Multiscale: A great development or a solution to a problem that doesn't exist?

[Leon C 2]

Nice idea, but having given it a go I find a huge problem with palm muting, which I believe is a very important technique that I personally use a lot. So, nice try but no cigar. 

[itu]

@Leon C 2 did a triple exposure. I have managed double so far.

 

After reading this thread through, I am making my own conclusion (this is about nearly any bass there is). There are quite a lot of people trying to find a bass to their string set. So many complain about "weak B" or any other not so well sounding bass string or the bass itself.

 

I suggest that if a nice looking bass was found, it should be treated with several string sets. Yes, it costs quite some (but the sets can be saved for future use). But if the sound will become alive with some set, the investment has paid itself. Most of my basses are strung with light D'Addario or GHS strings. They work really well for me. That B is a common nightmare, but other strings may present issues, too.

 

Multiscale may be ergonomic, and may sound different. But if the strings do not support the whole bass, those extra inches do not mean a thing.

[SumOne]

18 hours ago, itu said:

@Leon C 2 did a triple exposure. I have managed double so far.

 

After reading this thread through, I am making my own conclusion (this is about nearly any bass there is). There are quite a lot of people trying to find a bass to their string set. So many complain about "weak B" or any other not so well sounding bass string or the bass itself.

 

I suggest that if a nice looking bass was found, it should be treated with several string sets. Yes, it costs quite some (but the sets can be saved for future use). But if the sound will become alive with some set, the investment has paid itself. Most of my basses are strung with light D'Addario or GHS strings. They work really well for me. That B is a common nightmare, but other strings may present issues, too.

 

Multiscale may be ergonomic, and may sound different. But if the strings do not support the whole bass, those extra inches do not mean a thing.

 

That is something I was wondering. I guess, for example - my NY XL strings sound even across all strings on a normal non-multiscale Bass which is what they were designed for, but put them on a multiscale and it isn't going to be what they were designed for. So is it really going to be an improvement? There are a couple of sets of multiscale specific strings available now, but even then the scale lengths can vary quite a lot between Basses.

 

 In the 3 years after I started this thread I've owned and sold an EHB 1005MS (and previously owned a Combustion) but I'm still undecided about multiscale and if it is great new technology or just a way of selling new basses (probably somewhere in-between). And the votes are about 50/50 so I guess the jury is out.

 

 

Edited Monday at 08:56 by SumOne

[FatDrunkStupid]

Mutiscale fretless anyone? Because accurate intonation isn't hard enough.

[Stub Mandrel]

It's a nice aid for people whose technique isn't up to playing a conventional bass. 😈

[StickyDBRmf]

16 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

It's a nice aid for people whose technique isn't up to playing a conventional bass. 😈

Oooo. Good one.

(coming from a guy that plays a multi-dimensional fretted Stick)

[tauzero]

On 23/03/2025 at 22:48, FatDrunkStupid said:

Mutiscale fretless anyone? Because accurate intonation isn't hard enough.

 

https://reverb.com/item/66788652-dingwall-abii-5-3-fretless-2023-walnut

[Stub Mandrel]

7 hours ago, tauzero said:

 

https://reverb.com/item/66788652-dingwall-abii-5-3-fretless-2023-walnut

 

Which somehow begs the question... if having a longer B string sounds better, why not make all the other strings equally long?

[SumOne]

38 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

 

Which somehow begs the question... if having a longer B string sounds better, why not make all the other strings equally long?

The argument goes that not every string sounds better longer, 37" is good for the B but a 37" G would be too tight and twangy. The tension/tone is more even with the multiscale.

 

Personally, I can see it is an issue for the 7 octaves on a piano, not necessary on the 3 octaves of a 4 string Bass, and perhaps just about worthwhile on a 5 string Bass for those lowest B string notes that can be a bit indistinct on a 34".

[MichaelDean]

35 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:

 

Which somehow begs the question... if having a longer B string sounds better, why not make all the other strings equally long?

Because they sound worse for being at that longer scale length. It's the same principle as on a piano or a harp, the lower pitched strings are longer than high pitched ones. As a Dingwall owner, I'd say it's like the small amount of difference in an instrument that makes it feel different to others. It's not better or worse, it's just different. And it's a level of difference that only really matters to the player - the average audience member isn't realistically going to notice a sonic difference between a multiscale and standard scale bass. If that difference works for you, great. If not, move on.

[Dood]

On 23/03/2025 at 23:19, Stub Mandrel said:

It's a nice aid for people whose technique isn't up to playing a conventional bass. 😈

 

Isn't that Frets? Or Luminlay, ummm no, Ramps, no wait... String Mutes... oh hang on, Compresssors, Effects, errr... Plectrums, Ahhhh!!! Electric BASS!! It wasn't like it used to be in the olden days when we had to actually work to be heard at the back of the room with a double bass gahhhhh!!!! 😁 

 

I jest of course. 

[Woodinblack]

50 minutes ago, SumOne said:

The argument goes that not every string sounds better longer, 37" is good for the B but a 37" G would be too tight and twangy. The tension/tone is more even with the multiscale.

 

That's the theory but as one of the few people with a 42" scale electric bass (ie, not EUB, which is the same), the 42" G doesn't sound twangy at all. I think the best reason is that it is easier to play.

[TrevorR]

On 20/01/2022 at 16:09, neepheid said:

Or: it's a collusion between bass manufacturers and opticians/glasses manufacturers to drive up the sale of spectacles.

First time I saw a multi scale instrument in the wild was when Gordon Giltrap played his brand new multi scale Fylde at a gig.  I remarked to him afterwards about the guitar that I knew he had a reputation for nimble fingers, but I’d never seen someone with playing so hot it actually melted their instrument mid song. That tickled him.

 

I'm in the middle between the two options- I completely get the engineering philosophy behind them but as a long term 4 string player with no desire to play a 5, it’s all moot for me.

[neepheid]

Ultimately, I haven't indulged because they haven't made one yet which floats my boat, aesthetically.  I'm talking about the entire bass working as a whole for me, it's not the fact that it's multiscale in and of itself that's putting me off.  One day it might click.  The D-Roc comes close TBF - if I was forced to choose a multiscale bass available today, it'd be that.

[visog]

Not sure if this multiscale thread has covered the variance in multiscale geometries. That Charlie Hunter guitar has an extreme one, whereas some Ibanez models have a relatively gentle one. Also, the target of the multiscaling can vary up and down the fretboard. For example, having the straight frets at the 9th fret creates slants at the nut and in the upper register, whereas placing the straight frets at the 12th fret or higher results in a more extreme slant in the lower register but a relatively gentle one in the upper register. I think it's generally been a good thing, but maybe not as revolutionary as it looks.

[Jean-Luc Pickguard]

I don’t know and don’t care — I just know that I’m not likely to ever buy one.

[SumOne]

12 minutes ago, Jean-Luc Pickguard said:

I don’t know and don’t care — I just know that I’m not likely to ever buy one.

😃  caring enough to read and comment on a thread to say you don't care sounds like you must care a bit!