35" bass conversion necks

[Patrick from Davis]

I'd love to gain that inch for a five string to keep that B string from being noodle like.  Hmmm, I think this would be a great idea if I could keep the innuendo down. 
Patrick

 

[ThunderPig]

I posted a similar topic on Feb 6th, 2009.  A 35" scale neck that fits in a normal neck pocket CAN BE DONE.  I wonder why nobody's doin it.
I suppose I could make one by hand, (I'm a luthier) but I'm too lazy.  I want Warmoth to make them.  I like Warmoth bass necks.  I have three.

T-Pig, northern California.

 

[line6man]

I am a diehard  34" 4 string kind of guy, but i would agree that the low B string works better in 35" scale.
If i ever wanted a 5 string bass, i would be pushing for a 35".

Warmoth should definitely offer 35" scale length options for their 5 string necks and bodies.

FWIW, one of the guys here did a short scale 5 string fretless, where they just moved the bridge up closer to the neck, and put the side dots in their new locations.
If your into fretless, i would imagine the same thing could be done, provided there is enough room to move the bridge down an inch.

 

[SkuttleFunk]

sorry to be the nay-sayer here, but a 35" scale is absolutely NOT required to get a solid, thumping, and totally tight B-string. the key it an extra stiff neck and how you align the grain of your neck shaft woods. also important is your string selection (material, diameter, and how it crosses over the bridge)

as proof, I have a 33" prototype that I've load to several local pros to demo. they all have commented on it being the most comfortable playing 35" scale bass they've ever played before. when I then share with them that it's not a 35" scale or even a 34" scale but instead a weenie 33" scale, there is a look of confusion on their face as they wrestle to believe what their ears/hands have just busted a myth equally as large as the anointed instrument wood myth


retrofitting a 35" neck onto a 34" body can be done IF you have the room to relocated your bridge enough distance towards the tail. most of the Fender offerings don't allow this luxury with the standard bridge design.

all the best,

R

 

[tfcreative]

The Gecko is 35, but SF is totally right. I've got a 34" Tobias with a great B string. There is indeed merit to a longer scale, but it's not the only factor in quality of the low B.

 

[Patrick from Davis]

I understand the points that have been made, and that it is no small undertaking to write the programming to accomplish this request.  But, there is a difference.  As with guitars and the 24.75 and 25.5 inch scales, there is a difference with a change of one inch of length in the bass neck.  Whether it is a mental doohickey, or a true physical change in properties, I just like 35" scale better.  But, with the option of 24.75 inch guitar neck conversions for the guitar line, it seemed like a logical extension of the bass guitar product line to add the 35" option.  Once again, I am trying to get Warmoth to help satisfy my own selfish needs with their products. 
Patrick

 

[tfcreative]

It's not an unreasonable request, but W is pretty careful not to create new designs unless they think they'll move a crapload of them. Given that they already offer the Gecko in 35, and that their other bass designs are Fender replacement types, it's not too likely.

FWIW, I have a Deluxe 5 jazz and the B was pretty nice on it. I say was because I put a new nut on it and restrung it with a high C for solo/chording type work. The bass has a very modern bite that I attribute largely to the Dingwall pickups, so it works better as a mix-cutter, or as a rock bass where you just want to slam the E without a B string getting in the way. My Tobias fills in the low end when I need it, and I'm certainly not putting a new nut on that. At any rate, the 34" W design seems to have a good enough B. It's not the 37" Dingwall B, but nothing really is.

 

[ThunderPig]

FWIW, one of the guys here did a short scale 5 string fretless, where they just moved the bridge up closer to the neck, and put the side dots in their new locations.
If your into fretless, i would imagine the same thing could be done, provided there is enough room to move the bridge down an inch.

That must have been a nightmare.  Simply moving the bridge toward the neck, without rescaling the fret locations, would intonate about as well as a banjo with no bridge at all.  If you really need a short scale bass that bad, you be better off using a capo on the fifth fret to get the tension down, then string it with the fattest strings you can find to get the pitch back where it belongs.

T-Pig.  Northern California

 

[ThunderPig]

sorry to be the nay-sayer here, but a 35" scale is absolutely NOT required to get a solid, thumping, and totally tight B-string. the key it an extra stiff neck and how you align the grain of your neck shaft woods. also important is your string selection (material, diameter, and how it crosses over the bridge)

as proof, I have a 33" prototype that I've load to several local pros to demo. they all have commented on it being the most comfortable playing 35" scale bass they've ever played before. when I then share with them that it's not a 35" scale or even a 34" scale but instead a weenie 33" scale, there is a look of confusion on their face as they wrestle to believe what their ears/hands have just busted a myth equally as large as the anointed instrument wood myth

Good point, R.  Now that you mention it, my friend's 33" Fender Urge seems pretty solid on the down low.  But I must say that my other friend's 35" MTD 5 is the best sounding bass I have ever heard in D with roto 66's on it.  In fact, it's the very bass that got me all in torment of scale length in the first place.

T-Pig.  Northern California