# Etherial All Shall Perish Custom 9 String Bezier Curve



## PBC (Jun 9, 2016)

Looks like All Shall Perish are going to try to use some 9 strings on their new album. 


Here are some of the images. 












I'm assuming that it's meant to extend their 7 string tuning so: BF#BF#BEg#c#f#

The scale length is 29"-23.5", a whopping 5.5" inch fan. It feels like anything above the 12th fret would be difficult to play, I imaging sweeping and arpeggios would need to relearned with such an extreme angle. 

Flat fretboard radius, probably 17mm or 18mm consistent neck, 27 fret. I'm a fan of the Azwen body. Looks interesting, would love to be able to try one of these. 

Now that I've taken a better look at it, it looks like it's an inverse E-Scale. Where it exponentially grows to the tremble side instead of the bass side.


----------



## Spicypickles (Jun 9, 2016)

I dig these a lot. They're out there looking, but not super crazy.


----------



## thrsher (Jun 9, 2016)

my biggest struggle with multiscale has been my picking hand, id imagine a fan like that will be a nightmare to palm across strings.


----------



## Alex Kenivel (Jun 9, 2016)

It's a little too early in the morning for me to verbalize, but


----------



## 77zark77 (Jun 9, 2016)

Nice to see, but to play ....


----------



## mphsc (Jun 9, 2016)

Nice body style, but it honestly looks like this guy is just throwing stuff out there. Also looks like a nightmare to play, to fret, to pick, to mute, etc.... Props to the guy that's got to play it.


----------



## technomancer (Jun 9, 2016)

Looks like a badly copied version of Oni's E-Scale system... which I believe Dan patented.

I wonder if this guy's workmanship is still completely half-assed when it comes to build quality


----------



## Edika (Jun 9, 2016)

That low low string seems to be really close to the edge of the fretboard. String slipage 101.


----------



## Masoo2 (Jun 9, 2016)

Pickup placement is really weird, tons of space between the bass strings and the bridge pickup


----------



## BrailleDecibel (Jun 9, 2016)

77zark77 said:


> Nice to see, but to play ....



Pretty much this. It looks cool, and I like the inlays, but it makes my hands hurt just thinking about trying to play it.


----------



## PBC (Jun 9, 2016)

thrsher said:


> my biggest struggle with multiscale has been my picking hand, id imagine a fan like that will be a nightmare to palm across strings.



Unless they are tuning to High A. I see no reason to have the scale length that short. With the ability to buy individual .007 strings tuning up to F# doesn't require that short of scale. 

With a .007 D'Addario F#:

25.5" = 10lbs
26" = 10.4lbs
26.5" = 10.8lbs
27" = 11.2lbs
27.5" = 11.6lbs
28" = 12.1lbs

One could go to 27" and still have about 4lbs of leeway before it breaks. A NYXL would have an average breaking point of 15.39lbs. I understand wanting a shorter scale length for leads but at bare minimum, you could lose 2" off the fan and have a much easier time playing. Plus the 27th fret would be about the 25th wide on the 23.5" side (a significant difference for extra frets: the 27 on 23.5 is about 29th on 25.5). You would the able to access the high A (27th fret) much easier on a longer scale. 

Have to wait and see. Hopefully Chris Storey will upload some play through to his youtube account.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 9, 2016)

Etherial still builds guitars? Haven't heard anything about them until that huge backlash years ago.


----------



## Winspear (Jun 9, 2016)

This is interesting to me, as I use a 9 string with a high treble string and a 24.75-29.25 fan. HIgh G# not A which makes a big difference.
I'd certainly go 23.5" for a high A and would be facing the issue of large fan vs short low end like they have here...but...

Using Oni's E-scale in reverse is a good idea. Brings the treble scale down more dramatically as needed for that string. The funny thing is how it's wrecked the placement of that pickup. Sure you get a nice 29" scale on the bottom and a good high A, but I absolutely guarantee a modest 26" on the bottom with a normal fan, a bigger muddier string, _but a pickup positioned properly, _would sound so much better haha. All that effort for nothing...

(If it is indeed for high F#, yes, pointless. 25" can safely bend a full tone from F#)


----------



## Randy (Jun 9, 2016)

Subtle. Understated.


----------



## Spicypickles (Jun 9, 2016)

Homeboy in Rings of Saturn still plays one (has a sig too, I believe). Their old lead guitarist had one as well.


----------



## Tree (Jun 9, 2016)

Randy said:


> Subtle. Understated.





Echoing others, I'm surprised that this guy is still in business.


----------



## PBC (Jun 9, 2016)

EtherealEntity said:


> This is interesting to me, as I use a 9 string with a high treble string and a 24.75-29.25 fan. HIgh G# not A which makes a big difference.
> I'd certainly go 23.5" for a high A and would be facing the issue of large fan vs short low end like they have here...but...
> 
> Using Oni's E-scale in reverse is a good idea. Brings the treble scale down more dramatically as needed for that string. The funny thing is how it's wrecked the placement of that pickup. Sure you get a nice 29" scale on the bottom and a good high A, but I absolutely guarantee a modest 26" on the bottom with a normal fan, a bigger muddier string, _but a pickup positioned properly, _would sound so much better haha. All that effort for nothing...
> ...



I love your Vik Tom. You had it perpendicular on 7th? I recall your bridge angle looked wild. I printed out the reverse e-scale and found it a bit more playable than the regular, at least when it comes to extreme fans (4.5" +). You point out a big issue; the pickups. That M80M mojo that comes from it being super close to the bridge and - at this point in time - is impossible to achieve on a curved bridge. Even on a standard fan, I don't know of any pickups that can match the angle of bridge, being close to it, and achieve balance across all the strings.


----------



## CaptainD00M (Jun 9, 2016)

PBC said:


> It feels like anything above the 12th fret would be difficult to play, I imaging sweeping and arpeggios would need to relearned with such an extreme angle.



I'd be more worried that it would be difficult to play due to the build quality, Etherial doesn't have a good rep which is why I was surprised to see Lucas Mann's (who also doesn't have an awesome rep) still using them along with a couple NGD's here with them and an updated website.

Frankly, I think they are hideous - but I get the appeal. Just not some of the specs. I would really love someone explaining the benefit of the curved frets, I asked on one guys Oni NGD out of genuine curiosity because I'm ignorant to the benefit of them - but no one answered.

Anyone?


----------



## thrsher (Jun 9, 2016)

CaptainD00M said:


> . I would really love someone explaining the benefit of the curved frets, I asked on one guys Oni NGD out of genuine curiosity because I'm ignorant to the benefit of them - but no one answered.
> 
> Anyone?



