Official Luthiers Forum!

I was wondering what some of you all think about headstock shape designs. Which one is better: basic Martin, Ovation type shape, rounded, angled, slotted, etc... I'm thinking of trying a somewhat spear shaped one for straighter string to tuner travel. I'm sure there are many factors affecting choice, from aesthetic to functional concerns, not to mention the many arguments around set back angle. What is your favorite style? Or is it not important?

Perhaps we could see some pics of various designs too.

_________________
"Preoccupation with an effect gives it power and enhances the error"
from "Your Owner's Manual" by Burt Hotchkiss.

I've always used a V style, but now after I'm looking at a more the other way so the strings dont't lay on each other. Smaller guitars with martin style, the strings lay on each other, and I think its a little sloppy.

_________________
Jason Moe
LaCrosse WI 54601

I tend to stick to modifications of traditional designs, but ran into problems with my new 12 string peghead for the MJ Prairie State. Twelves are especially tough because of all the strings and long pegheads. Was really tight for the MJ because anything too long would look funny on the instrument. After binding four peghead veneers and tossing them, I finally got what I was looking for on the 5th. It's pretty cramped, and looks like the 11th string will just graze the 12th post, but I'm quite pleased with the shape and it fits the guitar size well.
JJ, the tuners work very well on the peghead. For this particular one, I have chosen have the gear over the worm, so I have to make a second set using gear over worm mandolin tuners.

I thought I had come up with something pretty cool, but a good old friend of mine called it the "000-28 frog gig." Luthiers seem to like it and players seem to hate it.

_________________
"...you have to get over your strict adherence to your largely imagined notion of absolute perfection..."

pretty straight forward...on a OM I am currenty working on

_________________
MK5acoustics.com

Mine of course, is stylized from the Prairie State of the '30's.
I'm not in agreement with Mr. Henderson, it's never too early to think about design shapes. Just do that sort of stuff in your spare time and keep it separate from the tonal qualities of the build. You will find as you think about it and make early attempts that you will be re-refining as you go. What looks to be a good idea at the outset will many times be re-defined several times, maybe even on several instruments. Sometimes what looks good on paper doesn't exactly do it in three dimensional form. And it is good practice to sharpen your artistic eye...

Food for thought. Thanks for the input and excellent link to that head gallery. I would think considerations about balance and strength are important too. For example if I had one that tapered too much at the tip, I'd be afraid of cracking it the invariable time I knock it on a wall or god forbid let it fall from a perching place. I kind of like that Ovation head because it appears to almost have a rounded bumper type design. One thing I notice is how some people veneer the back side , and do fancy elaborately routed bindings around edges.

By the way I love that prairie state style. Very elegant.

_________________
"Preoccupation with an effect gives it power and enhances the error"
from "Your Owner's Manual" by Burt Hotchkiss.

uncle... Uncle... UNCLE...

_________________
**************
Tony Flippo

Peterm just posted a finished build.
I like his headstock.

Sorry, couldn't resist....

_________________
http://www.presnallguitars.com

At the risk of criticizing a design of someone who is seen as being just a bit lower (if any) than God, I think any headstock that has the strings higher up touching the posts or windings of the strings lower down (not sure they do in the photo above--the D may be hitting the A-- but I've seen some of his that do) is a bad design. I also hate to see the E strings pulled inward of the nut slots as they go to the posts.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

Here's mine. I'm quite happy with the shape and how well it works together with the inlay. But now I'm pondering on a more 3 dimensional/sculpted kind of shape, since it occurred to me that there's no reason for a hand builder to stick with the standard flat 2 dimensional style. Plus this one is a terrible pain to bind. Those curves on the top are tighter than they look, and even if I can get them to bend, I haven't found any way to clamp them in place except to just hold it until the glue dries

It's the ciiiiiiiiiiiircle of life~
Once that thing gets big enough I'll make another guitar out of it

That style reminds me of Petros guitars. Very nice inlaying by the way.

I finally decided and made the cuts last night. Here it is:

_________________
"Preoccupation with an effect gives it power and enhances the error"
from "Your Owner's Manual" by Burt Hotchkiss.

I've always thought of a headstock to be sort of like a logo of sorts. It's pretty hard to come up with a simple design that hasn't already been taken. I've had the same classical guitar template for about 20 years now. My steal string design changes a bit here and there. The last comment I got was that it looked like Gumby My electric designs always change as I try to get customer input on that and try to make it flow with what ever body shape they desire.

Check it out, 3D/sculpted style shape #1! I've had my retop test guitar's headstock sitting around un-shaped for a while, so I decided to experiment on it. This would be cooler looking with more contrasting woods and a veneer layer under the headplate, but I didn't feel like peeling off the one that was there already.

So, this is just my standard shape, but with a pointy strip of spruce glued on to give it some "up", and the corners carved out to give it some "down", and then some notches that go all the way through to improve "string separation"
Then I could add some inlays in the corners, maybe a squiggly line up the center, or "inlay" a truss rod cover (since the center strip makes it too thick to add a cover as another layer).

So, what do y'all think? I'm not sure I really like it... seemed like a better idea on paper. But it was fun and quick to make, and just an experimental guitar that will never be fully finished out, so no big deal. Maybe next time I'll try something with slothead style tuners...

Dennis K, I have to agree with you. Although an interesting study in woodcrafting, I think it's not that appealing. It reminds me of when I designed my first bridge. It looked like the progeny of an illicit affair between an Edsel Grille and a handlebar moustache. My original intention was to create something that would be too ornate for others to imitate. What I got was something no one would want to imitate. I scrapped that design after my second guitar.

_________________
michael propsom
www.propsomguitars.com

Dennis, personally I wouldn't want to buff out the finish on a design like that, but mainly I would worry about strength issues. Those lateral cuts weaken the peghead, not just separate the strings. I would be concerned with longevity....

Steve

_________________
From Nacogdoches...the oldest town in Texas.

http://www.stephenkinnaird.com

Wow Filippo,I got to about page 46 and my computer froze.
SKIN

_________________
James W Bolan
Nashville Tennessee