(Basses with modified) scale length

[Johannes Felscher]

Well, I perfectly get your point - I wasn't thinking of extreme length like 44.5" and I was actually trying to discuss sound / response more than playability. I bet a bass with 41.5" scale length would be even easier to play down there if brought down to 39" - but how would that sound?
Let's put it differently: I might for whatever reason not be able to stretch my left hand very far (for whatever reason: size, injury, missing finger....) and I felt like I needed to shorten the playing length of my strings - how would it affect the tone - you know what I mean?
You might be playing lots of orchestra, I'm playing mostly in a jazz environment where a majority of parts don't contain playing octaves down on low f and f on the d string most of the time. I wasn't trying to convince anyone of any loss or gain in playing comfort, just curious about the effect the change in tension etc. might have on the instrument. I understand why you wouldn't want to play anything too long (and I was talking scale length 42-42", not 44,5"!) and I might not even recommend a student of mine playing such a bass, but still that wasn't really what I was trying to explore...

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Johannes Felscher

Well, I perfectly get your point - I wasn't thinking of extreme length like 44.5" and I was actually trying to discuss sound / response more than playability. I bet a bass with 41.5" scale length would be even easier to play down there if brought down to 39" - but how would that sound?
Let's put it differently: I might for whatever reason not be able to stretch my left hand very far (for whatever reason: size, injury, missing finger....) and I felt like I needed to shorten the playing length of my strings - how would it affect the tone - you know what I mean?
You might be playing lots of orchestra, I'm playing mostly in a jazz environment where a majority of parts don't contain playing octaves down on low f and f on the d string most of the time. I wasn't trying to convince anyone of any loss or gain in playing comfort, just curious about the effect the change in tension etc. might have on the instrument. I understand why you wouldn't want to play anything too long (and I was talking scale length 42-42", not 44,5"!) and I might not even recommend a student of mine playing such a bass, but still that wasn't really what I was trying to explore...

Well, if you are asking then here is what I suggest. If the bass is between 41"-42", leave it alone. Even if it's 40", do nothing more then move the bridge up. What you might want to do is find a 1/2 sized Germanic style bass (aka 5/8ths) and leave the 41-42" bass alone. It is more valuable for re-sale that way. As a matter of fact, smaller basses run less money, way less than Orchestra sized 3/4 models.

Sound? Well as I was talking about the bass becoming more focused when shortening I was referring to LARGE bodied 44" or so basses. These are deep and often organ like in tone. Shortening them tightens up the sound and response. With smaller basses like you describe, they are already smaller chambered instruments. So, a similar difference will occur in the sound when you shorten it. For jazz, especially amplified, thinner sounding basses are often more desirable. For me, I like them thick and full sounding so don't go by me on that.

A longer string on the same bass will be deeper sounding and visa versa.

[Johannes Felscher]

There we go - I like em thick and full, too, "even" in Jazz - check out Drew Gress on Marc Copland's CD "Haunted Hearts (and other ballads)" if you stop by the iTunes store the next time, one of the most pleasing bass sounds I know on any recording. He seems to be playing a pretty big bass too, I was always wondering what it might be, it's just got everything, the deepest lows and crunchy bite (he's a main ingredient of that sound recipe for sure):

http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/850...4E9696E16C8566

(that link looks pretty sketchy, it's just a JPEG found on Google pictures...)

[Johannes Felscher]

oops, seems like this link isn't working anymore (I guess the word "cache" said it all)....either way, any picture of Drew from recent gigs would do..

[Thomas Erickson]

A longer string on the same bass will be deeper sounding and visa versa.

Isn't this like what bass guitarists say about long scale guitars sounding "tighter"? I've played them and I'm pretty sure it isn't the case; there are a lot of factors involved, most of which seem pretty arbitrary. Not to be argumentative, of course - just sayin'...

[Ken Smith]

Originally Posted by Thomas Erickson

Isn't this like what bass guitarists say about long scale guitars sounding "tighter"? I've played them and I'm pretty sure it isn't the case; there are a lot of factors involved, most of which seem pretty arbitrary. Not to be argumentative, of course - just sayin'...

I think longer being deeper is not equal to being tighter. Longer is more flexible, therefore maybe NOT tighter. There are many factors that go into 'tighter'. With all the basses of the same length have you played over time I am sure you found some tighter and some looser. Length was not the issue there. Also, some were deeper and some were not.

[Thomas Erickson]

Originally Posted by Ken Smith

I think longer being deeper is not equal to being tighter. Longer is more flexible, therefore maybe NOT tighter. There are many factors that go into 'tighter'. With all the basses of the same length have you played over time I am sure you found some tighter and some looser. Length was not the issue there. Also, some were deeper and some were not.

It was not a direct comparison.