Sabredog Posted August 13, 2016 Posted August 13, 2016 I thought the G force was heavy. I couldn't find anywhere on the Internet how much it weighed. So I took it into my laboratory and weighed it. The Gibson vintage nickel machine Heads weighed With all Nuts Screws washers included 31.5 g. So 6×31.5 = 189 Grams. The robot tuners the g-force Weighs in quite heavily At 291.5 g. So that's an average of 48.6 g per tuner which equals some of the heaviest tuners that you can buy. I felt like it was interfering with my power chords. the power chords were mushy and slightly out of tune. I had to Strum very carefully to get Slash cutting chainsaw power chords. I almost felt like my guiitar neck was more like a fishing pole with a fish on the end of it bending back and forth. I also seemed to have to tune it every 15 minutes. Always one Or more of the strings was out of tune, However slight, and however quick and easy it is to keep it back into the push of a button. It just got annoying So it's only been a day but the new tuners definitely brighten and tighten the guitar. And they seem to be staying in tune for at least an hour of thrashing. You can also see the discoloration of the staining where the G-Force Was blocking the sunlight. I do think PRS is onto something with low mass tuners let the neck of the guitar influence the tone. I had put some Heavy duty locking tuners on a Fender Stratocaster previously not even thinking about the mass they darkened the tone of the guitar noticeably, not exactly sure of the physics but I didn't like it. Over 100 grams of weight loss, That is a quarter pounder with cheese, nearly 4 ounces. I can just feel the neck is happier with all that weight gone. Deefinitely brighhtened up the string attack. Improved the power chords resonance. I've never had problems really with nonlocking tuners, they're usually pretty good on non-tremolo guitars. Here's some pics. If they attach correctly. Cheers
merciful-evans Posted August 13, 2016 Posted August 13, 2016 I have never heard of the headstock weight affecting tone/sound before. It's curious. Perhaps a headless model would be good for you?
american cheez Posted August 13, 2016 Posted August 13, 2016 alot of folks used to believe that adding mass at the headstock increased sustain. people used to bolt giant brass weights up there, made for exactly that purpose. i don't know one way or the other if it's true, but i notice no one's doing it these days. however, i did add a set of gold locking sperzels and a roller nut to a strat once, the tone did seem to darken. i loved it, and thought it was a giant improvement.
rct Posted August 13, 2016 Posted August 13, 2016 I've used the heaviest t00ners money can buy, in fact, in the 70's we liked all that weight up there. In all of my life with guitars I've never heard anyone complain that the machines caused their neck to be like a fishing rod up there and caused mushy out of tune chords. rct
Sabredog Posted August 14, 2016 Author Posted August 14, 2016 I've used the heaviest t00ners money can buy, in fact, in the 70's we liked all that weight up there. In all of my life with guitars I've never heard anyone complain that the machines caused their neck to be like a fishing rod up there and caused mushy out of tune chords. rct I like the replies; high, low, and middle, Buy a guitar with no headstock low buy a guitar with heavy tuners middle buy a guitar with a massive piece of metal On the headstock. high I'm mostly convinced that 1959 to 1960 design is somewhat holy Grail. So I'm trying to rationally put pieces of a Les Paul together that get close. I think I'm very safe with these vintage tuners, Performing tone wise and functionally, especially scince Gibson continues to put them on 75% of their guitars. I lost count, you can go to Gibson and buy 15 different Les Paul 1959 historic. That's very impressive that That particular set of pieces apparently makes a nearly perfect Guitar tone. It does raise my curiosity, do you Still use the piece of metal on the headstock of Any of your guitars, why did you stop? Explain what do you remember about that time in the 70s. So I went and bought the fatfinger after researching your comment, It really seems that nobody has bothered to scientifically measure it. But it sure doesn't seem to be all that popular. I'll have to try it and see if certain placements on certain head stocks feel any different. I definitely noticed the darker tone on my Stratocaster with the big heavy locking tuners. But it's possible that sustain is already good Enough based on the equipment that we now use again pickups and amplifiers. So chasing an extra 2 or 3 seconds of sustain is a low value target for Musicians, perhaps. all of my guitars sustain for about 22-28 seconds with an open A string. Which I know is good one of my first guitars 20 years ago $99 Stratocaster was definitely 10 seconds. And could use all the help it could get. It's probably a lot like copper bracelets on your wrists that fix all of your health issues. The industry is reasonably good at incorporating technology that performs for musicians! amplifiers, pedals, pickups, tweaked and polished to perfection. But I went ahead and bought a big heavy piece of metal to attach to my headstock. Cheers BB