The idea behind it is to improve on the usual multi/compound/f'd fret idea, particularly above the 12th fret where the angle on the treble string frets can become problematic. better upper access, bit easy of barring chords. improvement of balanced tension


----------



## Bearitone (Jun 9, 2016)

Even the "bridge" pickup seems waaayyyy too far away from the saddles on the lower strings. more like a middle pickup. Because of that alone I think it would sound like crap. I can't imagine All Shall Perish style songs, played without a true bridge pickup


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Jun 9, 2016)

The middle pickup like position on the lower strings will undo the affect of the fan/longer scale while the highest strings will be really bright and thin. So it's doing the complete opposite of what you want. It would be like warming up your cup of tea with ice cubes.

The nut also needs to be replaced. The slots are to big and will cause all sorts of tuning problems.


----------



## ElysianGuitars (Jun 9, 2016)

technomancer said:


> Looks like a badly copied version of Oni's E-Scale system... which I believe Dan patented.
> 
> I wonder if this guy's workmanship is still completely half-assed when it comes to build quality



Dan hasn't pateneded E-scale, not sure he intends to. I've talked to him about using it, he's pretty open to that. 

This doesn't really look like E-scale though, it just looks like a curvy fanned fret. E-scale doesn't splay like that.


----------



## leftyguitarjoe (Jun 9, 2016)

It looks like the pickups were an afterthought. The placement looks horrible. Do not want.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Jun 9, 2016)

You could route out room for an 81 under the lower strings, that would sound tight as hell then but you'd be restricted to just 6 strings.


----------



## PBC (Jun 9, 2016)

CaptainD00M said:


> I would really love someone explaining the benefit of the curved frets, I asked on one guys Oni NGD out of genuine curiosity because I'm ignorant to the benefit of them - but no one answered.
> 
> Anyone?



Long post:

Hopefully InfinityCollision sees this thread as he knows the math more than myself and can explain it in greater detail as well as the benefits. Generally fanned frets are to allow: higher tuning, lead work on a smaller scale, potentially balance string gauge/tension, "shorter scale sound." If you look at fanned fret

Boden with 2" fan






Ibanez with 1.7" fan 





You notice that depending on the perpendicular, after the 12th fret, the higher register starts "pointing towards the nut." Generally, the perp is near the 7-9, to allow the bridge and the nut to share the same angle. What this does however is make it easier to play the bottom but make the higher register and the bridge to have exacerbated angles. This is especially prominent when the fan is increased.

2.5" Fan 






5" Fan 10 String 





Notice the angle of the bridge as well. Oni initially designed the e-scale to solve the issue of the highest register and increase playability. Since generally for 8 string guitars, the ideal is punchy tight low end (28, 29, 30 or higher) and ability to lead (26 or 25" bottom), it fall into the trap having a difficult to maneuver guitar. Since "Straight fretted" guitar are generally "easier" to play, symmetrical all over the board thereby allowing runs to be uniform in the higher register (prefer straight frets for this reason), he wanted to compromise fan fan - with all the benefits the fan entails - that played like a straight fret - or as close to it as possible. 

By having the fan exponentially grow in distance, rather than uniform, the frets are more vertically stacked. 






You don't have to shift the hand position as much and the higher register now plays like a normal straight fret guitar. Notice as well that the bridge angle, pickup angle, and nut angle are much nicer than with the extreme fans.

Essentially what is happening that the fan plays like its ~ .5-1" less than what it is - hopefully someone can get the actual numbers. On extreme fans, the standard option would be very difficult to play. Imagine fellow SSO member Jack_cat's 5" classical in 24 fret electric form 





It all around makes the guitar much more playable in almost all areas. Had a discussion with InfinityCollision about the concept he summed it up nicely 
here

Hope this helps. 

Also thrsher summed it up nicely while I was putting this post together.


----------



## cip 123 (Jun 9, 2016)

That low string looks disgustingly close to the edge of the fret board. The pickup placement is also gonna make that low string mud city.

Could've routed for two pickups running together, similar to a bass. 

One closer to the bridge on the low side and one higher up, similar to a Charlie hunter Novax.


----------



## bzhan1 (Jun 9, 2016)

Hilariously bad design, both aesthetically and functionally


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Jun 9, 2016)

the ridiculous fan and pickup placement are horrifying to me.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Jun 9, 2016)

cip 123 said:


> That low string looks disgustingly close to the edge of the fret board. The pickup placement is also gonna make that low string mud city.
> 
> Could've routed for two pickups running together, similar to a bass.
> 
> One closer to the bridge on the low side and one higher up, similar to a Charlie hunter Novax.



Like this? Not sure if you would run into overlap problems on the middle strings but maybe positioning them better could solve that. 





The only ideal solution other than a curved pickup would be a custom 9 string one at a very sharp angle.


----------



## Splinterhead (Jun 9, 2016)

For me this guitar would be a logistical nightmare. More power to the person whose fingers can move on that fretboard.


----------



## bloc (Jun 10, 2016)

I'm getting vertigo just looking at the fretboard. Seems REALLY distracting. And that's as if the curved frets weren't distracting enough.


----------



## xwmucradiox (Jun 10, 2016)

The problem with those frets is that side dots mean absolutely nothing when what's "below" any given marker when you're looking straight down the neck is a fret two off from where you expect. That would be fine if there were simple fretboard inlays but you have a huge graphic there that wont help with location while playing. I ran into this issue with my Oni and realized a blank fretboard was a bit foolish. I should have gotten treble side face inlays as well.


----------



## sezna (Jun 10, 2016)

cip 123 said:


> That low string looks disgustingly close to the edge of the fret board.



It looks like they tried to fit nine strings on an eight string neck they had lying around.


----------



## jephjacques (Jun 10, 2016)

It looks like someone hired John Carmack to design a guitar


----------



## r3tr0sp3ct1v3 (Jun 11, 2016)

Maybe it's supposed to be something they model for pictures with.


----------



## InfinityCollision (Jun 11, 2016)

PBC said:


> Hopefully InfinityCollision sees this thread







CaptainD00M said:


> I would really love someone explaining the benefit of the curved frets, I asked on one guys Oni NGD out of genuine curiosity because I'm ignorant to the benefit of them - but no one answered.
> 
> Anyone?


Escale's appeal is the ability to further optimize the interactions between fan width/scale lengths, playability, and tone, albeit at the cost of more challenging implementation and some localized compromises.

