Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
Posts: 42
Joined: Mar. 23 2010
From: Dunstable, England
Positioning of pegs in the headstock
In the world of electric and steel string acoustic guitars, several manufacturers offset the tuners in order to ensure that the strings pass in a straight line through the nut slots and on to the tuner posts. On classical guitars with machineheads, we ensure that the strings wind either to the left or the right of the hole in the posts in order to keep the strings as straight as possible. And, even on pegheads, we wind the strings in such a way as to keep them as straight as possible...
My question is: why don't luthiers build peghead guitars with the pegs offset inwards, to allow the inner strings to pass in a straight line through the nut?
In fact, the pegs could be offset in such as a way as to allow the strings to not only be kept straight, but that all the strings could be wound on to the pegs in the same direction, thus making tuning much simpler - no more need to remember which pegs need to be turned which way to tighten and loosen the strings...
It would also mean that luthiers could move away from the traditional shaped headstocks and come up with some new designs???
Here is an of example of a headstocks from an acoustic guitar that illustrate what I mean:
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
The reason it's not done is that aside from you, 98.9999999999 percent of classical guitar buyers would have a hypertensive cow and complain bitterly about the design.
The other reason is that three on a plate barrel tuners can really only be utilized in the conventional manner. The steel string post style tuners you show can be located in more positions on the headstock.
With the advent of Pegheads mechanical pegs one could position them in new ways, but sometimes doing something for novelties sake ends up looking odd. If one were to build a guitar which required more than six strings then there would reason to reconfigure the peg position in the headstock according to a function it has to fulfill. The mid range string pegs moved to a more center location on the headstock could help keep the middle strings from jumping the nut slots due to diagonal pull from the edge of the headstock in a conventional placement.
Posts: 42
Joined: Mar. 23 2010
From: Dunstable, England
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to estebanana)
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for your reply. I agree with you that you wouldn't be able to apply this to 3-on-a-plate tuners - I have some other thoughts on how it might be possible to straighten the string direction for these type of tuners.
But for wooden and mechanical pegs, there is nothing stopping us but the thought of "breaking with tradition" - I had to chuckle at your "hypertensive cow" comment
However, if there were enough advantages to offsetting the pegs, then eventually people may become more open to the idea - cf. sound ports - they are now becoming more and more acceptable and accepted...
Advantages to offsetting pegs could/would be:
- as you mentioned, less chance of inner strings jumping out of the nut groove, especially under heavy rasgueados with open D &/or G strings - easier tuning because the strings are less likely to catch in the nut groove - strings returning to their "home" position after string bends (not used often in flamenco, I know, but it does happen) - all strings wound in the same direction on the pegs, so less chance of turning the pegs the wrong way when tuning - this always happens to me - it might be possible to make the head smaller and so even lighter
And lastly, and this is just my personal belief, the traditional pegheads tend in general to be very plain looking - dare I say it: a little dull? Repositioning the pegs could allow use of new, more interesting, exciting head designs (e.g. the shape used on PRS electric guitars). The acoustic guitar headstock example I showed above uses a wedge shaped contrast strip in the middle to make the offset less optically obvious...
I would be interested to hear how other forum members feel about moving away from the traditional peghead's peg layout - would they buy such a guitar? Do they agree with the advantages that I listed above?
Posts: 401
Joined: Mar. 5 2010
From: Caves Beach Australia
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
That Bellido just looks wrong to me, it seems like the square peg layout has just been imposed on a standard head shape. It might have looked better if the head was about 25mm shorter and narrower at the end. The problem with having the E strings to the inside of the peg as you are sugesting Mohan is that you then have to increase the headstock width to maintain straight string pull and with the wider nut on a flamenco as compared to a steel string , that can look a bit bulky and may require a wider neck blank too(or ears)
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
Well, I think this actually makes the most sense.
It has been my experience with electrics with reverse headstocks that a string feels more taught when it has a greater distance to travel from nut to post. this is why on one of my 7 strings i need to use a 65 on the low b and the other only needs a 60.
food for thought.
That and a straight pull is the optimal for strings since it will cause less binding in the nut and it is less likely to pop out. it also means there is more downward tension into the nut rather than sideways on the slot
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to HemeolaMan)
quote:
ORIGINAL: HemeolaMan
Well, I think this actually makes the most sense.
It has been my experience with electrics with reverse headstocks that a string feels more taught when it has a greater distance to travel from nut to post. this is why on one of my 7 strings i need to use a 65 on the low b and the other only needs a 60.
food for thought.
That and a straight pull is the optimal for strings since it will cause less binding in the nut and it is less likely to pop out. it also means there is more downward tension into the nut rather than sideways on the slot
The one on the left is ugly. That's enough for me.
