Help with tuning nightmare!! RG2820

[bhuether]

I have a Carvin DC127 with Floyd Rose and Sperzel tuners that I can tune quite quickly. I only have to go through a few cycles of tuning the strings before the tuning stabilizes. With my RG2820 it takes so long to get a stable tuning. It is driving me nuts. How long does it take you? I wish I could feed the string through the tuning peg and then bring it to the bridge. That works well because the ball end sits right against the tuning peg so that there is no slippage. But with the RG2820, do I truly need the ball end sitting in that little cavity? I mean it seems that it isn't even necessary, because couldn't I just clip the string and then tighten the block that keeps it in place?

Any help is appreciated!

later,

brian

[Rich]

I'd never load the ball ends at the bridge, leave them at the tuners where they belong on a double locker

[bhuether]

Thanks. I don't understand why Ibanez made a special cavity in the bridge for the ball end to drop through. It had me thinking that it played some crucial role to the guitar staying in tune. But I guess I will ignore it!

later,

brian

[Rich]

gimick, better known for catching the balls and not letting you pull the string out when you want to than any beneficial good

[bhuether]

Do you think it would be straightforward to outfit my Ibanez with sperzel tuners? I think they are so great. I don't even have locking nuts on my Carvin and it stays in tune beautifully. If you don't know about them, check this site out:

http://www.sperzel.com/main.htm

later,

brian

[Rich]

Personal opinion, a locking system leaving out the locked nut is just plain dumb, and with the nut locked, whatever crap is behind it is inconsequential for keeping it in tune. Better the tuner the more precise the adjustment though.

[dex]

Just want to add that on these new bridges the string blocks are not as solid as the blocks on the old trems and if you want to get them vice tight you might crack them.
Tighten them enough to clamp the string but don't go super tight/medievil on them.

Locking tuning machines are a great idea if you never divebomb - if you do, absolutely no locking tuning machine will keep you in tune as well as a locking nut will.

ilia

[bhuether]

I used to think that til I got my Carvin. You should try it out sometime. It is so convenient. That way when the fine tuners have no room for movement, I can simply tune with the tuner without having to remove a nut. And the Carvin does in fact stay in tune better than my Ibanez...


But you know, someone made an interesting post here (saw it after searching). They commented on the method (the method I had asked about above) of putting the string through the pegs first so the ball rests against the tuning peg. They said that is in fact a locking tuner! So I bet my Ibanez will stay in tune even with the nuts removed if I tune it that way. Can't wait to try it.

later,

brian

[Rich]

The string block isn't the weak point, it's the boss in the saddle that takes all the stress. That's what will break

[bhuether]

I am surprised how well my Carvin stays in tune, even with tremelo use. I am not a dive bomber, but sometimes I mess with it just to confirm the stability of the tuning and am always amazed. I imagine the nuts in conjunction with a sperzel (or by having the ball end rest against the tuning peg) is the ultimate for tuning.

later,

brian

[Rich]

If you're running out of fine tuner than you have other problems, or probably not stretching the strings enough for a locking system

[jemsite]

Originally Posted by bhuether

But you know, someone made an interesting post here (saw it after searching). They commented on the method (the method I had asked about above) of putting the string through the pegs first so the ball rests against the tuning peg. They said that is in fact a locking tuner! So I bet my Ibanez will stay in tune even with the nuts removed if I tune it that way.

this has no chance of working effectively. i dont have time to expand but that is the fact. Sperzels will be a waste of $50 imho unless you use the trem exclusivately for a vintage trem-like warble and pull up after each dive.

as Rich said, your problem lies in improper string stretching and in addition failing to "unlock" the strings periodically (after you're done playing). good luck... glen

[dex]

Yeah Rich I ment the saddles but for some reason wrote blocks.

bhuether, imagine a really tight string winding on a tuner post that has been stretched, seated and is tuned to pitch.
Now divebomb - what happens?
All these tight windings will become unseated and will never go back to where they were.
The locking nut is there for a reason.

ilia

[MicJustMic]

If I may add . . .

If you decide to put locking tuners on your Ibanez and stop locking the nut you're going to have HORRIBLE tuning problems.

The locking nut is made to hold the string, right? Taking the pads off will cause the string to slide on a large surface (the base of the locking nut) adding quite a bit of friction, and this is actually what the double locking system was designed to reduce/eliminate.

You will have to replace the nut with either something teflon/graphite (like on the Carvins) or some type of roller nut to see similar tuning you're getting with your Carvin.

Even if you planned to block the trem the added friction at the nut would cause some problems when just bending the strings. The locking nut just isn't made to be not locked . . . simple as that.

Check out the JS model from Ibanez (I don't remember the #) that has a fixed Edge on it. Even that guitar still has a locking nut and that bridge doesn't move at all. :-)

That just proves my point . . .

Mic

[Kontalonis]

If you just took the pads off of your locking nut then i have got some things you might want to see that Rich told me in one post.

Locking nuts are not meant to work as regular nuts with the pads off. You bend a wound strings and it'll catch in the nut and won't return in tune. If you never bend strings you can get away with it. ~Rich