String Stretch at the Headstock

[Cagey]

I watched an interesting bit of video here where this guy who want so sell some solution or another built a jig to show how much movement there is of the string through your guitar's nut. Curious stuff. Everybody knows it happens and that it can cause tuning issues, but here's some objective data, which is often missing from the discussion.

Validates Floyd Rose's original contention that the nut was the elephant in the room that needed to be locked up. Also implicates the dreaded string tree and "standard" tuners.

I didn't follow through to see what he was selling, but I assume it's some sort of locking device.

Discuss.

 

[swarfrat]

Bah, another talky. My pet peeve is people making 10 minute videos of something I could read in one to two minutes, and probably have a better grasp of the presentation to boot,

 

[jordan_ytth]

when things get this technical, i tend to stop understanding them pretty quick. after watching the video, though, what seems fishy to me is that he's crediting the .003" movement of the string through the nut with the whole-step deviation caused by the string bend. but doesn't tuning up or down a half-step with a tuning peg cause more movement through the nut than .003"? i guess i'm not sold on how much the string movement he demonstrates with his jig actually causes tuning issues.

 

[drewfx]

I think he might sell more stuff if he didn't have a well cut and lubricated nut and could show it not going back to perfectly in tune every time.

 

[Cagey]

Bah, another talky. My pet peeve is people making 10 minute videos of something I could read in one to two minutes, and probably have a better grasp of the presentation to boot,

Forgive him; it's a sales pitch. You know how marketing weenies are. I only posted it to show how much the string moves in the headstock, which is to say past the nut and tree where there's an opportunity for the string to hang up and not return to tune. I knew it moved, but didn't realize it was that much. But, knowing that helps to understand why you need a well-made nut of good material, no string trees and locking tuners.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

Tonal zero.  I like that.

 

[Cagey]

when things get this technical, i tend to stop understanding them pretty quick. after watching the video, though, what seems fishy to me is that he's crediting the .003" movement of the string through the nut with the whole-step deviation caused by the string bend. but doesn't tuning up or down a half-step with a tuning peg cause more movement through the nut than .003"? i guess i'm not sold on how much the string movement he demonstrates with his jig actually causes tuning issues.

I think you may be misunderstanding what he's demonstrating. What he's trying to show is that there's a lot of movement through the nut (and under string trees if you have them) that will leave you out of tune if the reciprocal movement isn't identical. That is, if the string "hangs up" at some friction point because you pulled it to one length, but it didn't go back to its original length. Changes the tension, and thus the frequency of the string. Goes out of tune, in other words. By locking the string, you eliminate that problem. Floyd Rose already sold that idea back in the early '80s, so I don't know what this guy's trying to accomplish. He's doing it slightly differently, but it's the same thing, really. Keep the string from moving, and you eliminate the tuning issue.

The other thing you can do is keep the string from hanging up anywhere through the use of locking tuners, well-cut nuts made of slippery material, and no string trees.

 

[keeper006]

I hate it when people don't proofread. I can understand a typo on a forum comment or the like, but posting a Youtube vid for your business and the 1st screen says "moovement" doesn't give me a lot of faith in attention to detail. His statement of 20 MILLION websites complaining of this problem is also a far cry from the 2+ million search results I got, but I digress.

The point Cagey makes about the info is interesting, but his locking device, which he never shows, also requires installing a fine tuner on the back and right now is only made for a Bigsby or jazz guitar where it can be installed by the bridge.

My point being, it doesn't sound like he's going to sell a lot of these.

 

[sixstringsamurai]

Well since I don't use a Vibrato(Bigsby) anymore, or FR/Kahler style dive bomber trems, it's a moot point.
Fixed bridge is my cup o'tea, Locking tuners suffice for me, I do like to bend and if I need vibrato, I use my fingers.

 

[jordan_ytth]

I think you may be misunderstanding what he's demonstrating. What he's trying to show is that there's a lot of movement through the nut (and under string trees if you have them) that will leave you out of tune if the reciprocal movement isn't identical. That is, if the string "hangs up" at some friction point because you pulled it to one length, but it didn't go back to its original length. Changes the tension, and thus the frequency of the string. Goes out of tune, in other words. By locking the string, you eliminate that problem. Floyd Rose already sold that idea back in the early '80s, so I don't know what this guy's trying to accomplish. He's doing it slightly differently, but it's the same thing, really. Keep the string from moving, and you eliminate the tuning issue.

