#1
So is it only for looks?

or

Does it make a difference in your tone/ playability/ etc........ ??


EDIT: I found this video of Chris Broderick talking about his new signature Jackson. He says something about the reversed headstock. Check it out guys. o.o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbsMC3ATn0Y


Thanks,
Last edited by MaddMann274 at Jul 1, 2011,
#2
all looks bro, its like asking if a fender headstock is different tonally from a gibson 3x3 or a music man 4x2
#3
Some will say that it creates a different feel on the low E, but really, it doesnt have any real effect on tone/playability a once it passes the nut, it doesnt matter what or where the string goes.

So it is pretty much for looks.

1977 Burny FLG70
2004 EBMM JP6
2016 SE Holcolmb
#4
Some people find them rather annoying to tune up due to the position of the tuner knobs, but it makes no difference in playability. It does turn your guitar into a serviceable hockey stick, though.
"Maybe this world is another planet's hell?" - Aldous Huxley
#5
Quote by Tom 1.0
Some will say that it creates a different feel on the low E, but really, it doesnt have any real effect on tone/playability a once it passes the nut, it doesnt matter what or where the string goes.

So it is pretty much for looks.


Considering the high percentage of guitars with reverse head stocks that have Floyd's that pretty much a given
Gear
Jackson DK2
Ibanez RGR320EX
Guild X82 Nova
Godin Seagull S6

Vox V847
Vox VT40+ / VFS5 VT


Quote by FatalGear41

Right now, there are six and a half billion people on earth who don't care what kind of tubes you have in your amplifier
#7
It helps the guitar stay in tune, the lower strings need to have more tension and have it over a greater length. Most of the time it's simply done for looks though.
I play Lacrosse, you should too
Quote by reeses
heed this man's suggestion, for he is wise.

Aww shucks...

Quote by Tom 1.0
Oh and wait for the Schecter fan boys, if you listen real hard you can already hear them coming.
#8
All aesthetics. I haven't noticed any difference in playability anyway.
DARK_MATTER, Instrumental Post-Metal from Ireland


Bass:
Ibanez BTB 405QM
Ashdown PM600 - Peavey TVX 4x10
Russian Big Muff

Guitar:
Fender Jim Root sig
'99 Stagemaster 7-string
Yamaha F310
Hughes & Kettner Warp 7 w/4x12
#9
Quote by Metalfan41
It helps the guitar stay in tune, the lower strings need to have more tension and have it over a greater length. Most of the time it's simply done for looks though.



No.

Once it passes over the nut it doesnt matter how long the string goes on for, if anything, longer length allows for more potential slipping or sag.

1977 Burny FLG70
2004 EBMM JP6
2016 SE Holcolmb
#10
Quote by Tom 1.0
No.

Once it passes over the nut it doesnt matter how long the string goes on for, if anything, longer length allows for more potential slipping or sag.

The length from ball-end to tuning peg affects the tension on the string which in turn affects how well it will hold tune. The longer the overall lenght the more tension is on the string and thus it will hold tune better. The slipping and sag have to do with the bridge and nut and whether there's any binding with the string, not the string itself.
I play Lacrosse, you should too
Quote by reeses
heed this man's suggestion, for he is wise.

Aww shucks...

Quote by Tom 1.0
Oh and wait for the Schecter fan boys, if you listen real hard you can already hear them coming.
#11
Once it passes over the nut, the longer the distance to the tuning peg, the greater the chance for sympathetic hum, especially on the lower strings. This sympathetic hum could and probably does affect tone in one way or another. thus the use of string trees...

eta: I never really thought about it until now, but this probably the reason acoustic guitars are almost always 3 a side instead of 6 inline.
"When losers say it's over with you know that it's a lie
The gods made heavy metal and it's never gonna die"
Last edited by kolonelkadat at Jun 30, 2011,
#12
Quote by kolonelkadat
Once it passes over the nut, the longer the distance to the tuning peg, the greater the chance for sympathetic hum, especially on the lower strings. This sympathetic hum could and probably does affect tone in one way or another. thus the use of string trees...

