Bridge Systems To Avoid Tuning Pegs (besides Floyd

[MasterMinds]

My biggest issue with the speedloader system is that apparently they canno tbe bought by themselves. Is this true, or are there places in hiding?

Also, are their alternative systems to avoid tuning pegs - even if they aren't "speed string loading", I just dislike those damn things. It must be a system I could buy by itself.

Furthermore - is it possible to do this AND have a zero fret - couldn't I likely do this with any system that doesn't have "pre-stretched" strings?

Thanks.

[MasterMinds]

Their flaw is they take unique strings - that won't fly with 99% of people.

Anyhow - I did find a site selling the SL tremelo system, not the fixed one yet.

Now here's a question for you - let's say I build a guitar with the 24.X size right. And then I use the 25.X speed loader strings (they make both sizes). This way I could extend them past the zero fret to the real nut.

Think it would work? The real nut is only less than 1 centimeter behind the nut, so perhaps this would work!

Why don't I like tuners? Well, I think they're too old-fashioned, and annoying. It just doesn't make sense, and I want to go with the most modern and minimalist optons.

I have found the Steinberger systems, not for sale yet and will look for this ABS one as well.

I will also look at the Gearless tuners in a moment!

'ABS' and 'Steinberger' make systems that you can buy separately but they're designed for Headless type guitars but I suppose you could still put a headstock 'blank' on like the speedloader guitars. It all depends on the style of guitar you were building.

Why didn't you want tuners on the guitar? Have you seen the Steinberger Gearless tuners? They haven't got a button sticking out like a normal tuner.

Nobody else does a system quite like the 'speedloader'. By all accounts they're not very popular so far.

←

[MasterMinds]

Well, 100 bucks for steinberger gearless........that is a hell of a lot. However, If I am not going to go for peg-less systems, then I could always add these later so no big deal there.

THe look of a naked head is not awesome, it's just that pegs really aren't/shouldn't be needed. Oh well.

I still haven't decided if I want a tremelo or fixed - I never use the tremelo, so for my first "version" I may go without it. Much more simplstic a design, which is really my goal.

SO DOES ANYONE know much about installing a "zero fret" - any projects done here with it? I would be interested to see how it will mesh with my neck design since it's headstock has zero angle, unlike most.

Later!

[stiggz]

as much as a floyd and a speed loader are good bridges, i recon they look fugly (yes that ugly with an f out the front) and breakage of strings and for the floyd the time changing strings is really over the top, all this being said i dont mind playing on them, however i would never own 1

[MasterMinds]

Here is an idea guys. I need your thoughts

What if, I used some tremelo/fixed bridge - whatever doesn't matter, NOT a speed loader.

And then... I bought this

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

And used it as the nut on a zero fret.

Couldn't I then:

1. have a tremelo bridge

2. or a fixed

3. use normal strings

4. AND have NO tuning pegs because of this wonderful piece WITHOUT a matching steinberger 9 million dollar tremelo?

Wouldn't that work!!!!!!!! Me thinks so

[stiggz]

i think ur on to somthing, but dont most trems hold the ball on the other end of the string?? i thought so,

edit: oops, locking trem haha i am a silly 1 rnt 1

Edited March 28, 2005 by where's the beef???

[mledbetter]

i'm having a hard time understanding quibbling over 100 bucks for the gearless tuners?!?! I mean you're talking about speed loaders, steinberger bridges, wanting to be modern and contemporary and not old fashined.. Those things don't add up to cheap. Spend 100 bucks on gearless tuners and you can use a 30-40 dollar hardtail bridge adn save all around.

OR engeineer a way for the steinberger tuners to go on the bridge end of your guitar and feed over a tune-o-matic saddle or something. All kinds of ways you can do something "different" but the only way to do something inexpensive is to go standard.

That steinberger ball end holder works in conjunction with their headless neck piece.. I'm not seeing how that will help you. You have to be able to tune your strings. Bridges with fine tuners have to have a ball in them (unless they are floyd style) but all your other hardtail options with fine tuners require the ball end of the string. So you would be back to double ball strings.

What you probably need to do is lurn on ebay and look for one of those musicyo steinbergers to go on sale, buy it, and harvest it for parts.

[Digideus]

Ive been working on a design to reverse the guitars layout and have the tuners on the body end and something like that steinberger nut replacement to hold the ball end up where the nut is. That way, i dont have to make a neck wit a headstock and I can use standard tuners at the other end of the guitar while I can still use a standard Tuneomatic bridge.

I think the idea is sound and Im surprised more people havent tried it. I can envision some problems (Body thickness where the tuners penetrate the body, angle of strings from bridge to tuners, etc...) but solving those problems is what makes this hobby fun!

My advice, draw what you are thinking and blow it up full size. Youll soon know if youre on the right track by doing some homework and putting some work in the design stage BEFORE you even touch the wood. It will save loads of money in the long run.

[MasterMinds]

mledbetter - I was over exaggerating the 100 bucks for the tuners. If I go with any tuners I will go with those for sure, as they are "something different" and yet similiar enough. Right now I am still making decisions on multiple options for many pieces - and I am just situating myself on what I think will make sense to me long term.

JTM45 - Yes tuners are nearly essential, I am just used to double locking systems and so I have not used a tuner but once for each new string so I do not mess with them that much. I certainly do not want a headless guitar as they look very odd and stupid to me.

Digideus - THis sounds very interesting. I could see where a very simple tuning element with smaller pegs that have the turning machine on the TOP, not the buttom. This way it is screwed into the body through to the back and held with a nut. Then on the top, the turning machine goes right above the place where the string winds. This would be incredibly simple to make and - being that I work at Home Depot - I am sure we carry all the parts necessary for this very simplistic idea!

Let me know your ideas on this we can bounce back ideas. If I did this I'd want it to look subtle and not so space-consuming on the body you know.

ALL - Thanks guys, I am learning about more and more options and narrowing them down to what I think fits me the most, especially in terms of bridge.tremelo.nut ideas.