Samick lefty neck turned upside down on a Lotus body
Tonewood
- Thread starter RVA
- Start date
I have a real appreciation for headstock shapes...
Which headstock design do you prefer Robert, and please tell us why?
I think the PRS design nails it pretty well.
Why? It's compact, has a dead straight string pull and is back angled just enough @ 11 degrees that the string tension still feels slinky.
I think that's one reason why PRS guitars play so well.
I need to split this reply up into a few separate responses, so that I can address the different areas of headstock design. My background is in engineering of race car tubular space frames and structural aircraft repair, so my mind is always looking at everything from a functionality standpoint. From that perspective, six keys in a row, with 100% straight string pull through the nut is superior in every respect. Leo Fender created this with his design, but it is a very ugly headstock, and the Telecaster, well...it just looks like they sawed off a Stratocaster headstock 5 minutes before making the Telecaster and tried to call it different or unique. At least they wisely retained the six-in-a-row running keys and the straight pull through the nut.
The juvenile in me likes a "cool" looking headstock. Jackson is super cool, but has a very poor string pull angle, which is fine with a locking tremolo, but wouldn't work well with a non-locking tremolo, so that's an issue right there. A 'straight pull' design afford the use of a single headstock on a variety of guitars, which to me reduces production costs and increases production speed.
While the back angle, or 'tilt-back' is a good design strategy, I don't like it. many say Gibson is too extreme at 17° and 10° is nearly perfect. That may be. I think Leo's use of roller trees or descending height tuning keys is a better idea and reduces production time on the headstock and makes it less likely to break in the event it is dropped. I think my Ibanez Destroyer back angle was originally 14°, and I reduced that to 10° when we redesigned the neck, just to reduce string break angle a little and not totally re-design the neck and volute, but the Ibanez also has a very straight string pull through the nut, which is good, and it's a cool looking headstock too.
PRS and Schechter both have a similar six-per-side key arrangement, but it has a really good pull through the but. Both have a slight back angle, which doesn't require drilling and adding string trees. I personally hate six-on-each-side tuning keys. To me, it violates the principles of simplicity and economy of movement, but that's just my opinion. Some people love it. It is the only thing, other than the 25.5" scale (which I dislike from a tone and feel standpoint) that I dislike about my 2005 Schechter.
So, I suppose a design that is pleasing to the eye, or looks "cool" or whatever, is a big deal to me. I like a more streamlined look. I prefer symmetry to oblique angles. It seems ridiculous to me to create a new headstock for a guitar, such as Gibson did with the Explorer, which has a horrific string-through-nut angle also. It seems much easier to create one headstock that has all the best possible mechanical and mathematical advantages and use it on everything...even a bass.
I think the PRS headstock design is one reason their guitars tend to stay in tune very well with non-locking tremolos...
^^ agreed. My favorite is the Santana:
Props for symmetry and no waste of material. Straight pull through the nut with a generously sized nut too...
syscokid
Ambassador of War & Peace
Does less of an angle make the strings feel slinkier, or is it the other way around?
That's what I have read...Less angle = less tension.
Yes, the greater the angle the stiffer the feel.
I think Fender has 2 strikes against them with the 25.5" scale and the string trees that approximate a severe back angle over the nut, especially on the first 4 strings.
To me Strats feel stiff.
Gibsons with a 24.75 scale and 14 degree headstock feel slinkier and looser than a Strat or Tele.
I think a shorter scale length contributes to a looser feel as well.
Last edited:
I thought this Ed Roman Scorpion was "cool" but the reverse six-in-a-row to me is an ergonomic disaster, and I don't dig the mis-alignment of the two main "points," but he got a fairly straight pull so this could be used on guitars with both locking and non locking tremolos...
The string retainer bar seems like overkill with the locking nut, but I'm sure it's a help when restringing.
Here's a good shot of my Schechter C1 Hellraiser headstock...fairly straight pull, generous nut size, but unnecessary offset of the keys, asymmetrical points and lots of wasted material at the top...but not an ugly headstock anyways...
True, and I really don't think you need it....
This is unique, but doesn't grab me....
It doesn't look to be near as drastic of a step down as Fenders.
Thus negating the need for string trees.
Good eye, Hackmaster...but that requires a longer tuning post...
That's a neat guitar in your sig, Hack...I'm a triple humbucker fanatic...but mostly because I love the sound of the middle pickup...
syscokid
Ambassador of War & Peace
That makes sense... thanks!
Thanks Robert, my 98' PRS Custom 22.
I agree about the middle pickup. That's why I added it.
It's my 4th conversion to 3 pickup.
Some claim it's useless and gets in the way.
I disagree with them.
syscokid
Ambassador of War & Peace
Ha ha... I 50% disagree with your disagreement. I'm one of the ones that claim that a mid pup gets in the way. My only 3 pup guitar is a Strat. And I do love the sound of the mid pup, but it's the main reason I struggle to get fully comfortable with playing a Strat.