Official Luthiers Forum!
http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/

question about headstock angles!
http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10123&t=34062		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Krohn [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:51 am ]
Post subject:  question about headstock angles!
Hey folks, I'm curious

Is there some kind of pro/con list between using an angled headstock (like gibson) or a non-angled headstock with a string retainer (like Mr Hufschmidt)? It seems that it would be much easier to make a non-angled neck with a retainer, but would it be as strong as a scarf joint, or a one-piece angled neck? Thanks for your help guys!
Author:  alan stassforth [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 12:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
I don't think it matters at all.
I like the look of an angled headstock more,
but not by much.
Author:  cactus [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 1:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
I read somewheres that PRS uses LESS headstock angle than an LP because he believed less angle on the nut fulcrum led to "better" tone. So the headstock angle wasn't the issue, rather some combination of string weight on the nut & string straightness. But who knows?
I hate the look of a string tree and will avoid it if possible.
Author:  Krohn [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 4:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
so its totally a preference thing eh?
Author:  Mike Baker [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
i have built both ways. I like the look of a scarf jointed, 3x3 headstock. But I enjoy building the bolt on, straight pull necks more. Can't explain it, I don't really know the reason, I just know that I do. But I'm glad I don't have to decide. I can build both!
But i think it comes down to preference, and whichever you're better set up to build.
Author:  nyazzip [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
the harder the angle the strings ride over the nut, the more the strings are likely to catch/bind in the nut and create tuning problems, especially for string benders and trem users...
Author:  Krohn [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
thanks guys, especially to nyazzip... I am going to be using the schaller LP tremolo with rolling saddles, with a rolling nut, and i do believe rolling string trees. i don't think i'll angle the headstock. i was unsure of whether or not it would affect the sustain if it was not angled. clearly this won't be a problem!
Author:  Stuart Gort [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
I like to avoid the use of string trees to hold the strings into the nut. I originally built headstocks at a 15 degree angle but later found out that 12 degrees was quite enough to secure the string into the nut without having to tie them down. I like the presentation of the guitar to be as tidy as possible...so I eliminate as much hardware as possible...screws, tiedowns, pickup rings...ect. This makes the necks harder and more expensive to build but it's a preference.

I laminate my necks with a fairly thick maple strip down the middle so they are pretty strong. I don't build with a volute to strengthen that area...I don't like the way that looks either. I figure if that area breaks it's because the owner dropped the guitar. I'm not of the opinion that a builder should design an instrument to withstand dropping it. :)
Author:  VirgilGuitar [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
If somebody dropped MY guitar, I would kick their Aspen, Colorado was cold today.
Author:  Chameleon [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
Google "broken headstock" and click images. You'll see a lot more scarf-joints than fender-style.

Just sayin.

Zlurgh does make a good point though.
Author:  nyazzip [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
if you play your guitar, it is gonna fall over, count on it. i have had an '87 strat since it was new, that has fallen over literally dozens of times. i play it every day and it is always leaning on a couch or bed or wall or amp. if i had to unplug it and lock it away in a case after each time i used it, i would have never learned to play the dang thing.....but strat necks are maple, and maple doesn't break. mahogany, on the other hand, is a different story. if a gibson falls over once, there is an excellent chance the headstock is gonna bust off. mahogany is not a rock n roll material i'm afraid. guitars are meant to be functional, casual, household instruments, not art pieces; if they don't hold up to every day use and occasional abuse, then they fail in my opinion
Author:  Chris Pile [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 9:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
Quote:
mahogany is not a rock n roll material i'm afraid


Tell that to all the guys who have played Les Paul's through a Marshall stack.
Mahogany is THE rock'n'roll sound, if you ask me.
Author:  cbrviking [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 9:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
nyazzip wrote:
if you play your guitar, it is gonna fall over, count on it. i have had an '87 strat since it was new, that has fallen over literally dozens of times. i play it every day and it is always leaning on a couch or bed or wall or amp. if i had to unplug it and lock it away in a case after each time i used it, i would have never learned to play the dang thing.....but strat necks are maple, and maple doesn't break. mahogany, on the other hand, is a different story. if a gibson falls over once, there is an excellent chance the headstock is gonna bust off. mahogany is not a rock n roll material i'm afraid. guitars are meant to be functional, casual, household instruments, not art pieces; if they don't hold up to every day use and occasional abuse, then they fail in my opinion


