Scale Length confusion..

[Marcos]

I've talked to a lot of people about scale lengths for a while, and they say that 660-665 mm is for people with "big hands". I play a 650 mm scale length guitar (normal) and sometimes my fingers do get uncomfortable when i play it because of lack of space between my fingers themselves. My question is.. what are considered "big or large" hands? I want to know this for when i buy my next guitar some day :lol:

[nikpearson]

I have small hands and play a relatively long scale guitar - 664mm.
If you think about it that's only 14mm longer than the now more standard 650mm, and this is spread right up the fingerboard. Although the string tensions will be different the extra 14mm is virtually unnoticeable.

Regards, Nick

[jeremy]

Very often the problem of feeling crowded is not the scale length, but the distance between the strings and this translates to nut width. The std nut width is around 52mm.
A 52mm nut width will usually end up with a string spacing of around 9mm (centre to centre) (or center to center for the US people) at the nut end.

If the guitar feels cramped to you in the left hand, then I would suggest that you look at the nut width firstly. Try playing your guitar with a capo on and see if you still feel cramped. Scale length tends to have more effect when related to the length of peoples fingers. 650mm is fine for most people. Many people these days are actually going smaller, 640, 630 etc, but keeping the nut width around 52mm.
________
RM85 (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Suzuki_RM85)

[M. Stephenson]

I second the nut width idea.

My instructors last two guitars were custom made with a wider than normal nut width by Mexican luthier Luis Sevillano. For my instructor the wider nut makes a huge difference, especially for his right hand technique.

There is a noticeable difference and even though the guitar is the standard scale it feels much bigger. It always takes me a few minutes to adjust to the wider neck whenever I play one of these guitars.

[Clement]

I have two guitars that are very different in this respect. My Schramm is a standard spanish style guitar that has a 655 length and 52mm neck width.

My other guitar (which right now I am playing the most) is my 19th century style guitar, an Anton Stauffer reproduction by Kresse. This guitar has a 640 scale length and a 48mm neck width. Honestlly, the scale length difference between the two is not what makes tha latter guitar so much easier to play...it is the neck width!

BTW, my Stauffer guitar can compete easily with most spanish guitars in terms of volume and projection...but boy is the tone sweet!!!

Also, I am 6'1 with large hands and long fingers and I still enjoy playing the Stauffer more...it practically plays itself!

I think for most of us amateurs, this "need" to have long scale lengths is total B.S. I came to the realization that I am first and foremost playing for my own enjoyment so if that means playing an instrument that is not up to today's standards then so be it....but my Stauffer's scale length is actually even longer than most guitars of that period.

Bottom line - go for a guitar with something like a 640 scale and 50mm width...you'll enjoy playing more, you'll last longer, and you won't notice a difference in volume or anything else if you have a good luthier making your guitar.

Clement

[JerryO]

I have small hands and play a relatively long scale guitar - 664mm.
If you think about it that's only 14mm longer than the now more standard 650mm, and this is spread right up the fingerboard. Although the string tensions will be different the extra 14mm is virtually unnoticeable.

Regards, Nick

I agree wholeheartedly with Nick. On a percentage basis the actual difference is 2% and that's spread over the entire length. I have always played 650 mm instruments. When I went shopping for my Ramirez 1A I found one at a great price but the scale length was 664. Even though I have large hands with long fingers (7-7/8 inches from the start of the palm to the tip of I) I was afraid of the instrument because of all I read about how harder they were to play. When I played it I did not really notice the difference. I bought the guitar and its my favorite. I actually play it better than my other guitars which are all 650s. I think its all a matter of what's comfortable. BTW the nut width is 53 MM whcih may also have somethig to do with how well I play and like it (someone discussed this as a factor).

[Pepe Vergara]

[quote=nikpearson]On a percentage basis the actual difference is 2% and that's spread over the entire length. .

However, it is not an even spread. The first frets get higher impact. In my case, that makes a bit difference in playing my trills and in getting to the A from the first position.

[BigMac5]

I second the nut width idea.

