whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - Lutherie: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=22
- - - whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm?: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=64518



Message

Guest -> whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 12 2007 22:58:06)

whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm, there must be some reason they have the bigger scale but im not sure i havent played the 660mm before. Thanks in advance for any info.



jshelton5040 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 0:59:53)

At the risk of making myself a target for ridicule I'll make a stab a answering this question. Understand, any assessment of the difference in scales only relates to the guitars we build, I can't speak for others.

When I first started building I used 655mm exclusively for classics and flamencos. I had no reason for this other than that was the scale of a Ramirez flamenco guitar that I owned so I thought that was more or less standard. I later learned that Barbero used 660mm. Since I had played of couple of Barberos and thought they were better than the Ramirez I owned I switched to 660mm. This may seem simple minded but I was in my early 20's and there wasn't an internet and very few books on the subject let alone any guitar makers around.

Coincidentally the latest batch of flamenco guitars we built had three different scales (650, 655, 660) at the request of the customers. It was interesting to compare the guitars. In my opinion the 660mm guitar was by far the best. The volume was similar in all three but the 660mm guitar had a more robust voice and was very ronca (hoarse) sounding like a good cantaor. The 650mm had a prettier, sweeter voice which some people would definitely prefer. The 655mm was somewhere in between. I'm convinced that at least with the guitars we build you can set the action lower as the scale gets longer (which seems logical). The "feel" on the right hand is better with 660mm and the difference in playability for the left hand is negligible. I'm sure there are many other differences that could be mentioned but these are the ones that strike me. I've used 660mm scale on all the guitars I've built for myself over the last 3 decades or so and continue to prefer the 660mm sound.

John Shelton



Guest -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 2:32:26)

Hey thanks for your help!
quote:

At the risk of making myself a target for ridicule I'll make a stab a answering this question

c'mon it wasnt such a stupid question was it[:D] well all i thought it would do was make it more of a strech to play on[&:] i would never have thought the sound itself would be different.



Guest -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 2:35:55)

now u made me paranoid. Did i miss out on the whole 650-660mm scoop somewhere on the way. Everyones like, you spazzy dont u know anything, of course 650mm sounds different to 660mm.[:D]



flamencoguru -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 11:05:44)

I believe flamenco guitars that have a scale of 660mm or more have bigger, more flamenco sound. I have a few friends that are very well known luthiers and they swear that flamenco guitars should have a scale no shorter that 660mm. I believe them because I have played quite a few guitars and I can confirm this. I don't know why guitarists are so hung up on scale length. I think it's a bunch of bull when the excuse is....... "I have small hands". I've seen Manolo Sanlucar and I can tell you he probably has the smallest hands on the planet...... he plays a 660mm. Now, what do the have to say?

Classical guitars is another story.

Un saludo, Errol



jshelton5040 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 15:22:52)

quote:

ORIGINAL: flamencoguru
I've seen Manolo Sanlucar and I can tell you he probably has the smallest hands on the planet...... he plays a 660mm. Now, what do the have to say?


In the videos I've seen he and Serranito both play Ramirez classics which have a 664mm scale or longer. I know Ramirez sells them as flamenca negras but the ones I've seen are nothing more than a classic with a flamenco setup and golpeador.

John Shelton



Jim Opfer -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 21:35:44)

Gerundino's are also 660.
I once had a 667 made by Montero y Bellido and the left hand seemed fine. This guitar had a big sound.



TANúñez -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 21:38:46)

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the cejiila as a means for a longer scale. Puting a cejilla on 650mm scale makes for a tight fit for the fingers as you go up the fretboard. On a larger scale however, it is much more comfortable. Whether or not this is a reason for a longer scale, who knows?



TANúñez -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2007 21:50:20)

quote:

I believe flamenco guitars that have a scale of 660mm or more have bigger, more flamenco sound. I have a few friends that are very well known luthiers and they swear that flamenco guitars should have a scale no shorter that 660mm. I believe them because I have played quite a few guitars and I can confirm this. I don't know why guitarists are so hung up on scale length. I think it's a bunch of bull when the excuse is....... "I have small hands". I've seen Manolo Sanlucar and I can tell you he probably has the smallest hands on the planet...... he plays a 660mm. Now, what do the have to say?


Hey Errol,

There is one thing you have to consider. I don't know at what age Manolo started playing but I'm assuming it was while he was a child. A child will develop dexterity in his fingers/hands and once an adult, will have, or should have, the dexterity to reach difficult chords and make long stretches. An adult, learning to play the guitar at say...30, will never develop that dexterity. He'll develop some flexability, but his hands will not be like they would had he started playing the guitar as a child. Same applies to a pianist. Which is why it is so important for a child to begin piano lessons before he is 10 years old. After that, the hands will not develop the same way.