You know, they sell these things called guitar stands? You can even make them out of PVC pipe and pipe insulation...
Author:  BRC [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 11:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
I think it might all stack up a little differently than the common "Gibson style" VS "Fender style" story. You have 2 basic styles "straight pull" and "Paddle head". The wood choice you build either one out of, and the quality of the scarf, angle etc all come into play into the final strength.
No guitar should be fragile, but I am in the camp of "these are instruments folks", it should be played as much as possible. For god sake put it in a case when you are not playing it. If it has to hang on the wall or stay in it's case forever because someone is too afraid to play it then is it actually an instrument? Or is it a piece of art in the shape of an instrument? I can totally appreciate an amazing carved sculpture of a duck, but I wouldn't want to eat it.
I was at a band practice many years ago at the rhythm players house and he had his 1 week old custom-built guitar sitting on a stand out of the way, against the wall in the living room. Our drummer girl came through the front door with a bass drum, barely grazed a table lamp, which fell over, hitting a plant on the windowsill, knocking it off and falling against his guitar. This knocked the guitar off the stand which then fell over landing face down and just catching the top of the headstock on the rock fireplace hearth. It broke the headstock right off the neck. Seriously, the fireplace was 12 feet across the room from the front door or walkways any other perceived danger areas. Tragic, just tragic. I watched the whole thing and it was like slow motion.....
Author:  Jim_H [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
Every classical guitar ever made, and almost every acoustic guitar, and many other stringed instruments have an angled headstock.

I'm sure there is a lot of debate over what benefit there is, if any, on an electric guitar, of having this break angle over the nut. I doubt 'it might break' had anything to do with Leo's paddle headstock design. He was going for 'inexpensive' when he designed his first guitars. The fact that it was less likely to break if it was dropped was surely an unintended benefit.

My guitars stay on their stands or wall hangars. I have twelve of them within arms (one or two steps) reach of my pickin' chair and couch. All manner of acoustics and electrics. Paddle head Strats and Tele's (and clones), and angled Gibsons, Martins, and Taylors. I've never had a guitar get broken because someone sat on it, or tripped over it, or for any other reason for that matter. While they are musical instruments, to be played every day, they are precious, and are treated as such. They don't get left leaning on a couch, or against a piece of furniture. When they aren't in someone's lap, or over a shoulder, (or on my bench) they are safe on their stands.
Author:  cbrviking [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
Whether the headstock is angled or straight is not the determining factor as far as strength goes. The Gibson headstocks that break off are not scarf-jointed but rather made from one piece of wood. The angle cut into them causes weakness because of the grain issue. If a scarf-jointed headstock breaks off, it generally breaks the wood, not the joint. From a functional point of view, I think there are some great guitars made with both style headstock, so it's mainly just a preference as to the aesthetics.
Author:  butterschotchblond [ Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
Filippo Morelli wrote:
.... a properly executed scarf joint should be stronger than the wood itself.

Filippo
properly being the word.
Many old style lutes etc. have 90 degree neck angle, but they are tuned with pegs (literal wood pegs) and probably rely on tension over the nut, to purposely bind the string at the nut. If you ever tune a violin, you will find it is much more difficult than a guitar, do to peg friction and nut binding. With modern tuners very moderate neck angle can be used reducing binding at the nut.
Author:  Mustang_jt [ Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
The angle of the headstock if any does not affect much in the way of tone. What does affect things are the angle of the string at the nut. The higher the angle, the more down force is on the nut and the more binding that will be caused when tuning or using a tremolo. This will also effect string bends, because if the string is allowed to slide though the nut easier, you will have to bend the string further to go a half or full step. If it is binding, it will be more likely to break. What is bad is a one piece neck with a large neck angle as that weakens the neck as the grain is run out. I have made necks with as low as 5 degrees neck angle and they work great(no string trees). I have settled on 8 degrees though as that gives a little more pressure at the nut without over pressure. I also use a volute to help keep the neck strong at the nut area. It really all comes down to preference, but you should also remember why Fender and Gibson do things the way they do. Fender built their guitars as cheaply as possible, and it saved them money to cut the neck blanks to 1" or whatever and have no heel or headstock angle. Gibson made theirs more traditional (I.E. violin type). But we all know that even though Fenders was done more cheaply, it is a lot stronger. I personally don't like string trees, because to me it means the design is bad and they had to compensate. Once again though, that decision was made to save money.
Author:  JimO [ Tue Nov 29, 2011 3:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: question about headstock angles!
I like a slight angle, enough to avoid string trees as well, Mustang. I cut a 2" thick laminated neck blank which gives plenty of room for angling the headstock without overdoing it like Gibbys do.

A laminated neck gives it more strength as well, especially with purpleheart and maple.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/