Take Dan's original implementation for instance. The high strings use a relatively small fan, maintaining a transparent feel and easy chords/arpeggios up and down the fretboard. There's little need to adjust your wrist position/angle or find new fingerings. The bass strings flare out into longer scales for improved tone and clarity where it's most beneficial (treble strings retain the sweeter tone of a shorter scale), and the increased fan angle has less of an impact on playability since that area is mostly used for riffing and simpler chord shapes. A bit of extra curvature in the upper bass frets is likewise negligible given how little that region is typically used.

By varying the changes in scale length and placement of the strings, you can customize the layout to suit different needs. PBC posted a link to one of my previous posts on the subject, which includes a WIP mockup of my own variation. Slightly larger fan (3", 8 strings) and it shows, but a lot of the extra length is pushed towards the bass side of the bridge. I've also reduced the flare of the bass strings at the nut, and my curvature inverts (neither design has a true perpendicular line) nearer to the nut (around frets 5-6) than his (7-8). The end result is slightly better suited to my A1-A4 tuning and chord-heavy, classically-oriented playstyle. It plays like a much smaller fan when comparing angles in my most commonly used areas of the fretboard, but I still get the scale lengths I want at either end.

I've talked about Etherial's system a couple times in the past. My thoughts on it haven't really changed: the lower frets are fine, but the upper ones don't make any sense to me. Fret angles are maximized in the treble strings and minimized on the bass side, which directly opposes common use of the upper frets. Traditional chord/arpeggio fingerings are all but thrown out the window in that register; better to find new ones for that particular fan I'd think. I would expect it to feel very unintuitive, and the lack of clear fret markers could exacerbate that issue. That's to say nothing of other considerations like the pickup configuration or placement of the lowest string.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Jun 11, 2016)

What in the...?

How in the...?

Nope.

Walking away.


----------



## Jlang (Jun 11, 2016)

If anybody can play this thing, it will be Chris Storey.


----------



## lelandbowman3 (Jun 11, 2016)

Jlang said:


> If anybody can play this thing, it will be Chris Storey.



Chris storey actually has a standard-23.5 fan on a 7 that's pretty well-built. I think this is for Ben, but that said, it's probably going to play like a fart.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 11, 2016)

InfinityCollision said:


> I've talked about Etherial's system a couple times in the past. My thoughts on it haven't really changed: the lower frets are fine, but the upper ones don't make any sense to me. Fret angles are maximized in the treble strings and minimized on the bass side, which directly opposes common use of the upper frets. Traditional chord/arpeggio fingerings are all but thrown out the window in that register; better to find new ones for that particular fan I'd think. I would expect it to feel very unintuitive, and the lack of clear fret markers could exacerbate that issue. That's to say nothing of other considerations like the pickup configuration or placement of the lowest string.



Yeah, I agree. Nothing wrong with the 23.5-29" scales. But instead of having the standard side on the low end, and the curves on the treble end, it would make FAR more sense to do the opposite (like Dan's). I cannot imagine a situation in which this iteration of an e-scale would be easier than the other. Am I missing something here? I hope so. Otherwise this is either a misunderstanding of how people play, or being different just for the sake of being different.


----------



## gunch (Jun 11, 2016)

jephjacques said:


> It looks like someone hired John Carmack to design a guitar



I think you mean Romero. Carmack is/was just the programming wizard


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Jun 12, 2016)

Oh!
How I missed all the Etherial hate


----------



## ImBCRichBitch (Jun 12, 2016)

I saw this on the fb. First thought was "So Eddie wasnt leaving permanently" then it was "these frets look off" Eh, im curious as to how it sounds


----------



## prlgmnr (Jun 12, 2016)

I think they used the E-system in the sense that the designer dropped a couple of Es before getting down to work.


----------



## wigger (Jun 14, 2016)

Looks like a really nice guitar to look at, but the pickup placements is gonna make that 9th string sound like a fart party. IMHO, the fan and fanciness on this guitar is just overkill.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 14, 2016)

Simplest way to put it is that the e-scale is more ergonomic on extended range guitars by making chords and leads play on a subtler fan and low end riffing playing on a more extreme fan.

A subtle fan is quite ergonomic, whereas an extreme fan has more tonal benefit.

Before everybody dogpiles against reverse e-scale, the idea could work well for designs that use higher strings. For example, if you add a high A 440 string to an eight to make a nine, you have to shorten the scale on the highest string significantly to overcome the tensile limitations of the string. Going from a subtler fan on the B and G strings to a more extreme fan between the high E and high A means that you can still have the ergonomic benefits of a subtle fan for chording, but you can still get the high A not to get too brittle from too much scale length. But even at that, it'd be better to have a double e-scale, like the one I proposed ages ago on this site: Extreme fan on the low end, moderate fan on the higher wound strings, subtle fan on the thicker plain strings, then a moderate fan again on the really high strings. By keeping the high end parameters more subtle than the low end parameters, you could balance perfectly the tonal advantage of the longer scale on the low end, the ergonomic benefits of the subtler fan on the middle strings, and the tensile issues of the highest string.


----------



## Fred the Shred (Jun 14, 2016)

Ah, such inspiring design, and all round excellent decisions pertaining ergonomics and pickup placement. I can really count on Etherial to deliver the goods!


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Jun 14, 2016)

bostjan said:


> it'd be better to have a double e-scale, like the one I proposed ages ago on this site: Extreme fan on the low end, moderate fan on the higher wound strings, subtle fan on the thicker plain strings, then a moderate fan again on the really high strings. By keeping the high end parameters more subtle than the low end parameters, you could balance perfectly the tonal advantage of the longer scale on the low end, the ergonomic benefits of the subtler fan on the middle strings, and the tensile issues of the highest string.





This could work really well.


----------



## PBC (Jun 14, 2016)

bostjan said:


> Before everybody dogpiles against reverse e-scale, the idea could work well for designs that use higher strings. For example, if you add a high A 440 string to an eight to make a nine, you have to shorten the scale on the highest string significantly to overcome the tensile limitations of the string. Going from a subtler fan on the B and G strings to a more extreme fan between the high E and high A means that you can still have the ergonomic benefits of a subtle fan for chording, but you can still get the high A not to get too brittle from too much scale length. But even at that, it'd be better to have a double e-scale, like the one I proposed ages ago on this site: Extreme fan on the low end, moderate fan on the higher wound strings, subtle fan on the thicker plain strings, then a moderate fan again on the really high strings. By keeping the high end parameters more subtle than the low end parameters, you could balance perfectly the tonal advantage of the longer scale on the low end, the ergonomic benefits of the subtler fan on the middle strings, and the tensile issues of the highest string.





