GFS "Floyd Rose"

[vonFrenchie]

I have a friend who offered me a cheap strat as long as I suped it up. What do you think about these store.guitarfetish.com/blflroflotrs.html

[ranchtooth]

Everything I've ever gotten from GFS has been really top notch, especially for the price. These Floyd's aren't double locking though, so I'm not sure if they would stay in tune as good as the original. Still, can't beat the price, its worth a shot!

[dunkelfalke]

of course they are double locking. they are locked at the bridge and at the nut. the locking nut is also included.

[ranchtooth]

From the GFS site: Forget about the fussy snip-the-end-off-the-string deal- just pop your strings through the tubes and you're all set- NO locks on the saddles.

Straight from the horses mouth, I tells ya!

[sumgai]

Uh oh, it looks like things are gonna get ugly around here!

[jeepers59]

Would you have to have the locking nut or would locking Sperzels suffice?

[UnklMickey]

when using any trem (as long as you have fine tuners), a locking nut is always better than locking tuners.

see if you can reason out why.


unk

[jeepers59]

hmmmmm...there would be no binding of the string at the nut?

[UnklMickey]

that's the most important reason.

if the strings sometimes bind at the nut, it will "return" a little out of tune.



even if your nut was perfectly slippery, there are also 2 other reasons.

(they are related to each other.)



unk

[tacobobbo]

Well, c'mon unk......inquiring minds wanna know. OK.....I'll bite......how DO ya keep a moron in suspense?
Bob

[UnklMickey]

tacobobbo said:

.....how DO ya keep a moron in suspense?...

i'll tell you later.

[dunkelfalke]

unklmickey said:

when using any trem (as long as you have fine tuners), a locking nut is always better than locking tuners.
unk

i rather think locking tuners are always better because of

1) the tuning is not as pain in the arse
2) restringing is much easier
3) if you don't like the sound of a metal roller nut you can as well use a graphtech one
4) no screws in the nut - less parts can break (i have already killed floyd rose nut windings after a couple of restringings)

and of course 5) the whole system (vibrato with fine tuners, locking nut and normal tuners vs plain vibrato with locking tuners and roller or graphtech nut) weighs less.

[dunkelfalke]

tacobobbo said:

how DO ya keep a moron in suspense?

hmm, the german answer to this question is to write "please turn around" on both sides of a sheet of paper

[UnklMickey]

hey Falke,

Bob is a pretty good sport, eh?

the advantages you state, are true in terms of ease of operation.

but from a performance standpoint, a locking nut has 2 additional advantages we haven't mentioned .......................... yet.

unk

[tacobobbo]

unklmickey said:

hey Falke,

Bob is a pretty good sport, eh?

the advantages you state, are true in terms of ease of operation.

but from a performance standpoint, a locking nut has 2 additional advantages we haven't mentioned .......................... yet.

unk

Me? Good sport? Shirley, er surely you jest. ;D

[UnklMickey]

well Bob, that's another story all together.............................




back on topic (what was the topic?) oh, yeah.


a locking nut, eliminates the "excess" length from the tuners to the nut.

that means for a given deflection of the arm, the string tension changes more with a locking nut, than without.

so,

1 -- you get more range.

and

2 -- since the amount of "excess" is different, between the strings, a locking nut allows the change in pitch to be more uniform between the strings.


at least that's the way it would seem to me.



unk

[dunkelfalke]

unklmickey said:

the advantages you state, are true in terms of ease of operation.

well, to be honest, as i am not (yet, and won't be anytime soon) a live player and as far from a shredder as one could be (although i like many things on shredder guitars) terms of ease and comfortable playing are much more important for me

[UnklMickey]

i'm not a shredder either.

IMHO, it is important for things to perform at the highest possible level.

but you brought up important issues about convenience.


with that in mind, i think i'll temper my previous statement:

unklmickey said:

when using any trem (as long as you have fine tuners), a locking nut is always better than locking tuners...

and say: a locking nut will perform better.

ocking tuners, with a slippery nut will be easier to work with.

of course, an attempt was given, to getting high performance, and being easier to work with:



even if you can get past the phantom headstock, the strings are another sore spot.

they pop in quickly and easily.

but, you pay premium prices for them.

unk

[dunkelfalke]

ugh, strat net pocket.

not comfortable at all. and floyd rose neither.

if you really insist on a locking nut why not directly go for a real headless?

[UnklMickey]

dunkelfalke said:

...strat net pocket....

you kinda lost me there. what does that mean?


i had actually considered buying one of these about a year ago.

but, i KNEW i wouldn't be able to resist sawing off the headstock!


unk

[dunkelfalke]

compare these neck joints:

strat


full access


hohner revelation


which one is most comfortable?

[jester700]

Depends on how much time you spend playing in that region. I actually had the 4 bolt neck joint on my Ibanez Radius (though 4 bolt and square, it was angled in such a way as to already be more comfy than a strat's) mutated into an AANJ and refinned. It's nice, but after having it I wouldn't do it again. At least on that guitar, the difference isn't that big.

[dunkelfalke]

i have a strat, a hohner revelation and a headless with an ibanez style all access neck joint.

revelation neck joint is the most comfortable (for me at least) and ibanez style is also ok.

but i start hating that strat neck joint every time i play that high.

[UnklMickey]

i spend most of my time between the 5th and 12th frets.

and a reasonable amount from open to 5th.

on rare occasions i get up to 14 or 15.

for me, the neck joint isn't a big deal.

i can certainly see where it would be, for anyone who plays up there.



unk

[tacobobbo]

unklmickey said:

i spend most of my time between the 5th and 12th frets.

and a reasonable amount from open to 5th.

on rare occasions i get up to 14 or 15.

for me, the neck joint isn't a big deal.

i can certainly see where it would be, for anyone who plays up there.



unk

Thats about the same fret range I spend most of my time in too....unless I'm just messing around on my uhkoostick. Then its the open chords and a few bar chords (generally the relative minors or some chord progressions). If I ever DO get around to another project tho, I might get a body (strat) with the angled dangle neckjoint thingie.
Bob

[dunkelfalke]

unklmickey said:

for me, the neck joint isn't a big deal.

well, you stated yourself, that a guitar has to give its maximal performance

[sumgai]

dunkelfalke said:

unklmickey said:

for me, the neck joint isn't a big deal.

well, you stated yourself, that a guitar has to give its maximal performance

I wonder how Eric and the gang all got along, playing between the 15th and 21st frets a good part of the time, back in the 60's and 70's. My theory? They didn't let the guitar get the better of them, they got the better of the guitar! It's all in the head, dunk. If you use an alleged limitation that doesn't bother anyone else, then you're just making an excuse for not yet mastering your instrument.

Unless you have a true handicap, one that would get you a "Handicapped Parking" sticker or license plate, then you have no reason not to just do it.

Need further proof that the axe is not what's holding you back? Every play a Harmony, circa 1954? Pretty crummy guitar, by today's standards. But Django did it. And you know what kind of handicap he was operating under. No one ever heard him make an excuse, at least not that I know of.

And FWIW, I've got a Strat with a rounded-off neck pocket corner like yours. I don't notice the difference - I never played with my hand there anyway. With my left thumb in the classically proper position (at the back of the neck), the guitar's body literally can't contact any part of my hand.

Besides, assuming that you quoted unk correctly, then he was a bit wrong...... guitars don't give performance, players do.


Just some things to think about, that's all.


sumgai

[dunkelfalke]

well, by that logic you don't need floyd rose either - people managed to play electric guitar before that and it worked.

hmm, maybe you don't need an electric guitar at all and 5 strings are sufficient - people played baroque guitars and they were sufficient.

right?

wrong.
even david gilmour - a die hard stratocaster player - switched to a 24 fret guitar for recording some songs back in the seventies. if you try to play that high on a guitar with a strat neck joint you could manage it, but not very comfortably (unless you have fingers twice as long as mine).

while i haven't mastered my instrument yet (no problem with admitting it) i see a guitar as a tool. just as i see an IDE as a tool when i am programming at work. sure, you don't need a very comfortable tool to get your job done. if you are good, you actually don't need any comfort at all. still, any comfort you can get can spare you much time and hassle. and it is much easier to enjoy it when you never curse about the limitations of your tools.

[sumgai]

dunk,

I think you missed my point. Your comments about tools were spot on, as far as they went. But that came after you mentioned using different tools, because they were once sufficient. They still are sufficient, if that's the job you want to do!

The point is, and I repeat, if one handles the tool correctly (thumb on the back of the neck), one cannot help but be able to reach all available frets without hinderance from any part of the body. It is only when one attempts to "play like a blues player" (whatever that means) that one finds his thumb most of the way over the top edge of the neck, and trying to fret the low-E string, that's when one's hand will come in contact with the body (when up high on the neck). It's a natural consequence, and if one likes the feel of doing it "classically wrong", then one can certainly do so, I won't stop him.

But don't expect me to commisserate when you gripe about handicapping yourself. Do it right, and I'll smile in appreciation. Do it wrong, and I'll smile in pity. Your choice.

Oh, and that thing about 24 frets....... I just change to a patch on my VG-88 that's setup to transpose up an octave, but with the current V-Guitar. Presto, I'm back to playing in "5 to 12 territory", but I sound like I'm tearing Frankie Valli's tonsils out! No need for Rachmaninoff's fingers on my hand. ;D ;D ;D


sumgai

[sumgai]

dunk,

Come to think of it, I don't use, or need, a Floyd Rose. As far as I can tell, it's a device designed to suck money out of the pockets of innocent but unknowledgable players. IOW, it's a solution looking for a problem to solve.

I don't care what anyone says, my Strat can dive bomb down to slack, or I can press on the bridge and go up a 3rd, and yet I stay in tune all night, or even all month, if I'm too lazy to change the strings (they don't break, period). I've been able to do this with 10's and even 11's, and for years, over a couple of Strats. I daresay, I could set up nearly any Strat to do this, no special equipment needed.

Bottom line: It ain't the rig, it's what you do with the rig you've got, that's where the rubber hits the road, my friend. All the toys in the world will only get you so far, the rest is up to you. Or as Bugs Henderson once said:

Don't you get it kid? I'm the tone!

sumgai