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to jshelton5040)
I don't mind the look so much, if it worked. But I think the pegheads for the D and G strings are too close together, where they would hit each other, or make if very difficult to turn.
Posts: 401
Joined: Mar. 5 2010
From: Caves Beach Australia
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
"It has been my experience with electrics with reverse headstocks that a string feels more taught when it has a greater distance to travel from nut to post. this is why on one of my 7 strings i need to use a 65 on the low b and the other only needs a 60."
Unfortunately this is a myth Extra length beyond the nut will keep the same tension in the string but will make the string very slightly easier to deflect, it is fairly simple physics.
Posts: 401
Joined: Mar. 5 2010
From: Caves Beach Australia
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
No ignoring other factors, they just happen to work in exactly the opposite manner to what you propose. When you deflect a string by fretting it or plucking it you actually make it longer. If the string is capable of moving freely over the nut or saddle then this elongation from deflection is distributed over the total length of the string between post and anchorage at the bridge, not just within the scale length.
If you have additional string beyond the nut or saddle then the elongation from deflection is distributed over a greater length resulting in less strain(elongation divided by original length) and hence an easier feel rather than firmer.
Archtop makers have utilized this principle for years to soften the feel of the bass strings by giving them greater length from saddle to tailpiece.
Posts: 42
Joined: Mar. 23 2010
From: Dunstable, England
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Ted G)
Hi Ted, Thanks for the heads up on the Bellido - it's great to see that this concept already has some level of acceptance, but Manuel didn't go far enough to actually make the string pull straight for the D and G. I was thinking about going completely straight and then going a little further still as I described in my previous posting and then intend to discuss further in my replies to Jeff and Kevin following this reply to you...
Posts: 42
Joined: Mar. 23 2010
From: Dunstable, England
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to HemeolaMan)
Hi Kevin, I have an engineering background, so I quite liked the solution and the symmetry of your first suggestion and, all other things being equal, would choose that guitar over the traditional one. But, I was going to say the same thing as Ted about the spacing between the D and G strings, and my suggestion was going to be to stagger the upper and lower pegs as you have done in your second picture, but I was going to suggest a staggered "arrow head" shape pointing away from the nut:
making the separation between the pegs more even than you show in your picture. Of course, aesthetic fine tuning would need to be applied to get the optimal spacing and positioning. And, of course, the arrowhead could also be arranged pointing towards the nut...
This arrangement will mean that the direction the strings are wound will be different between the upper and lower sets of pegs, but that's better than the current practice of two different directions on each of the two sets of pegs...
Posts: 42
Joined: Mar. 23 2010
From: Dunstable, England
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Jeff Highland)
Hi Jeff, Yes, I think trying to keep the direction the strings are wound on of the pegs would mean a rethink of the head-neck joint and the shape of the headstock. I assume that acoustic guitars use a different head-neck joint to the way that flamenco/classical guitar are constructed. It would seem a waste of wood (and money) to make the whole of the neck wider in order to get the extra width on the head. The solution would have to be either as you suggest "wings" or using a different neck head joint where the head is made a complete and separate unit?
However, if we go with Kevin's suggestions, then there should be no need to change the construction method and using the "arrowhead" staggered peg pattern pointing away from the nut, would allow shaping of the head to follow the line of the upper and lower pegs - less wood/less weight. The stagger between the upper and lower pegs would allow an asymmetric shape to the upper and lower edges?
Posts: 597
Joined: Jan. 14 2007
From: York, England
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
quote:
My question is: why don't luthiers build peghead guitars with the pegs offset inwards, to allow the inner strings to pass in a straight line through the nut?
Mohan, sorry i missed this thread earlier!
The answer to your question is simple I think. There is nothing wrong with the traditional headstock, It works so there is no urge to change it.
There is no need for the strings to pass straight through the nut. A small angle does not cause the strings to pop out of the slot if the slot is made properly and the extra friction force in the slot makes hardly any difference. So, no need to change it really.
However, I prefer that all three strings turn the same way on each side, so I like this arrangement best
[image][/image]
(Sorry about the poor photography)
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to HemeolaMan)
Hi Guys, Imagine my surprise when I looked at this thread and saw my headstock being messed with in the name of alternative peg configurations. I have to say I am grateful for the opportunity to see how other patterns would look without having to do it in real life. Thanks for that and I'll be sticking to my original arrangement.
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
Hm.. I actually like the symmetrical, straight running variant that makes some of you guys loose your lunch. It looks art deco to me. Perhaps not the right look for a flamenco guitar, but I think it might work, if the other elements of the guitar are fashioned in a similar style.
RE: Positioning of pegs in the headstock (in reply to Mohan)
Yeah I'm not particular. If it plays well, sounds good and has one more aspect to make it function better I'm not too picky. I wouldn't turn down a good sounding great playing guitar because it had an asymmetrical peg layout.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread