Why isn't the Byrdland scale more popular?

[John A.]

Tal Farlow was known for having very large hands. He modified one of his guitars by cutting off the fretboard at the first fret to make a short-scale guitar. I wonder why he did that.

According to him:
"The result was the same as tuning down the strings by a semitone and using a capo at the first fret. With less tension in the strings, the sound was more mellow and softer; it also allowed me to cover a larger span of the fingerboard. I used this for quite a few years, but eventually I went back to the standard fingerboard." [from this interview]

He was an inveterate tinkerer and experimenter. He built an amp into his stool, designed and built an octave effect and other electronics, and designed the Tal Farlow model (including variants that were never built that had different electronics). All in all, he seem to have been a really fascinating guy with all sorts of interests who loved to follow his own curiosity.

TBH the scale length does make a difference in tone, if all are tuned to the same standard tuning, although the fret-to-fret distance difference may be imperceptible, a couple of thousandth of an inch or so. String tension does affect tone, and a short scale guitar has very low tension, unless the string scale is much larger than usual, and both tension and gauge affect tone.

There aren't a whole lot of ceterus paribus cases that allow us to gauge the effect of scale-length in isolation from other differences between guitars. I mean most of us are doing things like comparing a strat or tele to a 175, or a 335 to an L5, etc.. In those cases, scale-length is probably the least important difference. OTOH, I can think of examples of the same player playing, say, a 175 and a Tal Farlow, Barney Kessel, or ES 350 (including some folks who have posted here), and I'm hard pressed to hear the differences between the guitars at times.

So yes, as a matter of measurement in a lab two strings of the same gauge at the same pitch but with different scale-lengths have measurably different harmonic peaks and valleys. But I don't know how much to make of that in the real world (and grant that others may hear this better than I do). I also honestly don't know whether I feel a differences between scale lengths. I have 4 guitars, each with a different scale length [an archtop with the "Gibson" scale (24.6" measured by doubling the nut->12th fret distance) strung with flat 13's; a semi-hollow with an actual 24.75" scale length (round 10's); a Fender strat (actual 25.5", also round 10's); and an Eastman flattop (24.9", PB 12's)]. There's no way I can sort out the difference in feel based on scale-length.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

Try a chord grip spanning 5 frets from the first fret, on both you shortest and longest fretboards.

[sgosnell]

I don't claim a difference in feel, but I do believe that different tension makes some difference in tone. A string tuned to a pitch at one scale length sounds subtly different when tuned to the same pitch at a different scale length, because the tension is different. OTOH I have guitars with 25.5", 25.0", and 24.75" nominal scale lengths, and I honestly cannot feel any difference between them in terms of fret spans. I also play mandos of different scale lengths, and there is no real difference to me between them and playing a guitar at higher frets. If playing guitars with different scale lengths is difficult, then playing the same guitar in different keys, or at different places on the fretboard, should be just as difficult. To me, it's all the same - keys and scale length make no difference, other than different sounds in different locations, and using open strings, or not. I'm far from a pro guitarist, but I can't understand the difficulty of playing guitars with different scale lengths. I'm not saying that there is none, just that I have difficulty understanding it. To me, playing a tune in A, Bb, or B is pretty much the same, although the frets are slightly different distances apart. I just adjust and play.

[Chris236]

I don't claim a difference in feel, but I do believe that different tension makes some difference in tone. A string tuned to a pitch at one scale length sounds subtly different when tuned to the same pitch at a different scale length, because the tension is different. OTOH I have guitars with 25.5", 25.0", and 24.75" nominal scale lengths, and I honestly cannot feel any difference between them in terms of fret spans. I also play mandos of different scale lengths, and there is no real difference to me between them and playing a guitar at higher frets. If playing guitars with different scale lengths is difficult, then playing the same guitar in different keys, or at different places on the fretboard, should be just as difficult. To me, it's all the same - keys and scale length make no difference, other than different sounds in different locations, and using open strings, or not. I'm far from a pro guitarist, but I can't understand the difficulty of playing guitars with different scale lengths. I'm not saying that there is none, just that I have difficulty understanding it. To me, playing a tune in A, Bb, or B is pretty much the same, although the frets are slightly different distances apart. I just adjust and play.

yep - lower tension warms things up but this is where we get into true subjectiveness. Byrds aren’t necessarily low tension any more than a longer scale instrument is though. You make that choice with strings of course. I’ve got 14-53 on mine. Feels higher tension than my “L5” with 12-52.

and - yes! You get it. Not much difference physically in playing a bird. Nothing you don’t adjust to in a few minutes of playing and no different than more common scale lengths minus the 1st fret plus 2 at the end.

[Chris236]

Now here’s an important takeaway from having gone through 4 of these guitars. The width of the fret IS important. The blonde florentine I posted had been restored and refreted by Gibson before I got it. Despite having better upper register access, the 21st and 22nd frets were pretty difficult to trigger because of the (heavier) gauge of sting I was using, and that jumbo, wide fret wire they were using at the time. Narrow fret wire is pretty important to maintain the integrity of the frets as you get higher on the fretboard with a shorter scale…with heavy strings anyway, lighter strings were fine.

[bluejaybill]

I read an article, actually it was more like a scientific paper, that measured the overtones of different scale lengths. The 25.5 had the most, and also were different from 24.75, in whether they were even or odd harmonics, or which were accentuated I should say. 25" scale was mentioned briefly as being different still, and not just half way between the two. The Byrdland scale wasn't mentioned but would be assumed to be different as well.

The closest comparison I have is a vintage D28 and 00028 of roughly the same era, with the same woods. Slightly smaller body on the 000, but definitely different overtones. It's harder to extrapolate on arch tops because of the different construction and woods used between the different models.

