String trees on Strats: good or bad?

[Café Dekcuf]

I notice several different Fender Strat headstocks. Some with two string trees, some with one and some with none (new EJ custom Strat for example). Obviously requirement for ST depends on the angle of the headstock and position of the tuning pegs.

 

Do string trees really interfere with keeping a guitar in tune? Such as claimed by Eric Johnson and marketing for his new custom strat. Do cheaper guitars such as the Fender Highway 1 model have two string trees because angled headstocks cost more to produce?

[angus_old]

Originally posted by Caf

[LaXu]

Yes they do, actually I'm thinking of changing the roller string tree on my Yamaha Pacifica because it doesn't seem to do it's job too well..whenever I pick up the guitar I hear a ping coming from it. I'm thinking of replacing it with a graphite string tree since those seem to work very well on my strat and don't hurt tuning stability at all.

 

With staggered tuners you only need a string tree for the high E and B strings and sometimes can do without any.

[GuitArtMan]

Well my experience with the staggered height tuners was with a Suhr classic. He uses the staggered tuner so in theory a string tree should not be needed. When I got the guitar I felt the tone on the high E and B strings was weak; kind of thin, slappy, plinky plink sounding. I put a graphite string tree on there and the high E and B string filled right out. Both Tom Anderson and Don Grosh use string trees though they also use staggered height tuners. I wonder why?

[StratTone]

It doesn't matter to me to an extent but I don't like the strats with 2 string trees.

[LaXu]

 

Originally posted by GuitArtMan Well my experience with the staggered height tuners was with a Suhr classic. He uses the staggered tuner so in theory a string tree should not be needed. When I got the guitar I felt the tone on the high E and B strings was weak; kind of thin, slappy, plinky plink sounding. I put a graphite string tree on there and the high E and B string filled right out. Both Tom Anderson and Don Grosh use string trees though they also use staggered height tuners. I wonder why?

 

 

I think it's for the reason you installed one - the strings are held down at the nut better.

[walt0915]

I consider lube under the string trees to be a standard part of changing strings - along with lube on the nut, saddles, and breakpoint in the trem block. Personally I used a little ren wax completely saturated with fine graphite, but there are many options documented here. With proper lube the string trees don't mess with ya. Nothing wrong with putting rollers in if you like, but tom my mind a Strat don't have an angled headstock.

[mattburnside]

My '99 American Strat has a roller string tree. Best of both worlds.

[ExtraGum]

Originally posted by Caf

[Nathan Kwok]

There are no Strats with angled headstocks (although they are available from Warmoth!) made by Fender. The difference is in the tuning pegs. In my opinion, Strats and Strat-style guitars with staggered tuning pegs are "marginal" when it comes to needing a string tree on the E and B strings. If you have non-staggered tuners then depending on how tall the posts are, you may or may not need a 2nd tree. For example, '60s and '50s style guitars don't have staggered pegs but only have one tree, because the pegs are shorter overall, while the older American Stds and the current Highway One series have two trees, along with '70s style guitars using "F" tuners. These have taller pegs. The modern American Series and Amerian Deluxe with Schaller tuners, whether they are locking or not, have staggered tuners. This makes them marginal for needing one tree, some have one and some have none. You'll noticed American Deluxe HSS guitars with an LSR roller nut have no tree, while American Deluxe SSS guitars with a bone nut have one tree, even though both guitars have the same tuners. In addition, the EJ strat has staggered vintage style tuners and no tree, while the Vintage Player Strat has the same tuners but one tree. The main difference is that the EJ strat has a slightly thinner headstock so that does increase the break angle a little bit. Is it enough? Maybe so maybe no.

[GuitArtMan]

 

Originally posted by LaXu I think it's for the reason you installed one - the strings are held down at the nut better.

 

The question was rhetorical. Sorry, that doesn't always come across on the interenet.

[seven7]

i dislike string trees. i prefer angled headstocks like on my carvin neck. if i *had* to have string trees i'd go with the graphtech ones, at least the strings would slide through them well. i noticed on my latest that the guitar stayed in tune better after i got a graphite nut back on it. (the first graphite one was messed up from the factory so i had another on temporarily).