sparquelito Posted August 14, 2016 Posted August 14, 2016 BB, I support you in this. The bottom line is that each player has their own set of preferences, and if you are going to spend top dollar for a great Gibson Les Paul, it ought to be exactly they way you want it. My own personal preferences would dictate that I never buy a G-force guitar in the first place, since I am not a fan of ANYthing on the headstock of my guitars, even a clip-on tuner or spare capo. It's a strange pet peeve of mine. Re; tonal qualities with and without the extra weight on the headstock. If it sounds better to you with the lightweight (standard) Gibson tuners, then that's all that matters. I knew one player who refused to wipe-down or apply wax or polish to his guitar because to do so would 'wreck the perfect tone' of that guitar. (It was a mid-1970's Gibson SG.) Who was I to argue with him? It was his guitar, and he knew what he wanted. I just knew that I never wanted to play his SG, since I didn't feel safe touching it without a current tetanus shot in my medical records. :unsure: :mellow:
rct Posted August 14, 2016 Posted August 14, 2016 I like the replies; high, low, and middle, Buy a guitar with no headstock low buy a guitar with heavy tuners middle buy a guitar with a massive piece of metal On the headstock. high I'm mostly convinced that 1959 to 1960 design is somewhat holy Grail. So I'm trying to rationally put pieces of a Les Paul together that get close. I think I'm very safe with these vintage tuners, Performing tone wise and functionally, especially scince Gibson continues to put them on 75% of their guitars. I lost count, you can go to Gibson and buy 15 different Les Paul 1959 historic. That's very impressive that That particular set of pieces apparently makes a nearly perfect Guitar tone. It does raise my curiosity, do you Still use the piece of metal on the headstock of Any of your guitars, why did you stop? Explain what do you remember about that time in the 70s. So I went and bought the fatfinger after researching your comment, It really seems that nobody has bothered to scientifically measure it. But it sure doesn't seem to be all that popular. I'll have to try it and see if certain placements on certain head stocks feel any different. I definitely noticed the darker tone on my Stratocaster with the big heavy locking tuners. But it's possible that sustain is already good Enough based on the equipment that we now use again pickups and amplifiers. So chasing an extra 2 or 3 seconds of sustain is a low value target for Musicians, perhaps. all of my guitars sustain for about 22-28 seconds with an open A string. Which I know is good one of my first guitars 20 years ago $99 Stratocaster was definitely 10 seconds. And could use all the help it could get. It's probably a lot like copper bracelets on your wrists that fix all of your health issues. The industry is reasonably good at incorporating technology that performs for musicians! amplifiers, pedals, pickups, tweaked and polished to perfection. But I went ahead and bought a big heavy piece of metal to attach to my headstock. Cheers BB No, I never bought the FatHead that was popular. I did have a brass nut on a couple of guitars, it did me no good. I would go back to the original post and your original claim that having "heavy" tuners up on the stock cause mushy, out of tune chords. I've never heard anyone say that ever, and I've never had a guitar with heavy tuners cause such a thing. I think you are searching for some kind of thing that is going to net you the best sound ever, and it has to be light. Trust me on this, play until you get sick to your stomach, get sick, play some more. That way you won't care what anything weighs, you'll make everything sound as great as it can. Some of the greatest sounds ever recorded were made on some of the lightest guitars ever made. Some of the rest of the greatest sounds ever recorded were made on bricks. The rest of the sounds were made on something in between. In the end, the weight doesn't matter one bit. rct
MarkJB Posted August 15, 2016 Posted August 15, 2016 Digressing from the weight/tone/sustain discussion for me moment... Did the tuners drop straight in to the existing holes ok? Will at some point take my GForce off so am thinking about which tuners to go for - Gibsons, Schallers or Grovers.
