Lack of Consistent "Reach" Measurement

[jimmay]

Hey all,

I'm currently looking into buying an Emerald guitar and am working with them to get more detailed information. I have a ton of questions and I'll probably post a few here if I can't find a previous post on them ...

One of the things I ran across (and continue to run across) though, is the lack of some kind of measurement or spec that would give me an idea of how far I need to reach out to get to position one. Previously I was using the scale measurement, but after some research, that's clearly misleading. I have two Ibanez guitars with relatively the same scale. One feels great when playing in the first position. One feels like I need to reach across the room to finger an F barre chord. I've heard tales that Gibson SGs (short scales) also feel like you need to reach way way way out ...

After some thought, I realized that both of my Ibanez guitars end up with their waists centered on my right thigh in just about the same spot while I'm playing. And both guitars settle there at the narrowest point in their waists. By finding that point, I can "draw" a line across the narrowest point of the waist and then measure up perpendicular to the nut. In doing that, I found there is a 1 to 1-1/2" difference between the two guitars of the same scale.

I'm going to use this as my personal "reach" measurement so I can compare that value to other guitars I might want to purchase (like the Emerald X-20). I know that roughly 20-1/2" is comfortable for me. 21-1/2" feels awkward.

I was wondering....am I plowing the same field others have already plowed? Am I missing some common spec or measurement already in use that would provide this information?

[Brent Hutto]

People hold guitars in so many different ways that measurement would differ from person to person. You couldn't possibly standardize all the angles in three dimensions to get a standard measurement. Heck, I don't hold the guitar the same way from day to day for that matter!

[jimmay]

A measurement from the narrowest point in the waist to the nut would be a standard measurement. How that applies to a specific player would not be, any more than a bout measurement would be. Or a nut width. Everyone's hands are different, but we all use nut width and neck profile types to get an idea of how a neck is going to "relatively" feel. I'm trying to get that same "relative" idea for the reach of a guitar neck. Seems to be lacking.

[KevinH]

I had the exact same question a couple years or so ago, because my aging shoulder doesn't like a long reach out to the nut. Obviously it would be best to go play a guitar I was thinking about buying, but that's rarely been possible in my area. So I started collecting images of guitars I was interested in, all adjusted to a common scale (pixels/in, not scale as we usually talk about with guitars). That way I could compare a guitar I was thinking about to one I already had and at least get an idea if I was in the ball park.

So, here's an example of an X-20 compared to your AVC9CE:

i.jpg

I aligned the two guitars to the narrow part of the waist (lower blue line). The upper blue line shows the nuts are pretty close. So the X-20 could be a good fit in that sense.

Another, maybe more important thing about the X-20 is its ergonomic shape. It is really surprising when you play one for the first time. It doesn't feel anywhere near its size. Emerald designed them to be a comfortable fit - and they did a really nice job of it.

Another thing to keep in mind is that you can change the distance out to the nut by simply moving your right leg to the left by an inch or so, assuming you don't play with your legs crossed. I found that helps a lot.

I measured the distance from the waist to the nut on my X-20 and got somewhere around 21" to 21-1/4". I normally like 00 12-fret guitars just for the short reach, but the X-20 just isn't an issue for me.

[jimmay]

Wow....that's hugely helpful. Thanks!

I have the same issue. Don't like to feel I'm reaching way out to the left while playing. The Ibanez in the pic is a 25" scale. The X20 a 25.5" Perfect pic to show scale length is not a good measurement to use to get an idea of "reach".

Just got some info back from Emerald, and their reach measurements seem to confirm what the pic here is showing. A 20" reach (about identical to the Ibanez), 10" waist, 10.5" upper bout for both the X10 and X20. But the X10 overall body length is shorter.

All things being relative, it seems the X20 should give me about the same feel as the Ibanez, except a little more comfortable due to the contouring.

That makes me a happy camper.

[M19]

If your reach is an issue, why not stick with 12-fret guitars? The ones that accomplish the 12-fret join by moving back the bridge (Taylor, etc.) would save you 1-3/8".