My hands aren't that big. Probably small to medium. I have trouble playing longer scale guitars without a capo. However, since I'm always using the capo, longer scale do not matter to me. I do however practice a lot without it to help with flexibility. Given the fact that the capo is used so much in flamenco, we should not worry so much about longer scale guitars.

Lester DeVoe told me a while back the he feels that many hand injuries are a result of long scale guitars. So he prefers to build 650 and 655 scale lengths and accomodates larger hands by wider nut widths.

I personally like 655. It's a nice compromise.



Anders Eliasson -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 16 2007 9:54:59)

I have built several flamencos with 650, 655 and 660 scale. I have compared, I have tested I have drawn conclusions...

There are no conclusion. I think its a BIG myth. One of biggest sounding and most ronca guitars was a 650mm. I generally built 655, because its inbetween and thus easyer to adjust for those believing in this.

To John Shelton. TDo you find that to draw a conclusion on one batch of 3 guitars is reliable???? There are so many other factors deciding how a guitar reacts and sound

In my personal opinion as a player, the scale length is NOT very important. When a guitar feels big it has a lot more to do with the feel of the neck and the pulsation of the guitar. I have played 650mm guitars that felt enourmous and 660 guitars which felt like small guitars.

The capo thing is another myth IMO. The difference between the frets on a 650 and a 660mm scale is around a 1/2 to 1 mm. If you have such a precise left hand it might be an issue. But you´ll be one of the very few ones.

Some clients are absolutely hysterical with things like these. I´ve had one who needed 5 month to find out if he needed a 58mm or a 59mm stringspacing at the bridge.

I dont think it helps anyone to focus that much on sizes.



jshelton5040 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 16 2007 15:17:27)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anders Eliasson

to John Shelton. TDo you find that to draw a conclusion on one batch of 3 guitars is reliable???? There are so many other factors deciding how a guitar reacts and sound


Sorry Anders, I didn't mean to imply that my conclusion was based on just these three guitars. It was just a coincidence that we had just completed three with different scales and the 660mm was the best of the three in my opinion. I prefer 660mm because over the years it seems to produce a better instrument than the shorter scales.

As pure conjecture I've thought that the placement of the bridge may be having an effect on the sound. Since different scales will place the bridge a little closer or farther away from the end block. Theoretically the shape of the guitar body should be changed to account for different scale lengths. Perhaps 660mm fits best with our dimensions.

I do agree with you that it is virtually impossible to make pronouncements about cause and effect with the small number of guitars that luthiers are capable of turning out. One would need a factory churning out many guitars a month to begin to see the affect of small changes; however as a maker one must make decisions based on something even if it's only your hands, ears and intuition.

John Shelton



Guest -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 16 2007 16:22:44)

Hola

I have discussed this with Jose Romero, one of the finest guitarreros de España and his opinion is that 655 centres the sound. His prototype flamenco guitar is abeto, cipres and palillos, 655 de tiro. One day I will have the money to order it.

I have 2 guitars. One is 650, the other 660. The 660 sounds better, not because of its tiro, but because it is a Gerundino. The only great Conde I was ever offered, I rejected, because it was 670. What a mistake:-(

The idea that a long scale is better because of the cejilla convinces me completely. That the sound is noticably different, no.

Sean



a_arnold -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 16 2007 22:11:33)

I've got at 650 blanca and then commissioned a 660 negra by Salvador Castillo. He told me before he made the 660 that it would have more sustain, a more "profound", bigger sound. At the risk of disagreeing with John Shelton (never a safe thing to do), all that Salvador predicted is true. The difference is immediately noticeable. But, as John would point out, that's just 2 guitars.

I put a new set of strings on them both after they were both played in and compared them side by side.

The 660 has the same "punch" as the 650, but the longer sustain tends to mask the punch somewhat (during fast picado runs, for example.) If you blindfolded me I couldn't tell the difference with my hands as far as the "feel" of the extra 10mm goes, but the sound is unmistakable. The big difference is in sustain. Having more sustain means the effect of the strings aging and going dead becomes more noticeable earlier on the 660.

I think the 660 has a more classical sound, and is therefore better suited to flamenco solos that have a more lyrical feel (alegrias por Rosa, zambra mora, granainas, etc.) It would also be a good compromise for someone who wanted to play both classical and flamenco and only had one guitar.