Zentar Posted August 15, 2016 Posted August 15, 2016 Digressing from the weight/tone/sustain discussion for me moment... Did the tuners drop straight in to the existing holes ok? Will at some point take my GForce off so am thinking about which tuners to go for - Gibsons, Schallers or Grovers. Yea they drop right in
stein Posted August 15, 2016 Posted August 15, 2016 I believe, and I believe this is true, there are two different things in play here: the tonality of the guitar as it relates to weight, and the sustain of the guitar. I believe both exist, but they are not the same thing. For one, the idea that weight equates to sustain is a myth. Also, being solid doesn't matter either. It used to be the popular perception, but more and more people are realizing it isn't the case. I guess a good example would be an acoustic flat-top guitar. They are both lighter and definitely not solid, they should have no sustain at all. In the case of frequency, or bright vs dark tonality, weight IS one of the factors that effects it, along with tension and coupling. A heavier guitar, everything else being equal, will be darker sounding than a lighter one. The reason there are still bright sounding heavy ones and dark sounding light ones is because not everything is equal. But to be sure, if you take the same guitar and change the weight of the tuners, there will be a difference in tonality. A little or a lot, but to one who is listening for it, it may seem like a lot. To one listening to the entire picture, might not hear the difference past a string change or the turn of the settings on the amp. But back to sustain: If you have a very dark sounding guitar, like say, a Les Paul Custom with ebony board that weighs 14 pounds, and has a naturally "dead" sound, there isn't a lot of treble in it's own sound and not very loud acoustically. Note don't change much as they decay. Plugged into an amp where one would simply turn the tone controls where he likes it, it could SEEM to sustain for days, because it's all amp and the notes are even sounding. But if you time it, it's more often than not the same. Really, you would have to add a LOT of weight to the guitar to change it fundamentally, and you can't add enough weight to the headstock to effect it enough to change it to get that perceived sustain. But dialing in that little bit to go a direction you like when you can hear it, it does tend to make one hear a good guitar as better.
Sabredog Posted August 15, 2016 Author Posted August 15, 2016 Digressing from the weight/tone/sustain discussion for me moment... Did the tuners drop straight in to the existing holes ok? Will at some point take my GForce off so am thinking about which tuners to go for - Gibsons, Schallers or Grovers. Yes it was surprisingly nice and easy you do have to take several straight edges to align the tuners to an imaginary centerline. I then tightened with the top not to hold them in place then drilled Just a starting hole not 2-Deep with a 1/16 bit blue out the holes with compressed dry air. Screw the tiny wood screws in and it was done They drop righht in the holes 9.8 mm shaft diameter withh a 9.82 mm hole in the Les Paul.
MarkJB Posted August 15, 2016 Posted August 15, 2016 Yes it was surprisingly nice and easy you do have to take several straight edges to align the tuners to an imaginary centerline. I then tightened with the top not to hold them in place then drilled Just a starting hole not 2-Deep with a 1/16 bit blue out the holes with compressed dry air. Screw the tiny wood screws in and it was done They drop righht in the holes 9.8 mm shaft diameter withh a 9.82 mm hole in the Les Paul. Thanks... 2 (lazy) questions, 1) can you not just line them up with the wing join lines? 2) if the screws are that small do they need a drilled pilot hole, would a braddle not be sufficient?
SteveFord Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Why do you have a picture of Jean Luc-Picard on the back of your head stock and why is he shaking his fist at the camera?
capmaster Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Thanks... 2 (lazy) questions, ... 2) if the screws are that small do they need a drilled pilot hole, would a braddle not be sufficient? BB did it right. Drilling a pilot hole sized close to the screws' core diameter and a tad deeper than the depth required by the screw is very recommendable. As soon as you turn a screw into the wood without pre-drilling, the damage is done. Cracks caused through it may still appear much later. For all the woods commonly used to build guitars pre-drilling is the correct way of doing.
