| Author |
Topic: The long and short of it all |
ed packard
From:
Show Low AZ
|
Posted 11 Mar 2005 2:38 pm |
|
With the advent of the integrated Changer/Tuner taking no more room than the Changer alone, there are choices to be made:
1. Keep the same scale length and shorten the instrument.
2. Keep the same scale length and same body length.
3. Enlarge the scale length (more frets to play), and keep the same body length.
What would you do, and why.
|
|
|
 |
Karlis Abolins
From:
(near) Seattle, WA, USA
|
Posted 11 Mar 2005 5:21 pm
|
|
Ed, You are are asking a question that has two answers for me. The first is to leave the scale length the same and shorten the guitar to make it lighter. The second is to keep the guitar the same length and lengthen the scale. This would make it possible to play lower notes without extra strings. You could go to an 8 string guitar and end up with a lighter instrument. In either case, it would be an advantage to have a lighter instrument after years of dragging and carrying a pedal steel up and down stairs.
Karlis |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 11 Mar 2005 5:48 pm
|
|
| I think either option 1 or 3 is reasonable. Why keep scale length and body length same? Don't need a special design for that. A shorter, lighter instrument makes sense, but I think it's already possible to make a standard guitar light enough so it 'walks' across the floor with pedal/lever action. So I think I'd like a longer scale instrument provided we're talking keyless so the overall effective string length/string tension is not larger (i.e., string breakage isn't a problem). Advantages of longer string length: closer to 'ideal' string model, better sustain (I think), better intonation because space between frets becomes larger. I think I'd like some extra space between notes up there in Hugheyland. Sorta the same difference as between a Tele/Strat guitars (25.5" scale length) vs. Duosonic/Musicmaster guitars (around 22.5" -23.5" scale length), big differences in tone an intonation capability, much of which is atributable to scale length differences. Personally, I wouldn't cut number of strings, I guess I'm starting to get used to my 14-string Sierra. With such an instrument, I'd probably like standard 12-string E9/B6 universal. |
|
|
|
ed packard
From:
Show Low AZ
|
Posted 12 Mar 2005 8:39 am
|
|
KA & DM; Thanks for the replies. In considering the design of the BEAST, these were the choices to be made. For the BEAST, I decided on the largest, longest, therefor probably worst case approach = longer scale. The gauges and tensions were kept like E9 (actually Eb9), and three frets were added to get the 29.73" scale. Then it was tuned to C9. I like the increased range.
The Baby BEAST was made by keeping the body length the same as a keyless E9, and using the 24.25" scale tuned E9. This was to show that the PST hardware can be used as a retrofit to existing instruments.
The other possibility = standard scale length, short body will be next. About 3 inches can be removed from the body length; that is not a lot of weight, but about 5 inches could be also removed from the width of an 8 inch wide body for an S10 = shorter and lighter.
The longer scale provides another choice; do we mark the fretboard per the standard shorter scale (frets, new 3,5,7,9,12,etc.)or per frets old 3,5,7,9,12 (now frets 6,8,10,12,15 etc.)? The latter creates a problem re flageolet location.
|
|
|
|