My instructors last two guitars were custom made with a wider than normal nut width by Mexican luthier Luis Sevillano. For my instructor the wider nut makes a huge difference, especially for his right hand technique.

There is a noticeable difference and even though the guitar is the standard scale it feels much bigger. It always takes me a few minutes to adjust to the wider neck whenever I play one of these guitars.

How wide is the nut? Luis Sevillano offered to make the nut wider since I asked for a 664mm scale length guitar. The extra 14mm make a huge difference to me, especially in the higher positions. When I grab my son's Aria (650mm scale) I can really feel the difference when playing chords, arpeggios or barring in the higher positions.

[M. Stephenson]

BigMac5,

I am not sure how much wider the neck is. This thread has made me curious and I will find out on my next lesson, which should be next week.

There is enough of a difference that it is visually noticeable. My guess is that it is at least 54mm, maybe wider.

I hope that you enjoy your Sevillano guitar - I have played about 8 of his creations (3 of which are mine). They all sounded and looked wonderful - each guitar was truly unique and each used different woods. Interestingly, the least visually inspiring guitar was the best sounding - it is one of my instructors guitars. I told him it looked like one of the $99 guitars carried at the local Sam Ash - but when played the power of the guitar can be felt thru my entire body.

[MWA]

Hello, I would like to respond with a few observations about scale length vs playability. I used to worry about scale length as an indicator of playability when I wasn't fixated on tuning in an imperfect musical scale. However I have found that guitar scale length is only a fraction of the equation and possibly not the most important. I currently have in my collection 4 guitars with varying scale lengths. The longest is 664 mm with 53 mm width at the nut, the rest are 657/53, 650/52, 645/53. In order of playability, the easiest and therefore most comfortable is the 657, the rest in order of descending ease of playability are 664, 650 and, the most difficult, the 645. The most noticeable difference in the 4 is the fret profile. The 657 has a rather high profile fret and the 645 has thin frets with a low profile. The other two have about the same fret profile which fall between the other two. I feel the fret profile may be the most important single element in the playability of the guitar. I find the smaller frets require a more precise technique and are less forgiving. This leads to stress in the left hand due to excess force being necessary. Also smaller frets lead to a more cramped feel as the fingers must be as close to the fret as possible for the note to sound. On the other hand, the higher profile frets promote a lighter touch which is thus more comfortable. I realize this is possibly an over simplification because many things such as neck angle, action height (at both the nut and the 12 fret), and relief of the neck also contribute a great deal.

[jetiii]

Jose Oribe uses a higher than normal fret profile on his guitars which is supposed to make for easier playing. This is mentioned on his web site.

[jeremy]

Fret height and width do make a guitar feel different. This feeling, to me, is a bit different to that of different scale length or nut width. They all eventually tie together to form a comfort level, but they should not be confused.

Tall frets can make playing easier in some respects, but they can also cause intonation problems. Fret height is probably tied to the width on one's fingertips and the angle of attack of the left hand (for right handed players).
Thin fingers will find it easier to fret cleanly.
________
volcano vaporizer (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/volcano)

[Marcos]

my current guitar has a 52 mm wide nut, so I suppose a 53/54 mm would be better for me? I have unusually large hands for my height.. I'm 5'10-5'11 and have the same size hands as my friend who is 6'5 and even larger feet than him lol. so i suppose it wouldn't hurt to get a wider neck on my next guitar

[MWA]

52/54mm?
The change could help. In "The Classical Guitar Book, A Complete History" one of the collection is a Ramirez 1a formerly owned by Segovia (who it is said had large hands). This instrument has a 54mm width at the nut. However beware of just going by this measurement alone. The spacing of the strings as well as the overall setup of the guitar will be just as important. I am sure the Ramirez owned by Segovia was not just off-the -shelf, the action was probably tweaked quite a bit per his direction. The best advice is to play as many guitars in your price range as possible to find the "feel" you are most comfortable with. This is not as easy as it sounds. Depending on where you live, you may not be able to go to a dealer and find one suitable guitar to try much less several (I know this is true in NC where I live). If you get close, a good guitar repairman or builder may be able to fine tune the action for you. Good Luck.