Sabredog Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 Really, you would have to add a LOT of weight to the guitar to change it fundamentally, and you can't add enough weight to the headstock to effect it enough to change it to get that perceived sustain. But dialing in that little bit to go a direction you like when you can hear it, it does tend to make one hear a good guitar as better. Part of my reasoning comes from recently studying how to adjust the truss rod. Everyone says putting heavier strings of course bends the neck more. And you have to adjust the truss rod to compensate. Very much like a bow and arrow. Which reminded me how easy it is to bend the neck So that's where my fishing rod analogy came from. I've seen it several times on stage, Shaking the neck to get vibrato. People grabbing the headstock and bending the neck using it like a tremolo bar. So it only takes a few pounds of force to bend the neck. So I thought it was a reasonable approach to unload some of the weight up there for stability . But I agree if the weight is static and the guitar doesn't move a small mass shouldn't fundamentally change the tone that much. given all that i think its barely gone out of tune at all in 3 days now and very nice power chords. probably going up a gauge in strings would be a bigger change than I'm noticing . But the tuning stability is great great. So I give a thumbs up however small for stability and tone improvement. And sacrificing the possible wonders of automatic tuning. It actually now reminds me of a seminar I went to. The PRS custom shop repressentative brought 15 different pieces of wood all cut to the same shape 3 x 3 x 30" approximately . And he gave a demonstration on how he selects tone wood for the neck of custom guitars. The tap test for resonant frequency. Extremely interesting the how the density the grain pattern affected the resonant frequency. Hi plinking noises medium plinking noises and bbelow plinking noises. the plink is the frequency or tone that the wood communicates the loudest. But he also said that each piece that's put on the guitar absorbs frequencies as well. So the final sound is the collection of all 15 pieces attached to the guitar. So I think the robot tuner was absorbing some of the frequencies of my guitar that I wanted back. Just found this from the Fender custom shop tap Testing. interesting. Anyway my guitar is awesomeIn
Sabredog Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 Thanks... 2 (lazy) questions, 1) can you not just line them up with the wing join lines? 2) if the screws are that small do they need a drilled pilot hole, would a braddle not be sufficient? I was a carpenter for a while, and I worked occassionally with a cabinet maker. He was adamant that drilling the proper size pilot hole is the only way to not damage the wood and create internal stress fractures that eventually creep Along the grain structure, And eventually the screw strips. But other people's poor work Kept him in business as people constantly pull hinges out of their mounting frame. If you think about it the screw would have 10 to 20% less contact where the grain is splitting apart. So it seems like a small extra step to maintain a lot of quality Or integrity of the wood. good pilot holes are about 25 % of the OD Of the screw. And about 75% of the length or depth. Also the risk of not going in straight And not having the screw heads flush with the mounting plate is increased just trying to drive them in. But if you're very good And careful you can get away with it.
Sabredog Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 Why do you have a picture of Jean Luc-Picard on the back of your head stock and why is he shaking his fist at the camera? That was Capt. Picard when he was in Borg collective, the machine or robot part is now gone and the little human was all that was left under the robot.
Sabredog Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 Thanks... 2 (lazy) questions, 1) can you not just line them up with the wing join lines? 2) if the screws are that small do they need a drilled pilot hole, would a braddle not be sufficient? Oh question number 1. All the outer parts of the headstock seem to be Sllightly variable. I couldn't reliably line anything on the outside, so I googled some really detailed pictures of stock Gibsons. And it became clear that they're lining up parallel with a centerline and the inside planes of the box. Because Bottom pair of tuners is a differently spaced from the top one because of the wings Shaped Headstock. Because I assume that's how they drill the holes. I think the wings can be different on each guitar sanding and final cutting. But probably close enough, I did nootice that they were almost lined up with the wing glue line, but not quite on some of the other pictures I found. But the drilled gibson holes also give you an easy approximation of the centerline so if you get them in just straight enough, By eyeball, and Then put a small ruler in their. or Some sort of straight edge, it's very easy to make everything straight and parallel.
