Members gitmo Posted February 4, 2010 Members Share Posted February 4, 2010 I still like the idea and applaude ANY attempt to advance the craft!!! And so here is the question, exactly what does it do? If you run 6 strings along the top of a 2 X 4 are you "advancing the craft"? Again, I'm not being negative but no benefit has been declared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitnoob Posted February 4, 2010 Members Share Posted February 4, 2010 Lots of innovations here: A neck-through design that eliminates the need for neck resets. A side-cut soundport that provides more vibrating surface area for the top. And women will love the vibrating head. Of course, if it sounds like crap, the market is somewhat limited.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members musicdog400 Posted February 5, 2010 Author Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 You guys are right about the bridge location. That was kind of a mistake. My previous measurement put the bridge a bit higher, but when strung up I had to move it down to get the intonation spot on. If I made the instrument much longer, the headstock (buttstock?) design would have to change so the tuner to nut length was not too long. It is a bolt on neck design BTW, bamboo neck with carbon fiber support. And carved sides. My friend asked for an unusual guitar (it was a gift), I think I met the goal. And I forgot the best thing about headless guitars: the way they annoy people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members riffmeister Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 That guitar has its head up its ass. Yes......a severe case of rectal-cranial inversion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitnoob Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 And I forgot the best thing about headless guitars: the way they annoy people. If you really want to annoy people.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Grant Harding Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 I have no issues with inverted P-bass, but to go to all that trouble and then only put 2 strings on it? WTF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 I have lurked around here long enough to know I am kinda pushing it here, discussing unorthodox ideas. There are some really good reasons for some traditions. Then others are just plain dogma. Sacred cows make great hamburger. If you lurked here long enough you should know this forum is one of the most open-minded acoustic forums around. Yes, some folks are traditionalists, but we are far removed from the elitist traditionalists that frequent many of the other acoustic forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 And I forgot the best thing about headless guitars: the way they annoy people. Believe me when I tell you your guitar does not annoy me. What I find curious is why you refer to it as headless when it clearly has a head, jokes about it's location aside. Is this Stevie Wonder? Perhaps the problem is that you've not seen a headless guitar? http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/Hohner-G3T-Headless-Guitar?sku=512513 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Grant Harding Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 The guy just tried something different for a laugh and as a present for someone. It's normal and correct to refer to a guitar that doesn't have a headstock at the end of the neck as headless, regardless of how you tune them up back at the bridge. Take an Ovation and stick some bridge pins on the headstock - I'm still gonna call that a guitar without bridge pins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 The guy just tried something different for a laugh and as a present for someone. It's normal and correct to refer to a guitar that doesn't have a headstock at the end of the neck as headless, regardless of how you tune them up back at the bridge.Take an Ovation and stick some bridge pins on the headstock - I'm still gonna call that a guitar without bridge pins. I don't disagree with your statement. What I can't reconcile is cutting off what is clearly a head, mounting it on the back and calling it headless. I offer an example off the Hohner as what I would consider headless. Other examples would be welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitnoob Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 I don't disagree with your statement. What I can't reconcile is cutting off what is clearly a head, mounting it on the back and calling it headless. I offer an example off the Hohner as what I would consider headless. Other examples would be welcome. If you watched his vid, he didn't simply transplant the head to the tail. If you don't like the tuners on the tail, then you might like this one better:http://buildingtheergonomicguitar.com/2007/11/mash-acoustic-guitar.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 If you watched his vid, he didn't simply transplant the head to the tail. If you don't like the tuners on the tail, then you might like this one better: http://buildingtheergonomicguitar.com/2007/11/mash-acoustic-guitar.html Yes, I watched the video. Now that MaSh guitar is innovative! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fendouglas Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'm just going to wait until Denny gives it a 'scientific' makeover:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members musicdog400 Posted February 5, 2010 Author Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 but we are far removed from the elitist traditionalists Agreed. I was hoping just to share an interesting picture here. Not start any tension. why you refer to it as headless I can see your point. Maybe I should call it 'guitar with butt tuners'. For those of you who buy headless parts you may have noticed the bridge prices have gone from $250 to $450, so while there are definitely more attractive solutions than mine, there is a lot of incentive for hacks like myself to improvise some more affordable solutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dave W. Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 Must be some bad acid going around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted February 5, 2010 Members Share Posted February 5, 2010 Agreed. I was hoping just to share an interesting picture here. Not start any tension. I can see your point. Maybe I should call it 'guitar with butt tuners'. I haven't detected any tension. I think a headless guitar is an interesting concept. If I were to go about it the Hohner I linked to would be my solution. I think it is elegant and functional truly eliminating the head while providing the features required for proper function. Genuine innovation IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.