The other thing you can do is keep the string from hanging up anywhere through the use of locking tuners, well-cut nuts made of slippery material, and no string trees.

okay, this plus your post above about how he undercuts the necessity of his product by using a well-lubricated nut makes this much clearer to me. however, i'm still curious about how much that actually affects whether you're in tune - seeing how much the string visibly moves if you tune up or down even 1/4 or 1/8-step, if you move it .003" via a string bend, and then it gets hung up moving back so there's a total of .0015" movement - will you be noticeably out of tune? and even if you kept bending the same note, it's never going to pull the string more than .003" through the nut (assuming you're sticking to full-step bends, of course). i could be totally wrong about how much the string moves through the nut when you tune up or down - just because i see the string wrapping around the tuning machine doesn't necessarily mean it's moving any more than .003" per whole step thought the nut.

and i'm glad i don't need to run out and buy his $200 solution, primarily because fine tuners on any guitar that doesn't have a floyd rose looks mighty bizarre to me.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

I think the guitar he was using had a fixed bridge.  He brought up the trem dive bomb thing because that made it worse.  Hardtail and locking tuners, those have movement over the nut too.

 

[Cagey]

My point being, it doesn't sound like he's going to sell a lot of these.

I don't expect him to sell many of his widgets, either. But, YouTube is free while magazines, catalogs, TV, Radio, and dealer incentives are not. Can't beat that with a stick. If he sells 10 instead of 1, he's ahead of the game. Not every idea is viable or successful, but there's no harm in trying and you know there's a sucker born every minute. Hell, there are still several companies selling Jaguar/Jazzmaster/Mustang bridges. You'd think such a stupid design would have died out many years ago.

 

[sixstringsamurai]

I think the guitar he was using had a fixed bridge.  He brought up the trem dive bomb thing because that made it worse.  Hardtail and locking tuners, those have movement over the nut too.

Of course, it is inevitable, but negligible in my eyes.

My point being, it doesn't sound like he's going to sell a lot of these.

I don't expect him to sell many of his widgets, either. But, YouTube is free while magazines, catalogs, TV, Radio, and dealer incentives are not. Can't beat that with a stick. If he sells 10 instead of 1, he's ahead of the game. Not every idea is viable or successful, but there's no harm in trying and you know there's a sucker born every minute. Hell, there are still several companies selling Jaguar/Jazzmaster/Mustang bridges. You'd think such a stupid design would have died out many years ago.

Yup if he sells no more than a dozen or so he still is on the upside.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

While he doesn't show the device, since it requires no modification (fine tuners on the bridge don't count as a modification?  :icon_scratch, I'm assuming it's a Floyd like nut that doesn't attach to the neck.  It just buts up to the nut and is floating on the strings.  In other words, he invented a locking nut that isn't a nut.

 

[Cagey]

okay, this plus your post above about how he undercuts the necessity of his product by using a well-lubricated nut makes this much clearer to me. however, i'm still curious about how much that actually affects whether you're in tune - seeing how much the string visibly moves if you tune up or down even 1/4 or 1/8-step, if you move it .003" via a string bend, and then it gets hung up moving back so there's a total of .0015" movement - will you be noticeably out of tune? and even if you kept bending the same note, it's never going to pull the string more than .003" through the nut (assuming you're sticking to full-step bends, of course). i could be totally wrong about how much the string moves through the nut when you tune up or down - just because i see the string wrapping around the tuning machine doesn't necessarily mean it's moving any more than .003" per whole step thought the nut.

.003" is huge. .0015" is substantial. You will be noticeably out of tune. Why do you think guys spend so much money on Floyd Rose bridges? They're an incredible pain in the ass, but it used to be worth it. Now you can accomplish the same thing for less money due to better designs, but people still buy into the Floyd solution for exactly the reason this guy's demonstrating.

