Which, in your opinion, is the worst looking headstock?

Bucket

Firebird, looks great but functionally it's awful. Same goes for Parker's old design (I believe they've changed it on most models now).

I like Dean and BCR's headstocks, they suit the guitars they're on. I love the CBS and even like the Starcaster, especially Bilt's variation of it:

http://www.biltguitars.com/assets/images/relevator_ls/relevator_ls_small.png

It kind of looks like the headstock has a quiff, it's super cool

Ones I don't like:

Tyler - hideous

G&L - kind of ugly, still want an ASAT though

Anderson/Suhr/Vigier/Schecter - not offensive, just boring... doesn't stop me wanting an Anderson Drop Top or Angel

ESP Eclipse - a wonky, bastardised monstrosity:

http://www.elderly.com/new_instruments/items/images/30N/ECII-STBC_headstock-front.jpg

WezV

Missing the point I am making, string tension is applied at the top of the post. The connection between the two gears is at the bottom of the post. Somewhere in the middle is a pivot point.

If there is a wiggle without string tension it will be gone once strung up. But the tension will either be pulling gears together or gears apart. Pulling them slightly apart encourages gear wear.

zenzeypher

THAT^

looks like a sock. Someone get it some Viagra.

ICBM

WezV said:

Missing the point I am making, string tension is applied at the top of the post. The connection between the two gears is at the bottom of the post. Somewhere in the middle is a pivot point.

If there is a wiggle without string tension it will be gone once strung up. But the tension will either be pulling gears together or gears apart. Pulling them slightly apart encourages gear wear.

No, the force is pushing the pinion sideways against the worm, not together or apart. There is no mechanical difference which way the gear is loaded.

But if you look at that headstock, what you're saying isn't true anyway! By reversing the two machineheads that are strung backwards, the direction of the forces is exactly the same as it would be if it was strung 'correctly' on the other side of the headstock . I wasn't awake enough last night .

Bucket

zenzeypher said:

[photo of Electric XII]

looks like a sock. Someone get it some Viagra.

Mayones heard you and paid attention:

http://stephanschultz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Mayones-Regius-Pro-Custom-Headstock.jpg

Bucket

Although I should state that I like that Mayones headstock and the similar ESP "cockstock" design. I don't know if that says anything about my sexuality, but I just think they're nice, well-resolved designs.

cruxiform

Steinberger

Neil

The Fender "Custom".

A vile concoction of cut up leftover parts that Fender produced with a 12 string headstock for a six stringer!!

Completely hideous.

stickyfiddle

guitarfishbay;656096" said:

[quote="octatonic;656061"]No contest:

Zachary Guitars:

That wins.

PRS is one of my favourites. It does look a bit like a chip fork but it suits the guitars IMO.[/quote]

Chip fork... Can't be unseen..!!

The only head stocks I don't like are the Epiphone "shoulderless" LP and SG ones. The semis all have headstocks that look intentionally designed, rather than specifically chosen purely so they can't be turned into fake Gibsons.

ICBM

I'm going to be controversial and also add the 'classic' Charvel/Jackson/everyone else who immediately copied it angled pointy head from the 80s. It's not only extremely ugly, it's a really poor design from a practical viewpoint. It requires a scarf joint - hence defeating Leo Fender's strong one-piece neck design - and without a locking nut, guarantees tuning problems and/or a broken nut. The only thing worse is the same but upside down…

The original Gibson Explorer is hideous too, it's only just tolerable because it's become so associated with the body shape. Gibson didn't even scarf-joint them either, with predictable results.

Fiftyshadesofjay

The Epiphone Elite/Elitist headstock, lovingly christened "the nipple".

StefB

DBZ 3 a side - absolutely hideous.

Lodestone - pointless.

George Lynch ESPs with the Explorer headstock.

I don't mind PRS, or the headstocks G&L and Fret King use on their Tele variants, but I hate the batwing FK use on their other designs.

Agreed re Suhr & Anderson looking bland, but that design looks far better when used in reverse, and I love standard sized Strat headstocks used in reverse with a Floyd.

scrumhalf

I've long been tempted to by a Vintage LP or SG, but the headstocks look gigantic.

57Deluxe

this looks pretty shit...

http://www.violinguitarmaker.com/images/Guitolini1W600.jpg

CHRISB50

^^

Jesus, I think the headstock would be the last of your worries. Wtf is that?!

Cirrus

Someone's already mentioned Dean I'm sure. Fucking hate them. They're like spread arse cheeks at the end of your guitar.

english_bob

Cirrus said:

Someone's already mentioned Dean I'm sure. Fucking hate them. They're like spread arse cheeks at the end of your guitar.

You must have an unusually pointy arse.

 

StefB

Steinberger.

ChuckManual

1) Dean

2) Dean
3) Dean

WezV

ICBM said:

WezV said:

Missing the point I am making, string tension is applied at the top of the post. The connection between the two gears is at the bottom of the post. Somewhere in the middle is a pivot point.

If there is a wiggle without string tension it will be gone once strung up. But the tension will either be pulling gears together or gears apart. Pulling them slightly apart encourages gear wear.

No, the force is pushing the pinion sideways against the worm, not together or apart. There is no mechanical difference which way the gear is loaded.

But if you look at that headstock, what you're saying isn't true anyway! By reversing the two machineheads that are strung backwards, the direction of the forces is exactly the same as it would be if it was strung 'correctly' on the other side of the headstock . I wasn't awake enough last night .

dude, you made me do pics and a video!!    

string tension will pull the two gears apart slightly if mounted the wrong way round

here are a couple of pics of me adding tension to a tuner post in two different directions

this is the same as normal mounting, the tip of the post is being pulled towards the body of the guitar by string tension, the gears are pulled together and will function absolutely fine.  

http://i62.tinypic.com/255j86q.jpg

This is the equivalent or reverse mounting, i am applying pressure to the opposite side of the post.  there is now a gap between the two gears.  not an issue in the short term, but its less than ideal and can lead to irregular wear and tuner slippage down the line

http://i57.tinypic.com/2vammiu.jpg

but that is not real is it.  Its a cheap ass tuner, its not been mounted so the bushing isn't there to provide any support and my finger pressure  is not comparable to string pressure

so, here is a vid of me applying pressure to the top of a brand new high quality hipshot tuner which is mounted properly to a new guitar.  I am using a string to apply pressure towards the tip of the headstock, as if the tuner was mounted backwards.  i even wrapped the string around the post to make sure the tension was applied at the correct point

that wobble won't be an issue at all when this guitar gets strung up.  its quite normal, the gears will be pulled together for a nice positive contact... as long as the tuners are mounted the correct way

the amount of tuner wobble varies massively with different brands.   Planet waves autor trim and sperzels usually seem particularly solid and i would have no issue mounting them backwards.  but anything with a bit of wiggle, always mount the correct way!!