Post Number: 348
|Posted on Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - 5:56 pm: |
G Guitars of Connecticut
Post Number: 1
|Posted on Wednesday, October 21, 2009 - 11:22 am: |
Gorgeous, arent they?
Post Number: 28
|Posted on Wednesday, October 21, 2009 - 11:33 am: |
WOWZER!!! Simply elegant lines.....
Post Number: 8950
|Posted on Thursday, November 12, 2009 - 5:14 pm: |
Hi Brian; welcome to the board!
Post Number: 225
|Posted on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 - 1:31 pm: |
I will own one of those someday.
Why does it seem like many of the 5 str with crown heads have three tuners on the bottom?
I mean, I'm sure I'd get used to it an all, but I always thought that was a little strange....
Post Number: 459
|Posted on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 - 1:49 pm: |
(Message edited by pace on November 19, 2009)
Post Number: 2353
|Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009 - 1:08 am: |
IIRC the reason behind the 2+3 crown headstock is that the B string on the tuner peg can get in the way of the E string in the 3+2 configuration.
[Edit:]More likely the E string getting in the way of the A string, but I digress.[/edit]
Not sure if it was to do with the interim Goto tuners that had the different "ears" and a wider peg.
(Message edited by adriaan on November 19, 2009)
Post Number: 2499
|Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009 - 4:39 am: |
I spoke to Jimmy Johnson about this and the main reason he went with the 2 over 3 layout is so that the B string has a straight pull from the nut to the tuner. Looking at my signature headstock I can see his point...
Post Number: 671
|Posted on Thursday, November 19, 2009 - 10:32 pm: |
I like the 2+3 on my Stanley Signature Standard:
Post Number: 226
|Posted on Friday, November 20, 2009 - 6:29 am: |
Interesting. Yeah, looks different, and there's a function to that form. Thanks guys.