Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to CarloJuan)
Mates, thank you all for your replies. I just posted my thoughts about this issue to get the brainstorming going, and to hopefully be able to make a more sound decision.
To answer some of your questions: I measured my left hand, and it is just the same in terms of all measurements as my right. I tried playing the F add9 chord with a capo on the first fret, and it was STILL impossible for me to get the high F on the first string to sound clean with the base of my barre index finger (it was still muffled as compared to when I play a regular barre F). I was able to better reach the G on the fourth string though. I either have crappy technique, or this is possibly because I have a synovial cyst on my LEFT wrist that causes pain with excess stretching of the left hand, and with sharp angles of my left wrist. I am thinking of getting this surgically removed in the hopes of my reach and flexibility improving upon doing so.
I'll try to post a link to a video to show you what I mean about the reach problems, and I hope y'all will help me reach a finalized, best decision.
Posts: 1240
Joined: Nov. 6 2008
From: Sydney, Australia
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
hey El Rumbo.. this is actually your guitar and maybe you can try to see if you can find a 640 guitar around where you are where you can play to check it out.. Anders has said this before, many look at the sound when checking out a guitar but it's playabiity that would make you want to play it. Even though Anders don't recommend it.. following that advice I would say you get a guitar that makes you want to play it.. and I'm a little asian bloke and I have 22cm span on my left hand.. I have a 650 and a 655 guitar..
hope you will get your dream guitar soon mate! you really deserve it.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to HolyEvil)
Here is a video of me explaining what I meant regarding the "reach" problem with certain chords / positions. In this video, I am playing my Jose Ramirez R1 classical guitar (650 mm scale length, with the saddle filed down to lower the action, and with golpeadores added, and with normal tension D'Addario Pro Arte classical guitar strings).
After viewing this video, do you think:
a- My barre technique sucks? b- I should indeed go for a 640 mm scale length guitar with a narrow nut? c- I should go for a 650 mm scale length with a narrower-than-usual nut (i.e. 51 or 50 mm)? d- I should go for a STANDARD 650 mm scale length guitar (with 52 mm, standard nut width) and use a capo / avoid certain chords?
Gracias!
PS: There's a storm outside, hence all the noise in the background...
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
Ramzi, I don't think your technique sucks. I think you're an awesome player, but you do seem to have some difficulty reaching some of those chords. You are a better overall player than me, especially right hand technique, but I have very little problem getting those chords on my guitar with no capo. The narrower nut (or narrower string spacing) could actually help you a lot. Also the 640 scale, as long as you realize it will only be a small difference. P.S. how high is the action on that guitar? What about the string height at the nut? If you fret at the third fret and then push the string down behind your finger to the first fret, how far is that distance?
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Andy Culpepper)
quote:
If you fret at the third fret and then push the string down behind your finger to the first fret, how far is that distance?
Thanks for the reply, Andy.
The action at the 12th fret is 0.45 cm nearly.
The string height at the nut is 2 mm nearly.
(I am using a regular ruler to do these measurements, so it's not 100% accurate.)
The question of yours I quoted above was not clear to me. What does "push the string down behind my finger to the first fret" mean? Do you mean that I should fret both the first and third fret, and measure the maximal string height in between the first and third frets?
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Ramon Amira)
I currently use normal tension strings (D'Addario Pro Arte).
I was just thinking: a friend of mine has a Yamaha CG-171SF. He's in the US now, but he's coming back to Beirut in a few days. I am going to try to go meet up with him, and play his guitar to see if I can get the stuff I played here to sound cleaner on HIS guitar (considering that both of MY guitars are "rigged" classical guitars that have been made a bit more flamenco by adding golpeadores, filing down the saddle, etc.).
If I can play the stuff in the above video CLEAN and with more comfort on his guitar, then it probably has to do with the guitars I am playing, and then maybe I'll feel more at east just going for blanca with STANDARD dimensions (scale length, nut width, etc.).
I'll let y'all know how that goes probably a week from now.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
quote:
The action at the 12th fret is 0.45 cm nearly.
Dude. You don't need a 640 guitar, you need a proper setup. That's a good 1.5 mm higher than it needs to be. Are you measuring from the top of the fret to the bottom of the string?
For the nut thing, fret a string at the 3rd fret with your left hand, then take your right hand and push the string down *behind* your left hand finger, by the nut. Is the string very close to the 1st fret, meaning, you don't have to push it very far to hit the fret?
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Andy Culpepper)
quote:
Are you measuring from the top of the fret to the bottom of the string?
Oh! Silly me! I was measuring from the surface of the fretboard, not the top of the fret. I just re-measured, from the top of the fret, to the bottom of the low E string, and it turned out about 3.5 mm, plus or minus.
About the nut thing: I just tried it, and when I fret the third fret, the string is already NEARLY touching the first fret. I just need to apply VERY LITTLE pressure on the string very close to the nut, and the string then comes in contact with the first fret.
Posts: 1025
Joined: Oct. 14 2009
From: New York City
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
640/50 means a 640 scale with a 50 nut.
It now sounds as though you've never played a genuine flamenco guitar, cheap or otherwise. Your problems could easily be attributable to the action. Play that Yamaha if you can, or any other flamenco guitar before you decide on anything, and try the same chords that give you trouble. Then you'll have a much better idea of what's what.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Ramon Amira)
quote:
640/50 means a 640 scale with a 50 nut.
Whoops! That was obvious - I don't know why I didn't get that.
I HAVE played that Yamaha, and I've played a Madrigal flamenco guitar as well (both blancas). I've never actually played them carefully though to see whether the same stuff that gives me trouble on my rigged classical guitars actually can be played smoothly on those "flamenco" guitars. I need to try that. Next week, for sure...
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
Rumbero Watched the video.
I dont think a smaller guitar will help you. I dont think you´ll feel much difference and the chords which are difficult for you now will be difficult on a smaller one as well. Your hands are not small, but they are not very strong and you should teach them how to strech some more. Put the left hand flat on a table and strech all you can. Remember to breathe. You should be able to get almost 170 degrees between the thumb and the pinky and while fixing those two, move the other 3 fingers all you can.
Having a 50mm nut, makes big chords easyer but makes small chords more difficult and the hand cramp some more. The 650/52 also called factory standard or classical standard is usefull for players being a lot smaller than you.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Anders Eliasson)
quote:
The 650/50 also called factory standard or classical standard
I think you meant 640/50, and NOT 650/50, right? Or were you referring to a guitar with a standard scale length (650), but a narrow nut (of 50 instead of 52)?
quote:
You should be able to get almost 170 degrees between the thumb and the pinky
I just put my hand flat on a paper, and projected the MAXIMAL (with straining) angle between my thumb and pinky, and it turned out about 130 (one-hundred-and-thirty) degrees. There is NO WAY I think I can ever get that angle to reach 170 degrees as you mentioned. Can you post a picture of your hand opening up to 170 degrees? That is IMPOSSIBLE for me to do now, unless I use the fingers of my right hand to forcefully and actively OPEN UP the thumb of my left hand to get such a 170-degree angle. In general, I am not a very flexible person (I mean, I can't bend down and touch my toes with my knees straight, and I've been too busy to follow-up on that yoga I was trying a while back).
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Anders Eliasson)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Anders Eliasson Your hands are not small, but they are not very strong and you should teach them how to strech some more.
More? Im not sure we watched the same video. To me it looks like he has fairly flexible fingers already. The pinky is sticking way out. But he cant fret the trebles with the index because the distance (mainly palm distance) to the pinky is too short on capo position 0 and 1. Btw i cant fret that chord either...
Your hands are not small, but they are not very strong and you should teach them how to strech some more.
Ramzi, I watched your vid, you don't seem to be doing too badly, I think nearly everyone has struggles with stretches to overcome, so keep on with it, you look like you are getting there.
Actually one think I think really helps is to play stuff (like the example in the vid) with a high capo on 3 or 4 and when you are really relaxed and comfortable with it, just take it down a fret and hang out there for a while before taking it down another fret etc.
Another one is do you practise or mess around with scales? I think the 3 note per fret "stretch" scales are really useful for developing stretches. Again if they are a problem work on them with a capo and progressively lower the capo fret. And not just the major scale modes, the harmonic minor modes use slightly different stretches, between fingers 1 and 3 as well as between fingers 1 and 2 and/or 3 and 4.
Finally, beware trying to build "strength". The actual muscular strength required to push down guitar strings is so minimal, almost noone needs to "build strength". Be sure to only use the minimal muscle effort required, and focus on developing co-ordination with the (surely adequate) strength you already have.
When you want to stretch you have to use muscular contraction to power the movement (abductors located in the hand), but other muscles need to be relaxed (such as the adductors in the hand), and one common fault is to over-contract the flexors, which need only work a little to bring the finger to the string.
In other words, contracting the wrong muscles can actually limit the stretch!
There is also some stuff on stretches in the 3rd Oscar Herrero Paso A Paso vid, but I have been told not to try to develop a stretch between fingers 2 and 3 (which he advocates), and I think there is good anatomical reason for this (it is not actually possible, so don't try to force it!), but you can adapt the exercises and material to avoid this.