Lorcan Ward said:


> This could work really well.



Bostjan, your original post in the mulitscale thread made me crunch some numbers. I came up with two variations of the idea, a Convergent Scale and a Divergent Scale. Simply put, the D-Scale exponents outward from a certain string and the C-Scale tries to meet in the middle - approximate (5th/3rd string for 9 string and 7 string or the hypothetical 4.5th/2.5th for 8 and 6 strings. 

Here are links to old ones I create (ironically similar scale length to the Etherial)

D-Scale

C-Scale

Notice the different degrees of the S shaped frets depending on the direction of the growth. I tried asymmetrical such as 25.5-23.5 e-scale for 5-1 string and then 29-25.5 e-scale for 9-6 strings but found it very uncomfortable. Anything deviating from the middle made such compromises to the playability. Ultimately I decided the the same equation for an anchor point was the best playability. 

Alas, InfinityCollision helped me realize that the high strings, even an extreme fan like 24.75-23.5 from E4 to A4 would be unwieldy to use - the full scale printouts tried under my strings were uncomfortable. Since tuning lower (tone wise) and higher (breakage) on a guitar is the most difficult, it made sense to allow the greatest fan spread in the middle because it could afford it; the C-Scale. 

Back on the title thread; since side dots are useless with this much of a fan, imagine trying to play All Shall Perish material on a dark stage with strobe lights with the 5.5" guitar.


----------



## odibrom (Jun 15, 2016)

I'm starting to think that these iterations of multiscale designs are becoming kind of pointless and ridiculous. The practical difference between these and straight lined fret multiscales will be minimal for these efforts to pay off. IMO they are becoming up charges excuses.

Lets face it, a guitar is NOT an Harp or Piano, where the strings are tuned by 1/2 tone... where's the need for that extreme curvilinear design? IMO it's pointless, but to each, each own.


----------



## TemjinStrife (Jun 15, 2016)

Tasteful, understated, and flawless as always.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 15, 2016)

PBC said:


> Bostjan, your original post in the mulitscale thread made me crunch some numbers. I came up with two variations of the idea, a Convergent Scale and a Divergent Scale. Simply put, the D-Scale exponents outward from a certain string and the C-Scale tries to meet in the middle - approximate (5th/3rd string for 9 string and 7 string or the hypothetical 4.5th/2.5th for 8 and 6 strings.
> 
> Here are links to old ones I create (ironically similar scale length to the Etherial)
> 
> ...



I developed mine grouping strings 1-3 and 3-9, so a lot less symmetrical. Also with heavier spanning on the lower side and subtler on the higher side, assuming that the treble strings can simply cope with being shorter in scale. I'm trying to find what I did with it now...perhaps I abandoned the idea for good reason, which another user pointed out, that it's not at all cost effective to implement, and the benefit is marginal. I believe the "Law of Diminishing Returns" comes into play with anything like this.


----------



## CaptainD00M (Jun 15, 2016)

PBC said:


> Long post:
> 
> Hopefully InfinityCollision sees this thread as he knows the math more than myself and can explain it in greater detail as well as the benefits. Generally fanned frets are to allow: higher tuning, lead work on a smaller scale, potentially balance string gauge/tension, "shorter scale sound." If you look at fanned fret



Ah dude that was excellent and makes perfect sense based on my dirty working knowledge of guitar speccing. Yeah I get your point on the higher register, that fan on the 10 string looks nasty to try and play well.

Infinity collision also echoed my thoughts, when I see the escale on the Oni it looks playable - but when Etherial seems to get a hold of it, it goes wrong but then that seems to be his MO.

Thanks dudes for clarifying, even though I have zero desire to play something with that kind of design its cool to know the science behind it all.


----------



## xwmucradiox (Jun 15, 2016)

odibrom said:


> I'm starting to think that these iterations of multiscale designs are becoming kind of pointless and ridiculous. The practical difference between these and straight lined fret multiscales will be minimal for these efforts to pay off. IMO they are becoming up charges excuses.
> 
> Lets face it, a guitar is NOT an Harp or Piano, where the strings are tuned by 1/2 tone... where's the need for that extreme curvilinear design? IMO it's pointless, but to each, each own.



Oni's E Scale was a substantial improvement over straight fret multiscale for me. Especially for complex chords on the top 4 strings. And the long scale length was only where it was needed on the 7th and 8th strings. 

I agree that frets with multiple curves are a stretch and offer little benefit.


----------



## InfinityCollision (Jun 15, 2016)

bostjan said:


> I developed mine grouping strings 1-3 and 3-9, so a lot less symmetrical. Also with heavier spanning on the lower side and subtler on the higher side, assuming that the treble strings can simply cope with being shorter in scale. I'm trying to find what I did with it now...perhaps I abandoned the idea for good reason, which another user pointed out, that it's not at all cost effective to implement, and the benefit is marginal. I believe the "Law of Diminishing Returns" comes into play with anything like this.



Dunno if you ever posted an updated design, but I recall your post on that subject here. I believe the green and black colored strings are the ones most relevant to the current discussion.

Incidentally, that's also the thread where escale was first discussed on this site. An interesting read if anyone wants a bit of history on the design.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 15, 2016)

InfinityCollision said:


> Dunno if you ever posted an updated design, but I recall your post on that subject here. I believe the green and black colored strings are the ones most relevant to the current discussion.
> 
> Incidentally, that's also the thread where escale was first discussed on this site. An interesting read if anyone wants a bit of history on the design.



Thanks. I think I posted a nine string version at some point...

I wonder what ever happened to those amorphous strings...


----------



## odibrom (Jun 15, 2016)

xwmucradiox said:


> Oni's E Scale was a substantial improvement over straight fret multiscale for me. Especially for complex chords on the top 4 strings. And the long scale length was only where it was needed on the 7th and 8th strings.
> 
> I agree that frets with multiple curves are a stretch and offer little benefit.



I must say that I have no experience with multiscale guitars, they aren't that popular around here for me to try them. Having that said, obviously, we all have different hands to play with, so if those designs suit your needs, great! I just think that the difference will be minimal, but again, I am no expert on the subject...


----------



## InfinityCollision (Jun 15, 2016)

bostjan said:


> Thanks. I think I posted a nine string version at some point...
> 
> I wonder what ever happened to those amorphous strings...



