The Headless Tremolo: Let's Crack This Nut, Once And For All

[andvari7]

Ever since Steinberger released the TransTrem back in the mid-1980s, we've had literally tens of different varieties of headless trem systems to choose from. Trouble is, only a few of them are worth looking at: TransTrem mk1.5 (the original unit, modified by Steinberger to use non-threaded ball strings), S-Trem, and the Strandberg Floyd Rose drop-in spring immediately to mind. The ones you find on eBay seem a little dodgy, and even Steinberger never did better. Where does this leave us? It leaves us with the power of the billions of people who use the Internet, and the possibility that some of them have some knowledge of metallurgy, mechanical engineering and metals fabrication. We also have the original research to use.

What I am proposing is simple, yet at the same time, daunting: We need to come up with a grand vision for what a headless trem (or whatever you feel is the appropriate term for the device) is supposed to be and do. Ideas thrown around and dissected, prototypes built, and all points in between.

I shall start: I have a Kahler 7410 on my bass. It has string hooks that can be (re)moved. I was thinking that a modified string hook/retainer would be the best solution, as it would keep the engineering to a minimum, and use a proven design.

I had hoped this wouldn't be necessary to state, but Harmony Central rendered it so: Any and all comments to the effect of "headless guitars are fundamentally wrong; quit wasting our time" are inappropriate, counterproductive, and absolutely unacceptable. I am trying to raise a serious point; I want something that actually works.

The inconsistency in the bold font is because I copied the bulk of the text from a thread I started at Harmony Central an hour ago. I apologize for the inconsistency and inconvenience.

Edited June 3, 2012 by andvari7

[WezV]

the trems you mention seem to have it sorted. they are all a bit on the pricey side, but they do work well. Myab eif you start by identifying the issues you have with those systems you may get some peoples brains ticking over

I guess I would be happy if someone could come up with something like this but more affordable.

Whilst i wont go all HC on you and tell you that you are wasting your time, i would point out this is a very niche market and most guitarists wont share your passion for an improved headless trem system.

[andvari7]

My problems are as follows:

1. They are rather difficult to find, even online

2. When you do find one, they either cost a considerable amount of money, or are suspiciously cheap

3. When they're that cheap, you can never be sure of their origins, or their build quality

[westhemann]

Why don't you prove you aren't wasting your time and invent your own?That is what Strandberg did...since he is a member here,we watched him invent his own deal without asking others to do his research for him or telling us what is counterproductive or unacceptable.

Your spelling is terrific.

[WezV]

My problems are as follows:

1. They are rather difficult to find, even online

2. When you do find one, they either cost a considerable amount of money, or are suspiciously cheap

3. When they're that cheap, you can never be sure of their origins, or their build quality

1. because its a niche market

2. because its a niche market

3. because its a niche market

redesigning them wont change that

[Bmth Builder]

Buying Strangberg stuff direct (when available) is your best bet, I doubt you could design and manufacture your own any cheaper.

[Technology4Musicians]

WezV's right. Headless instruments represent a niche marketing.

Personally I love them. It's true: headless hardware is extremely difficult to find. Cheaper versions are limited by material' s quality. Finally I've tried to create my own sistem.

Take a look:

http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.php?showtopic=45982