locking tuners vs. locking nut

[toejam]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

The Fender/Floyd is not double locking. You cut off the ball ends like a Floyd, but it uses a roller nut and locking tuners to stay in tune better than a vintage or two-point trem.

[trillian guitars]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

yeah its a great trem...one of our guys uses it exclusivly for all his gigs...with locking tuners it stays in tune great

[gemini8026]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Originally posted by toejam:
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.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Like me for example. A blocked neck thru guitar with Floyd/locking nut is the ultimate in tuning stability IMO

[trillian guitars]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

we are actually developing a trem with locking saddles and no fine tuners and a vintage appearance that i think a lot of you guys may like.....hopefully ill have it for namm

[quiksilver]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Based on my experience, the Fender-Floyd Rose locking bridge/LSR roller nut/locking tuners approach does not compare to a Floyd Rose locking nut arrangement. The "G" string goes sharp.

[chemical_ali]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Originally posted by gemini8026:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by toejam:
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.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Like me for example. A blocked neck thru guitar with Floyd/locking nut is the ultimate in tuning stability IMO </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">question: how does neck-through contribute to tuning stability?!?! [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]

when paul gilbert [img]graemlins/notworthy.gif[/img] was with mr. big he used a blocked floyd w/o locking nut. that's around the time he stopped using the trem. now he only uses fixed bridges. i'd say that any fixed bridge guitar is infinately more stable than a trem equiped guitar. [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

[ChickenScratch]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

I have never used locking tuners only locking nuts. In fact before I knew that there were brass nuts I used locking nuts on all my guitars (even the non trem) because open notes really ring well and the tuning stability.

[Sunbane]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Originally posted by Black Mariah:
Jackson does have a straight-pull headstock, but people b!tch about it every time it's put on a guitar. "That 3+3 headstock is UGLY! MORE POINTY!!!!! POIN-TEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!" Then they go back to licking their Dokken records.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">[img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[yabba]

Re: locking tuners vs. locking nut

Originally posted by Black Mariah:
Jackson does have a straight-pull headstock, but people b!tch about it every time it's put on a guitar. "That 3+3 headstock is UGLY! MORE POINTY!!!!! POIN-TEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!" Then they go back to licking their Dokken records.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">bwahahaha! it's funny 'cause it's true [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]