Purpose of reverse headstock?

[BennyD]

Hi all,

I'm curious what purpose a reverse headstock serves other than looks. I've heard its "better" because it makes the high E string have more tension, but, with a locking tremolo, I don't see how thats possible (I think thats bs).

[pedalGEEK]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

True, with a locknut it doesn't matter, but with a standard nut I imagine it would have some kind of imapct on the relative tension of the lower strings compared to the higher strings. I'm not sure because I've never played a reverse HS guitar without a locknut. I suppose you could unlock the nut and see how it effects the feel. I don't think the impact would be that great on the feel, but I could be wrong.

[etaeniura]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

It is so you can play guitar and hockey at the same time.

[mm2002]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

It's so the tuners will be on the wrong side making it a
b!tch to string up! I sure love the looks though!

[toejam]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

[ QUOTE ]
It's so the tuners will be on the wrong side making it a
b!tch to string up!

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL I used to think the same way, now I prefer it and find it easier to tune on a reverse headstock. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
My Carvin SC90 has the reverse headstock with no lock nut, and I really like it. The only thing is, with the low E string being longer behind the nut, sometimes annoying overtones can ring out, especially with lower tunings. A piece of foam behind the nut helps alleviate this problem, though. There has been some discussion/debate before about this on both the Carvin and Fender boards that there is some kind of tension difference between reverse and standard headstocks. I never really took particular notice when I had my Carvin DC400, or the Fender or Dinky HX models I still have now with standard headstocks. Now I actually have the Carvin tuned to D with 11s and the Fender and Jackson have 10s in either E or Eb, so I can't really make that great of a comparison any more. Then again, the Carvin is a 25" scaled compared to the 25.5" of the others. [img]/images/graemlins/fart.gif[/img] I have had a couple Dinky Reverse models, but they all had locking nuts, so I didn't notice any difference on them either. Maybe do a search on the Carvin and Fender boards about this subject.
http://apps.carvin.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi
http://www.fenderforum.com/forum.html?db=

[Number Of The Priest]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

No tension difference. It's all aesthetic.

If the tension were different, you wouldn't be tuning to the same pitch with the same gauge of strings. If proper downforce angles are applied at the nut and bridge, everything behind the nut and bridge should be eliminated. They just hold the speaking length of the string in place.

Try this experiment. Get a piece of string/yarn and two friends to help you with this experiment. Here is a schematic:



Have your two friends pull on the string with the same strength, simulating string tension. The string should be strung between two table legs or something as indicated by the two Posts in the diagram. The two Posts represent the speaking length extremes of the string (nut and bridge). You should stand at the top of the diagram (under the table) and feel the tension.

Next, have one of your friends move a few steps forward along the string, simulating reduced headstock string distance, but still pulling with exactly the same strength (tension). Feel the tension at the speaking length. It's the same as when your friend was standing back.

You can conclude that as long as tension is kept constant (ie- the guitar string is tuned to pitch), the distance between the nut and string should not matter.

Ever try strumming the strings at the headstock? You get those characteristic high-pitched "plink" sounds. Only those change pitch when considering different headstocks because the string length is different but the tension remains the same.

Something to think about.

[zeegler]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

NOTP is exactly right. Any length of string not between the nut or bridge saddles, will make no difference whatsoever to string tension.

[dg]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

The only possible thing I can see might be that the perceived string tension might seem slightly greater on the high strings with a reversed headstock, but only if there is no locknut. With less string behind the nut to stretch during bends, it might feel like there is more tension. This is sorta similar to the concept of how using 2 trem springs decreases the perceived string tension by making it easier to deflect the trem during bends. The tension is exactly the same if the tuning is the same, but the strings feel more "slinky". I guess a quick and easy way to test whether you can feel a difference due to the amount of string behind the nut would be to take a guitar with a locknut and try some bends with and without the nut locked to see if you can feel any difference in perceived string tension. I don't think I've ever noticed much of a difference, if any.

[Jester700]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

It doesn't affect string tension per se, since that would also effect pitch. But there is a longer length of string involved when bending - more material there to stretch - and this DOES feel different.

But not on a locking nut guitar, where it only makes the guitar look stupid. IMO. ;-)

[txcharvel]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

I have basically two identical guitars. Both have a strat style headstock but one has a vintage trem and one has an OFR with a lock nut. The vintage trem is much easier to bend. If I switch guitars from the vintage to the OFR the string will slip from under my finger if I'm not warmed up for it.

The extra string behind the nut makes it much easier to bend. It's kinda like NOTP's diagram above, but with a rubber band instead of a string. The string has some give to it. The distance stays the same but the tension varies. I have Sperzel locking tuners so I know I'm not pulling slack string off the tuner.

The lock nut guitar is static the whole time. When you bend a note, there is no extra string to pull through the nut to make it easier.

The only reverse headstock guitars I've owned have had tilt back headstocks. You might not feel it as much with the extra tension over the nut...

Just my humble, uninformed opinion...actual mileage may vary [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[zeegler]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

I tend to agree. While the tension of the nut to bridge section of the string HAS to be constant to maintain pitch, extra string length above the nut would allow more stretch. This is my theory: the initial tension is the same when bending a string, however, on the guitar with a locking nut, the tension increases faster as you bend the string. On the guitar without a locking nut, since there is extra string (therefore extra potential stretch) as you bend the string, the tension increases at a lesser rate.

Makes sense to me anyway. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[dg]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

Now let's make it even more complicated! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I still like to call it strictly a perceived difference in tension, because when it's all said & done you still have to bend that string to a given tension to achieve a particular pitch. If you have a few extra inches of string behind the nut or just 2 springs on the trem making it feel easier to bend the string, the other side of the coin is that you will have to bend a little bit more to get the tension needed to hit a given note. Easier to get the bend started, but you have to take it further.

[zeegler]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

Ah, yes. Yet another important detail thrown into the mix.

[guitar geek]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

I think there is a difference that DOES matter in case of a normal nut guitar, so no lock nut. it has been touched already when spoken about the part of the string above the nut. I believe I already said it before, but what the hell.

I think it has something to do with tuning stability. For the wound strings it is no big issue since they have surface resistance themselves agains movement over the nut, so it will stay in tune quite good. the unwound strings are an entirely different story, these strings have a smooth surface and will move more easily over the nut. To my experience with my old les paul (which drove me crazy from time to time) when doing a bend my guitar almost always went out of tune, especially on the strings that had some stringlength above the nut, the g and b string. the e had considerably less length above the nut, but still did not stay in tune THAT well. I think if it had more lenght above the nut like the g and b string it would have been worse, because of the even smaller surface to get resistance from.

just my thoughts

Harrald

[zeegler]

Re: Purpose of reverse headstock?

That has a lot to do with the nut material, and how well the nut slots are cut for the particular gauge of string you are using. A friend of mine got all bent out of shape because the new set of Zakk Wylde GHS Boomers he bought, wouldn't fit in the nut slots. (they are 10-60s)

I often lubricate my nut slots with a graphite pencil. It helps the strings slide. I've never tried one, but Graphtec nuts are supposed to achieve the same results.