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, Tom Blackshear and Sean O'Brien 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.
Hi folks - to measure the scale length on a traditional guitar, I go from the nut to the saddle. In the case of a guitar with a zero fret, how would one measure the scale length? From the zero fret to the saddle? Or still from the nut to the saddle still? Thanks!
RE: Scale length with zero fret (in reply to rombsix)
quote:
ORIGINAL: rombsix
Thanks Rob - wow, this guitar is ULTRA short. It's a 637 mm scale length!
After you measure the distance from zero fret to 12th fret, measure from zero fret to saddle and see is the actual string length is longer that twice times the distance from zero to 12. Make sure you measure to the exact center of the frets.
RE: Scale length with zero fret (in reply to rombsix)
quote:
ORIGINAL: rombsix
Thanks Rob - wow, this guitar is ULTRA short. It's a 637 mm scale length!
Just to clarify...if the measurement from zero to twelfth fret was 637/2 = 318.5mm, then 637mm is the true scale length. The difference between the zero to twelfth and the measure from the twelfth to the saddle (as suggested by estebanana) will also show the compensation due to saddle placement. Another method is to just measure the zero fret (from the middle) to where the string leaves the saddle but that's the scale length plus compensation. The use of a zero fret implies there's no compensation at the nut, as one of the reasons for a zero fret is to eliminate the need.
I suspect the 630mm mentioned by Firefrets is a typo? Otherwise, I don't know how that was arrived at based on the information presented.
I would think any increase in compensation due to a reduction in scale length would be inversely proportional to the percentage of the reduction, assuming no reduction in string height above the twelfth is done. There could be a slight increase in compensation at the saddle but nothing dramatic. Maybe I'm missing something here?
RE: Scale length with zero fret (in reply to RobF)
From the middle of the zero fret to the middle of the twelfth fret was indeed 318.5 mm so I multiplied that number by two and got 637 mm. When I measured from the middle of the zero fret to the edge of the saddle (where the string leaves the saddle) closer to the "sound hole" (you'll see why I put that in quotation marks by looking at the video below), I got 637 mm.
RE: Scale length with zero fret (in reply to estebanana)
So just to make sure, based on what I discussed of the measurements I obtained, is this guitar considered a 637 mm scale length instrument? Most guitars I play are 650 mm scale length, but they don't have zero frets, and for those, I measure from the nut to the saddle and I get 650 mm as the value. So for this guitar with the zero fret, is 637 mm (from the zero fret to the saddle) not the scale length? If not, what is it then?
RE: Scale length with zero fret (in reply to rombsix)
It would be a 637mm scale length without compensation. Compensation would make the string length longer by the amount of compensation. The zero fret to twelfth fret is an accurate measure of scale length as it is half of the scale length. Scale length is used to determine the placement of the frets. Compensation sits outside of that and that's why the string length doesn't always match the scale length.
So, if anyone asks, tell them it is a 637mm scale length. That the string length and scale length are the same just means this particular instrument is not compensated.
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