[donlyn]

Lack of Consistent "Reach" Measurement

A "short scale" guitar could also do wonders for ease of play. It might not seem like much, but it really does matter. A lot.
I prefer playing large body Jumbo guitars, but in comparison, my short-scale smaller-body Taylor 412e-R Grand Concert is almost a toy to play. This can be very important when my old hands are 'acting' up from time to time.

And no one measurement will give the 'reach' (as you define it) of the guitar. But starting with the length of scale, length of body, and where they meet (fret 12 or 14 or otherwise) may go a long way to make a good guess. Experience and empirical evidence are important too. Get out and play as many different instruments and brands as you can.

One underlying issue pertaining to all guitars is that there is no 'standard' as to what a given company may prefer as to size of bodies and necks in either length or depth or shape, and it's often impossible to compare between companies regarding sizes and the resultant effects. Unfortunately in the covid era, it's not always possible to "play before pay", but if you can, I highly recommend doing that as often as possible. Many of these 'differences' in design are responsible for the overall tone a guitar has.

Also, due to the relatively narrow waist on a true Jumbo, they are far easier to play given a relative body size simply due to the guitar resting lower on your leg. It's much easier than you would think to reach all the strings when resting the a Jumbo on either leg.

Don
.

[jimmay]

Originally Posted by M19

If your reach is an issue, why not stick with 12-fret guitars? The ones that accomplish the 12-fret join by moving back the bridge (Taylor, etc.) would save you 1-3/8".

I did go that route at first. The Taylor GC bodies are a tad small for comfort for me. The GAs are OK, and GPs are a tad big. The Martin 000s are very comfortable, but for some strange reason, the 000-15 is a full scale instead of the standard 000 shorter scale. And the 000-15sm extends the body up the neck instead of shifting the neck and bridge further back (as in the Taylor).

In the end there is no substitute for putting your hands (and ears) on the actual guitar, but often this is just not possible. The best you can do is formulate an idea of what a guitar "probably" will feel/play like, based on comparisons to known variables ... like the distance from mid-waist to the nut, and what others who actually own one can tell you.

[s2y]

OP, how is your technique? I'm probably the smallest male on this forum and I'm fine on a 25.5" scale dreadnought as long as I use technique highly influenced by classical guitar posture. My 28.6" scale jumbo baritone is a tad big, but doable. Otherwise, I'd probably be limited to OM or smaller.

[jimmay]

Originally Posted by s2y

OP, how is your technique? I'm probably the smallest male on this forum and I'm fine on a 25.5" scale dreadnought as long as I use technique highly influenced by classical guitar posture. My 28.6" scale jumbo baritone is a tad big, but doable. Otherwise, I'd probably be limited to OM or smaller.

I play seated on a stool, standard style (non-classical). I use a portable rig that holds my pedals, mixer, chartbook, laptop, and mic boom, which I sit behind. To be able to work the pedals with either foot, I need a guitar I'm not fighting to play. Dreads, though playable, tend to make pedalwork harder. Ditto smaller bodied guitars (parlor, Taylor Minis, GTs, GCs). It's been a lot of trial and error, but 000, short scales seem to be my sweet spot.

[nostatic]

If you play standing, it depends on strap attachment points as well. With solid body instruments, upper horn length can make or break the reach to the nut. Going old-school folk and attaching the strap at the nut should slide the guitar to the right, bringing the nut closer. But then your right shoulder angle will be different which may bug you. Ergos can be quite individual. For instance I am not comfortable on any guitar with a body depth greater than 4" - hence my OM preference. ymmv

[jimmay]

Originally Posted by nostatic

If you play standing, it depends on strap attachment points as well. With solid body instruments, upper horn length can make or break the reach to the nut. Going old-school folk and attaching the strap at the nut should slide the guitar to the right, bringing the nut closer. But then your right shoulder angle will be different which may bug you. Ergos can be quite individual. For instance I am not comfortable on any guitar with a body depth greater than 4" - hence my OM preference. ymmv

It is such a personal, subjective thing, for sure.