[rickfr]

My 2 cents is they are great if...

a) you keep them lubed (3 in 1 oil or lip balm, etc)

b) you use the tremolo (mine is set mid-way)

c) you like the vintage vibe

 

I have locking, staggered tuners and don't necessarily 'need' them... but, i recently installed a tremsetter on my parts-o-caster and the trees really helped w/tone, look and tuning (assuming my noted aspects).

 

Best!!!

[mnhhngbfs]

if you have enough wind on the tuners you don't need em. it takes a long as time to string that high e though...

[steggy414]

Alright, a lot of this thread has to do with choosing a guitar based on the string trees, but for a guitar I already own, will choosing to use or not use the string tree(e and B), will there be some loss in performance of the guitar? essentially, is a guitar with a string tree designed to be played using it or will it work without it?

[Slide Guitar]

 

Alright, a lot of this thread has to do with choosing a guitar based on the string trees, but for a guitar I already own, will choosing to use or not use the string tree(e and B), will there be some loss in performance of the guitar? essentially, is a guitar with a string tree designed to be played using it or will it work without it?

 

 

It depends on the break angle and the string gauges. On Eric's guitar the tuning machines set back farther than regular strats creating greater break angle of the strings on the nut. If your guitar has similar offset like Eric's (some say "thinner headstock" here) then that is the first step. Eric also prefers thicker strings. This is something that will improve your sound, but you will have to get used to bending with heavier strings. Without all these things working together you may get the "plinky" effect or an E string that pops out of the nut slot. So yes a guitar designed with the string tree was designed to be played with it, unless you get the staggered tuners, use heavier gauge strings or overwind the strings on the posts.

[Zone47.1]

I bought an EJ Strat and kind of like it better without the tree. I also have a 57 reissue with the tree and have to keep a little graphite and vasoline on the contact point so it doesn't pull when I bend or use the trem.

[Nxt Lvl]

USA deluxe strats need a second string tree added in addition to the stock single tree. This is my only criticism of this guitar. See my thread below about why I think this is the best all around guitar ever. The USA g-string will resonate between the nut and tuning gear and come through sounding like feedback, because there is not enough angle.

[wagdog]

My srv has one tree, my '74 has two. I prefer less trees as there is less to get in the way when tuning. Yes, theoretically trees don't interfere with tuning, but the reality is they can bind (even when lubed properly) and you need to double check your guitar when tuning. I usually push down behind the nut on strings with trees a hair, adjust, do it again, behind the tree, repeat a few times until there is no change. At that point the guitar holds tune pretty well.

[cratz2]

Well, the Eric Johnson bit flies right out the window. He is recorded as saying that of his favorite two non-Vintage strats, one has trees and one does not. The prototype has trees because they hadn't worked out the headstock/tuner design. This is the black one you often see him playing. The other is a red one that is basically a production model with no trees.

 

I've never had an issue with them. Any difference in tuning must be minimal. It's certainly not like a dead stock strat with vintage trem will be 100% stable with Vai-like dive bombs as long as there are no string trees. Alternately, you might buy that EJ strat and have it perfectly set up by Gilmour's tech, but if you do some 1.5 and 2 whole step bends on the B and G strings, one might go a few cents flat after a half hour.

[stomias]

graphtech string trees

[stomias]

Not as ugly as the roller ones

[headless]

 

...The main difference is that the EJ strat has a slightly thinner headstock so that does increase the break angle a little bit. Is it enough? Maybe so maybe no.

 

 

I've wondered about the geometry of the "thinner headstock" on the EJ.

 

If the headstock is thinner on the "scooped" side (logo side), then the tuner post-holes would be in exactly the same location (and thus same string down-angle), as a conventional, or even thicker than conventional headstock. Because tuners would be mounted on the back of headstock, and it is in the exact same plane as the back of the heel of neck.

 

If the headstock was thinner on the back, then the turner post-holes would be moved "forward" and would produce a more shallow string down-angle. In this scenario the back to the headstock would no longer be in the same plane as the back of the neck heel.

 

I know all that probably didn't make sense, but perhaps someone can explain it to me.

 

Thanks in advance.