In terms of the scale length, I have 24.75, 25 and 25.5 and can get around on all, but some things are easier on one than the others. I've played shorter, and didn't like them. I also find that I have more trouble with intonation as the necks get shorter. YMMV etc.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

I read an article, actually it was more like a scientific paper, that measured the overtones of different scale lengths. The 25.5 had the most, and also were different from 24.75, in whether they were even or odd harmonics, or which were accentuated I should say. 25" scale was mentioned briefly as being different still, and not just half way between the two. The Byrdland scale wasn't mentioned but would be assumed to be different as well.

The closest comparison I have is a vintage D28 and 00028 of roughly the same era, with the same woods. Slightly smaller body on the 000, but definitely different overtones. It's harder to extrapolate on arch tops because of the different construction and woods used between the different models.

In terms of the scale length, I have 24.75, 25 and 25.5 and can get around on all, but some things are easier on one than the others. I've played shorter, and didn't like them. I also find that I have more trouble with intonation as the necks get shorter. YMMV etc.

I heard that some time ago about the Byrdland and intonation. What are we saying? That we can’t really nail it? That it falls off more drastically in higher positions, relative to other guitars? That it won’t stay in tune, or what?

[Dennis D]

I believe that Anthony Wilson played a Byrdland with Diana Krall during the live in Paris gig. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70b5-L13B6k

......' Live in Paris ' - -all that need be said !

.....And I just had to add this from ' Live in Montreal ' - - also magic !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uhpAKuQOQA

[sgosnell]

I heard that some time ago about the Byrdland and intonation. What are we saying? That we can’t really nail it? That it falls off more drastically in higher positions, relative to other guitars? That it won’t stay in tune, or what?

As the length of the string decreases, there is less margin for error, and our ears hear mistakes more easily. It's affected both by the amount the string has to be stretched to be fretted, and by the percentage of string length that each fret affects. Fret width can affect intonation, which is why short-scale instruments like mandolins have very narrow frets. One millimeter difference in placement on a bass may not even be hearable, but on a mando it's more obvious. So intonation is just harder to get right as the scale length decreases. Shorter is harder to tune, because it must be more precise, but once tuned it should stay, given proper tuning technique and decent tuners. But even a very small amount of stretch in the string can be heard more easily, the shorter the total length, because it's a larger percentage of the total.

Sort of rambling while still on the first cup of coffee, but hopefully still understandable.

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

As the length of the string decreases, there is less margin for error, and our ears hear mistakes more easily. It's affected both by the amount the string has to be stretched to be fretted, and by the percentage of string length that each fret affects. Fret width can affect intonation, which is why short-scale instruments like mandolins have very narrow frets. One millimeter difference in placement on a bass may not even be hearable, but on a mando it's more obvious. So intonation is just harder to get right as the scale length decreases. Shorter is harder to tune, because it must be more precise, but once tuned it should stay, given proper tuning technique and decent tuners. But even a very small amount of stretch in the string can be heard more easily, the shorter the total length, because it's a larger percentage of the total.

Sort of rambling while still on the first cup of coffee, but hopefully still understandable.

Yeah, thanks! And all that is worth it for someone who really wants the short scale, I'm sure.

[Chris236]

I don’t find the Byrd harder to tune than any other guitar nor does it have intonation issues. In fact, my Byrd is probably the most stable instrument I’ve ever owned.

[sgosnell]

I don't think tuning is any more difficult on a Byrdland scale than most other guitars, because the scale length difference isn't as drastic. By the time you get to mandolin length, it does become touchier, at least for me. On a bass, there is a wider range of acceptable tuning. Like most other things, it's relative. At least, that's my theory of relativity.

[bohemian46]

I wanted a Byrdland until I bought one.
We lasted a year.

Pickups too close to each other.
Conclusion, a novelty for me.

[Chris236]

I wanted a Byrdland until I bought one.
We lasted a year.

Pickups too close to each other.
Conclusion, a novelty for me.

hmmm, that’s interesting. What was it about having the pickups ‘close together’ that bothered you? Some might not like having the neck pu so close to the bridge(I actually like the “175” location of the neck pu)…..the only down side to that in my mind is potentially bumping into the pu with the pick. This is easily addressed by lowering the pickup in the mounting ring. I’ve yet to see a Byrd that didn’t have a generous amount of room in this regard and I prefer the sound of pickups farther from the strings anyway.

[Tal_175]

I think the es 175 has its neck pickup at the 24th fret, just like the es335 and Les Paul (or telecasters).
The gap is because the es 175 is missing two frets.

[Chris236]

I think the es 175 has its neck pickup at the 24th fret, just like the es335 and Les Paul (or telecasters).
The gap is because the es 175 is missing two frets.

22nd fret you mean….just like the Byrd.

[Tal_175]

22nd fret you mean….just like the Byrd.

Nope, I definitely don't mean the 22nd fret.

[Chris236]

I think the es 175 has its neck pickup at the 24th fret, just like the es335 and Les Paul (or telecasters).
The gap is because the es 175 is missing two frets.

Nope, I definitely don't mean the 22nd fret.

Whelp, the thing is a es335 has 22 frets and a es175 has 20. Are you saying the pole pieces are configured under what (would be) the 24th fret harmonics? If so, yes, exactly like the Byrdland.

[Archie]

Interesting video here if you want to really hear the difference between scale lengths.

I have skipped to the last page on this thread, so apologies if this has been posted previously.

My take away is that the shorter the scale length gets, the more honky and less dynamic the tone becomes.

That's not to take away from shorter scale guitars or to claim they don't sound as good.
They sound great on record vintage records to me. It's just what I hear from the experiment done in the video.