Headless Guitars?

[GuitarBizarre]

This is where I think you're coming at what I'm saying from an angle that doesn't make sense. I'm obviously not saying that headless guitars all exhibit the same characteristics. It would make as muchbsense as saying all guitars with piezo pickups are going to have feedback problems on stage,because the majority of guitars with piezo pickups are acoustic.

What I'm saying is that as a design a headless has potential improvements over a headstock in some ways,and sidesteps a bunch of potential issues that require extra time and effort to mitigate when using a headstock.

One of your points about the weight at the end of the neck is an example of this - we've talked before about my theoretical ideals for string vibration and energy loss in a system. Your big hunk of brass is an advantage in my eyes.

Its evident you think this is all unnecessary when given designs work. And that's fine, but I'm not interested in things that just work. I'm interested in seeing where fine improvements can be made and so far I see no reason the believe headless isn't part of the answer to that.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

All I'm saying is that you're putting way too much stock in something that, on it's own, has no real benefit. It can help achieve a given goal in context, but in the real world, that's it.

You can have compact, lightweight, ergonomic guitars that sound amazing and will outlast us all.........that still have a headstock.

I say all this as I sit here with my fanned fret guitars, headless bass, composite necked guitar, CF acoustic and at least one more headless guitar on the way. I'm not at all against progress.

 

[onefingersweep]

To me the headless design only makes sense when you have more strings than seven. If there's less strings than eight I personally feel no need to have a headless guitar. Or if it's a baritone guitar with a really long scale it can be justified as well.

 

[thraxil]

As a clumsy person, it's also kind of nice to have a few inches less guitar sticking out to whack into bandmates and bystanders. My headless guitars cause less collateral damage than the regular ones.

 

[Señor Voorhees]

To me the headless design only makes sense when you have more strings than seven. If there's less strings than eight I personally feel no need to have a headless guitar. Or if it's a baritone guitar with a really long scale it can be justified as well.

Why? You act like neck dive is the only reason to want a lighter more compact guitar. Portability and weight are also reasons to get one. Headless fits in an overhead bin on a plane quite a bit more readily than a headed guitar. A chambered headless guitar weights quite a bit less than standard guitars, which is great if you have back problems and such.

Headless guitars are convenient for many reasons.

edit: Jebus, I really need to start reading threads first.

 

[GuitarBizarre]

It's the Porsche 911 syndrome. Everyone knows the engine over the back wheels is a terrible idea and shouldn't work. Everyone also knows that Porsche 911s work really well, thanks to a level of refinement that has become a bit of a black art.

Traditional guitars are full of stuff like that, that's been refined so repeatedly it's now very very good at doing what it's meant to do even though there are lots of things that can, and on less refined guitars, usually do, go wrong.

What I'm interested in is the polar opposite of that.

 

[Winger]

Easier truss rod access because you can access it from the end of the neck not from above the strings as they pass to the tuners.

Is that really a problem people have?

Yes. I only restarted playing guitar about a year ago, but I have no plans to buy a guitar with the truss rod adjustment in the headstock. Memories of caring for my guitars in the late 80s and early 90s, plus recent experience working on my nephew's guitar have reinforced that attitude. Not really an ergonomic issue, more like a setup/maintenance issue. If the headless guitars have the truss rod adjustment in an easily accessible place, that's a mark in the positive column for me.

 

[espdna]

never understood them, not my cup of tea but.. still cool. it's like a circumcised guitar. some girls prefer them.

 

[NoodleFace]

never understood them, not my cup of tea but.. still cool. it's like a circumcised guitar. some girls prefer them.

I dunno man, I think it's more of a dick head cut off than circumsized

 

[Casper777]

A matter of taste in my view and a good thing to see some diversity on the guitar space...

To me my Strandberg is actually very fun to play, super light, super comfortable (but that's also due to the body shape), takes less place. That's the first "light" guitar that sounds so good and thick... my other attenpts to lighter, thinner body guitars (think Parker Fly, etc) all led to thin sounding instruments...

The convenient factor or really important. The last gig I did with my band, I came with my 2Kg Strandberg in its padded bag, along with my Kemper Head and Remote... that's it. the second guitarist in my band came with its Gibson Les Paul, along with its Mesa Boogie head and 4x12 cab.

Guess who was happier with his sound?!

Still no one is "better", just a bit more diversity and GAS for us guitarist!!

 

[marcwormjim]

What pickups are you using in your Strandberg?

 

[Casper777]

What pickups are you using in your Strandberg?

SD Pegasus / Sentient on one and SD Distortion / Jazz on the other one

Both are nice, The Pegasus si warmer than the Distortion obviously