article on short scale basses

[hieronymous]

I was originally going to post this in the Fender section, but I think it's more interesting from the point of view of what it says about short scale basses: http://www.fender.com/news/index.php?display_article=806&utm_content=sf2548359&utm_medium=spredfast&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=Fender+Guitars&sf2548359=1

They go way overboard on the "students and kids" angle, but at least at the end they admit that "short-scale bass playing has not been the exclusive province of kids and beginners." Of course there's advertising built into the article - they are talking about Fender short scales, not short scales in general - but I still found it a bit annoying. Any thoughts? Especially on the things it says about the way short scales sound?

[Dave W]

That next-to-last paragraph is just plain wrong.  Heavier strings (at any scale length) don't necessarily produce a thicker or bass-heavier tone. Lower tension isn't "required" for proper intonation, it's just a natural byproduct of the shorter scale length. Fatter sounding low notes aren't related to floppy strings.

[Freuds_Cat]

I'd challenge anyone to pick a recording of my Allen Woody Shorty as being "short scale" in sound. I guess ppl with limited experience and a lazy disposition might refer to an EB with flats as "that short scale sound". 

[exiledarchangel]

There are two kinds of basses, good and bad ones. Some people should do their homework first before they start posting rubbish on the net.

[PhilT]

The kids and beginners thing is common in advertising short scale, there was a similar thread in the Gibson section not very long ago.

The obvious question, that no one who writes advertising copy ever seems to ask, is why all these players, who are clearly not beginners, children, or short-armed and are not all ex-guitarists, chose in some part of their careers to play short scale basses. The answer to that might provide a real value proposition that would sell a few more than they do now.

[Basvarken]

When I started playing bass as a thirteen year old I didn't even know there was such a thing as a short scale bass. I used a Jazz Bass copy from a friend. And when I had saved enough money I bought an Ibanez Blazer (p-type). And after that some more long scale basses.
It wasn't until I was thirty three years old that I bought my first short scale bass.
So it took me twenty years of playing in bands till I finally was experienced enough to play a short scale 

[chromium]

I think people like what's familiar to them, and its easy to dismiss the short and mid scales because of that.  I see that in the classifieds at TB a lot... "nice bass! if only it was long scale...".  My thought is always: "Well... that's kinda the whole point!?"

The other thing is that people who play a certain type of music -and only that- might dismiss short scales because they won't get the sounds they're after (bright, ringing low register, Wooten slap tones, and so on).  Although, I'd venture to say that some short scales could still probably pull that off (that modified JS I had could do angry piano wire sounds, my Triumph actually sounds great when I've had to do slap on it, the Alembic can run the gamut...)

Always get a chuckle out of ad copy like that    They're kinda selling themselves short there ().. I know Fender conceived the Mustang as more of a budget/intermediate bass, but they play and sound great IMO.

[Pilgrim]

I figure that there's a lot more variation in sound caused by the totality of strings, electronics, playing style and amps than there is in long vs. short scale.

In other words, to me it's only one difference among a lot of differences that players introduce by the gear they choose, the setup and their playing style.

And therefore, to me it's a non-issue.

[Droombolus]

I know Fender conceived the Mustang as more of a budget/intermediate bass, but they play and sound great IMO.

The Mustang's not really my cuppa but at the turn from the 60s to the 70s a whole shitload of bass players were using them, including Roger Glover .....

[Dave W]

Scale length does makes a difference, and if everything else were equal, you could tell a difference in tone. But almost everything makes some kind of difference.

[Pilgrim]

Scale length does makes a difference, and if everything else were equal, you could tell a difference in tone. But almost everything makes some kind of difference.

Perzackly. 

And there's no assumption on my part that whatever difference exists is a negative factor.  It could just as easily be positive.

[Freuds_Cat]

Scale length does makes a difference, and if everything else were equal, you could tell a difference in tone. But almost everything makes some kind of difference.

I guess thats part of the point. Even two basses of the same type are made from different wood and have some variation. It depends on how much time the individual has spent creating that map of bass sounds in their heads. Some of those Triumph basses sound more like Triumph basses than they do "short Scale" if that makes any sense at all. Which gets back to Chromiums point.