which can equate to a loss of clarity if you're not careful. Tone is the sum of a lot of little details, and I wouldn't want to reduce it to a simple comparison - but, although I find the shorter guitars easier to play, I prefer the tonal characteristics of a longer scale: clarity, sustain, note separation, pitch stability.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, 9-42 and 10-46 on "most guitars"? Where are you getting those numbers from? I don't know anyone that uses those gauges; everyone has a different preference, there's nothing standard about it. I'm currently in C# standard with a 12-63 set; up in D, I used 11-55. The other guitarist in my band uses 11-56.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I notice the date after the reply xD But you were right although I have another bunch of sincere questions, How does the sound changes with the help of a pedal? Which pedal goes with what set? D: Which scale sounds better in what pedal? etc...
Are you talking about effects pedals? I'm not sure what you mean, but there are hundreds of effects pedals that change your sound in all kinds of ways. Scale length and other physical characteristics of your guitar don't have any bearing on that, though. Unrelated issues. Do you mean something different by "pedal"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Join Metal Forum

    joinus-home.jpg

  • Our picks

    • Whichever tier of thrash metal you consigned Sacred Reich back in the 80's/90's they still had their moments.  "Ignorance" & "Surf Nicaragura" did a great job of establishing the band, whereas "The American Way" just got a little to comfortable and accessible (the title track grates nowadays) for my ears.  A couple more records better left forgotten about and then nothing for twenty three years.  2019 alone has now seen three releases from Phil Rind and co.  A live EP, a split EP with Iron Reagan and now a full length.

      Notable addition to the ranks for the current throng of releases is former Machine Head sticksman, Dave McClean.  Love or hate Machine Head, McClean is a more than capable drummer and his presence here is felt from the off with the opening and title track kicking things off with some real gusto.  'Divide & Conquer' and 'Salvation' muddle along nicely, never quite reaching any quality that would make my balls tingle but comfortable enough.  The looming build to 'Manifest Reality' delivers a real punch when the song starts proper.  Frenzied riffs and drums with shots of lead work to hold the interest.


      There's a problem already though (I know, I am such a fucking mood hoover).  I don't like Phil's vocals.  I never had if I am being honest.  The aggression to them seems a little forced even when they are at their best on tracks like 'Manifest Reality'.  When he tries to sing it just feels weak though ('Salvation') and tracks lose real punch.  Give him a riffy number such as 'Killing Machine' and he is fine with the Reich engine (probably a poor choice of phrase) up in sixth gear.  For every thrashy riff there's a fair share of rock edged, local bar act rhythm aplenty too.

      Let's not poo-poo proceedings though, because overall I actually enjoy "Awakening".  It is stacked full of catchy riffs that are sticky on the old ears.  Whilst not as raw as perhaps the - brilliant - artwork suggests with its black and white, tattoo flash sheet style design it is enjoyable enough.  Yes, 'Death Valley' & 'Something to Believe' have no place here, saved only by Arnett and Radziwill's lead work but 'Revolution' is a fucking 80's thrash heyday throwback to the extent that if you turn the TV on during it you might catch a new episode of Cheers!

      3/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 10 replies
    • I
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/52-vltimas-something-wicked-marches-in/
      • Reputation Points

      • 3 replies

    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/48-candlemass-the-door-to-doom/
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • Full length number 19 from overkill certainly makes a splash in the energy stakes, I mean there's some modern thrash bands that are a good two decades younger than Overkill who can only hope to achieve the levels of spunk that New Jersey's finest produce here.  That in itself is an achievement, for a band of Overkill's stature and reputation to be able to still sound relevant four decades into their career is no mean feat.  Even in the albums weaker moments it never gets redundant and the energy levels remain high.  There's a real sense of a band in a state of some renewed vigour, helped in no small part by the addition of Jason Bittner on drums.  The former Flotsam & Jetsam skinsman is nothing short of superb throughout "The Wings of War" and seems to have squeezed a little extra out of the rest of his peers.

      The album kicks of with a great build to opening track "Last Man Standing" and for the first 4 tracks of the album the Overkill crew stomp, bash and groove their way to a solid level of consistency.  The lead work is of particular note and Blitz sounds as sneery and scathing as ever.  The album is well produced and mixed too with all parts of the thrash machine audible as the five piece hammer away at your skull with the usual blend of chugging riffs and infectious anthems.  


      There are weak moments as mentioned but they are more a victim of how good the strong tracks are.  In it's own right "Distortion" is a solid enough - if not slightly varied a journey from the last offering - but it just doesn't stand up well against a "Bat Shit Crazy" or a "Head of a Pin".  As the album draws to a close you get the increasing impression that the last few tracks are rescued really by some great solos and stomping skin work which is a shame because trimming of a couple of tracks may have made this less obvious. 

      4/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...