Probably just not feasible for large scale production right now. There are other potential obstacles, some of which were discussed in that thread (notably magnetic response), but that's the big one that has to be overcome to get amorphous metal anything, let alone niche guitar strings, out into the market. Even then, whether it'll have any significant presence in the market probably comes down to if it has any notable benefits (ex longevity) over conventional strings. Super high pitch strings are theoretically interesting, but even A4 tuning is a pretty small niche right now.

It'd be interesting to explore how variations in different parameters affect that design. As shown in an 8-9 string configuration it should be workable, though I'd probably have to look at the fretboard more often and maybe approach fingerings more carefully for chords. 2.5" spread on a 9 string fan is on the milder side though, so it's pretty forgiving as is. The dual curvature may constrain the extent to which aspects such as fan width or string positioning can vary before further complications arise. If you exclusively play in such a way that the curvature does not significantly affect playability then fair game.


----------



## xwmucradiox (Jun 16, 2016)

odibrom said:


> I must say that I have no experience with multiscale guitars, they aren't that popular around here for me to try them. Having that said, obviously, we all have different hands to play with, so if those designs suit your needs, great! I just think that the difference will be minimal, but again, I am no expert on the subject...



You would really need to have hands-on experience to understand then. I recommend trying a multiscale instrument of any kind out if you get a chance.


----------



## odibrom (Jun 16, 2016)

xwmucradiox said:


> You would really need to have hands-on experience to understand then. I recommend trying a multiscale instrument of any kind out if you get a chance.



Just a reminder, I am not saying that multiscales aren't functional or ergonomic, only these curved ones are IMO a little too much and possibily an up charge for crumbs...


----------



## InfinityCollision (Jun 17, 2016)

If you think a solid implementation of nonlinear frets is just a quick cash grab then you severely underestimate the amount of additional work involved in both the design and building phases of such an instrument, to say nothing of your already noted lack of experience in the subject matter relative to the escale owner you're replying to...

I can't speak to Ethereal's design process or costs, but Dan (Oni) put a lot of time and thought into his setup. He's able to keep time and costs on individual builds at a reasonable level because he's already laid that groundwork, he's experienced with regards to implementation, and he sticks to two established configurations (one each for 7 and 8 strings) on his escale builds. I daresay the results (ongoing positive buyer feedback, emerging imitation within the market) speak well for the design, especially given the tiny niche involved.

Are there variations on the concept that are ultimately impractical? Certainly (this is inevitable given the multitude of potential variations), but there are more thoughtful and productive ways to approach that subject than carelessly positing that anyone who's invested time or money into such things is simply getting taken for a ride.


----------



## odibrom (Jun 17, 2016)

Please don't take me wrong, I do not wish to disrespect anyone, just trying to express an opinion and feeling on a subject I do not master at all, but on which I do have some thoughts also on designing concepts. On a side note, I am not a kid nor unexperienced on guitars.

I understand what you mean. I get that curved multiscale guitars like those ONI or Etherial guitars are not "easy" nor superficial thinking, nor eventually a scheme to intentionally upcharge the client. I just think that the playing difference between a straight fret multiscale to a curved one on the same scale length specs will be minimal. IF one is willing the pay the extra effort, who am I to say whatever about it, I just feel that it is not such an upgrade to the multiscale concept.

With this in mind, I do feel strange the "s" approach that showed up recently, and the Etherial one is also a bit awkward, being the Oni one more "visual friendly".

What is the then difference between these curved multiscales and those true temperament multiscales? aren't all these in the focus of getting better intonation, more regular string tension and, therefore, better tone and play? Again, I feel that these designs are a little over the top and reflect little bonus on the overall package value, so the statement of being an unneeded upcharge. But then, I might be totally wrong, simply because I have never experimented with these designs in a real play situation (only on paper / CAD software).

As I said before, IN MY HONEST OPINION it is not worth the extra effort, either be it in the concept and design or in the building equation. I'd like to quote a teacher I had that said something like "tuning a guitar is not a matter of getting perfect pitch, but a compromise on the string pitch relations"... and over that one has to trust his/hers ears and feel.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 17, 2016)

odibrom said:


> Please don't take me wrong, I do not wish to disrespect anyone, just trying to express an opinion and feeling on a subject I do not master at all, but on which I do have some thoughts also on designing concepts. On a side note, I am not a kid nor unexperienced on guitars.
> 
> I understand what you mean. I get that curved multiscale guitars like those ONI or Etherial guitars are not "easy" nor superficial thinking, nor eventually a scheme to intentionally upcharge the client. I just think that the playing difference between a straight fret multiscale to a curved one on the same scale length specs will be minimal. IF one is willing the pay the extra effort, who am I to say whatever about it, I just feel that it is not such an upgrade to the multiscale concept.
> 
> ...



Ugh. I get what you are saying, but, at the same time, I feel that part of what you are saying is that you don't get the idea, and that you don't care to get the idea for practical reasons. That's maybe not a bad stance to take, but it might rub people the wrong way if you are vocal about it. 

Temperaments have literally nothing to do with multiscaling, FYI. There are thousands of ways to tune, and there are now dozens of ways to choose a scale length on a guitar. These two things are not often combined for practical reasons. In fact, there are many built-in practical limitations of using any temperament other than 12-EDO (standard) on a guitar anyway.


----------



## odibrom (Jun 17, 2016)

Ok then, so far I've seen "linear" multiscales or if you will, "the basic option"; true temperament multiscales and curved multiscales, where the ONI comes as the most / first(?) to come to mind, followed by Etherial and whom else?

What are the benefits and major differences of these last iterations (TT and curved) when compared to the basic model, considering that the scale lengths specs, string number, prep fret location and nut / bridge width are the same for all 3 options? How about a graphic exercise superimposing all 3 iterations (more if we are to consider more than one curved multiscale design) and check the difference by ourselves?

Lets take it to another point of view, if one of the multiscale deign purposes is to mime/copy the Harp or Piano string structure, why haven't the Arpegii or the touch style guitars like the stick haven't adopted this multiscale concept? Or, for what matters, those 10 and 12 stringed laptop/slide guitars?

Again, don't take me wrong, I'd LOVE to try out a multiscale, an Oni or even an Etherial. One has to try things out to fulfil his ideas on things as practical as guitars. I've been an superstrat guy for quite some time (Ibby fan) and have experimented some Gibsons LPs or various Fenders models and they didn't bond to me because of many minor design features/differences that affected my play and not their overall tone or value. Those Fender JazzMasters, for example, had a too small fretboard radius and the Gibies where in many ways a disappointment.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 17, 2016)

Here's a multiscale lap steel.

Multiscale Chapman stick:


----------



## bostjan (Jun 17, 2016)

Again, True Temperament is something else. I don't know how that relates to the discussion here.