Lastly, it's not really possible to be totally sure from just watching a vid, but it looks a little like you might be over-tensing your 4th finger when making stretchs, so don't try to force the stretches, try to let your hand relax and open out.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to mark indigo)
quote:
In short, don't try to use the flexors (in the forearm) to make the stretch!
absolutely right!
tolking about strenght of left hand in my post, I meant to develop it with practicing a lot - scales exercises for example-, strenght comes together with precision of finghers working on frets; the suggestion of "progressively lower the capo fret", is very appropriate too. TIME! at the and is always a matter of (daily) time spent on the guitar! ciao
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to gbv1158)
Mark and gbv: I really appreciate your posts. Thanks!
My input is as follows: I've been playing guitar (classical, flamenco, and other fiddly bits) for NINE (9) years now. I think by now, I should have DEVELOPED enough stretch / strength to allow me to play nearly ANYTHING I should want to play (let alone a "silly" F add9 chord). Is that a correct assumption on my part, or do you think I've been going through these past nine years doing something wrong, or avoiding to properly exercise my left hand correctly to develop actual FULL strength / stretch?
If after nine years it is possible to have been "doing it wrong all this time" regarding the issue of flexibility / strength in the left hand, then granted, I'll need to work on that. If you think that it is HARD to have been messing that up all this time (considering that simply having been PLAYING for nine years should have built up enough flexibility / strength to no longer have problems like the ones I have shown in the above video), then it is likely that for some reason (small hands, synovial cyst in my left wrist, screwed up rigged classical guitars, etc.) I really just CANNOT play these chords / positions clean?
Posts: 15242
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
quote:
What's your take on the matter?
Hmm. I have small hands and I always found a way to work around tough stretches in a way the music still comes out clear. Again my guitar is 670 and a stretch as tough as it might be without a capo, I bend over the guitar or adjust my butt in the chair, lower my elbow WAYYYY down, etc whatever it takes to make the notes clean. I feel you are just not making the effort big guy.
When I watch your vid your elbow is way back near your hip. It should be more forward so you play more on top of the fingerboard and your wrist more parallel to the neck. Thumb may have to move WAY down to the bottom of the neck. Watch me here at 2:45:
Posts: 1025
Joined: Oct. 14 2009
From: New York City
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
If you have been playing for nine years, and you can play what I see you playing, then I don't think there is anything to be gained by trying to increase either your strength or your reach. But there could easily be something to be lost, in terms of time, effort, and even possible injury. You would know that better than most.
Everyone is individual, and players with the same size hands have different abilities. If at this point you are getting that buzz I hear on the first string F while barring the first fret and reaching, then I would reiterate my first thoughts – I feel that a total combination of shorter scale (640) - narrower nut (50) - and especially low tension strings, will make playing a lot easier and more pleasurable for you.
If you were planning to play professionally, where you might want more projection, etc., it might be different - you might want a larger scale and high tension strings. But you're not, so why should you have to struggle. Especially if you plan to buy a luthier guitar, where you can get exactly what you want and need.
Hanika makes full size guitars with all options – scale, nut, even radiussed fingerboard. If by chance you have access to a store or dealer that sells these, you might be able to try some out, and see what you feel most comfortable with, then have the luthier of your choice build it that way for you. At the least you have to try out a 640 flamenco guitar if you can, and on that guitar test everything that gives you trouble, to see if it makes a difference.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Ricardo)
quote:
I feel you are just not making the effort big guy.
When I watch your vid your elbow is way back near your hip. It should be more forward so you play more on top of the fingerboard and your wrist more parallel to the neck.
Thank you for your comment, Ricardo.
The reason why I keep my elbow far back near my hip is because it helps keep my wrist in continuity with my forearm (i.e. parallel to the FLOOR, and NOT parallel to the neck/fretboard). This is because I CANNOT angle my wrist the way you do at 2:45 of your video, or else, I will end up with BAD pain and stiffness in my wrist which will prevent me from playing for a couple of days. This is mainly because of the synovial cyst that I have on my left wrist. Before I developed this problem with the cyst, I used to do what you mentioned when I found certain positions that required more stretching. I'm afraid doing this for sometime had a role in making me develop that cyst in my left wrist. There are no studies that show a direct relationship between mechanical overuse of joints, and the development of such cysts, but there are trends that show a relationship.
If you remember, at one point, I started playing in the traditionalposition with the neck way up in the air (like Paco Pena), but that didn't feel very comfortable in terms of the guitar being unstable and prone to fall (requiring me to hold it up with my left hand, and thus have less freedom to move up and down the neck). However, this allowed me to keep my wrist IN CONTINUITY with my forearm, thus allowing me to avoid forming an angle thereby avoiding the pain due to the cyst. I then started using a strap to keep the guitar from wanting to fall, and to free my left hand up a bit. That was more comfortable, but NOT as comfortable as playing cross-legged, like PdL. I therefore returned to playing in the PdL position (despite all the back pain it causes me, which I then started remedying by going to the gym and working out my lower back and abs, and by doing "yoga" stretches at home), but settled for an elbow far back near the hip to keep my wrist from angling and exacerbating the cyst pain.