Actually, string T's are mostly there to stop the string slipping out of the nut on longer headstocks, and to change the angle of the string behind the nut, which does affect the feel.
They will change the tone of the string too though. My JP7 doesn't have a retainer bar/string T, and if you touch the G string behind the nut, the string doesn't ring out as well, it sounds a tiny bit duller.

I've heard people say that a reverse headstock will give you better tension over the lower strings, but personally I don't believe it. The difference they may have felt most likely came about because they had more wraps around the tuner, which increased the angle over the nut, not because the string was longer.
#13
Quote by kolonelkadat
Once it passes over the nut, the longer the distance to the tuning peg, the greater the chance for sympathetic hum, especially on the lower strings. This sympathetic hum could and probably does affect tone in one way or another. thus the use of string trees...

eta: I never really thought about it until now, but this probably the reason acoustic guitars are almost always 3 a side instead of 6 inline.

3 per side is done because it's easier to make. Acoustics as you think of them are based on spanish and baroque classical guitars which had 3 per side because it required less work. To get sympathetic vibrations you need full length strings, not the few inches behind the nut.
I play Lacrosse, you should too
Quote by reeses
heed this man's suggestion, for he is wise.

Aww shucks...

Quote by Tom 1.0
Oh and wait for the Schecter fan boys, if you listen real hard you can already hear them coming.
#14
Quote by Metalfan41
To get sympathetic vibrations you need full length strings, not the few inches behind the nut.

No, you don't.
Like I said, the G string of my JP7 gets sympathetic resonance, and there's only 4-5 inches of string behind the nut.
And how long do you thing trem springs are? Every guitar that has a trem with springs gets sympathetic resonance from the springs, unless you dampen the vibrations with foam or tissues.
#15
Quote by andrerist
all looks bro, its like asking if a fender headstock is different tonally from a gibson 3x3 or a music man 4x2


well that is debatable. A lot of people believe Gibson's headstocks give out more sustain because they are placed at an angle. Supposedly placing more string tension on the nut. I don't know if this is change the tone or not but it is possible. My answer is no tuner placement should not make a significant tonal differance.
#16
Quote by littlephil
No, you don't.
Like I said, the G string of my JP7 gets sympathetic resonance, and there's only 4-5 inches of string behind the nut.
And how long do you thing trem springs are? Every guitar that has a trem with springs gets sympathetic resonance from the springs, unless you dampen the vibrations with foam or tissues.

All sympathetic vibrations do are take energy away from the strings, they aren't desirable in most cases. You may get them on your g string but it's not under the same amount of tension as an acoustic. More tension make sit harder for a smaller length to vibrate, thus it's very unlikely that an acoustic guitar gets any kind of vibration from the strings beyond the nut that aren't caused by the headstock itself vibrating.
I play Lacrosse, you should too
Quote by reeses
heed this man's suggestion, for he is wise.

Aww shucks...

Quote by Tom 1.0
Oh and wait for the Schecter fan boys, if you listen real hard you can already hear them coming.
#17
There is no functional diff between any style headstock, it is pure astetics.
2002 PRS CE22
2013 G&L ASAT Deluxe
2009 Epiphone G-400 (SH-4)
Marshall JCM2000 DSL100
Krank 1980 Jr 20watt
Krank Rev 4x12 (eminence V12)
GFS Greenie/Digitech Bad Monkey
Morley Bad Horsie 2
MXR Smart Gate
#18
I'll sum up basically what everyone has said:

They're mostly for aesthetics. Any headstock style may have slight impact on the tension of the strings depending on the distance from nut to tuner, but it's probably not very noticeable.