I think most of your questions have already been answered in this thread, if you go back, but the idea of the e scale, as Oni uses, is to get better ergonomics for multiscale with a larger span. When you say it's not practical to implement, you are correct, but the point is, once it's made, you reap the benefits, tonally, of a more extreme multiscale without chords becoming awkward. The Etherial style curvilinear scales are to reap benefits of shorter scales for up tuning (now that I can see the photo, I really question their thought process, though), and the s shaped splined curvilinear scales are supposed to get some of the benefits of each.

I'm not clear on which difference you are curious about checking- I think maybe try them out and see what you think. If you don't like them, that's fine, no one will fault you for it. I guess since you keep talking about intonation and temperament, though, I might have gotten the impression that you are relating the two.


----------



## odibrom (Jun 18, 2016)

Thanks for those links, I've never seen those before. If multiscales are a niche in conventional guitar, those are sure rare examples. Glad to see that everyone is experimenting.

About the True Temperament, by itself, it can be applied to parallel and multiscale frets. Please correct me if I am wrong on this, the true temperament thing is focused on getting all notes to ring at the correct pitch, having it to be string dependant. Therefore the result of all those _drunk_ frets.

What I am thinking is that, the multiscale thing, be it either curved or straight, also improves on intonation (the purpose of True temperament, right?). In the end, all of these become tweaks on a basic design. I believe if one builds several guitars with the same specs in everything and changing only these details, most of us wouldn't know how to choose the best and in a blind test for better tone, well... 

Could the next thing be an E-Scale multiscale guitar with true temperament?

In the end, the purpose behind a design may not reflect the projected result. Science and history of man are full of fortunate mistakes.

I do have to try some of these out, but at the moment it is totally impossible, specially those curved iterations...


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 18, 2016)

I know curved frets are hard currently, but given that we can design them easily on a computer, could they not be milled, as opposed to bent or cast? It lends itself to larger production numbers, but if you had access to some sort of metal cutting CNC (plasma or water jet or whatever) it would seem easier to just cut them and place them. You could crank out necks that way.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 18, 2016)

True Temperament is an alternate tuning, not a truer representation of standard tuning.

It's a long story, but standard tuning, known technically as 12-EDO or twelve equal divisions of the octave, only relatively recently became the standard. Perfect tuning is called "just intonation," and it offers the clearest chords and intervals in one key, but when you change keys, everything sounds like garbage. Baroque musicians developed "tempered tunings" to compromise between sweet intervals and ability to play in different keys. This culminated in "equal temperament," in which each available key sounds identical, but at the sacrifice of thirds and sixth sounding less sweet.

So "True Temperament" is just a more modern iteration of well temperament, meaning some keys will once again sound better, at the cost of others. If you play a lot in two or three keys, it's a good choice, but if you play in twelve different keys, it's actually not the best choice, unless you want each key to be coloured very differently, with some of the less common keys sounding a bit sour.


----------



## ixlramp (Jun 18, 2016)

Fan is not ideal for Harpeggi because of how it is played, the idea is for each fret to run perpendicular to the hands like a keyboard, any angle would twist one of the the wrists in a bad way.
Touch guitars tend to prefer straight frets because no longer is one hand approaching the fretboard from one side, any fan will be good for one hand and not so good for the other.
Multiscale has little to do with improving intonation, it's more about ergonomics and optimum string lengths.
Another way to do multiscale is a stepped nut (best done with a headless of course):


----------



## InfinityCollision (Jun 18, 2016)

bostjan said:


> True Temperament is an alternate tuning, not a truer representation of standard tuning.


If memory serves, it's actually both. Their current website is not at all clear on this subject, but in the past at least they offered several different configurations. One of them was/is for 12EDO, another was designed to favor common guitar keys, and a third supposedly emulates a historical well-tempered tuning (The article I found says "the one used by Bach", but to my knowledge we don't actually know what system he really used. There exist a variety of attempted reconstructions, however.).



odibrom said:


> the multiscale thing, be it either curved or straight, also improves on intonation


Intonation on any given string of a fanned fret guitar is generally not significantly different from a string of the same length on a single scale instrument. It has the potential to differ very slightly by virtue of the fact that you're no longer arranging frets perpendicular to strings that don't actually run parallel to each other, but the difference is basically imperceptible (maybe 1 cent at the very most, potentially obscured by build tolerances, wood shifting, etc). There are other, far more significant factors affecting a guitar's intonation (and even then, perfect intonation just means you're aligned with a necessarily imperfect tuning system).



Hollowway said:


> I know curved frets are hard currently, but given that we can design them easily on a computer, could they not be milled, as opposed to bent or cast? It lends itself to larger production numbers, but if you had access to some sort of metal cutting CNC (plasma or water jet or whatever) it would seem easier to just cut them and place them. You could crank out necks that way.


I'd imagine that the initial design phase and challenge of slotting the fretboard are more pressing issues than the frets themselves. I recall Dan seemed to regard that as a relatively small obstacle. There may not be much difference in terms of end cost once you account for equipment and such.


----------



## DaddleCecapitation (Jun 18, 2016)

The comparisons to the e-scale are pretty ironic, considering that this design has chosen a logarithmic increase in scale length instead of an exponential one.

Aren't there bound to be issues with that? Exponential increase gives a progressive increase in string tension towards the low strings, but this design would have the opposite effect.


----------



## Dayn (Jun 18, 2016)

Now I'm even more intrigued by an Oni e-scale guitar. That really does make a *lot* of sense.

In either case, I'm glad that there are builders like Etherial that are doing crazy .... like this, and just going all-out, balls-to-the-wall. I'm just sad to hear the reviews.


----------



## odibrom (Jun 18, 2016)

bostjan said:


> True Temperament is an alternate tuning, not a truer representation of standard tuning.
> 
> It's a long story, but standard tuning, known technically as 12-EDO or twelve equal divisions of the octave, only relatively recently became the standard. Perfect tuning is called "just intonation," and it offers the clearest chords and intervals in one key, but when you change keys, everything sounds like garbage. Baroque musicians developed "tempered tunings" to compromise between sweet intervals and ability to play in different keys. This culminated in "equal temperament," in which each available key sounds identical, but at the sacrifice of thirds and sixth sounding less sweet.
> 
> So "True Temperament" is just a more modern iteration of well temperament, meaning some keys will once again sound better, at the cost of others. If you play a lot in two or three keys, it's a good choice, but if you play in twelve different keys, it's actually not the best choice, unless you want each key to be coloured very differently, with some of the less common keys sounding a bit sour.



