bye bye kahler, hello floyd?

[MikeW]

I have two guitars with Floyds and love them. The only problem I have with them is that the back of my hand rubs on the fine tuners for the 5 and 6 strings and knocks them (slightly) out of tune as I play. Definitely not a big deal at all, but I'm with DR6 in that I took some time to figure out how to get them setup properly to start with.

I just recently got the itch to try a Wilkinson based on recommendations here and from another friend. Wow is all I have to say. As much as I like the Floyd, I like the Wilkinson. The one major difference is that, to my ear, the variation of the Wilkinson is more 'linear' rather than 'exponential' like you get with the Floyd. It just seems that the Wilkinson is more subtle in the rate of change to the pitch, if that makes sense.

Just my $0.02 anyway.

 

[animal control]

That's the best way to describe the difference between Floyd and Wilky I've heard yet, totally agree.

I always keep the Wilky up a bit, doesn't feel there is an initial resistance when I want to be subtle.

My big complaint about the Floyd I had was that to change a string you have to do a lot of work. Not fun in the dark or when you need to hustle. That was a permanent deal breaker for me, I do a lot of bends.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Do any guitars come from the factory with Wilkinson trems?  I'd like to try one out but I'm not going to buy one so I can do it.  ccasion14:

 

[Jumble Jumble]

Guys, no need to be so defensive. Nobody's saying its wrong to have a Floyd. That linear/exponential thing is spot on. That's why you have to have one.

To answer all my issues with ways of getting round them is kind of an admission that those issues exist though. I know you can buy a special tool for setting intonation(which, less be honest, is in no way as simple as on any bridge where the saddles are on a thread of some kind). I know you can get a speed loader - why did they invent that if the ball thing isn't a pain?

I'm interested to hear that the locking nut is only for fine tuners? I could have sworn the nut came first and the fine tuners were added to reduce the number of times you had to undo them. The fine tuners do a great job of that, but aren't necessary without the locking nut.

I've actually found that with strings that end at full thickness, you can just put the strings in backwards. Thread them through the tuner first then clamp the end into the bridge. Then when you trim the string after tuning in the normal way, you're done. Some strings, the wound ones end plain though, so you can't do it.

 

[Cagey]

I'm interested to hear that the locking nut is only for fine tuners? I could have sworn the nut came first and the fine tuners were added to reduce the number of times you had to undo them. The fine tuners do a great job of that, but aren't necessary without the locking nut.

The locking nut is not for the fine tuners, the fine tuners are because of the locking nut. Otherwise, you'd never be able to maintain tune. Strings stretch. If you had to unlock the nut every time you needed a tweak, you'd be smashing that guitar in less than a week.

The locking nut exists because there were no locking tuners when Mr. Floyd designed that bridge, and it has long been known that standard tuners make for sloppy string terminations.

Why he locked the string at the bridge end has always been a mystery, but I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time.

 

[Orpheo]

I like the look of floyds over wilkinsons. And i like the tone of floyds. Good units like ofr or gotih that is.

 

[Jumble Jumble]

That's what I thought!

I guess the locking at the bridge end is to stop the string having to move over the saddle. That's never been an issue for me with traditional trems though. I do, once in a while, touch a cotton bud with some 3-in-1 on it to the saddle surface, but to be honest that's more superstition than anything. I find locking tuners and decent nut is all you need.

Here's how I've always looked at the difference: traditional bridges are "vibrato". Floyds are "whammy". There's just a sound to a Floyd that you can't get elsewhere.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

I'm interested to hear that the locking nut is only for fine tuners? I could have sworn the nut came first and the fine tuners were added to reduce the number of times you had to undo them. The fine tuners do a great job of that, but aren't necessary without the locking nut.

The locking nut is not for the fine tuners, the fine tuners are because of the locking nut. Otherwise, you'd never be able to maintain tune. Strings stretch. If you had to unlock the nut every time you needed a tweak, you'd be smashing that guitar in less than a week.

The locking nut exists because there were no locking tuners when Mr. Floyd designed that bridge, and it has long been known that standard tuners make for sloppy string terminations.