So you see, if I play the way you want me to, I get wrist pain. If I play like Paco Pena, I get no pain, but I don't feel comfortable playing freely over the whole neck. If I play like PdL (cross-legged), I get back pain and I have to move my elbow back near my hip (for better wrist-forearm alignment - the whole cyst issue), therefore disallowing me to get those stretchy chords / positions.
That is why I was thinking to myself: maybe a 640 scale length guitar with a narrower nut will solve the problem once and for all - but then, I started getting people telling me that such guitar dimensions would make other positions (especially with a capo) too crowded, and thus uncomfortable to play.
THAT is why I am confused about the matter, and I can't seem to make up my mind regarding what guitar dimensions to settle on. Maybe the BEST solution would be to finally gather the courage to get surgery done on my left wrist to remove that cyst, and hope that my pain / range of motion would go back to pre-cyst days. However, there are always risks with surgery, and there's about a 5 to 10% chance that the cyst will RECUR after surgery.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
have you tried a guitar support that lets you play in the trad. position without using your left hand to hold it up? Like the Gitano or others. I tried my friend's and they're actually very comfy
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Andy Culpepper)
quote:
Like the Gitano or others.
You know? I think that's a great idea, Andy. A friend was telling me she could get me one for a special, reduced price. I am going to try playing a bit using the "traditional" Paco Pena position, and see if I can get those stretches to sound clean. If so, I'll be sure to get in touch with my friend, and see if she can get me one of those Gitano supports.
I'll keep y'all posted - I hope I'm finally onto something that might solve this issue once and for all!
PS: And Prominent Critic - unfortunately, I don't have access to dealers that sell guitars like the ones you mentioned.
Posts: 42
Joined: Mar. 23 2010
From: Dunstable, England
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
Hi Rombsix,
You could try guitar support as Andy suggested and you could also try using a footstool under the RIGHT foot so that you can rest the guitar on the right leg, a la PdL, but without crossing your legs. Of course, there is always the traditional classical footstool under the left foot-guitar at an angle approach...
It may not look cool, but the healthiest is to use a guitar support with the guitar at an angle across your body, both feet flat on the floor and a nice straight back. This allows you to keep your weight distributed evenly on both sides of your body, your wrist straight, access all parts of the fretboard, and gives you the best leverage for (i.e. clean sounding) barre chords. Just like the traditional flamenco position, but more stable. But, as I say it doesn't look cool, and that's enough to stop most flamenco guitar players from using guitar supports.
I have used all of the above methods, but mainly stick with either both feet flat on the floor and guitar on the right thigh - the most restrictive way of playing, especially barre chords - or footstool under the right foot. I also practice playing holding the guitar in the traditional flamenco way, which gives the best access and comfort, but my main problem is that the stool I sit on is too high - for this position to work well, you have to sit such that the knee is slightly higher than the hip joint so that you can clamp the guitar securely between thigh and arm.
Hope this helps and good luck with your decision. Mohan.
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Mohan)
Thank you Mohan! Wise words indeed. The "coolness" is always going to be a factor, no matter how mature one is and how strong one's personality is. If at the end of the day my health is at stake though, then forgetting about the coolness would be the way to go.
Here is a picture of what my wrist looks like if kept in continuity with my forearm.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to rombsix)
And here is my wrist if I angle it (the way Ricardo suggested). You can tell, it's NOT pretty. And, the feeling is NOT pretty either... The arrow points to the cyst. Notice how it raises the skin above it thereby creating a dip in the skin in front of it (closer to my knuckles) due to the stretching.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: 640 mm scale length guitar (in reply to Mohan)
quote:
It may not look cool
i use this "gitano" guitar support. it is virtually invisible, hardly anyone ever notices it. so not that "uncool"
also it depends where you place the suction cups under the guitar, further back you get the guitar in "trad" position, further forward (as i use it) you get the guitar in relation to your body same as "PDL" position.
I wish i had a picture, in dance class one night, three of us playing, me in the middle. all three heads, bodies and guitars look the same, but the two either side had legs crossed, and me with both feet on ground.
Even in Spain the last two times either noone notices it, or (last year) the dance teacher asks and the class guitarist i'm sitting in with tells her it is a good thing, much better for your back, or (this year) the guitarist is interested in it and tries it out and thinks it's good.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread