Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

This is an interesting topic and obviously people have different opinions. I originally thought that more mass = more sustain, but then either read or heard that the opposite is true (ala JB). I did find the following in a book on building guitars:

“The most untraditional headstock option is none at all. This is done by mounting tuners on the body or, more commonly, using a bridge with tuners built in. The main reason for this design is sonic: the headstock mass influences tone and sustain unevenly up and down the fingerboard. the reason for this are mostly because the headstock is an isolated center of mass at the end of the nick, causing the neck to vibrate inconsistently at different frequencies and as the stings are fretted to various lengths. By doing away with the headstock altogether this complex interaction is greatly simplified, leading to a more consistent tone and sustain. Some of the benefits of headless necks can be achieved by designing a conventional headstock as light as possible. Keep in mind that tonal consistency is only a good thing if you want it; some players prefer that each note have its own distinct character.” “make your own electric guitar and bass”; Waring & Reynold

Perhaps the issue is not only one of "more" sustain, but "consistent" sustain. It seems possible that these two things are not mutually exclusive. In other words, you could have more, inconsistent sustain, or less sustain that is consistent up and down the neck.

I'd love to hear what others think about this topic; I am always willing to learn and be corrected.

Nothing to correct, John. Plenty to learn. The above is, as most things I've read on this topic, partly science and partly conjecture. I think the stuff that's in the Pittman press release about "nodes" rings true, though.

But, again, we're talking about sustain, and brute overdesign will always give you enough. Ricks, however, are not known for brute overdesign. My guess here is that there's a 30-40% reduction in headstock mass (yes that much), and that should make a sonic difference. Will that mean more/less sustain?

The reason why Leo Fender changed the size and shape of the Precision Bass from the Telecaster head design to how it has been shaped since '57 was an attempt to add sustain and eliminate the deadspots on the neck particularly the D note on the first, seventh fret.

This had to be done partly from speculation and partly experimentation. I'm guessing that he heard something about more headstock mass possibly equating to more sustain, and then a lot of experimenting was done. Everything I've read about Leo Fender seems to indicate that his happiest role was as an experimenter. Can't you just see him there in his lab checking a bunch of necks with different headstocks for just the right, happy combination of factors and dimensions to give the sound he thought was right?

jingle_jangle wrote:...Can't you just see him there in his lab checking a bunch of necks with different headstocks for just the right, happy combination of factors and dimensions to give the sound he thought was right?

Paul,

I can picture that very easily....Just thinking about being able to do that kind of experimentation makes me smile!

I'll tell you one thing... The Steinbergers (spelling?) have got to be the ugliest bass I've ever seen. And I'm in an 80's Band!!! I seem to recall the press about how light and easy they were, but then you had to have some silly "... kick stand" to play them sitting down. How crazy is that?

Our bassist picked up a copy for awhile and I found it difficult to play because there was no mass, no where to rest your forearm, and it all felt too light.

Back to the headstock question... I think the thin lines are cosmetically cool, but I just doubt any kind of weight reduction can be heard in sustain, and I'm betting it couldn't be measured either. Call me sacharine, but I just cannot see it...

JKC

The new NS line is, in my opinion, breathtaking. I saw them at NAMM in '05 and '06, and was dumbstruck by their elegance and amazed by their sound. Because I don't play stand-up, however, I can't comment on playability, but they are selling...

They're shown on his new home page:

http://www.nedsteinberger.com

From all that I've heard and read about Leo Fender, it seems he did like to experiment and tinker with projects.
I can't recall what publication that I saw the picture of a bass neck bolted to a body blank that he specially rigged to be able to quickly change out different pickups and in different locations to hear what sounds best and where. I thought that was pretty cool. I had also heard that even the day he passed away, he working on a new bass guitar project. I can't recall if it was supposed to be another 5 string model or an 8 string model.

Those NS Steinberger uprights are very nice. I checked them out at NAMM last year also.

rickenbrother wrote:The reason why Leo Fender changed the size and shape of the Precision Bass from the Telecaster head design to how it has been shaped since '57 was an attempt to add sustain and eliminate the deadspots on the neck particularly the D note on the first, seventh fret.

don't forget about the fatheaded strats as well.

I can attest to the fact that the NS Designs EUB are quite nice.

More Mass, larger size headstock - whether equating to more sustain or not ...
I prefer the vintage Headstock size and shape - I hope it's here to stay.

jps - Nice NS Bass and the Rick Bass looks really sweet.

Personally I like the way the bigger headstock looks, but the smaller headstock means better balance for the instrument, so I won't complain.

Are there any photos online comparing the "new Smaller" headstock with the "old Bigger" headstock?

Mine are 360s. I've played both the large and the small and never noticed a balance problem... Except the 12 strings... 'Cause of all those tuners! I agree the smaller ones look pretty cool.

Hey Mitch here are a couple examples of the different size headstocks. I grew up with the smaller headstock and that's what I like but many like the larger.
It appears that in 2006 and probably into 2007 that many of the guitars came with the smaller vintage style I have pictured below (for the 6 string guitars).
The larger red headstock below has been most common since the early 80's.