Thank you for that clear explanation on the true temperament stuff. I know that chords sound differently across the fretboard. The same chord sounds differently. I becomes the player "duty" to adjust it so it becomes more harmonic pleasant. A guitar has never been a absolute reference tuned instrument, more of a relative one, even within itself. The quest for perfect pitch (on a guitar) isn't new, it's just that now it's becoming more trendy.




ixlramp said:


> Fan is not ideal for Harpeggi because of how it is played, the idea is for each fret to run perpendicular to the hands like a keyboard, any angle would twist one of the the wrists in a bad way.
> Touch guitars tend to prefer straight frets because no longer is one hand approaching the fretboard from one side, any fan will be good for one hand and not so good for the other.
> Multiscale has little to do with improving intonation, it's more about ergonomics and optimum string lengths.
> Another way to do multiscale is a stepped nut (best done with a headless of course):



Well, as I said before, I am not an expert, just a guy interested in these matters and willing to learn somehow but doesn't have the time to do it properly (you know, studying in music schools and stuff) so I gather here (in SS.org) and there (world wide web...) info and get going with it, but I don't see these stepped nuts as multiscales... more like extended scales. However If those are also called multiscales who am I to say the opposite.




InfinityCollision said:


> If memory serves, it's actually both. Their current website is not at all clear on this subject, but in the past at least they offered several different configurations. One of them was/is for 12EDO, another was designed to favor common guitar keys, and a third supposedly emulates a historical well-tempered tuning (The article I found says "the one used by Bach", but to my knowledge we don't actually know what system he really used. There exist a variety of attempted reconstructions, however.).
> 
> Intonation on any given string of a fanned fret guitar is generally not significantly different from a string of the same length on a single scale instrument. It has the potential to differ very slightly by virtue of the fact that you're no longer arranging frets perpendicular to strings that don't actually run parallel to each other, but the difference is basically imperceptible (maybe 1 cent at the very most, potentially obscured by build tolerances, wood shifting, etc). There are other, far more significant factors affecting a guitar's intonation (and even then, perfect intonation just means you're aligned with a necessarily imperfect tuning system).
> 
> I'd imagine that the initial design phase and challenge of slotting the fretboard are more pressing issues than the frets themselves. I recall Dan seemed to regard that as a relatively small obstacle. There may not be much difference in terms of end cost once you account for equipment and such.



Most of the slotting (if not all) for curved frets might be done by CNC machnery, which are quite an investment in small business. Doing it by X-Acto knifes would be painful on hard woods and I am not imagining a bendable tool to cut fret slots, more so if those are double curved.

Did you know that spline tracing came from the art of building wood ships, from about... 2000 or more years ago? They'd create solid posts where they'd want the wood to bend so they could modulate the ships form to cruise the water. Only recently in the XX century (or was it XIX?, I may be a little off here) it was theorized into mathematical equations and lately transported into computer graphics.

Back on topic, even if the multiscale thing is not directly designed into getting a better intonation, it is a secondary bonus, since it betters the overall string tension with the increasing scale length from high to low. I mean, string length is then better suited for the strings' gauge and pitch, therefore, a better intonation.

In the end, I doubt we could hear the differences on guitars that would only differ on these particular designs. Very few of us have "Absolute Hearing" (I know I don't), so we make relative comparisons of notes to identify relations between them. This means that most of our hearing is modulated by its neighbouring context. In a multiscale context, these solutions become most likely undistinguishable, IMO.

On a side note, my way of getting a single curve multiscale would be to define 3 different scale lengths for low, mid and treble strings, choose a perpendicular (or a straight) fret (or space between) and go for a 3 point circumference arc on each fret. Depending on the scales differences and perpendicular fret position, we could end with a result closer to Oni's or the Etherial's... The double curve multiscale should need more scale definitions and then use a spline tool of some sort to draw the fret lines. Slotting them would be another matter.

Oh, and sorry for hijacking the topic into something a little different...


----------



## Winspear (Jun 19, 2016)

'Better intonation' is thrown around far too often as a function of multiscale. Normal guitars can intonate perfect 12edo just fine. It really doesn't affect anything at all, aside from maybe the performance of a few more upper frets of the very thickest string only - which is kind of a separate problem. 
'Better tension' is also something I take issue with - it implies that you can't get the tension you desire on any scale length with a custom string set. "Standard scale is too floppy for low tunings" etc (just get a thicker string!) Of course it does change the tension, but the real benefit is the _TONE. _Thick strings sound dark on short scales, and thin strings sound shrill on long scales. The first one is much more of an issue, imo. Afterall, a 30" high E is only longer than normal on the first three frets. But multiscale reduces the _range of gauges _needed on the guitar significantly, giving a much more balanced tone and clearer low end. 

As I previously mentioned, I own a 9 string with a 4.5" fan. That was necessary to get a clear tight low E with little inharmonicity, alongside a high Ab that doesn't break. 24.75-29.25". I don't personally have a problem with it for what I play, but the fan angle sure does make a big difference for chording and the upper frets. I haven't tried curved frets but they would enable me to get a rapid increase in scale on the low end where it matters, and keep the angle at the high end much more regular. I can say this would definitely make the guitar feel much more ordinary. 
It wouldn't be about hearing a difference. You certainly hear the difference between a multiscale like this and a standard scale. However no, there would be no audible difference between regular multiscale and curved frets - the outer lengths remain the same. Unless you use the curved frets to achieve a longer scale that you would otherwise have, in which case again you would certainly hear a difference. 
Curved frets vs regular multiscale is purely an ergonomics optimization thing.


----------



## Random3 (Jun 19, 2016)

I've only ever played one guitar with fanned frets, but the only way I can imagine that thing being playable is if you never use the frets on the lowest string, and never play anything higher than fret 12 on the others.

That said I would love to see a video of someone actually playing this.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 20, 2016)

EtherealEntity said:


> 'Better intonation' is thrown around far too often as a function of multiscale. Normal guitars can intonate perfect 12edo just fine. It really doesn't affect anything at all, aside from maybe the performance of a few more upper frets of the very thickest string only - which is kind of a separate problem.
> 'Better tension' is also something I take issue with - it implies that you can't get the tension you desire on any scale length with a custom string set. "Standard scale is too floppy for low tunings" etc (just get a thicker string!) Of course it does change the tension, but the real benefit is the _TONE. _Thick strings sound dark on short scales, and thin strings sound shrill on long scales. The first one is much more of an issue, imo. Afterall, a 30" high E is only longer than normal on the first three frets. But multiscale reduces the _range of gauges _needed on the guitar significantly, giving a much more balanced tone and clearer low end.
> 
> As I previously mentioned, I own a 9 string with a 4.5" fan. That was necessary to get a clear tight low E with little inharmonicity, alongside a high Ab that doesn't break. 24.75-29.25". I don't personally have a problem with it for what I play, but the fan angle sure does make a big difference for chording and the upper frets. I haven't tried curved frets but they would enable me to get a rapid increase in scale on the low end where it matters, and keep the angle at the high end much more regular. I can say this would definitely make the guitar feel much more ordinary.
> ...