 

[sixstringsamurai]

.003" is huge. .0015" is substantial.

Also true, after I spent some time working in a machine shop I realized this, now and inch looks like a mile!

While he doesn't show the device, since it requires no modification (fine tuners on the bridge don't count as a modification?  :icon_scratch, I'm assuming it's a Floyd like nut that doesn't attach to the neck.  It just buts up to the nut and is floating on the strings.  In other words, he invented a locking nut that isn't a nut.

Yeah this is weird, what effect, if any, would such a thing have in sustain?

 

[Cagey]

While he doesn't show the device, since it requires no modification (fine tuners on the bridge don't count as a modification?  :icon_scratch, I'm assuming it's a Floyd like nut that doesn't attach to the neck.  It just buts up to the nut and is floating on the strings.  In other words, he invented a locking nut that isn't a nut.

I didn't look it up, since it's old news anyway, but that's the impression I got. It's a lock behind the nut.

He has another video where he shows off a nifty little dingus that theoretically cures another problem on some necks - angled strings. This little dingus also attaches before the nut to straighten out your strings as they go through the nut so they don't hang up on the nut. Not sure how you're supposed to keep them from hanging up on the nifty little dingus, or what we're supposed to do about the intensified angle created by going through the dingus before it gets to the tuning peg, but I suppose we're not supposed to think about that.

 

[drewfx]

I think you may be misunderstanding what he's demonstrating. What he's trying to show is that there's a lot of movement through the nut (and under string trees if you have them) that will leave you out of tune if the reciprocal movement isn't identical. That is, if the string "hangs up" at some friction point because you pulled it to one length, but it didn't go back to its original length. Changes the tension, and thus the frequency of the string. Goes out of tune, in other words. By locking the string, you eliminate that problem. Floyd Rose already sold that idea back in the early '80s, so I don't know what this guy's trying to accomplish. He's doing it slightly differently, but it's the same thing, really. Keep the string from moving, and you eliminate the tuning issue.

The other thing you can do is keep the string from hanging up anywhere through the use of locking tuners, well-cut nuts made of slippery material, and no string trees.

okay, this plus your post above about how he undercuts the necessity of his product by using a well-lubricated nut makes this much clearer to me. however, i'm still curious about how much that actually affects whether you're in tune - seeing how much the string visibly moves if you tune up or down even 1/4 or 1/8-step, if you move it .003" via a string bend, and then it gets hung up moving back so there's a total of .0015" movement - will you be noticeably out of tune? and even if you kept bending the same note, it's never going to pull the string more than .003" through the nut (assuming you're sticking to full-step bends, of course). i could be totally wrong about how much the string moves through the nut when you tune up or down - just because i see the string wrapping around the tuning machine doesn't necessarily mean it's moving any more than .003" per whole step thought the nut.

and i'm glad i don't need to run out and buy his $200 solution, primarily because fine tuners on any guitar that doesn't have a floyd rose looks mighty bizarre to me.

I believe the answer is that when you tune up or down the amount of movement you see at the tuner stretches the string and is distributed over the entire length of the string.

And if the string catches at the nut after a bend the amount of detuning is going to be much less than 1/2 or 1 whole step for the same reason. But that doesn't mean it won't still be out of tune by more than enough to matter.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

He just has another version of a mousetrap.  It doesn't do anything something else doesn't already do atleast as good.

But the tuning thing, do y'all remember the post a while back about the guy with a Jazzmaster with a Floyd and EMGs?  He straight up said that combo isn't his first choice, but playing a variety of styles in a variety of permanent, semi-permanent, and temporary venues that were haphazardly wired, the Floyd consistently had less tuning issues and the EMGs with no string ground kept him from getting shocked by difference in potential possibility of different grounding sources for amps and PAs.  EMGs are effectively a ground lift.

 

[bagman67]

G&L was locking the strings behind the nut in the mid 1980's - here is an Interceptor headstock from 1986. 

I had a Nighthawk from the same era with the same "solution."  It sucked.    Perhaps this guy has gotten past some of the problems of the G&L kludge, but I will stand on the side of the line that says "use locking tuners and a well cut graphite nut, or a roller nut."