My Pipe Dream

[GregP]

Yeah, I think I agree with you.

It's all on hold for now anyhow... and I've yet to find the trem hardware available anywhere.

Greg

[GregP]

You need to look into Bartolini systems if you want to have that kind of flexibility. I mean a pair of 89's is okay but if you want to have true coil splitting ability then you can choose whatever Bartolini humbucker you want, and it will be splittable. In other words, it doesn't have to sound like an EMG 85/SA just because that's all EMG offers. And 2 SA's next to eachother won't sound anything like a humbucker because they'll be parallel wired, post-preamp.

But you can also design the active system to involve a boost, like the SPC, but have total control over the frequency as well as level. Bartolini is the only company I know that can truly make a guitar a "swiss army knife" with all the sounds you choose to make available. No offense to EMG, but you're describing all these needs that frankly EMG can't meet.

←

I've had a peek around, and I can't seem to find any reliable Bartolini websites... don't they have an official one? bartolini.net looks like an amateur job, by a guy who wants to sell Bartolini pickups. If it's their official site, they need to hire a web designer.

If I'm going to consider a Bartolini system, I have to be able to get some descriptions of options and hopefully some sound clips, too. While sound will change from guitar to guitar and fingers to fingers, at least it's a good enough 'idea' as a starting point.

By contrast, EMG's information is excellent, and they have a few things going for them:

1 - the accessories seem to be able to add huge variety

2 - the website makes it easy to understand your options

3 - quick-connect and also pre-wired options will make installation a snap.

I'd LOVE to know more about Bartolini, as I have no particular devotion to EITHER company, but there just doesn't seem to be info out there, and no matter how good the Bartolini sound may be, I can't buy if I don't know my choices.

Anybody know of a good place to learn more about them?

Greg

[MasterMinds]

GregP.

In another thread I posted my "solution" to this (or a very similiar problem).

What I said was, regardless of the tremelo you pick (except a unique-string one like th e speed loader) you could use THIS as a nut:

http://www.musicyo.com/product_specs.asp?pf_id=225

This allows you to have a headless guitar with ANY tremelo system IF and ONLY IF I am correct in my assumption.... I am quite sure it will work fine though.

So you can use that to end the strings, and with the ball end at the tremelo, giving you a headless or naked head, which is my goal.

See ya later.

PS: I too would like to make a neckthrough guitar, especially since the "wings" (or horns on some) could be extra pieces attached, haven't drawn the spefifics yet. Like you I need it customized because I want to go with no fingerboard (explained elsewhere) and need a zero-angle headstock too TTYL - so my requirements this is why I am never impressed with even a 5,000 electric, doesn't meet my needs.

[GregP]

Looks like Gibson/Steinberger have pulled the R-type trem (the cheap one) that they sold on MusicYo, leaving only the $700 and the $450 models. So if/when I ever get around to this project, it'll be Speedloader I guess. I was leaning in that direction anyhow, to be honest.

Hope Speedloader strings become less expensive, and that the idea catches on. It seems to have not caught on very rapidly yet.

Greg

[n8rofwyo]

About that "Clip On" bout. Given the premise that an electric guitar is essentially an accoustic with amplified sound through the pups - not going to argue about acoustics and electrics being different animals, but sound waves are sound waves and they are affected by mass and continuity. Aren't you concerned that having a break in the body will significantly alter the acoustic characteristics of the body that are then transferred to the pups? I have no reason to doubt your jointery or "fitting" skills, but it seems to me that in order to maintain the resonance I assume you are looking for... it would take a hammer to pull that bout off - regardless of what external hard drive clips you used. No personal experience here, just wondered if it had crossed your mind.

Nate Robinson

[GregP]

Nope, it's not a consideration for me.

First, I don't buy the premise that an electric is just an acoustic amplified. I'm one of those arses who doesn't even believe in all the hype surrounding wood choice. Yes, I'm smart enough to know that the wood's mass and resonance WILL have an effect (two very dissimilar woods will produce different results); however, I don't believe certain wood choices make the world of difference that some people claim.

On top of that, though, and since we disagree on the above point, this is probably the one that I should simply be responding with ( ) --> the body itself will still have the mass of a normal Steinberger L-type guitar. Without the attachments, the rest of the body will look identical to an L-type.

The wings won't be particularly bulky, so I don't think they will have enough mass to dampen the vibration of the main part of the body in the event of a slighly weak clipping technology. After all, I'm not worried that my body and my soft, vibration-damping lap seriously undermines my guitar's tone when I'm playing from a seated position. If there IS any damping to be had (and I'm sure that scientifically speaking there IS going to be a little) it won't be any more than my soft body pressed up against a guitar would accomplish.

