Re: Scale Length Question


"Ed Edelenbos" <eded@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fq8sma$pq2$1@xxxxxxxxxxx

"Tony Done" <tonydone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:HgNxj.20573$421.3702@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Ed Edelenbos" <eded@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fq819k$u4f$1@xxxxxxxxxxx

"Tony Done" <tonydone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%%Kxj.20541$421.14615@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

One major ramification is that unless the guitar was built around the
shorter scale (as is the BT), your 14-fretter would become a 12 fretter
with 2 frets less at the soundhole. But if you usually play with a capo
anyway, that wouldn't matter except in terms of resale value (think
very low). To get a short-scale 14 fretter would involve major changes
in the build of the guitar, in particular moving the bridge forwards.
This might have an adverse effect on tone unless the bracing and
perhaps soundhole location was also radically altered.


Resale value aside... I've heard that said and I keep having a hard
time understanding the reasoning.... I understand it would become a 12
fret. The bracing part I can understand. But how would things change if
the first 2 frets were left off (i.e. if the nut was where the 2nd fret
is)? It seems to me that if was tuned up a full step (to F#), there
would be no change (other than minor intonation tweaks). If it was
tuned standard ( to E), the string gauges and/or bracing would have to
change. But I still don't see why the soundhole would need relocation.

One thing I'd like to try sometime (but it seems I'd have to build it
myself which means I'll never try one) would be a regular 14 fret 25.5"
guitar with the nut at fret 1... the result being a 24" scale 13 fret.
Another would be a 24" scale 14 fret "0" size.

Ed

(trust me, I am *not* arguing it, trying to understand)


Here's the reasoning, as I see it. As you say, getting a 12-fretter is no
problem, all you have to do is take two frets off a standard 14-fretter.
Imagine you have done that, and you now have a guitar sitting in front of
you with a 14 fret body and this shortened 12-fret neck. How do you turn
it into a 14 fretter, apart from adding the two frets back on? You have
two choices:

You can shorten the upper bout to expose two extra frets. This is exactly
how the 14-fret steel string guitars evolved from the earlier
12-fretters - the lower bout was made shorter. You can see it in pics of
a modern 12-fret 000 compared with a standard 14-fretter:

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/product/Martin-00028VS-Acoustic-Guitar?sku=514681&src=3SOSWXXA

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/product/Martin-00028EC-Eric-Clapton-Signature-Acoustic-Guitar?sku=514784

You can see by comparing the two pics that trimming another piece off the
end of the upper bout would put it very close to the soundhole

Or

You can move the bridge and neck forwards on the body. take a piece of
stick the same length as the nut to bridge distance, lay it on the guitar
and mark on it the position of the 14th fret. Then move the stick up
until the 14th fret mark is at the neck-body joint. The body end of the
stick shows where you have to move the bridge to get 14 frets and the
same scale length on that body. This puts the bridge closer to the
soundhole, and probably sitting on top of the braces, so you would want
to move those as well.

Either of these options involves significant remodeling to get a 14-fret
short scale guitar

I hope I have explained this OK, I can see it in my minds eye quite
clearly, but explaining it is another matter.

Tony D


Ok, we're (or maybe only I am) talking a different beast. I was thinking
leaving everything the same except the scale length... i.e. a 12 fret
neck on a 14 fret body or, a 14 fret neck that has been made 2 frets short
(or 1 fret short to get the 13 fret 24" scale). I forget offhand what the
scale on a Martin size 7 is, but it is a short scale 14 fret.

http://www.jacksonsrareguitars.com/product.php?productid=17359

Ed


Yeah, what you are talking about has no problem that I can see except low
string tension and resale value. My best sounding electric has a baritone
(30") neck, so I use a capo on the second fret to get more or less normal
tension with 13-56 strings, and scale length. This leads to two difficulties
for me. Firstly, not having enough frets at the high end, and secondly
having all the dots in the wrong places. Neither of these are so bad when
fretting, but with slide you jump up and down the neck all the time, using
the highest frets as markers, and misplaced dots cause chaos.

<g> Just to add to the confusion some of us are interested in the other
option, a standard 14-fret body with a full-scale12-fret neck, so that the
bridge is set closer to the centre of the lower bout. - See my "Norman
Blake" thread.

Tony D


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Scale Length Question
    ... same scale length as putting a capo on at the second fret, ... Would it actually sound like a guitar with a capo placed on the second ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: Scale Length Question
    ... the short scale. ... Also I looked at the Hoffman, nice guitar but strill I want a larger ... install a nut behind the 2nd fret and turn it into a zero fret. ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: Guitar Recommendation
    ... > It depends on what kind of guitar (i.e. body size and to a less degree, ... The 12 or 14 fret name has no bearing on scale length, ... but not with the free neck length. ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: Scale Length Question
    ... Would it actually sound like a guitar with a capo placed on the second fret? ... Would the strings need to be lighter gauge to account for the shorter scale? ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: Scale Length Question
    ... EBEABE on a 24.5 scale guitar, I think I would have to go to light gauge ... I think I am leaning toward the shorter scale because it'd easier ... scale length as putting a capo on at the second fret, ... Would the strings need to be lighter gauge to account for the shorter ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)