i dont understand the notion that locking tuners

[DarkHorseJ27]

how far down are you tuning from standard? down to open D shouldn't be a problem at all.

 

 

Tuning down the low E string isn't so much a problem, but it gets more problematic with other strings. But most of those other tunings are more common on acoustic anyways.

[jrockbridge]

Damn! These are teh most intelligent responses I've seen here in a LONG time!

 

 

+1

 

Locking tuners improve sustain because of the extra weight on the headstock. And, the action of locking and unlocking them helps to strengthen your fingers making you a better player. Also, they look cool which can help you get laid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:poke:

[golias]

Tuning down the low E string isn't so much a problem, but it gets more problematic with other strings. But most of those other tunings are more common on acoustic anyways.

 

 

Never been a problem for me.

 

An 1/8 turn of the post is a HUGE difference in pitch on the string. I can re-tune my locked-tuner guitars to any common alternate tuning with no trouble at all.

 

And what's all this about people thinking that fear of the posts slipping is the reason for locking tuners?

 

One other poster had it right. The point of locking tuners is NO WINDINGS. Most of the time that doesn't matter, but depending on what gauge of strings you use and how much you use (or abuse) the whammy bar, it can be helpful.

[Kuroyume]

I don't get it. My strategy with double locking systems is to put the ball-end at the tuner and feed out string if the string breaks near the bridge. These days I haven't noticed as much of a need for that but back in da day (when my income was much lower and my guitars much cheaper) it proved indispensable when the, say, high-E continually broke at the bridge (most likely because of bending the string into the sharp machining of low-end bridge saddles). I could literally use the same string for several breaks.

 

Otherwise, the wrapping of the string about the tuning peg will 'settle' after a bit if you prepare it properly. The first thing that I do with nylon strings on a classical guitar to 'bind' the knots on the bridge and tuning peg is to tune the guitar a half step above standard, let it settle for a bit, and then tune it properly (either way as some strings will adjust lower whereas others may remain tuned above). For steel strings, I either do a bit of up-tuning or tug up on the string to stretch it which, coincidentally, settles the strings on the tuning peg.

 

Otherwise, I don't understand tuner locks. Double locking systems clamp the strings so that any settling or discrepancy on the tuner side is irrelevant. But locking at tuner cannot possibly accomplish this same feat. So, it must be 'no windings' only (?).

[golias]

I don't get it. Otherwise, I don't understand tuner locks. Double locking systems clamp the strings so that any settling or discrepancy on the tuner side is irrelevant. But locking at tuner cannot possibly accomplish this same feat. So, it must be 'no windings' only (?).

 

 

You are exactly right.... when you say you don't get it.

 

The "settling" of strings (once they are stretched properly) is almost entirely because of the windings around the tuning peg, so a locking tuner can, in fact, accomplish the same feat as a double-locking system.

 

Granted, making sure your nut & bridge don't bind is about a thousand times more important than worrying about the string windings settle, but it is a nice feature to have one less potential issue to deal with.

[Funderbunk]

Well, if you have it in standard tuning and don't have any winds around the post (the way I see most people do it with locking tuners) it is hard to tune down.

 

 

I seldom have a full wrap on my locking tuners - however, if I tune down to where there is no wrap at all (the string is going straight from the tuner post to the nut), the string is slack - I'm not pulling these strings up to any pitch before I lock them.

[PlectrumPete]

Tuning down the low E string isn't so much a problem, but it gets more problematic with other strings. But most of those other tunings are more common on acoustic anyways.

 

 

Your problem is entirely imaginary. Either that or you are incredibly strong and, before locking thee strings, you are pulling them up to a pitch higher than you want to tune to.

[Kuroyume]

You are exactly right.... when you say you don't get it. The "settling" of strings (once they are stretched properly) is almost entirely because of the windings around the tuning peg, so a locking tuner can, in fact, accomplish the same feat as a double-locking system.

