Short scale vs. long scale

[thebass]

Hello all,
 
I played long scale 34 basses since the last +20yrs and want to switch to 30.73 short scale mainly because I assume that my left hand playing will gain speed for faster licks. Unfortunately I am not able to try this before.
 
What should I consider when I change from long scale to short scale ? Will it change the sound, sustain etc. ? Any input welcome.

[bassplaynmatt]

This may not apply to Alembic because there basses constantly defy natural law but there is an amount of physics involved with string length. There is an actual equation for this but my last physics class was a long time ago : )  
 
It basically states that the fundamental of a given note needs a certain length of wave to exist. and I vaguely remember that translating into something like a 12-ft wave for 20 hrtz! Now don't quote me on the specifics but I know the concept is easily compared when you listen to an upright piano vs. a concert grand piano. The upright has a bright and less focused sound anywhere past C in the bass clef. However, the grand will fill up a concert hall and speak those low notes quite clearly. The difference between the two is the fact that most upright pianos don't have strings much longer than 4 1/2 - 5 feet but the low strings on a concert grand are 9 ft long. In my opinion most short scale basses and long scale basses compare the same way. Not to say that there aren't great characteristics about short scale basses, plus being an electric instrument you are alot less bound to Acoustic fundamental properties. If you play a short scale bass through a 600 watt amp with an 18in sub I am sure you could knock a couple piano players of any stage in the world ; ) Also, I can't vouch for Alembic short scale basses because I've never played one, like you I've been a long scale player since my first bass 12 years ago. I can say that I have compared 34 to 35 My Epic is a 34 scale bass and my Roscoe is a 35. They are both 6's and the low B on the Roscoe does have a bit more focus and a clearer fundamental the the Epic. As far as playability  is concerned I can defiantly feel the extra fatigue when I play around the first to third fret area on the Roscoe but as far as playing faster I haven't really noticed the Roscoe slowing me down. I would think if you had smaller hands that It might make a bigger difference.  
 
Anyway, there is my random input so take it for what its worth (not much) and if you do get a new short scale then drop us long scale guys a line for info!
 
Later, Matt

[rogertvr]

For what this is worth...
 
Whenever I've played short scale basses (just to try them in shops) I've never got on with them. Last one I played was a Stanley Clarke Alembic last year. I'm ok at the nut end of the neck because the frets are a little closer together and I have small pork-sausage shape fingers ;-) so it eases the spread required. Trouble is, down at the other end where the frets are closer together, I keep tripping myself up because my fingers are a bit too big for the gaps between the frets.  I've never tried a 32 but I'm so used to 34 now that I'm comfortable with it.
 
Rog

[dnburgess]

thebass, I switched from a Jazz bass to short scale Series 1 about 12 years ago and have never regretted it. My style of playing tends to be fairly melodic, so I don't miss the low end timbre that Matt refers to - and with decent amplification I have no trouble cutting through on the E string when needed.
 
The only drawbacks are that my S1 is so easy to play and the action so fast that:
1. there is a temptation to overplay - that will normally be solved by being slapped around by other band members;
2. my left hand technique got a bit lazy - so the move back to 34 scale is not so easy;
3. I probably use too many three note pulloffs -  see point 1.

[jl_mitchell]

Hello all,
 
I've been playing an Alembic short scale for four months now and am entirely happy with the sound and feel. I wouldn't go back to long scale and I played a jazz bass for fifteen years.
 
I was actually pleasantly surprised by the great string tension that an Alembic short scale (through neck) has. I thought that the strings would have felt looser. This bass has plenty of bottom as well.
 
I appreciate what bassplaynmatt has to say about string lenghts between upright and concert grand pianos (4.5 to 9 feet) but the difference between short and long scale Alembics is only 3.25 inches, i.e. a more subtle difference.  
 
James

[thebass]

Thanks to all for collective wisdom. The background why I am asking is that I am about to exchange my MK Std (34 scale) with another board member against his SC (30.75 scale). I've played a medium scale (no Alembic) more than 15 yrs ago and felt very comfortable with it but I have no experience with short scale basses especially not Alembic. I am sure Alembic would never build short scales if they would sound good and if even Stanley Clarke is satisfied with the sound ... well how could I be wrong with it ? It's just that I love the huge sound from my MK and just want some more input to convice me that I make the right decision which I don't need to regret afterwards.

[stoney]

Hi Werner,
Nice website.
 
For what it's worth, I play a medium scale Essence and a short scale Brown Bass. I had a long scale but, as I told Paul (TBO) I got tired of chasing it around the room.  From long to short, yes, there is a difference between frets and you will most likely notice that right off. But for the tone I think it is important to consider the woods or which the bass (particularly Alembic)is made.  My Brown Bass is stock walnut, & myrtle with a walnut(center piece), mahogany (outside pieces) and maple neck (two laminates). Those woods make that bass very deep in tone by comparison to say a bass with a mostly maple neck. It seems as thoug you almost have to push the Brown Bass to get a really bright tone.  Point being is that if you have the opportunity, play some with different woods.