Short scale guitars

Dallas Selman

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 11:24:54 AM9/22/04

to

I am interested in buying a good short scale guitar such as the new Epiphone
version of the Byrdland. This particular Epi is made in Japan not Korea as
a limited edition, and albeit a little expensive, is reported to be a nice
guitar. I have also read a criticism of an older Gibson Brydland as feeling
cheap and sounding not so hot. Does a short scale necessarily affect the
tone of a guitar in a serious way?

Dallas Selman

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 12:43:02 PM9/22/04

to

I did the search which I should have done in the first place, found lots of
info. Still wonder about the Epi Byrdland though, anybody own one?

"Dallas Selman" <dse...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:aPg4d.73893$KU5.1968@edtnps89...

Kurt Shapiro

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 3:22:23 PM9/22/04

to

Played one a couple weeks ago.

Buzzy and twangy. Sure looked nice though.

"Dallas Selman" <dse...@shaw.ca> wrote in message

news:qYh4d.42898$t61.3874@clgrps13...

Jerry Carden

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 3:31:23 PM9/22/04

to

I have one, and like it a lot. It sis a well-made instrument, and I'm
satisfied with both the sound and playability.

Jerry

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 16:43:02 GMT, "Dallas Selman" <dse...@shaw.ca>
wrote:

Greger Hoel

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 3:45:42 PM9/22/04

to

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:24:54 GMT, "Dallas Selman" <dse...@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>I am interested in buying a good short scale guitar such as the new Epiphone

I'd like to know abiout this too. The 25 1/2" is killing my tiny
hands.

--
_______________________________________________
Always cross a vampire, never moon a werewolf

To reach me, swap spammers get bent with softhome
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kurt Shapiro

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 5:58:23 PM9/22/04

to

Perhaps I played a bad one. I'd like to find a a good one, since I have
small hands.

"Jerry Carden" <grioles...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4151d14e...@news.east.earthlink.net...

Paul Craven

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 6:27:31 PM9/22/04

to

I think there have been 2 Epi Byrdlands -- the 'Elitist' model which has
been well reviewed and a straight Epi version.

I played a Gibson Byrdland for a couple of years. It had a great sound and
I loved the 23.5" scale length, but the neck was way too narrow for me. I
believe the neck width varied over the years; you might find a wider one. I
haven't had an 'Elitist' Byrdland in my hands, but as I recall the published
specs, it had a fairly 'normal' nut width, certainly wider than my old
Gibson.

I prefer a short scale and a wide neck. Unfortunately for my chequebook,
the only solution for me has been to order custom-built instruments.

"Greger Hoel" <gre...@spammersgetbent.net> wrote in message
news:3il3l05apithlqcg1...@4ax.com...

Steven Rosenberg

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 7:07:25 PM9/22/04

to

"Dallas Selman" <dse...@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:<aPg4d.73893$KU5.1968@edtnps89>...

A short-scale guitar will play, feel and sound different. You may like
it better, or not. One thing is that you'll need heavier strings to
get the same tension as with a longer-scale instrument. I'd suggest
trying before buying, especially in this case.

That said, there are some nice sounding Byrdlands out there. Check out
Anthony Wilson's trio record.

Stan Gosnell

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 7:26:41 PM9/22/04

to

"Kurt Shapiro" <kurtWITHOUTT...@hotmailNOSPAMTHANKS.com> wrote
in news:pp-dnays7PE...@comcast.com:

> Perhaps I played a bad one. I'd like to find a a good one, since I
> have small hands.

You need to try one with heavy strings. If you put light strings on a
short-scale instrument, there won't be enough string tension, and the
result will be lots of buzzing, and a trebly tone. You need .013s at a
minimum, and heavier will sound better. .010 strings on a Byrdland will
sound terrible no matter what, and if the store had 009s on it, it will
sound like crap.

--
Regards,

Stan

Steven Rosenberg

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 8:22:54 PM9/22/04

to

The shorter the scale, the more critical the setup, since the strings
are floppier (go heavier) and there is less room for error in
intonation.

I've seen some pictures of Tal Farlow with what looks like a 3/4-size
guitar ... and he had big hands, too.

thom_j

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 9:54:21 PM9/22/04

to

"Greger Hoel" wrote:
> I'd like to know abiout this too. The 25 1/2" is killing my tiny
> hands.

Grow longer hands? 8^)'.. curious tee'...

Jurupari

unread,

Sep 22, 2004, 10:06:07 PM9/22/04

to

>> I'd like to know abiout this too. The 25 1/2" is killing my tiny
>> hands.

I don't like them. It depends on your hand I guess, but if you like those nice
minor second intervals in the middle of your chords and a really broad compass
from low note to high, it makes sense to use a shorter scale if the long one
gives you trouble like it does me.

I'm a pretty big guy, but I never did like big guitars.

Clif

Danny W.

unread,

Sep 23, 2004, 1:32:51 AM9/23/04

to

"Paul Craven" <pcr...@yorku.ca> wrote in message news:<f5n4d.19273$pA.13...@news20.bellglobal.com>...