On the other hand, I do NOT believe that even with an awesome technique, that the 'wings' will impart any significant mass or tone enhancement to the guitar. I don't think they'll make it sound worse, but I don't think they'll make it sound better, either.

I've a very big believer in perspective. As a math teacher, one of the things we get to teach is the manipulation of data to present a strong case. I could take a graph of the time it takes for a guitar body's vibration to die out, both with the wings and without, and I do imagine that there could be a measureable difference, for sure. But on one graph, "zooming in" on the tail end, I could make it look like there's a significant difference. On the other hand, if I "zoom out" of the graph, you'd see how insignificant the difference is.

There could be all kinds of arguments, and you hear all kinds of voodoo around magazines, other guitarists, and this very forum, but I don't buy into it. It would not be beyond the scope of imagination that someone could say, "The wings will darken the tone slightly, but it'll be balanced off by a snappy maple fingerboard, and the pickups of choice will exert less magnetic pull on the strings, increasing sustain also." It's exactly the kind of thing that could be said, and people would buy it.

Greg

[GregP]

Bumping my own thread again--

I just got notification today that the R-Trem is back in stock, and yes it even appears again on the website. So, I wanted to clear up that misinformation in case other people were considering purchasing these units.

On a side note, the EZ-bender is also back in stock. B-bender for $30 US? Gotta get one... gotta get one...

Greg

[GregP]

And AGAIN with the replying to myself. Also again for other people (possibly non-posting lurker-types, we know you're out there!! ) to be informed:

The trem sold on MusicYo does NOT come with the headpiece. It's the bridge only. I'd consider buying one of those 'converters', but then you'd still have to jury rig or manufacture some sort of headpiece, I believe.

Still looking like Speedloader... I like the profile of the Steinberger better, but what can you do?

Greg

[GregP]

Bumping my own thread back from the dead... but yet, not reading the first 2 pages of it to see if this has already been answered! Doh!!!

I noticed Scott French's headless guitar just uses a Floyd nut. How would one get the strings in there with minimal fuss? If it's a feasible prospect, I might have to bring this idea back to life.

Greg

[Nitefly SA]

well, you put the string on its space in the nut, then tighten the clamp on top of it, this pressure is strong enough to keep the string from slipping; like how after you lock the nut on a Floyded guitar you can detune past the nut and it will have no affect on the string before the nut.

[GregP]

Not being a Floyd guy, I was just wondering if the remaining slack after "hand-placing" the strings through the nut would be tight enough that the fine tuners could bring you to pitch. It seems to me that the strings will stretch enough that this won't work.

A surrogate headstock just for stringing up the guitar would work, using just a set of $10 Pings or something.

The more I'm thinking about it, though, the more I'm thinking that I should probably just get a Synapse. They're not terribly expensive, and I'll get a better-playing guitar than what I could come up with. I'm not worried about that per se, but with my guitar-building energy I'm sure there would be other more "interesting" projects I could come up with.

Greg

[Mickguard]

This showed up on ebay France: Reverse head gibson

I've asked for some photos, I'll send them to you when I get them.

If it were me, I'd add a small headstock on there and use those Steinberger gearless tuners. You could retain the square head with those, and place them in an array around that (two to each surface, obviously). But I gather you don't want to spend money on this project?

Well, you could save a pretty penny by ditching the EMGs and going with a different set of pickups. Bass player in my band has EMGs in his bass...and they sound awful, nothing like what a bass should sound like. (I know, I know, this is comparable to saying there is no god in an evangelist forum... )

You asked earlier where to find a leg support --seems like that would be really easy to build for yourself. Just take a block of wood and shape it. Plenty of ways to attach it to the body --the simplest would be a dowel system --one end is permanently attached to the leg support block, which mates tightly into a hole in the body. Satisfaction guaranteed

Hmm...I ought to try that for the Bocaster. Thanks!

In fact, I'd been planning something similar for the longhorn on the upper bout--I'm not sure there will be enough elbow support-- you can add a second block there for added ergonomity (ergonomosity? ergonomiciousness? ) . I call them Ergo-blocs .

[GregP]

This showed up on ebay France: Reverse head gibson

I've asked for some photos, I'll send them to you when I get them.

That's berzerk. And ugly! But definitely interesting. <chuckle>

If it were me, I'd add a small headstock on there and use those Steinberger gearless tuners. You could retain the square head with those, and place them in an array around that (two to each surface, obviously). But I gather you don't want to spend money on this project?

