Simulating a long scale guitar by moving the stop tail to back?

[gorch]

It just came into my mind to make my MIK Standard a bit more snappy. It has classic single coil pickups built under a humbucker hat in it and obviously is a short or Gibson scale guitar.

In order to support the classic Strat tone a bit more, I thought it might be possible to move the stop tail further to the back to tighten the string tension to reach long scale tensions and therefore sound. The bridge would remain at its place or what would I have to do to accomplish the idea?

What do the experts say?

[Studio Custom]

Why not just increase your string gauge to increase the tension?

[burningyen]

It won't do what you want it to. The tension and the tone of the strings will be the same since you still have the same scale length. The only difference will be in how hard it will be to bend strings and how far you need to bend them to get to a certain pitch. There might be some resonance/ringing from the longer strings between the bridge and tailpiece, but it probably won't be that noticeable.

To do what you want, you would really need to get a new neck or fretboard with the correct scale length. And it wouldn't be worth it. Just put a Warmoth partscaster together if you want a Strat-sounding Explorer: http://www.warmoth.com/Guitar/Bodies/Radical/Xplorer.aspx .

[tbonesullivan]

you won't increase the tension by moving the stop tail at all. In fact, you might make it feel "looser", as there will be more string to stretch and compensate for any bends and such. Within a given string gauge, the tension at pitch is always the same. It just takes more winding when you have more overall string involved.

[gorch]

...Within a given string gauge, the tension at pitch is always the same. It just takes more winding when you have more overall string involved.

OK, what is the difference between long scale and short scale from this point of view then?

[burningyen]

With a long scale the strings need to be under more tension than they would be under with a short scale to get to the same pitch.

[velorush]

Here's a really great explanation of the relationships involved. Given that this is also a topic in the "Different Bridges" thread, I thought this might be helpful.

[Feynman]

Buy a Strat - they are awesome.

[Hamer Dave]

It just came into my mind to make my MIK Standard a bit more snappy. It has classic single coil pickups built under a humbucker hat in it and obviously is a short or Gibson scale guitar.

In order to support the classic Strat tone a bit more, I thought it might be possible to move the stop tail further to the back to tighten the string tension to reach long scale tensions and therefore sound. The bridge would remain at its place or what would I have to do to accomplish the idea?

What do the experts say?

Gorch,

You can't change scale length by simply pulling the bridge further back. You'd also have to change the neck. The twelfth fret theoretically is your midpoint. You mess with the location of the bridge, and that midpoint changes. You will not have a tunable guitar. Intonation will become impossible. Using a higher gauge string will increase tension, if that is what you are looking for.

OK. Forget what I said above. I reread your initial post of only pulling the stop piece back. I think that would increase the tension. Good question!

[Jem]

The bridge would remain at its place or what would I have to do to accomplish the idea?

What do the experts say?

Gorch,

You can't change scale length by simply pulling the bridge further back. You'd also have to change the neck. The twelfth fret theoretically is your midpoint. You mess with the location of the bridge, and that midpoint changes. You will not have a tunable guitar. Intonation will become impossible. Using a higher gauge string will increase tension, if that is what you are looking for.

He wasn't talking about the scale length. he's talking increased tension.

Gorch, strike the idea. I know where you're coming from but you won't get that fight you get from a 25 1/2" scale guitar without changing the actual scale length.

[Armitage]

Here's a really great explanation of the relationships involved. Given that this is also a topic in the "Different Bridges" thread, I thought this might be helpful.

Great info!

[Hamer Dave]

OK. Forget what I said above. I reread your initial post of only pulling the stop piece back. Leaving the bridge as is will not change the scale length, so you're ok.

I think that would increase the tension. Good question! Keep in mind that will likely reduce the back angle of the strings over the bridge.

[crunchee]

He wasn't talking about the scale length. he's talking increased tension.

Gorch, strike the idea. I know where you're coming from but you won't get that fight you get from a 25 1/2" scale guitar without changing the actual scale length.

+1. If it were that easy, people would be using trapeze tailpieces where the string anchors could be adjusted for length behind the bridge, up and down the length of the trapeze tailpiece, anytime they wanted to.

Gibson has had a TP-6 'fine tuning' tailpiece with individual string adjustments for exactly that purpose (supposedly), for years. It hasn't made the old plain stoptail tailpiece unpopular, as far as I can tell...and I don't know how useful a TP-6 is, unless you're as picky as Eric Johnson (yeah, I know, he's a Strat guy, I'm just using him as an example of being picky).

[tbonesullivan]

...Within a given string gauge, the tension at pitch is always the same. It just takes more winding when you have more overall string involved.

OK, what is the difference between long scale and short scale from this point of view then?

Guess I should have said "within a given string gauge and scale length, the tension at pitch is always the same" You've got more of a "buffer" when you've got more string involved, which is why how easy it is to bend is actually influenced by headstock design. On strats/teles/etc the high E has 4 more inches of overall length that needs to be brought up to tension. bending up requires pushing the string further over than it would on a gibson style headstock. On the other hand the G string on a Gibson will require more bending distance than some of the other strings.