Why he locked the string at the bridge end has always been a mystery, but I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time.

It must still be a good idea, because there are tons of guitars running Floyds over Wilkinsons...

 

[MikeW]

The locking nut is not for the fine tuners, the fine tuners are because of the locking nut. Otherwise, you'd never be able to maintain tune. Strings stretch. If you had to unlock the nut every time you needed a tweak, you'd be smashing that guitar in less than a week.

The locking nut exists because there were no locking tuners when Mr. Floyd designed that bridge, and it has long been known that standard tuners make for sloppy string terminations.

Why he locked the string at the bridge end has always been a mystery, but I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time.

It must still be a good idea, because there are tons of guitars running Floyds over Wilkinsons...

Still a good idea yes, but I think it's more a case of who planted the flag in the ground first. IIRC, the Floyd and locking nut solution came around a bit before the Wilkinson did. Locking tuners came a bit after that as well.

Plus, the Floyd had the advantage of one of the greats spreading its gospel. EVH's ground-breaking techniques with it really paved the way for the Floyd's popularity.

Not that I'm picking one over the other. I love the Floyds that I have and for the guitars they're on, they're the right solution. But I'm liking the Wilkinson just as much if not more because I find it easier to use to 'slide' notes up or down. It's just easier to find pitch or to coax a note out of the guitar with the Wilkinson.

Again, just my $0.02.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

The locking nut is not for the fine tuners, the fine tuners are because of the locking nut. Otherwise, you'd never be able to maintain tune. Strings stretch. If you had to unlock the nut every time you needed a tweak, you'd be smashing that guitar in less than a week.

The locking nut exists because there were no locking tuners when Mr. Floyd designed that bridge, and it has long been known that standard tuners make for sloppy string terminations.

Why he locked the string at the bridge end has always been a mystery, but I'm sure it seemed like a good idea at the time.

It must still be a good idea, because there are tons of guitars running Floyds over Wilkinsons...

Still a good idea yes, but I think it's more a case of who planted the flag in the ground first. IIRC, the Floyd and locking nut solution came around a bit before the Wilkinson did. Locking tuners came a bit after that as well.

Plus, the Floyd had the advantage of one of the greats spreading its gospel. EVH's ground-breaking techniques with it really paved the way for the Floyd's popularity.

Not that I'm picking one over the other. I love the Floyds that I have and for the guitars they're on, they're the right solution. But I'm liking the Wilkinson just as much if not more because I find it easier to use to 'slide' notes up or down. It's just easier to find pitch or to coax a note out of the guitar with the Wilkinson.

Again, just my $0.02.

I'm just not seeing how locking tuners are going to be more stable than a locking nut.  Without the locking nut, one good crank on the tremolo would pop the strings right out of the non-locking nut, wouldn't it?  I mean, look at Strats with tremolos and no locking nuts.  One pull and the tuning is all over the place.

 

[Cagey]

I'm just not seeing how locking tuners are going to be more stable than a locking nut.  Without the locking nut, one good crank on the tremolo would pop the strings right out of the non-locking nut, wouldn't it?  I mean, look at Strats with tremolos and no locking nuts.  One pull and the tuning is all over the place.

If a pull on the vibrato popped the strings out of the nut, a LOT of people would not have them installed. But, it just doesn't happen. For all intents and purposes, the strings do not raise or lower at the nut, so they stay in their slots. Even Floyds or Wilkies that will slack the strings so far they'll hang off the neck or stick to the pickups usually won't see strings leave their slots.

The reason some Strats with vibrato bridges won't stay in tune is usually because of poorly fabricated nuts, string trees, non-locking tuners, and 6 point fulcrums on the bridge. Most modern Strats don't suffer from any of those things and so stay in tune as well as any hardtail. Floyd Rose's design addressed all those issues at once and was the first to do so, which is why it became so popular. It was a modern miracle - a vibrato-equipped guitar that could stay in tune! What a concept! Then Sperzel came out with locking tuners and Wilkinson came up with his much-simplified bridge design, and you didn't need a Floyd setup any more to have a working vibrato that didn't drive you nuts.