What impacts the tension of the strings the most is the angle of the headstock and the string trees.
#19
It's not true about it being just purely for aesthetics. Reversed headstock gives you better chug out of your low E due to the extended length from nut to tuner... but i think all these are really negligent difference... you'll probably only know the difference only if you're a pro
#20
i think it does make a difference but not in tone. the longer piece of string leading to the tuning knob on a fender headstock could react different to the shorter the piece( high E and low E respectively on the usual headstock), i dont know if it is noticeable since i only have a double locking charvel with fender headstock.
now if you place different headstock of different brands against each other, for example gibson and fender, then people tend to say different stuff about them.
gibson claims that the angled headstock increases sustain, might be true mitgh be false, i have a gibson les paul but do not think it makes that much of a different.
#21
Quote by r0ckth3d34n
What impacts the tension of the strings the most is the angle of the headstock and the string trees.
No it doesn't. The only things that affect string tension are mass per unit length of the string, the scale length and what frequency it's tuned to.
Quote by Blooddrunk_Moon
Reversed headstock gives you better chug out of your low E due to the extended length from nut to tuner...
How do you think it does that? Utter rubbish.
#22
Quote by smb
No it doesn't. The only things that affect string tension are mass per unit length of the string, the scale length and what frequency it's tuned to. How do you think it does that? Utter rubbish.

But the perceived tension/feel does change. With a larger angle, the string doesn't move as easily through the nut, and it feels tighter, whether or not the actual tension has changed.
Go grab a Strat or a Tele, play around with the G-string, then take it out of the string tee, re-tune, and play it again. It feels looser when it isn't under the tee, because the break angle has decreased, and it moves more freely through the nut.
#23
@smb

It has to, an angled head stock increases the distance from nut to tuner compared to a flat, Fender headstock, which uses the string trees.

By adding an angle, the string is being pulled tighter into the tuner.
#24
Quote by FatalGear41
Some people find them rather annoying to tune up due to the position of the tuner knobs, but it makes no difference in playability. It does turn your guitar into a serviceable hockey stick, though.


Mine is reversed and pointed. I put a hole in a wall and almost impaled someone with it haha
Current Stage Gear
Ibanez 1987 RG550 Road Flare Red(66th one ever made)
HD500 Pedal
Bugera Vintage 22



Quote by metaldood91
Hi. Can someone tell me which guitars are real 24 fret guitars and which are just 22 fret guitars with 2 extra frets added on?
#25
Quote by r0ckth3d34n
@smb

It has to, an angled head stock increases the distance from nut to tuner compared to a flat, Fender headstock, which uses the string trees.

By adding an angle, the string is being pulled tighter into the tuner.
If you say so
#26
Quote by smb
If you say so


Gibson agrees with what I have to say and they advertise it when selling their guitars.
#27
Try it yourself then - take a guitar string, fix one end and set up a nut and put some weight on the other end. Keep the scale length the same and the weight on the end and change the angle over the nut. See if you still get the same frequency out of the string.

You can do the same changing the length of string past the nut if you like.
Last edited by smb at Jul 2, 2011,
#28
Quote by smb
Try it yourself then - take a guitar string, fix one end and set up a nut and put some weight on the other end. Keep the scale length the same and the weight on the end and change the angle over the nut. See if you still get the same frequency out of the string.

You can do the same changing the length of string past the nut if you like.


If you adjusted the string without changing the tuning, it would be sharp. So there would be more tension on the string.

With your logic, it's like saying a guitar with a 25.5" scale will be sharp in standard tuning compared to a 24.75"
#30
Well, anyway, it's basic linear mathematics. What's longer, a diagonal or a straight line? If you pull a string back and make it a diagonal, you're making it longer.

Quote from Gibson's website:
"...the Les Paul Traditional headstock is carefully angled at Gibson’s traditional 17 degrees. This subtle yet crucial element of the guitar’s design increases pressure on the strings and helps them stay in the nut slots. An increase in string pressure also means there is no loss of string vibration between the nut and the tuners, which equals better sustain."

The string is being "pulled" by having the angled headstock. That's what I've been saying.
#31
The string isn't under any more tension if there's more length behind the nut or a greater headstock angle.