[velorush]

Gibson has had a TP-6 'fine tuning' tailpiece with individual string adjustments for exactly that purpose (supposedly), for years. It hasn't made the old plain stoptail tailpiece unpopular, as far as I can tell...and I don't know how useful a TP-6 is, unless you're as picky as Eric Johnson (yeah, I know, he's a Strat guy, I'm just using him as an example of being picky).

I think you mean the 'fingers' tailpiece. The TP-6 is this guy:

The TP-6 is a stop tailpiece with fine tuners. The 'fingers' tailpiece has these levers that allow changing the break angle over the bridge, thereby allowing changes in feel string to string. Gibson puts them on the Howard Roberts Fusion (II and III), Super V, ES-775 and various other hollow bodies.

It certainly works for adjusting feel, but they're kind of heavy. As an experiment, I replaced the one on my HRF III with a StewMac trapeze tailpiece and haven't bothered to swap it back. FWIW: the fingers tailpieces are really expensive.

[crunchee]

Gibson has had a TP-6 'fine tuning' tailpiece with individual string adjustments for exactly that purpose (supposedly), for years. It hasn't made the old plain stoptail tailpiece unpopular, as far as I can tell...and I don't know how useful a TP-6 is, unless you're as picky as Eric Johnson (yeah, I know, he's a Strat guy, I'm just using him as an example of being picky).

I think you mean the 'fingers' tailpiece. The TP-6 is this guy:

The TP-6 is a stop tailpiece with fine tuners. The 'fingers' tailpiece has these levers that allow changing the break angle over the bridge, thereby allowing changes in feel string to string. Gibson puts them on the Howard Roberts Fusion (II and III), Super V, ES-775 and various other hollow bodies.

It certainly works for adjusting feel, but they're kind of heavy. As an experiment, I replaced the one on my HRF III with a StewMac trapeze tailpiece and haven't bothered to swap it back. FWIW: the fingers tailpieces are really expensive.

Yup, you're right. Time is playing tricks with me. Funny how neither of these is 'standard equipment' on very many guitars.

[zorrow]

I think it might change the tone (in some unpredictable ways), but tension will remain the same.

The length that counts it's the length between the bridge and the nut -that's the "scale length" indeed. The tension-gauge-pitch formula refers to that length, and nothing else.

How long the string is before the bridge and after the nut is totally irrelevant from a physical standpoint.

So, if someone tells you the reason behind reverse headstocks is tighter lower frequencies, that's more cork-sniffing than anything else.

I mean, longer string-ends at both sides (nut and bridge) might color the tone somehow (as some different harmonics will be introduced, longer string-ends might vibrate more, etc); however, tension will remain the same for the same pitch and the same gauge, if the scale length remains the same.

[zorrow]

BTW gorch, what you might want to try is shortening the distance between the stop-tail and the bridge... to zero!

I mean, given that you're considering modifying your guitar, why not installing a sustainblock bridge on it?

Everyone around would tell you the sustainblock adds more "snap" to your short-scale --well, at least I can tell you sustainblock-ed Vectors have more "snap" than any other TOM-ed Vee I've ever played (and this applies to both stop-tails and string-through's).

You might also want to try a hardtail bridge, if a sustainblock doesn't pop around. They are more Strat-ish anyway, right?

[tbonesullivan]

How long the string is before the bridge and after the nut is totally irrelevant from a physical standpoint.

So, if someone tells you the reason behind reverse headstocks is tighter lower frequencies, that's more cork-sniffing than anything else.

I mean, longer string-ends at both sides (nut and bridge) might color the tone somehow (as some different harmonics will be introduced, longer string-ends might vibrate more, etc); however, tension will remain the same for the same pitch and the same gauge, if the scale length remains the same.

It's not entirely irrelevant. When you bend a string, you are bending the ENTIRE string, unless you have a locking tremelo system or locking bridge. This means that the string behind the nut is stretching as well when you bend. This is also why your guitar goes out of tune if you have badly cut slots that aren't lubricated at all: the string hangs up there during a bend.

If you have more overall string to bend, you'll have to bend the entire string more to get the same raise in tension. it's not a HUGE difference, but it is a difference.

[zorrow]

How long the string is before the bridge and after the nut is totally irrelevant from a physical standpoint.

So, if someone tells you the reason behind reverse headstocks is tighter lower frequencies, that's more cork-sniffing than anything else.

I mean, longer string-ends at both sides (nut and bridge) might color the tone somehow (as some different harmonics will be introduced, longer string-ends might vibrate more, etc); however, tension will remain the same for the same pitch and the same gauge, if the scale length remains the same.

It's not entirely irrelevant. When you bend a string, you are bending the ENTIRE string, unless you have a locking tremelo system or locking bridge. This means that the string behind the nut is stretching as well when you bend. This is also why your guitar goes out of tune if you have badly cut slots that aren't lubricated at all: the string hangs up there during a bend.

If you have more overall string to bend, you'll have to bend the entire string more to get the same raise in tension. it's not a HUGE difference, but it is a difference.

Tension still remains the same for the same pitch, same scale length and same gauge, but I do get what you say:

Given longer string-ends mean more "loose" behind the nut and/or the bridge, you'll need some extra effort to bend -though it would be quite hard to notice, I guess.