By the way, I understand PDL's conde is more than 660 -- maybe 667, if I remember correctly. And (although I disagree with him) Huber's book (the Development of the Modern Guitar) makes the (unsupported) claim that professionals prefer the longer string length, and implies that this is because the "bigger" sound is necessary for concert performance, even though it is harder to play, especially for "amateurs". Take Huber's academic opinion for what it's worth. It's a good book, but not intended to be scholarly, and I doubt he took a census of professional players' string lengths. I guess opinions are allowed in a non-scholarly book, even when unsupported by data.

Huber does, however, provide an extensive list of the proportions and string lengths of a large number of top-end guitars made by respected luthiers. Apparently he has been taking measurements through his entire academic career.

Hope that helps.

Tony Arnold



Ricardo -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 16 2007 22:44:40)

I posted about this in another forum, so if you read it don't answer. These are the same make and model Conde A25, different years, same shop. I like them both, and they have a lot of similar qualities. I measured the strings from nut to bone. One guitar is 664mm, the other 651mm. So can you tell by looking or by the sound which one is which? Again if you know really don't answer, I just want to see if anybody can tell the difference from the outside.



Verses this one:



So which one is 664, and which is 651, and which sounds better?

Ricardo



koella -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 16 2007 23:01:26)

I think the first one ( buleria solea ) has a more raw compact sound. The second one ( rondena ) sounds bigger.

So I would say the second one is long scale though I like the sound of the first one better.



jshelton5040 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 16 2007 23:24:49)

Ricardo, although I enjoyed your playing immensely this is not a fair test of the difference scale length makes. The guitars need to be the same make with the same strings and you have to play the same piece. Furthermore I doubt a recording is the optimum way to show the difference since some guitars record beautifully but are poorly suited to accompaniment or performance.

John Shelton



TANúñez -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 17 2007 0:39:50)

I agree with John's comments. Just to take a stab at it, by the looks of the fingerboards, I say the Rondeña guitar is the longer scale.



wiseguy493 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 17 2007 2:24:17)

I was taught by my father and many great luthier mentors that scale has nothing to do with tone/projection or any other sound-related factors. Scale is a personal playing preference, and I've made and bought many guitars with many different scales and if scale is a factor in sound then is a VERY small factor.

The source of myth that scale changes tone is ancient, but the principles of scale NOT changing tone was established in Torrez in 1870. I could pull out the books and quote off why and how Torrez established these conclusions, but I don't think there's much point because people who believe myths will stand by them firmly.

It saddens me that so many flamenco players do base their decisions on myths rather than science. Guitars are a science, not mysticism



Anders Eliasson -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 17 2007 9:55:03)

I agree with your points Wiseguy493.

Some facts:

A longer string will sound different. Of course. It will devide its vibration in another way. Will it sound better? Not nescessarily. It depends on the note it should play. If you make a violin with a twice as long scale it will sound poorer. The same for guitars.

If you pitch the same string to the same note on two different scale length, the longer will have higher tension.....

There will of course be a difference (small!!!) between two 100% identical guitars with a 650 and 660 scale.
Fact is that noone, even the best builder in kosmos will ever be able to build two identical guitars. Why:
There are som many variabels affecting the way a guitar works.
We work wood. wood changes so much that each centimeter is different.

I´ve said this many times before: Its all about balance. Each guitar is different. The good builder is the one that understands how to balance out the variabels.

The good client is one that understands that 1mm difference in stringspacing or 5mm in scale length will change something..... but.... it will hardly be noticable[;)]



Per Hallgren -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 17 2007 12:02:05)

Being a little late in this discussion I want to add that stringlength and plantilla are depending on each other. That is, a short scale give a smaller body than a long scale. This is of course only if we use the traditional look of the guitar. 12th fret at the neck/body joint etc.

I agree in the conclusion that it is very hard to say what in the sound and string behaviour that is because of the scale and what is from other factors. For example, a longer string has bigger amplitude but also higher tension. Can we expect to set it to a higher action (because of the amplitude), or a lower (because of the higher tension)? I really don't know. My feeling is that the individual guitar has an individual way of vibrate so the setup is always individual...



Ricardo -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 17 2007 15:55:11)

quote:

Ricardo, although I enjoyed your playing immensely this is not a fair test of the difference scale length makes. The guitars need to be the same make with the same strings and you have to play the same piece. Furthermore I doubt a recording is the optimum way to show the difference since some guitars record beautifully but are poorly suited to accompaniment or performance.



