Hi there. I am planning my next few instruments. A strummer as a test bed, three string fretted and four string fretted. Playing around with tuner arrangements. The heads I see often look quite large with the tuners spread out. Nothing wrong with that but I would like to make a very compact head with a tight tuner configuration. I see that the norm is to have the gear towards the body of the instrument. However, if you have two tuners almost in line, one with the gear towards and the other the reverse way round, assuming that you wound the tuners the same way one would wrap the string one way and the other would be reversed. That could very neatly take account of the string spacing at the nut. Here is a pic of what I have in mind.
The lower ones are slightly further out and the strings would wrap from the outside, whereas with the upper tuners the strings would wrap from the centre. As you see, there should also be room for a string winder to clear the lower tuner which stick out more.
OK. The question is, is there any reason not to do this (finally got there)? I have had a look through LOADS of pics but can't seen anyone doing this. Maybe there's a good reason that hasn't occurred to me.
Replies
yea, even with the super cheap ones I used 5 out of 8 installed that way are fine. The rest work, just feel icky when tuning... sloppy, difficult to tune.
What kind of tuners are those Don? I like the dark knobs but haven't found any lower price ones as of yet.
Hi Don.
Thanks for the link to your photos. Seems that nothing is cut and dried in this world.
Thanks also for the link to Zachary Guitars. Lots of look at and to be inspired by on that site. As you suggest, he is using much higher quality tuners than the ones I have.
Don Thompson said:
Don
http://www.zacharyguitars.com/
He uses much better tuners BTW.
mad max tuners.jpg
MadMaxsixstring.jpg
Mark. You are quite right. It's probably an idea he rejected as being too easy and not presenting a sufficient challenge.
"I personally dont like trees"
I agree. Let's chop them all down and make guitars out of them. Sorry. Am I not taking this seriously enough.
OK then, seriously. I can't quite visualise your plan but look forward to an illustration when you have time and then photographs of the instrument when you have made it.
I like it, but thats too easy for him!
I personally dont like trees, guide pins etc, (nothing personal against those who make it work that way) and I dont like a lot of string "tail" in the design either above the nut, or beyond the bridge if I can help it. I feel it removes from the design, both asthetically and I suspect at times functionally. Anything that can shift and affect tuning whether it be from temperature changes, playing stresses, whatever is to be avoided.
Therefore, playing on your idea, I like the headless design, and terminating the strings just below the bridge on tuner pegs sticking through the top would be simple beautiful by design. Access could be with a tool through holes in the back using straight tuners (like banjo tuners) or a slot that your fingers could fit into could be used. Or a pocket/notch in the tail of the box and conventional tuners. The tool could be as simple as the re-stringing tool in your tuner pic above. Either the openings could be left open, and the recess in the back would leave clean lines and no protrusions to effect playing, or you could create a simple sliding cover along the lines of what you see as the top on some cigar boxes, with a panel sliding in two grooves.
Just some thoughts. Have to sketch something up. But I like it!
What you see there is only a very basic germ of an idea without any real detail. I had assumed that it would go round some sort of radused reinforcement. People use screws of small diameter to divert and align strings on normal CBG heads. Within the box one would have the luxury of being able to make something of much bigger radius. Metals such as phosphor bronze or stainless steel could be used or even PTFE (or as you say, some sort of roller mechanism).
If you wanted geared tuners you could probably use normal ones with little modification. The ones in the pic at the top mount the lobe bit onto a slightly tapered shaft with two flats on for transmitting the torque. Remove the lobe bit and make a key with the same shape.
I think Scott would probably power the tuners electronically from current generated by mice riding miniature exercise bikes (exquisitely sculpted from exotic hardwoods - the bikes that is, not the mice). No mice would be harmed either physically or emotionally in the tuning of that guitar of course. When he makes it, remember. You read it here first.
Mark Bliss said:
BUT, I like the general idea in theory. How about small rollers where the strings kick over the tailpeice, and some straight geared tuners accessable from inside. (unfortunately I havent found any that arent a bit steep.- $) Taking the idea a step further how about an arrangement that accesses the tuners with a tool through a hole in the back, with the pegs sticking up through the front of the box to form a pegged tailpiece?....... Hmmmmm. Ya gotta ask the question. What would Scott Winburn do? LOL!
One last thing, I have never had a backwards tuner slip, but the cheap ones can be especially sloppy. Nothing like a 1/4 turn of nothing when you change directions. Hate that.
As you say, this is a great place to exchange ideas.-Rand.
John H. Maw said:
Rand Moore said:
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next