660 vs 670 scale length

Trovador98

Consider this:

Two Selmer style D-hole guitars made from solid walnut back and sides, spruce top, typical body dimensions, but one made at a medium 660mm and another long 670mm scale length.

Ergonomics aside, what are some pros and cons of each guitar?

JasonS

That's not even half an inch so not really a meaningful difference. I would just go with whichever one I like better.

MichaelHorowitz

Generally shorter scale lengths will decrease string tension resulting in easier playability and fuller mids/bass. Longer scale lengths will have more string tension which will require greater strength/technique to play but will have greater projection, especially in the high end.

Of course, there are many other variables like action, string gauge, neck angle, body size, top thickness, etc which can effect the result. Some great luthiers like Hahl or Dupont can manage all these variables to produce short scale guitars that still have great lead projection while others sound pretty flubby and only useful for rhythm.

pdg

Just to clarify, 660mm is not really "short"scale. 12-fret D-holes are typically and traditionally 640mm scale. So 660mm will have a slight difference from 670mm, but should still be closer to 670mm than the short-scale D-holes.

D-holes generally have less cutting power, so if you want the most cut and closest to "stinging" trebles of oval holes, the 670mm would be the best bet, though the 660mm guitar may be a bit more versatile. Also, 670mm is more standard, in case you decide at some point to sell it.