Reverse Headstocks , are they Ergonomically superior ?

K

kreig

Guest
Ergonomics - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergonomics

If you "Own" a guitar with a reverse headstock , please give your opinions and comments .

Do you agree that there is a quantifiable benefit to this feature ?

Thank you ,

Kreig

 

DangerousR6

Senior member
Messages
15,456
kreig said:
Ergonomics - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergonomics

If you "Own" a guitar with a reverse headstock , please give your opinions and comments .

Do you agree that there is a quantifiable benefit to this feature ?

Thank you ,

Kreig
I own 5 Jackson's with reverse headstock, fix 'n' to be 6 when my spalt telly is complete. I feel that ergonomically they are superior in relationship to the mechanics of balance..
:headbang1:
 

willyk

Senior member
Messages
1,278
I hate them. Being a lefty  all the old upside downers of my youth were "reverse" When I got a real lefty it was so much more convenient having the tuners within easy reach I cannot understand the fascination for them. But if you like them, that's great! not for me that's all  :icon_scratch:
 

DangerousR6

Senior member
Messages
15,456
willyk said:
I hate them. Being a lefty  all the old upside downers of my youth were "reverse" When I got a real lefty it was so much more convenient having the tuners within easy reach I cannot understand the fascination for them. But if you like them, that's great! not for me that's all  :icon_scratch:
You're left handed so you're bassackwards anyway.. :tard: As far as tuners go, the reverse headstocks are easier access as the tuners are on the bottom of the headstock. Your hand is naturally under the neck, thus making the tuners more"ergonomically" inline with the natural movement which occurs in the tuning process.... :icon_biggrin:
 

stubhead

Senior member
Messages
4,669
With a locking nut, I can't see much functional difference. With a non-locking nut, I believe that the effect it has on bending strings, and whammy tension, is what really matters to people. I'd like to try one sometimes - it seems that since a whammy affects the bass string's pitch more in a standard "tuners-up" arrangement, the reverse head would even things out somewhat. They look ugly, wrong & degenerate to me, though. :sad1:
 
K

kreig

Guest
stubhead,

Pleez, but pleez don't use the word "degenerate" - that really pulls on my heartstrings. :sad: if you understood the years of discrimination that us lefty's really feel . . . it's a VERY tangible feeling for me .

Example : ALWAYS to enter a store knowing that they will probably NOT have ANY Lefties to test drive . :sad: :sad: :sad: :sad: :sad:

All your righty friends have the latest and greatest and you can't play-o-one-o-them , unless you re-string them .
the scenario plays itself over&over&over&over&over&over&over&over&over&over&over&over&over ... :sad:

I need a hug, Really ... it's been a very sad situation ! ! ! :help:

and then W offers  lefty at the same price as righty .  :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2:

they REALLY SERVICE LEFTY'S :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2: :hello2:

THANK YOU , W
 

elgravos

Senior member
Messages
331
I've got 2.  Had the first for over 2 years and I have to say that it still feels somewhat weird to have to reach under the headstock to adjust the tuning.  And then I'm always turning in the wrong direction.  Then again, I feel the same way about my gibson LP.  I guess I just spent too much time with 6 in a row "right side up headstocks" in my early days.  It's hard to break a habit of 20 years.  That said, it's not a big deal.  I'm perfectly happy with my 2 reverse headstock warmoths.
 

DangerousR6

Senior member
Messages
15,456
Never had any issues about tuning, but then mine all have floyds with locking nuts. So I always use the fine tuners on the bridge...
 

riverbluff

Senior member
Messages
733
kreig said:
If you "Own" a guitar with a reverse headstock , please give your opinions and comments .

Do you agree that there is a quantifiable benefit to this feature ?

Of course there is a benefit! 

Reverse headstocks with a point look COOOOOOOOOOLLLLL! :headbang:
 

Graffiti62

Senior member
Messages
654
I guess its a matter of personal preference--I put a lefty neck on my Squier and I personally feel that I have better luck with fine tuning. The only thing that I find that I have an issue with is that when I do a lot of heavy bending on the B string and the high E string that there feels like there's more resistance to those strings. Also, bending the lower strings feels a little easier as well--I assume this is from the difference in behind-the-nut string length.
 

koshersteel

Senior member
Messages
190
  Longer scale lengths lead to greater string tension which creates what could be described as a "snappier" sound. Scale length is the main determinant in this equation but the overall length of the string is also a factor. This is why a Tele with through body strings has a stiffer feel than a Strat even though they share the same scale length (the spring mounted bridge is also a part of this). The same is true on the other end of the neck.

  Think of Jimi Hendrix. He could afford play any guitar he wanted to and they had left handed guitars beck then. Now think of Jimi's style... wild bends on the high strings made easier by the slightly reduced tension from the reverse headstock (and from tuning down a half step)... hammed bass notes on the low strings benefit from the extra string tension too.

  Were guitarists not such a conservative and superstitious lot reverse headstocks would probably be more popular. I don't think they are any harder to tune though it can be unusual when we are use to standard and 3+3 headstocks. If you do a lot of bending or are dealing with weak muscles or tendonitis than a reverse headstock could be a ergonomically superior choice.
 

dbw

Senior member
Messages
4,531
Sorry, I should have been clearer.  I don't think they're harder to get in tune, it's just the fact that most of my guitars have always been 3+3 or regular strat-style, so a reverse headstock confuses me.

koshersteel, I still think the length of the string beyond the nut and bridge doesn't matter at all.  Break angle, sure, but length, I don't believe it.  :icon_tongue:
 

Orpheo

Senior member
Messages
2,738
dbw said:
Sorry, I should have been clearer.  I don't think they're harder to get in tune, it's just the fact that most of my guitars have always been 3+3 or regular strat-style, so a reverse headstock confuses me.

koshersteel, I still think the length of the string beyond the nut and bridge doesn't matter at all.  Break angle, sure, but length, I don't believe it.   :icon_tongue:

on both accounts, +1. afterall, its all about downward pressure on the bridge or on the nut, and that depends on the angle, not on the length.

correction: due to the construction of the guitar, it MAKES a difference, because a more shallow angle towards the tuners from the nut will also result in a somewhat smaller length of the string, but that is neglegable I think. behind the bridge, same story. but thats just because of the way a guitar is build; you can't have tuners and/or a tailstop that move so the stringlength remains the same whenever that angle changes. and this, ofcourse, is because it doesn't matter in the end.  :laughing8:
 

Orpheo

Senior member
Messages
2,738
stubhead said:
I still think the length of the string beyond the nut and bridge doesn't matter at all.

Why do you lubricate the strings at the nut, on a non-locking guitar?

so the strings can slide better in the nutslots. that HAS something to do with the string length behind the nut (staying in tune) but playability doesnt have a thing to do with stringlength behind the nut.
 

stubhead

Senior member
Messages
4,669
I would guess that Young's Modulus would apply the coefficient of elasticity to the entire length of the string when you bend it, if it's sliding in a non-locked nut. Wouldn't 29" of wire have a different, lesser degree of vertical deformation than 25" of wire, for a given amount of sideways force?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_modulus
 
Top