 

[Torment Leaves Scars]

I'm just not seeing how locking tuners are going to be more stable than a locking nut.  Without the locking nut, one good crank on the tremolo would pop the strings right out of the non-locking nut, wouldn't it?  I mean, look at Strats with tremolos and no locking nuts.  One pull and the tuning is all over the place.

If a pull on the vibrato popped the strings out of the nut, a LOT of people would not have them installed. But, it just doesn't happen. For all intents and purposes, the strings do not raise or lower at the nut, so they stay in their slots. Even Floyds or Wilkies that will slack the strings so far they'll hang off the neck or stick to the pickups usually won't see strings leave their slots.

The reason some Strats with vibrato bridges won't stay in tune is usually because of poorly fabricated nuts, string trees, non-locking tuners, and 6 point fulcrums on the bridge. Most modern Strats don't suffer from any of those things and so stay in tune as well as any hardtail. Floyd Rose's design addressed all those issues at once and was the first to do so, which is why it became so popular. It was a modern miracle - a vibrato-equipped guitar that could stay in tune! What a concept! Then Sperzel came out with locking tuners and Wilkinson came up with his much-simplified bridge design, and you didn't need a Floyd setup any more to have a working vibrato that didn't drive you nuts.

I guess I'd just have to experience a Wilkinson for myself and see one in person...

 

[Jumble Jumble]

Even if you dip the tremolo and a string does come free of the nut, it'll pop back in again when you release, so long as the string path from bridge to tuner is straight.

 

[Strat Avenger]

I had become accustomed to the feel of the Floyd, and always liked the fine-tuners, which is why I have 3 of them, but nowadays, I'd just rather have a hard-tail. A hard-tail with fine-tuners I think would be ideal for me. I know they exist, but I haven't yet gotten one.

The reduced low-end frequencies of the Floyd was never an issue for me. It helps the guitar cut through a mix better in a band situation, and a player can always turn up the bass on the amp if they need more.

 

[Cagey]

I had become accustomed to the feel of the Floyd, and always liked the fine-tuners, which is why I have 3 of them, but nowadays, I'd just rather have a hard-tail. A hard-tail with fine-tuners I think would be ideal for me. I know they exist, but I haven't yet gotten one.

The reduced low-end frequencies of the Floyd was never an issue for me. It helps the guitar cut through a mix better in a band situation, and a player can always turn up the bass on the amp if they need more.

I've become more enamoured of the hardtail as well. The last three have fixed bridges. Sometimes you need a wang bar, but that's a good excuse to own more than one guitar <grin>

I have one of those hardtail bridges with the fine tuners on my Gibson Melody Maker, as it came with a garbage bridge that had to be replaced immediatedly. It also came with Klusons, so I knew it was going to be a bitch to keep in tune. Figured if I got it close with the Klusons, I could leave them alone and do all my tuning at the bridge. As it worked out, I replaced the Klusons as well. Hate those sloppy pieces of shit. So, I didn't need the fine tuners after all. But, they're not hurting anything.

 

[whitebison66]

I never cared for Kahlers either, just didn't feel right for me.

I also needed a lot of years learning to get a floating Floyd set up properly, but when it is, it's very stable and, dare I say it, fun.

Until a string breaks, anyway.

The best description of 'Floyd flutter' I ever heard was 'the sound of a guitar getting kicked in the nuts.' Ever since then the sound makes me cringe just a little. 

I can personally attest to using locking tuners with a Floyd bridge as well as a Wilkinson (and with assorted hardtails too) and NOT having any problem with the strings falling out at the nut even when the low E et al. go slack.

If you want to beef up your Floyd tone, I strongly recommend a brass 'big block'; the difference is noticeable.

I always wanted to get one of those Schaller fine-tuner TOM tailpieces (G*bson made them too) since it's easier to make smaller adjustments with them and it's also faster/easier to do onstage.

I just haven't built a TOM guitar.

Yet.