advertisement


Guitar talk: acoustic, bass, classical, twelve string? You name it! Pt III

gavreid said:
or just file the nut correctly ;)
Click to expand...

By correctly, do you mean filing the nut so that the slots run towards the machine heads at the appropriate angles? Filing the nut in this way may well reduce the break angles to negligible levels, but it introduces sharp bends on the fretboard side of the nut - break angles have to be introduced somewhere and if not on one side of the nut, then it must be the other.

From what the guy in the video is saying, inserting rollers between the nut and machine heads reduces friction, which in turn, allows for better tuning stability - even when the break angle is more acute than it would otherwise be without the String Butler.

I'm not suggesting the String Butler is at all necessary, I'm not convinced there's enough of a problem that needs solving in this manner, but the mechanics of it seem intuitively correct all the same i.e. lining-up strings with machine heads via low friction rollers is better than lining-up strings with machine heads with via high(er) friction angled slots in the nut
 
Alternatively with a Les Paul just wait for the headstock to snap off, which it likely will, and then get it glued back at a more sensible angle!
 
windhoek said:
By correctly, do you mean filing the nut so that the slots run towards the machine heads at the appropriate angles? Filing the nut in this way may well reduce the break angles to negligible levels, but it introduces sharp bends on the fretboard side of the nut - break angles have to be introduced somewhere and if not on one side of the nut, then it must be the other.
Click to expand...

Sure it's a bit of a compromise but it really isn't much of a problem having 3 a-side machines...
 
gavreid said:
Sure it's a bit of a compromise but it really isn't much of a problem have 3 a-side machines...
Click to expand...

Agreed. It may be a theoretical improvement, but for most guitars it won't be needed. That said, the guy said it solved his tuning issues so we can only take his word for it that it was needed on that particular guitar. I do like the concept though as it does make sense and in some ways, it's the same as having a string tree on Fender-style guitars, except that the branches are horizontal and simply rounded with no rotation.
 
windhoek said:
Agreed. It may be a theoretical improvement, but for most guitars it won't be needed. That said, the guy said it solved his tuning issues so we can only take his word for it that it was needed on that particular guitar. I do like the concept though as it does make sense and in some ways, it's the same as having a string tree on Fender-style guitars, except that the branches are horizontal and simply rounded with no rotation.
Click to expand...

I'd be reluctant to add any weight to the headstock but from an engineering perspective it should be fine
 
Tony L said:
Alternatively with a Les Paul just wait for the headstock to snap off, which it likely will, and then get it glued back at a more sensible angle!
Click to expand...

:)

(And surely only those old-fashioned Gibson versions of the Lester..you don't get that nonsense on a properly shaped Tokai one ..)
 
104289608.jpg


It's amazing there are any left that haven't broken.
 
I’m hoping the ultra-rare limited edition intact headstock of my 2005 LP Std will prove a major selling point! Every year it gets rarer!

PS No way in hell would I ship it, even with its lovely Gibson hard-case. I’ve heard of them breaking in there before now!
 
I had a brand new acoustic (not a Gibson) arrive with a broken headstock, despite it being in a hardcase. If you drop them or throw them about under tension it's always a risk. It's the nature of the 1-piece mahogany neck in general, and the small amount of material in the vicinity of the truss rod access hole or just the truss rod channel in the case of my acoustic. A scarf jointed neck or a multi-ply neck would have been an inherently stronger design.
 
-alan- said:
Can't see any way to avoid it whilst you still need a truss-too nut alas.
Click to expand...
True, though the hole wouldn't need to be anywhere near that large if Gibson used an allen nut like Fender instead of a nut where there has to be space for the spanner/socket on the outside.
 
-alan- said:
The stress concentration around that 90 degree cut must be huge. Can't see any way to avoid it whilst you still need a truss-too nut alas.
Click to expand...

It's the orientation of the grain in that area that's the issue, I think, much of if is exposed end grain and there's little strength. When the necks break, the 'layers' of wood separate from each other rather than just snapping straight across the cutout. My acoustic had the same kind of break, only in the other direction, although the truss rod access was through the sound hole.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top