Should I replace my grover tuners with locking tuners?

WiresDreamDisasters

Something I've always wondered about, and tuning my guitar this weekend for tracking I noticed one of my tuners was a fair bit tighter than the others. Might be time for a replacement maybe, so got to thinking... maybe try some locking tuners.

I'm pretty squeamish about changing stuff on my guitar. I once changed my saddles to graphtec ones and I swear it changed my tone, but like an idiot I threw the old saddles away so can never go back to truly compare. Well.... could buy some saddles too and check it out I suppoose........

thomasw88

I don’t like locking tuners personally.  Had them on a few guitars and tbh if you stretch your strings in properly and string them up properly they don’t add anything imho.   I don’t use a term much tho. 

Personally I think a good set of non locking is the best way.

WiresDreamDisasters

Oh sorry, should say, my weapon o' choice is my Orville Les Paul. Don't have anything with a trem.

richman6100

My Feline Lion has Ratio non-locking tuners. Best tuners I have.

FelineGuitars

richman6100 said:

My Feline Lion has Ratio non-locking tuners. Best tuners I have.

I'd need to see if they do a left handed set though

stickyfiddle

You can usually adjust the stiffness of Groves by tightening the screw that holds the button on - just be very gentle when tightening it. 

I've had locking tuners on a couple of things. They're neat, but a solution looking for a problem most of the time.

grungebob

I like lockers for the quickness of string changes but I prefer the fender type, the vintage ones you poke the string down the shaft and then tune. 

sergio

If you are already going to replace your current tuners and are curious about locking, maybe you should do it: a new set is not significantly more expensive than non-locking and worst case scenario you can revert things to normal.

I have them in a few guitars and always make string changes more convenient. Not enough to change the tuners in my other guitars to locking if they are not faulty, but an always appreciated perk for the guitars that have them.

MikeB

sergio said:

If you are already going to replace your current tuners and are curious about locking, maybe you should do it: a new set is not significantly more expensive than non-locking and worst case scenario you can revert things to normal.

I have them in a few guitars and always make string changes more convenient. Not enough to change the tuners in my other guitars to locking if they are not faulty, but an always appreciated perk for the guitars that have them.

Likewise - convenient and makes changes very swift but not really a game changer. Try adjusting your current set as per the other posts first.

Moloch

I would definitely switch to locking tuners, and have done so myself frequently. I have five guitars with them on and a set waiting to be installed on another. I use Hipshot ones, as they come with a mounting bracket for screwless installation.

Musicwolf

I'm another one who favours locking tuners for ease of string changing.  I've got three guitars that came with locking tuners and two where I've fitted replacements.  I don't think that they improve tuning stability in any way compared to a conventional tuner where the string has been wound properly - I just think that they are more convenient,

I know that some people think that they are just something else to go wrong, but I've never had a problem with any of them in the last 25 years.

Blueingreen

I absolutely prefer locking tuners.   I have them on some guitars and intend to put them on the others soon.

The only real advantage is more convenient restringing, but I find restringing a bore and am grateful for anything that makes it faster and easier. 

Philly_Q

grungebob said:

I like lockers for the quickness of string changes but I prefer the fender type, the vintage ones you poke the string down the shaft and then tune. 

Me too.  I went through a period of being obsessed with locking tuners and put them on everything, but I'm not so bothered now.  The vintage Fender/Kluson types with slot-headed posts make string changing even easier than lockers do.

One thing I'll mention because nobody else has:  locking tuners, the thumbwheel-on-the-back type, can add a fair bit of weight to the headstock.  Sperzels are pretty lightweight anyway, but the locking Schallers are pretty hefty things. 

I'm not sure about Grovers, the only type I've tried didn't have thumbwheels, they had very tall posts with a screw at the end, a bit like PRS.  They looked a bit silly so I replaced them with Gotohs.  On the thumbwheel ones the wheel is quite slim so it may not add much weight.

crunchman

I much prefer locking tuners for the ease of string changing.

I do prefer the PRS style ones with the slot on the top that you tighten with a coin to the thumb wheel type though.

thegummy

I would hate to go back to non-locking tuners, they just make so much sense that the string is held in place by a clamping screw rather than by wrapping it round a post.

I don't particularly buy in to the idea that they'll keep tuning better than a well-stringed normal tuner but it does mean that even a total beginner stringing a guitar for the first time will be just as good as the best accomplished tech could do with normal tuners.

The simple feature of just pulling the new string through and screwing it instead of putting the string through then wrapping it round is worth the whole price of the tuners alone IMO.

ICBM

I find the ones which need a screw tightening with a tool - even the self-locking ones that just need it to release the string - more of a faff than non-locking tuners, although the ones with a thumbwheel on the back are marginally easier.

I did like the PRS 'wing' tuners too, although they also need a learned technique to make them lock perfectly tightly and reliably every time.

merciful-evans

I have PRS locking tuners. They are ok. 

I bought two sets of tuners (Schallers and Grovers) not too long ago. I thought about getting locking ones, but didn't bother in the end. 

WiresDreamDisasters

I think I'll probably leave it for now. Too much change going on anyway!

But I like the idea of them.

crunchman

ICBM said:

I find the ones which need a screw tightening with a tool - even the self-locking ones that just need it to release the string - more of a faff than non-locking tuners, although the ones with a thumbwheel on the back are marginally easier.

I did like the PRS 'wing' tuners too, although they also need a learned technique to make them lock perfectly tightly and reliably every time.

Those PRS tuners were good when you got the hang of them.  I do prefer their newer tuners though.  I've always got a coin handy to do them up.  Only problem is that I don't have any PRS guitars left, and nobody else seems to make tuners in that style.

TeleMaster

Yes. Without a doubt do it. I've put them on every one of my guitars that I could and haven't looked back. Changing strings is super quick and tuning stability is much, much better. 

octatonic

I don't bother with locking tuners on non-trem guitars personally.