But have you done any measurements (FFT or otherwise) or calculations, or is this "by ear?" Nothing wrong with "by ear," if that's the case, but it's rather subjective, which does not nullify your opinion, but may have effect on how your opinion is interpreted by others.

I have some nit-picky issues with some of the details of stuff you said in your post, that just don't scan for me, for instance "a 30" high E is only longer than normal on the first three frets" - each fret position results in a longer vibrating string than it corresponds to on a 25.5" scale instrument. I'm not really sure what fact you are trying to point out with that statement.

Again, if people do not want a multiscale instrument, then they shouldn't get one, but people saying that it is impractical or superfluous or that there is no benefit to tone whatsoever might want to back such statements up with objective information.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 20, 2016)

InfinityCollision said:


> If memory serves, it's actually both. Their current website is not at all clear on this subject, but in the past at least they offered several different configurations. One of them was/is for 12EDO, another was designed to favor common guitar keys, and a third supposedly emulates a historical well-tempered tuning (The article I found says "the one used by Bach", but to my knowledge we don't actually know what system he really used. There exist a variety of attempted reconstructions, however.).



This has come up a few times in other threads, too. Check out their website: How to tune, it gives away the fact that TT =/= 12-EDO, because you necessarily have to offset your open strings from 12-EDO standard tuning by small correction factors. I don't recall a TT system with only a corrected nut, or them ever having one in which you could tune without the offsets, but there have been other systems that did use such, in the past and in the present.

I don't think Bach really had a particular tuning system in mind, when he wrote _Das Wohltemperierte Clavier_, but Werkmeister III was the most common piano tuning at the time. Some music scholars have paired up with statisticians to discover that many Bach favoured certain intervals in certain keys much more than others, and that his preferences were consistent with sweetened intervals in Werkmeister III tuning, and his most avoided intervals were consistent with the weakest intervals in that tuning. We may never know for sure that Back intended Werkmeister III tuning, but all evidence supports the idea that he did.


----------



## Winspear (Jun 20, 2016)

No measurements, no, but it seems pretty widely agreed upon that an 80 E at 28" is going to sound a lot better than a 90 E at 25". I'm not sure what specifics you are pointing at in my post, though I understand I was speaking rather broadly  

Yes indeed the 30" E statement is a bit of an extreme of course - I get that it's significant - just pointing out my justification for long enough low end being more important to me than short enough trebles as far as tone goes. I know each fret is longer but we are concerned more with the overall length relative to the gauge - what I mean is, beyond fret 3 on a 30" you are into normal 25" treble string territory in terms of tone, regardless of whether the pitch is three semitones lower or not.


----------



## InfinityCollision (Jun 20, 2016)

bostjan said:


> This has come up a few times in other threads, too. Check out their website: How to tune, it gives away the fact that TT =/= 12-EDO, because you necessarily have to offset your open strings from 12-EDO standard tuning by small correction factors. I don't recall a TT system with only a corrected nut, or them ever having one in which you could tune without the offsets, but there have been other systems that did use such, in the past and in the present.


Thidell Formula 1 (the tuning system discussed on that page) is the second of the three systems I mentioned. The first only attempts to correct for the fact that guitar strings do not behave in an ideal manner.

Found a link with more info: Which temperament should I choose?



odibrom said:


> Most of the slotting (if not all) for curved frets might be done by CNC machnery, which are quite an investment in small business. Doing it by X-Acto knifes would be painful on hard woods and I am not imagining a bendable tool to cut fret slots, more so if those are double curved.
> 
> Did you know that spline tracing came from the art of building wood ships, from about... 2000 or more years ago? They'd create solid posts where they'd want the wood to bend so they could modulate the ships form to cruise the water. Only recently in the XX century (or was it XIX?, I may be a little off here) it was theorized into mathematical equations and lately transported into computer graphics.


Yeah, CNC is the way to go. More something to consider for those who already have or plan to obtain an appropriate setup given the cost involved. Trying to do nonlinear setups without CNC just seems horribly impractical, though it's technically possible.

The math for splines and Bezier curves dates back to the early 20th century. Use in digital environments began in the early 60s, though as you noted splines were frequently used in manufacturing prior to that time.



> Back on topic, even if the multiscale thing is not directly designed into getting a better intonation, it is a secondary bonus, since it betters the overall string tension with the increasing scale length from high to low. I mean, string length is then better suited for the strings' gauge and pitch, therefore, a better intonation.


You're drifting closer to the related concept of inharmonicity here, though it's worth noting that multiscale instruments explicitly do not attempt to improve/optimize inharmonicity on any but the lowest string(s) given the shorter treble scale. There's also a certain issue of perspective: are you lengthening the bass strings on a multiscale or shortening the treble strings? Both?



> On a side note, my way of getting a single curve multiscale would be to define 3 different scale lengths for low, mid and treble strings, choose a perpendicular (or a straight) fret (or space between) and go for a 3 point circumference arc on each fret. Depending on the scales differences and perpendicular fret position, we could end with a result closer to Oni's or the Etherial's...


I touched on this a bit earlier, but strictly speaking there's no need for a perpendicular fret. In fact, it's arguably easier and more flexible to work without trying to define one. I'm not sure if Dan's designs or mine have a position at which corresponding points in each string's length form a straight line; they certainly don't have anything corresponding to a perpendicular fret (even looking between frets).

I don't know if Dan maintains complete mathematical models for his system, but I generate the fretboard using two geometric series. The first designates scale lengths for each string; the second dictates how each string's nut-side endpoint is positioned relative to a line drawn perpendicular to the endpoint of the outermost treble string.



EtherealEntity said:


> what I mean is, beyond fret 3 on a 30" you are into normal 25" treble string territory in terms of tone, regardless of whether the pitch is three semitones lower or not.


The three semitone difference in pitch for a given length still matters though. You're always three frets longer than the corresponding length for the 25.5" instrument, three semitones off, etc. Pitch, tone, length, everything is that little bit different.


----------