Well this was just for fun and I thought it was related. The guitars ARE the same make and model, same strings too, just different scales. And different pieces of course, but like I said just for fun. The Rondeña guitar was indeed bigger. I would only say the sound was "bigger" because of the tunning, tuning to lower pitches and open chords gives a fatter sound. But as a player, I can't tell the difference with scale lengths. Action certainly is the number one factor to a player, affecting both playability AND sound.

Ricardo



jshelton5040 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 17 2007 22:26:08)

quote:


Well this was just for fun and I thought it was related. Ricardo

More fun for the rest of us to watch and listen to your masterful toque. Didn't one of those guitar have black trebles and the other clear?

John Shelton



sartorius -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 14:33:15)

I bought José Romero a new 1A professional guitar a few months ago (February 2017) in his workshop in Madrid. Ten years I had been wanting one and it was the right time. I wanted a 650mm. He told me he only builds 660mm because it's (considered) best for flamenco. His conscious mind obviously spoke but when I told him this one was 650mm (which I assessed visually) he measured it and was incredibly surprised to see that indeed it was 650mm without even him knowing it.

Always refer to your unconscious mind for the correct reply. José Romero implicitly knows that 650mm is better for his guitars.



jshelton5040 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 18:20:11)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sartorius

. His conscious mind obviously spoke but when I told him this one was 650mm (which I assessed visually) he measured it and was incredibly surprised to see that indeed it was 650mm without even him knowing it.


what utter nonsense! If he didn't know the scale of the guitar he probably didn't build it. I've been building for over 50 years and played guitar almost as long. I still can't feel the difference in scales and certainly can't tell what the scale is by looking. We build three scales (650-655-660mm) depending on customer preference and I guarantee I know exactly what scale every guitar has (of course our guitars are completely handmade, we don't produce hundreds a year). There is no perfect scale but I personally prefer the sound of 660mm.



sartorius -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 18:29:39)

How do you compare to a builder the size of José Romero? For sure your ego IS superior to the scales of the guitars you build...



Escribano -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 20:13:12)

quote:

How do you compare to a builder the size of José Romero? For sure your ego IS superior to the scales of the guitars you build...


Steady on, John is entitled to his opinion as a builder.

Your story is confusing i.e. "He told me he only builds 660mm because it's (considered) best for flamenco" but "José Romero implicitly knows that 650mm is better for his guitars."

As an engineer (of sorts) I use my unconscious mind once then measure twice. [8|]



pundi64 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 21:42:08)

I liked the sound of bottom video, Ricardo playing Rondena, only my opinion though



estebanana -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 22:03:29)

I use the collective unconscious mind! And the Jung Scale, AKA 'the dream scale'. [:D][:D][:D]

Who really cares? You the buy scale that feels right to you on any particular guitar. I have some definite thoughts on scale based on experience and I talk to customers from that point of view. Talking about scale is a conversation that needs to held in a context - the context has many factors and each person sets their own context.

I've make flamenco guitars between 646 and 665- and there are general qualities to longer or shorter, but _WOW_ what you logically or empirically reason out may be _WAY_ off. Hands on is important.

Keith Richards said in an interview I heard on the radio, "Guitars are weird animals, they don't play by rules." Or some such thing, meaning you can't judge a guitar by it's fret-span. Generalizations about scale length qualities can be disproved by many, many guitars.



jshelton5040 -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 22:18:26)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sartorius

How do you compare to a builder the size of José Romero? For sure your ego IS superior to the scales of the guitars you build...

I meant no criticism of Jose Romero, I've never seen or played one of his guitars but suspect he's a fine maker. My criticism (if that's what it was) is of your psychic ability to assess the quality of the guitar by some mystical inner consciousness.

By the way, when you refer to his "size" does that mean he's larger than my 6'2" and 250 pounds or something else [:D].

Anyone who thinks he can make a guitar to compete with the best from Spain had better have a big ego. My ego is 75 years old and becoming rather brittle I think.

I apologize if I bruised your ego, you didn't ( and couldn't ) bruise mine.



estebanana -> RE: whats the benefit of 660mm scale compared to 650mm? (May 14 2017 22:34:10)

The only observation I really hold about scale is that most players can reasonably play guitars with scales that are longer than they consciously think they can play.

Long scale vs. short in the mind of someone who is scared of or reticent to go with longer scale is in my opinion most often a mind game. The exception are players who have been playing a really long time. If a seasoned player has a preference it's usually solid. If a beginner or someone playing for a shorter time has a long scale fear, it's often just not having taken confidence to adapt or develop.

I say this from the point of view that most players don't know they can adapt, until after they adapt. At least that has been my observation. I think that says something positive in some way about human nature, you'll be surprised at what you can do of you don't over think it.



Page: [1] 2 3    >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET