Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks? - Jemsite
All Other Guitars (including Prestige) Discussion about other Ibanez Guitars not covered in the above topics. Includes J-Custom, USA-Custom, Prestige subforum.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 01:47 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24
Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Does a reverse headstock have any practical benefit (or real disadvantage, for that matter), or is it just an appearance option? I'm going to make my own Warmoth guitar and I think a reverse headstock looks cool but I don't know if theres a functionality tradeoff.
aero90 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 01:50 PM
EKG
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,287
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Actually, it cames in handy (no pun intended). Your hand stays in the same orientation while playing and tuning.
EKG is offline  
post #3 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 02:18 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 2,674
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

You get slightly different tension, but I doubt that the difference is significant.
pawel is offline  
post #4 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 03:03 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 144
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

I remember reading somewhere that the reverse headstock aids in bending on the "higher" strings 'cause the tuners are closer or something.

Maybe jsut BS.
old_metal_head is offline  
post #5 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 04:30 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Somerville, MA
Posts: 6,200
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

On a fixed bridge or vintage trem, maybe, although I'd think a shorter string length would actually make the string feel "tighter" as it'll have less of a length to flex along. Someone with a background in physics explain that better.

On a locking trem? Not a thing - anything that happens behind the lock is irrelevant.

-D
Drew is offline  
post #6 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 04:50 PM
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 472
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

I have one guitar with a reverse headstock (an ESP) and I don't like it because it's different. When I go to tune it, my hand automatically reaches for the top of the headstock and all the tuners are on the bottom, and then I get mildly confused about which way to turn them for a second, and I can't as easily see the tuners, as the view is somewhat blocked by the headstock. It really only comes up when changing strings though.

If all my guitars were like that one, I'd probably dislike the kind with the tuners on the top. Probably just a matter of what you're used to.
Ferrous Lepidoptera is offline  
post #7 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 05:41 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,215
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

I find that ergonomically, having the tuners along the treble side of the headstock is easier on the wrist for tuning.
darren wilson is offline  
post #8 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 05:52 PM
EKG
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,287
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Hey...there's an echo...echo...echo
EKG is offline  
post #9 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 06:02 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,215
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Yeah, it's called "agreement".
darren wilson is offline  
post #10 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 06:07 PM
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Galway, Ireland
Posts: 1,747
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Drew there shouldn't be any any noticable difference as goes tension but yeah when you bend there should be a little more tightness to it. On a locking nut guitar it shouldn't make any difference.
Tom Gilroy is offline  
post #11 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 06:31 PM Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 24
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew
On a fixed bridge or vintage trem, maybe, although I'd think a shorter string length would actually make the string feel "tighter" as it'll have less of a length to flex along. Someone with a background in physics explain that better.
I'll take a shot at this. You are correct that the shorter strings will feel tighter because even though the string tension load is the same regardless of headstock, the stiffness of a string (amount it moves with change in load) is inversely proportional to its total length. Thus the optimum headstock would have the strings most often bent be the longest.

Since I usually bend the G & B strings, a Gibson-style 3X3 headstock would seem optimum. I just don't like the way they look.
aero90 is offline  
post #12 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 07:08 PM
dex
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by EKG
Actually, it cames in handy (no pun intended). Your hand stays in the same orientation while playing and tuning.
It does indeed and let's face it - it looks much, much cooler as well.

ilia
dex is offline  
post #13 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-03-2005, 07:43 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London/Nottingham, UK
Posts: 681
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aero90
You are correct that the shorter strings will feel tighter because even though the string tension load is the same regardless of headstock, the stiffness of a string (amount it moves with change in load) is inversely proportional to its total length. Thus the optimum headstock would have the strings most often bent be the longest.
This is true! Physics teaches us so. It seems peculiar that 80's shred guitars, which arguably see the most high string bending, are the most likely to have a reverse headstock though!

(I used to have an RGR320, and i swear that the lower srings had less tension, and the higher more, even though it had a locking nut! ah well, thats the lo-trs II for ya!! )
Globbits is offline  
post #14 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-09-2005, 12:09 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 380
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aero90
I'll take a shot at this. You are correct that the shorter strings will feel tighter because even though the string tension load is the same regardless of headstock, the stiffness of a string (amount it moves with change in load) is inversely proportional to its total length. Thus the optimum headstock would have the strings most often bent be the longest.

Since I usually bend the G & B strings, a Gibson-style 3X3 headstock would seem optimum. I just don't like the way they look.
In the case of locking nuts the string length would be measured from lock to lock as nothing which happens on the headstock side of the lock matters. once the string is properly locked the tension can be completely removed on the headstock side without affecting the playability of the guitar or tuning stability. Thus on a guitar with nut locks a reverse headstock is merely cool looking and possibly more comfortable for some when restringing, but has no effect on tone or bendability. A reverse without locking nuts would however be a different story.
cusplaya is offline  
post #15 of 25 (permalink) Old 05-09-2005, 05:34 AM
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Odense S, Denmark
Posts: 9,952
Re: Reverse Headstocks - Just for looks?

I actually didn't like reverse headstocks at until I saw this one





Regards

André



fettouhi is offline  
Reply

Tags
angelo batio , custom guitar , fixed bridge , joe satriani , locking nut , locking nuts , michael angelo batio , reverse headstock , reverse headstocks , rob balducci , shred guitars , steve vai , string tension , vintage trem

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Jemsite forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address

IMPORTANT: You will be required to activate your account so please ensure that your email address is correct.

If you do not receive your activation check your spam folder before using the CONTACT US form (at the bottom right of each page).



Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Not enough reverse headstocks! harsh All Other Guitars (including Prestige) 62 07-08-2014 11:41 AM
headstocks.... Sean777 All Other Guitars (including Prestige) 9 09-04-2012 04:06 PM
Do reverse headstocks have a function other than looking cool? ironfistx All Other Guitars (including Prestige) 17 06-09-2012 08:18 PM
RGR - reverse headstocks & sharktooth & FIXED bridge? jd All Other Guitars (including Prestige) 2 02-18-2007 10:46 PM
reverse headstocks.. BZ Beetle All Other Guitars (including Prestige) 6 11-13-2002 10:04 AM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome