64 cm vs 65 cm scale photo comparison

Discussions relating to the classical guitar which don't fit elsewhere.
User avatar
JohnyZuper
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:26 pm
Location: Ghent, Belgium

Re: 64 cm vs 65 cm scale photo comparison

Postby JohnyZuper » Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:09 am

My acoustic jazz guitar (The Loar) also has a 64 cm scale.

soltirefa
Posts: 1246
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 3:59 am
Location: Southern California

Re: 64 cm vs 65 cm scale photo comparison

Postby soltirefa » Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:42 pm

If I remember correctly, you had (or still have) a 630 Byers? I was wondering if you prefer that guitar for Bach, or if you find it easier on the 640.


It's hard to say like better or not. To me it's really a matter of trade-offs. I do like the 630 Byers, but there are some aspects to my larger guitars that I like better. More space on the neck makes playing easier in general. But there are some passages in music where I appreciate the 630 for that extra skosh of stretch-ability. I don't dislike the modern all-wood lattice on my Byers, but I gravitate more towards the traditional fan bracing sound of my GVR. Each instrument has its own personality and I like both for what they offer.

I will add that one of the best things that happened with I got a 630mm is that it made me appreciate my larger guitars so much, even 650mm. And that's not to say I don't like the 630mm.

brooks
Posts: 989
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:11 am
Location: halifax, nova scotia

Re: 64 cm vs 65 cm scale photo comparison

Postby brooks » Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:18 pm

Ok, thanks for your thoughts on this. I will need to make a decision in a little while about scale length for what will be my only good guitar. I've been going back and forth between 640 and 630. I still haven't decided, so it's interesting for me to hear about people's preferences and their reasons for them. I was planning to go with 640 as I like that scale and have owned a number of them in the past - like you I always thought of it as a good compromise length - until I recently played a little Panormo replica. It had a really short scale - 600 I think, but with a comfortable 42 string spacing at the nut - and I was amazed how much easier it was to play Bach fugues on...which put the idea in my head of maybe going with 630. But I am still thinking about it.

User avatar
rojarosguitar
Posts: 3884
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:24 pm
Location: near Freiburg, Germany

Re: 64 cm vs 65 cm scale photo comparison

Postby rojarosguitar » Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 am

I have done a slightly simplified calculation for the change of pressing force from 650 to 660 scale length and it yielded an increase of 1.54%.
If you want to look into my handwritten notes:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mtg4sewaii15i ... 1.pdf?dl=0


An analogous calculation for the transition from 640 to 65o yields an increase by 1.56% in pressing force (for an nylon e-1 string of 0.7mm diameter and an action of 4mm at 12th fret).

See also the discussion here:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=111928&start=15
Music is a big continent with different landscapes and corners. Some of them I do visit frequently, some from time to time and some I know from hearsay only ...

brooks
Posts: 989
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:11 am
Location: halifax, nova scotia

Re: 64 cm vs 65 cm scale photo comparison

Postby brooks » Thu Apr 20, 2017 12:38 pm

Interesting, Robert. Unfortunately, I`m not up to the math/physics, but I assume the shorter string distance between the pressure point and the nut/saddle means less leverage against the string tension? Does the ~1.5 % have the increased string tension required to bring a longer string up to the same pitch factored in?


Return to “Public Space”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Andrew Fryer, astro64, bacsidoan, bear, Blondie, brooks, CommonCrawl [Bot], Feynman, gitgeezer, johnd, Lawler, Michael.N., Paul Janssen, Rick Beauregard, tubeman, zupfgeiger and 22 guests