 

 

I understand that it 'locks' the string end but then I've seen some people noticing that their strings don't slip on the peg even without locking tuners (but still need settling sometimes). The locking part isn't going to stop the strings (wrapped) from settling on the peg over time if not wound properly (it's plain simple physics). It'll just keep it from slipping with added tension (bends or vibrato). So, in that I agree that it acts like a double-locking system If you do the winding correctly (no overlaps - except see below), then the setting should be near instant with applied tension (tuning). After that, it is the strings stretching under tensile.

 

But if you wind properly, you don't need locking tuners (see http://www.stringthis.com/howtostringu.html). This is standard practice for stringing classical guitars: the end of the string is captured under the winding to lock the string on the peg. And at the bridge, the end of the braided loop is pinched against the back of the bridge and settles when the knot's tightness and string tension have been equalized. Which is why I tune up a half step a time or two after restringing a classical guitar.

[GCDEF]

 

Locking tuners can reduce or even eliminate the number of wraps around the tuner post. The thought is that when you use a trem to dive, the lower tension can allow the string to "unwrap" some from the post and it may not lay back down in the same spot when you un-dive, and thus be slightly out of tune. Is it true? Maybe. But I like locking tuners specifically for the faster string changes, which is also why I like the Planet Waves auto-trim tuners.

 

 

That makes the most sense. The tension on the strings is what keeps them in place. When you take that tension off, in theory they may not come back in tune. It's the same principle that applies when you put new strings on and have to stretch them to get them seated properly.

 

In practice, I haven't seen a difference. Tuning stability with a non-locking trem comes from having the nut properly set up, and the bridge angle set correctly.

[Belva]

But the Planet Waves Autotrims are just plain cool!

[Help!I'maRock!]

 

Tuning down the low E string isn't so much a problem, but it gets more problematic with other strings. But most of those other tunings are more common on acoustic anyways.

 

 

i tune my telecaster (which has gotoh locking tuners) to all kinds of open tunings. its definitely not an acoustic guitar. so you're wrong on all counts, as golias and other posters have clearly shown.

[Funderbunk]

But the Planet Waves Autotrims are just plain cool!

 

 

Agreed - they tend to end up on just about all my guitars sooner or later, just because they make string changes a completely tool-free affair - guitar, strings, hands are all you need - no wire snippers, string winders, etc.

[Kuroyume]

Hmmmm. Reviews on the Planet Waves Auto Trim Locking Tuners are mixed (right here at HC). If the string pops out, you have to replace the string. Cheap construction is noted.

 

I'm not an expert on these types of things - I just play the guitar.

[hecticone]

Well, if you have it in standard tuning and don't have any winds around the post (the way I see most people do it with locking tuners) it is hard to tune down.

Never used locking tuners I see.

[Artslinger]

For a Fender I like the Fender Schaller Locking Tuners.

[ashasha]

I've been thinking about getting some just to have a project for my strat, but in my experience they really just aren't any better than having the damn wraps around the post done correctly. Logic tells me that having less than 1 wrap around the post and locked would make it more stable, but with a lot of diving it will still drift. I think that between the tremolo posts having some play, the frickin bridge saddles having a tiny bit of play and whatever makes a nut be a pain in the ass contributes to the problem more than the tuners.

Unless it's double locking I just don't see where it's going to be perfectly stable for going nuts unless you just really hit that magical spot by getting lucky while tweaking it in.

[caveman]

But the Planet Waves Autotrims are just plain cool!

Yep, awesome coolness. :cool:

[timmyfirst]

I use sperzels on all my guitars, the tuning stability is about x10 better than when i was using standard grovers. Its much easier to re-string too.

[ashasha]

How about string trees? I went ahead and bought a set of locking graduated height tuners for my strat to try and eliminate the string trees and try to get a better handle on that damn G string.

[Bro Blue]

I have had no need for the string tree for the G string using Sperzel locking tuners.