Re: Rickenbacker bass
- From: blahx3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 16 May 2007 10:14:50 -0700
On May 16, 8:06 am, Fletch <geoffarn...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 15, 1:53 pm, handgun...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
.. why did they decide to go shorter than the norm when everyone else
was/is doing a 34 inch scale?
The answer "because they could" comes to mind. ;)
What you've got to remember is when Ric brought out their first Bass
they were only the Second successful electric Bass to come out after the
P. The 34" scale length was not the "standard" yet, just an arbitrary
number Leo had pulled out of his hat. Since then 34" has become the norm
due to Fenders position in the industry and all it's clones.
I would argue that the number Leo pulled was arbitrary. I believe he
based his scale length on the stand up bass scale length, which is in
the neightbourhood of 34 inches.
I beg to differ:
The normal double bass (aka, 3/4 bass) has a 41.3"-41.5" scale length.
The more unusual sizes (1/2, 1/4) are shorter, but nothing around 34"
This is one of the major reasons why an acoustic bass guitar with a
34" scale length, using 34" string tension will not sound like a 2x
bass, regardless of body size.
- Prev by Date: Re: Huh? Very Strange Craigslist Ad
- Next by Date: Re: Learning songs
- Previous by thread: Re: Rickenbacker bass
- Next by thread: Re: Rickenbacker bass