Well, it's not TOO much about money, but I need a low-noise and small guitar for recording at home. The thing is that although I DO really want one just for the design of it, etc., it seems to me that for the time being at least, if it's going to cost more than $700US, I could just get the Synapse, which is ready to go. I'm usually the opposite way, preferring the general aesthetic of "ProjectGuitar" over "BuyAGuitar", but there are times when purchasing makes more sense.

I don't think the gearless tuners would be my ideal option. I want the benefits of a locking floating trem, and the Steinberg ones, with small tuners, would still ultimately cost a similar amount to just getting a speedloader or decent "normal" Floyd and trying the way Scott did it.

Well, you could save a pretty penny by ditching the EMGs and going with a different set of pickups. Bass player in my band has EMGs in his bass...and they sound awful, nothing like what a bass should sound like. (I know, I know, this is comparable to saying there is no god in an evangelist forum... )

I'd definitely consider other brands, but I doubt I'd save money. They have to be extremely low-noise to operate in the environment I'm planning on using them in (my EMI-littered apartment, which even an AWESOME shiedling job-- if I do say so myself-- does little to combat). So, alternatives would be something like a Lace or Kinman set (Kinman is kinda low-output, though), or a Bartolini set; and that could run me some bucks. Also, for this particular kind of guitar, I kind of LIKE that "hi-fi" sound. It's part of Martin Tielli's tone that I enjoy and wouldn't mind adding to my palette of tones. All things considered, and for the sound I'm after, a set of EMGs will likely be more economical (believe it or not) than the alternatives.

You asked earlier where to find a leg support --seems like that would be really easy to build for yourself. Just take a block of wood and shape it. Plenty of ways to attach it to the body --the simplest would be a dowel system --one end is permanently attached to the leg support block, which mates tightly into a hole in the body. Satisfaction guaranteed

I can't remember wanting the exact Steinberger one, though I may have mentioned it. I agree that there are many ways you could make a better one, including the simple dowel method you outline. I had ideas for the Ergo-Blocs, too. Part of me wonders if I'd be better off going for a "fuller" body from the get-go, though, instead of just sticking to the "L-style" Steinberger body.

Thanks for your input!

Greg

[NamelessOne]

I actually liked the idea of a temporary headstock for bringing the strings to pitch... maybe just use dowels and tension to hold it on, then lock the nut, detune the tuners, and snip the strings. or just use a vice grip and pull as hard as you can...

[Ben]

This showed up on ebay France: Reverse head gibson

I've asked for some photos, I'll send them to you when I get them.

Haha! thats insane!

Looks like a crazy solution to a headstock break

[GregP]

I actually liked the idea of a temporary headstock for bringing the strings to pitch... maybe just use dowels and tension to hold it on, then lock the nut, detune the tuners, and snip the strings. or just use a vice grip and pull as hard as you can...

Yup, that's exactly what I had in mind. I mean, if I DID use 'normal' Floyd, I'd of course first see if doing it by hand worked OK, and if so then no problems. But with cheap tuners (I think I even have an ancient set from an old upgraded acoustic around) making a surrogate "tuning plank" would be a breeze.

Greg

[Robert Irizarry]

[Part of me wonders if I'd be better off going for a "fuller" body from the get-go, though, instead of just sticking to the "L-style" Steinberger body.

Hey Greg: I own one of the broom types - a Hohner licensed copy of the Steinberger. It's lightweight and the leg rest works remarkably well while sitting especially if you play in classical position. One thing I find problematic is the lack of right arm support. That's why I'm hoping to build a Klein guitar replica. I got as far back in March as purchasing the plans and creating my template but I got sidetracked by very bad tendonitis.

You also mentioned cost in one of your posts and that is something I've been battling with as well. I've looked at a lot of options in terms of necks and bridges and I come back to purchasing a low end Steinberger (about $310) and stripping it for its bridge and neck. Its a "conventional" wood neck but together with the bridge, it seems a cheaper alternative than a custom aftermarket neck and ABM bridge. Of course, that depends on these satisfying your requirements.

Just some thoughts...

[GregP]

I've definitely thought of doing the same.

I went to a show by a band called OHN recently, and the lead guitarist had a Klein-inspired guitar. It's making me swing more fully toward that kind of design rather than the broom. After all, it's really the lateral space that I need to save, and the distance between fine tuners and nut is the same on both.

One thing I liked on this guy's guitar is that he had a mini "headstock" just past the nut, which served essentially as a placeholder for the "beginning" of the headstock so that it feels more familiar to the hand.

Greg