MarkJB Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 Oh question number 1. All the outer parts of the headstock seem to be Sllightly variable. I couldn't reliably line anything on the outside, so I googled some really detailed pictures of stock Gibsons. And it became clear that they're lining up parallel with a centerline and the inside planes of the box. Because Bottom pair of tuners is a differently spaced from the top one because of the wings Shaped Headstock. Because I assume that's how they drill the holes. I think the wings can be different on each guitar sanding and final cutting. But probably close enough, I did nootice that they were almost lined up with the wing glue line, but not quite on some of the other pictures I found. But the drilled gibson holes also give you an easy approximation of the centerline so if you get them in just straight enough, By eyeball, and Then put a small ruler in their. or Some sort of straight edge, it's very easy to make everything straight and parallel. Thanks Sabredog - very helpful, I will use your methods!
merciful-evans Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 So I think the robot tuner was absorbing some of the frequencies of my guitar that I wanted back. A novel thought (to me anyway). I wonder how heavy/absorbent the tuners would need to be silence the guitar entirely?
rct Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 So that's where my fishing rod analogy came from. I've seen it several times on stage, Shaking the neck to get vibrato. More drama than anything else. People grabbing the headstock and bending the neck using it like a tremolo bar. Barely enough to make it dissonant, so not even like a tremolo bar. Heavy tuners don't make the headstock lash like a fishing rod and they don't cause mushy, out of tune chords, no matter how many times or ways you say it, blaming the tuners is just plain wrong. rct
MarkJB Posted August 17, 2016 Posted August 17, 2016 Took mine off today and replaced with Gibson Vintage Deluxe pegs... Dead easy! Used a 1.5mm bit in my Dremell to drill the pilot holes and took the opportunity to put my usual 10s on and switch to top wrapping and lowering the bridge. Feels great and sounds it too - I'm not going to make any kind of comparison relating to the GForce because I've changed string size and the bridge settings, both of which I suspect would have had a far greater impact, but there's no doubt it sustains and sounds better.
Sabredog Posted August 18, 2016 Author Posted August 18, 2016 More drama than anything else. Barely enough to make it dissonant, so not even like a tremolo bar. Heavy tuners don't make the headstock lash like a fishing rod and they don't cause mushy, out of tune chords, no matter how many times or ways you say it, blaming the tuners is just plain wrong. rct It's possible what you say is true, but I'm pretty convinced it was acting a like a Sonic sponge, Certain harmonics and frequencies were not right. It is a little hollow plastic box With quite a bit of mass, I would suppose if you're playing at very high gain you wouldn't notice very much but low medium crunch seems to be an improvement without it. And I think that's what I meant it seemed like my power chords Were not in tune even after just tuning it to perfection. Just slightly dissonant on one string versus another string. Do you have a G-Force on yours? And it seems okay
Sabredog Posted August 18, 2016 Author Posted August 18, 2016 Took mine off today and replaced with Gibson Vintage Deluxe pegs... Dead easy! Used a 1.5mm bit in my Dremell to drill the pilot holes and took the opportunity to put my usual 10s on and switch to top wrapping and lowering the bridge. Feels great and sounds it too - I'm not going to make any kind of comparison relating to the GForce because I've changed string size and the bridge settings, both of which I suspect would have had a far greater impact, but there's no doubt it sustains and sounds better. Did you replace the brass nut with the titanium, I had to file out my low E Slot a little bit with my 10's, On the titanium nut Cheers
Zentar Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 I marked the pilot hole with a large sewing needle to punch a good starter point for the drill bit. Drill the pilot hole shorter and narrower than the screw. I was looking at a pic of the Grovers John Lennon put on the headstock of his Casino. A couple of tuners were pretty crooked. He was doing a lot of acid at that time. Don't take acid while mounting a new set of tuners.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.