Can one predict how that slight difference would impact your tone?

[tbonesullivan]

Tension still remains the same for the same pitch, same scale length and same gauge, but I do get what you say:

Given longer string-ends mean more "loose" behind the nut and/or the bridge, you'll need some extra effort to bend -though it would be quite hard to notice, I guess.

Can one predict how that slight difference would impact your tone?

Not sure if it would impact the tone at all, as those parts of the strings are not really vibrating. It mainly seems to be a difference in feel, though a slight one at that.

I do have to admit that there is a whole lot of superstition and hocus pocus stuff involved with getting the "ultimate tone" according to some. Top wrapping, bottoming out the bridge, locking bridges and tailpieces, stainless steel bridge pieces and tremolo blocks etc. I can see it making some difference, but some companies advertise the stuff almost like your tone will totally suck unless you swap out your zinc/zamak bridge for a steel one.

[gorch]

Very interesting posts so far. We've had family visit this weekend, so I could not join in the discussion. Bridge to nut certainly spans the scale. To achieve tonal correctness the distance is built up by tone steps chained from bridge (smallest step) up to the nut (largest step). My assumption is that the difference between the short and long scale is one large tone step extending the short scale (24 3/4) to long scale (25 1/2). I may get to proof this.

With one tonal step less on the short scale I may not achieve the snappyness of the long scale as a whole on the short scale.So, the idea is by extending the overall string length involved in moving the stop tail, not the bridge, towards the back to achieve some kind of long scale simulation that possibly might be limited to bendings.

However, only the "pics or it doesn't count" rule may apply here in the way that I may have to proof it by simply doing it. Damn, I should have bid on the all black creme bound Monaco XT selling the other day. Changing hands for 140 quit.

[kizanski]

These are all interesting points, but i can tell you from experience (not so much from playing experience, but the experience from a guy that does more buying & selling than playing), that not all of these "facts" are etched in stone when the instrument is actually strung up and in your hands.

There is a lot of truth, of course. For instance, on the wrap tail, Gibson scale guitars that I've had (LP Junior, Hamer Junior, Firebird 1, etc), I've run 10- 52 strings on them, because I found that the wound strings on my usual 10 - 46 gauge to be too "floppy." Whereas on a Les Paul, or any Gibson scale stop tail/tune-o-matic combo guitar, the 10 - 46 strings feel right.

That said, the tension feels the same to me on the Fender term/string through guitars as it does on the Les Paul types.

But there are exceptions, and one in particular has never made sense to me.

Years ago, I had a '64 Gretsch 6120. Loved the sound, loved the look, hated the way it played. The set up on this guitar was the same as any other Bigsby-equipped guitar I've had, regardless of scale (5 of which I can think of off the top of my head), but the 10 - 46 set of strings played like barber poles for some reason.

There was nothing wrong with the set up. The action was perfect (the neck had been reset), the frets were polished, I even installed a roller saddle bridge (which ruined the sound of the guitar, but that's another thread for another day), but none of that helped.

I tried 9 - 46's and then the unthinkable... 9 - 42's, but still, stretching strings required an reasonable amount of effort.

Eventually, the guitar won and I sold it.

The only different about this guitar than any other that I have owned was that it had a Zero fret. Since then I've sworn off any zero fret guitars, and some of them were vintage Gretsch's that I really wanted.

I think that sometimes there are just no answers for this phenomenon.

You can play 100 Strats, but then there's one that fights you. All of the string changes isn't going to make that guitar a player.

Sometimes you pick up a Les Paul that feels like the whole thing is alive and bending to your will. This is what my Monaco and my Monaco SuperPro feel like to me, and that's when you know you have a keeper.

What makes these Monacos "feel" different than the other Monacos and Monaco M3's I've owned and played??

You got me, but for me, this is what makes all of this so much fun!

[Studio Custom]

Another option is to purchase stings with a thicker internal core. When you read about gauges you are seeing the overall external diameter only, if you research the inner core versus the outer wrap you can add tension while retaining the same overall diameter.

[gorch]

Many good ideas and lots of mojo.

As everybody would agree, long scale guitars have that snappyness short scales don't have. I know this from the Tally I have and love. As such, I had installed 60s retro custom wound single coil pickups into my MIK Standard that's having alder body and neck. It swings like hell. Pots and cap had been changed to adjust to the single coils. I've also strung Pyramid 0.10 nickels on the guitar. As a result it truly sounds like a single coil guitar that's coming close to familiar strat sounds. What's it is finally missing is the particular snappyness only long scale guitars provide. Now comes the idea of extending the string length by moving the stop tail to the back.

Check for the Standard here.

http://www.guitarmaniacs.de/cgi-bin/gallery.pl?action=gallery&id=2135#anchor

In order to apply the idea to this particular guitar I'd add a bridge at the place of the Schaller LP trem and move the latter to the back. Writing this, I cannot remember the guitar were sounding different with the stop tail on it. Well, I had the trem on before the pickup change.

[zorrow]

Snappiness also comes from bolt-on necks, but you'd have a hard time to make that change on your guitar.