locking tuners vs. locking nut

[chemical_ali]

i was checking out some carvin guitars. they're pretty cool. the floyd models don't have locking nuts, only locking tuners. do they both acheive the same result in terms of tuning stability?

anyone have experience with these different systems?

[Ace]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

As long as the guitar has straight string pull, and the nut is made well you will most likely be OK.

[JimmyApollo]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

For the record you can get a locking nut with a Carvin, it's just not a standard option.

[trillian guitars]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

its actually beeter to have the locking tuners...its way easier to change strings and set up...no need for fine tuners, or a floyd for that matter

[toejam]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Yeah, Carvin's got a LN option for the locking nut. It's one of those hidden options they seem to have forgotten to put on their site. It actually is now finally in their new catalog, it's $40, but with the half-off options, it's $20. Since there's straight string pull over the nut to the tuners, you shouldn't have a problem with tuning stability; though, some people still prefer to have the locking nut for extra peace of mind.
I'm actually getting a custom Carvin 24-fret bolt on neck made for a Jackson body that will have a non-recessed Floyd. I'm going with locking Schaller tuners and don't want to deal with the locking nut.

[Ace]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Originally posted by Trillian Guitars:
its actually beeter to have the locking tuners...its way easier to change strings and set up...no need for fine tuners, or a floyd for that matter

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think the whole point was that he wanted a Floyd. [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]

[trillian guitars]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

locking tuners make the floyd obsolete really, or overkill....you dont need a bridge with fine tuners...any locking bridge will give the same action as a floyd.....most people it seems have a single mindset when it comes to floyds....its tough to break people of the habit...but when you understand why it stays in tune and how it works then yolu can free yourself up.....locking tuners are one of the best develops to come along for guitar, i think anyway.....its such a better system then a locking nut

[toejam]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Yeah, but it's a pain in the ass to find locking trems that don't have fine tuners. If you use a Wilkinson with locking tuners, it may stay in tune better than a vintage or two-point fulcrum trem, but will go out of tune easier than a Floyd with moderate use, since the strings aren't locked in the saddle. There's plenty of people who don't even use the Floyd anyway but love the way it keeps in tune.

[chemical_ali]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

i wanted a floyd but thought that it wouldn't stay in tune with just locking tuners. i see now that carvin does offer locking nuts. i think that's a better choice, cause i like to use the floyd.

carvins are an overall better value than jacksons for usa customs.

[trillian guitars]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

i thought wilkensons had locking saddles....? one of the guys in the shop swears by the floyd vintage trem he made for fender....fender calls it something else now.....it works the best...id like to make a few improvements(basically bulk it up a bit) to it and we might have the ultimate trem...allthough, i do like the new speedloader a lot....but looks wise its horrid

[chemical_ali]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

i agree with you about the speed loader. it looks horrid! [img]graemlins/puke.gif[/img]
contemplate this:
a flute without holes isn't a flute at all.
a guitar without strings attatched to the headstock isn't a guitar at all... [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]

[VitaminG]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

I'm contemplating it, but it's not making much sense to me.

A flute without holes is a length of metal tubing.

A guitar is not defined by whether the strings stop at the nut itself, or extend past the nut to the headstock. Play either style with your eyes closed and you'll be hard pressed to notice any real difference. You're still fretting 25 1/2" of string against metal frets on a wooden fretboard.

[chemical_ali]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

its just the principle of having a headstock that doesn't hold strings. it's crazy. i've seen the headstockless guitars with the ball end of the string fitting into the nut and that's better than having a fake headstock IMHO. [img]graemlins/band.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]

[trillian guitars]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

im finding the speedloader useful actually....but we are only using it right now on some crazy one off custom stuff that doesnt have a headstock or has something in its place

[lerxstcat]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Originally posted by chemical_ali:
its just the principle of having a headstock that doesn't hold strings. it's crazy. i've seen the headstockless guitars with the ball end of the string fitting into the nut and that's better than having a fake headstock IMHO. [img]graemlins/band.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, when the Speedloader fails and is out of production, and nobody makes the special strings anymore, then you can drill out the fake headstock for tuners!
guess they left it on for that reason!
[img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]