> I think there have been 2 Epi Byrdlands -- the 'Elitist' model which has
> been well reviewed and a straight Epi version.
>
> I played a Gibson Byrdland for a couple of years. It had a great sound and
> I loved the 23.5" scale length, but the neck was way too narrow for me. I
> believe the neck width varied over the years; you might find a wider one. I
> haven't had an 'Elitist' Byrdland in my hands, but as I recall the published
> specs, it had a fairly 'normal' nut width, certainly wider than my old
> Gibson.
>
> I prefer a short scale and a wide neck. Unfortunately for my chequebook,
> the only solution for me has been to order custom-built instruments.
>

Current standard neck width at the nut on the Gibson Byrdland is
1&11/16". During the '60's it was sometimes as narrow as 1&9/16".

Danny

Rob MacKillop

unread,

Sep 23, 2004, 6:02:40 AM9/23/04

to

I've had my Epi Elite Byrdland for about a year, maybe less. It seems
an excellent guitar - first-rate workmanship from the luthier, and
good pickups. There was only one problem - the third string seemed to
trigger a rattle sound. Drove me nuts trying to find it. Phoned the
dealer (Peter Cook, London) who said it was probably the screw in the
bridge under that string. All it needed was a little bit of clear nail
varnish on it to lock it place. Hey presto, rattle gone. He said a
number of these guitars shared that same problem, but it is very
easily fixed and has never been a problem since.

I have large hands and can do some silly stretches on this instrument,
but to be honest, I now wish I had bought the Epi Elite Broadway (also
on sale at the time) which is a standard size. The Byrd just gets a
little too tight for my big hands in the high positions. Smaller hands
just love it. But it is a trully excellent instrument and looks a
dream.

Prices vary. In the UK the RRP is 2,500 pounds, but Peter was selling
them for 999 pounds - quite a saving!

Might swap for a regular size of similar quality...

Rob

Tom Walls

unread,

Sep 23, 2004, 8:19:06 AM9/23/04

to

In article <pp-dnays7PE...@comcast.com>,
kurtWITHOUTT...@hotmailNOSPAMTHANKS.com says...

>
> Perhaps I played a bad one. I'd like to find a a good one, since I have
> small hands.
>
>

FWIW I have small hands and can't stand short scale guitars. When I pick
them up it's "Damn, this neck sucks!", then I realize it's just the
short scale.
--
Tom Walls
the guy at the Temple of Zeus

Pete Kerezman

unread,

Sep 23, 2004, 1:01:01 PM9/23/04

to

On 22 Sep 2004 16:07:25 -0700, ste...@usa.com (Steven Rosenberg)
wrote:

>A short-scale guitar will play, feel and sound different.

I don't notice much difference between the feel of a 24-3/4" scale
and a 25-1/2" one, even with the same string gauge on each type. I at
first worried that it might be a problem changing back and forth
between them but it's not.

Texas Pete

Josip Seidl

unread,

Sep 23, 2004, 3:07:29 PM9/23/04

to

Hi Rob,what is Peter Cook`s adress(how can I reach him)? Greetings Josip
"Rob MacKillop" <byrd...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:e85fb2d8.04092...@posting.google.com...

Byron Atkins

unread,

Sep 23, 2004, 3:45:05 PM9/23/04

to

> You need to try one with heavy strings. If you put light strings on a
> short-scale instrument, there won't be enough string tension, and the
> result will be lots of buzzing, and a trebly tone. You need .013s at a
> minimum, and heavier will sound better. .010 strings on a Byrdland will
> sound terrible no matter what, and if the store had 009s on it, it will
> sound like crap.

Stan, I happen to differ with your opinion. I've played Gibson
Byrdlands for 35 years. I have two of them, a 63 which I've owned for
35 years and a 69 that I've owned since 1992. I've used 10s on a
Byrdland before and if the guitar is adjusted, it is no big problem.
Mostly now I use .012s to .052 guage which suits me just fine but
before this I used .011 to .049 and intonation was abolutely perfect.
The problem with the .011s was that the guitar just played too easily,
however it sounded great. Right now I have Thomastik George Benson's
on it, round wounds .012 to .053. I think I will string the other
Byrdland with .011 to .049. In the past I've used all brands and kinds
of strings but usually have stayed away from Flat Wounds, just because
I don't like a dull sounding string. It's a myth that you have to have
heavy guage strings on a short scale neck, like the Byrdland. As long
as the guitar is adjusted properly, it will play just fine. I've never
tried to go under .010 because my style does not require that light of
a guage. I well remember a fine jazz guitarist from Houston, Texas
(from around 1973-74) named Clarence Halderman or Holderman (can't
remember exactly how the last name was spelled) who played a Gibson
L-5, with light guage strings .010s to .048. His sound was great, as
well as his technique (he played in a style similar to Benson) and his
guitar sounded good and played effortlessly. I could not believe his
strings were so light but he told me he like the feel of them. L-5 is
a different scale of course, and much longer.

Byron