I have been wondering about why acoustics are tuned three clock wise - three counter clock wise(away from the nut)?like my electrics there is no confusion they're all counter clock wise.the antique Balladeer I had and lost was strung(tuned) the same way.is there some kind of unwritten protocol that dictates all acoustics must go three one way and three the other? when the time comes to change strings they will all go in the same direction If for no other reason than to avoid confusion . counter clock wise is my preference.
decades of tuning tightening away from the nut then get hit tuning three south toward makes no sense here.is keeping things simple that hard to comprehend?
any input on this anomaly?
Any one care to explain why Electric guitars are normally tuned up with the tuners away from the nut and Acoustics are three one way and three the other?my nephew(25) and I talked about it beats him too,is it some kind of protocol or what?
this is the third forum this has been posted in hence the two ways the same question is asked. fwiw
appears I have a Gotcha question here.
Heroes Don't wear capes.They wear Dog tags
They're all counter-clockwise to tighten, no matter which side of the peghead they're on. You're always rotating your hand the same way to tighten a string... on any guitar.
As far as what side of the peghead they're on, that's a design element - there's no functional reason.
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
They're all counter-clockwise to tighten, no matter which side of the peghead they're on. You're always rotating your hand the same way to tighten a string... on any guitar.
As far as what side of the peghead they're on, that's a design element - there's no functional reason. glad someone else sees the common sense approach I do thanks for that
Heroes Don't wear capes.They wear Dog tags
There are many electrics that have 3+3 tuners (PRS, Danelectro, Burns, etc.) and a very few acoustics that have 6 straight (almost all Fender). In fact, the majority of necked stringed instruments have their tuners split l+r - banjos, ukuleles, mandolins, bazoukis, ouds, balalaikas, sitars, etc., etc..
6 straight is a relatively new development - as far as I know, it was the brainchild of Leo Fender, with the Broadcaster. It hasn't spread to any other instruments, either (other than a few Fender models).
3+3 is centuries old and was a natural progression from the original friction pegs to mechanical tuners, which meant very little change in the design of instruments. I can't see the type of mechanical tuner, used on classical guitars (which require the peghead to be cut out), would lend themselves to 6 straight - keeping the posts at right angles to the strings would be a major pain.
I started with nothing - and I've still got most of it left.
Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in any dictionary?
Greybeard's Pages
My Articles & Reviews on GN
Mechanically it's the best design....straight shot, easiest flow.
the strings are wound so that the string is on the inside of the peghead when it goes towards the nut. otherwise, there would be a much sharper angle to the nut, and there'd also be an overlap of the non-e strings with lower pegs, causing them to have to be bent around the pegs.
les pauls and lots of others use the same headstock design and peg placement as most acoustics.
Yes, I think what the guys are saying, and what is supposed to happen, is for each string to go to the outside of each post or capstan of the tuner. Some installers still goof it up and do it backwards, perhaps they want the pegs or keys to turn the same way? That is hard on the nut and not an efficient design. Some 3 per-side with superior design still allow straight pull.
Like a bird on the wire,
like a drunk in a midnight choir
I have tried in my way to be free.
it's also hard on the string and would snap them much more frequently.
A lot of six-in-line arrangements allow for straight pull too, and even a few that use a 'horizontal' string tee to bring the strings into line with the nut slots. And while 3+3 or 6-in-line are the most common, I've seen some others... one of my students has a 4+2, and some makers use 3+3 that are offset - sort of a zig-zag arrangement (and I've even seen that used with classical guitar style tuners too!)
I think the bottom line is that it's a design element for placement, but it's a standard for which direction you turn.... sort of like tightening a screw, the user always knows which direction to turn their wrist to get the desired effect.
Guitar teacher offering lessons in Plainfield IL
Yes, I think what the guys are saying, and what is supposed to happen, is for each string to go to the outside of each post or capstan of the tuner. Some installers still goof it up and do it backwards, perhaps they want the pegs or keys to turn the same way? That is hard on the nut and not an efficient design. Some 3 per-side with superior design still allow straight pull.
Thanks for that clarification Blue Jay.I hope you are not saying tinsmith is wrong because I tend to agree.for the record I have always made sure they get wrapped right from E to E normally insert the string through the right of the peg give a wrap and bend the tail up or back toward the nut,follow through tighten to see it does wrap right.exactly how many wraps depends on the string.found least is almost always best on the high E and B for instance.also for the record the go to axe thought of here Electric is a 1967 Fender Coronado II Wildwood I semi acoustic thinline.the acoustic is a dare I mention it an Estaban Legacy acous/elec from who knows when China put it out.The Fender is Homegrown of course with better machine heads no doubt.I will test it on el cheapo figuring if wrapped correct the tuning pegs will emulate those of the Fender turned/tuned inline.I've only been changing strings on the Fender the last four decades.have yet to do it on the este(that the action gives me fits on).next time,when I do change them lighter gauge.(yes heard acoustics action is always higher)thought about cutting into the bridge but a luthier I am not in case things go south.no extra bridges around.two string trees on the Fender bought it that way(in mod process someone neglected to pick it up) back then.one on E+B one on D + G photo below doubt the trees can be seen.on mine they're gold(stock are silver) or at least plated lol... do not use the tremolo or have it on.
Heroes Don't wear capes.They wear Dog tags
I don't know if keeping this in this thread is right or wrong,sorry if wrong But would anyone believe a so called '' road show'' could not even offer or guestimate a number on the guitar in the picture here? it is in pristine condition with the original hard shell.I took it there to find out what it was worth.apparently not a darn thing to anyone out there.just recently read about someone showing them a 6 or 7 grand guitar and they did not know what it was.either do I the article didn't say.love it when they do that.point is this outfit were real winners.last I heard someone filed suit on them for having road show in their name.treasure hunters road show what a joke. they're out of Illinois heads up to everyone they are supposedly on tour.
Heroes Don't wear capes.They wear Dog tags
Hi... a reply to your notes on the Fender and the Estaban.
Okay, when you want to lower your saddle on the acoustic, you pull it out and run the bottom over a flat file, and give it the slightest forward facing angle, if you stand it on a flat surface, such as your counter or a table, because the strings will pull it forward towards the nut and it is best if the entire flat/angled bottom of the saddle contacts length of the bridge 'cavity'.
Quickest way to do it is on a belt sander, but that lets you make mistakes or shoots it out of your grasp, or takes your skin.
Before you remove any material, draw a felt pen line on the bottom of the saddle, to use as a guide, whilst reducing height.
The string tree thing is something I haven't seen talked about here much. I tend to think that they are not so much to guide strings - shredder guitars have a string bar for that. Fender indicates they use trees to apply downward pressure so that there isn't buzzing in the nut slots. When staggered (lowering) posts came out in 2001, the lower posts pulled higher strings down, and there was only one tree for awhile. I'm not counting any nowadays, not paying attention, might have a look here:
Well, here's the bar that goes with Floyd Rose but this nice straight pull Fender doesn't really need it, it was intended for headstocks with a real down-nosed angle to prevent strings going horizontally through air space on their way to the post.
Now here's an example of a down facing headstock, but Jackson was smart in design, and doesn't need the string bar.
It was hard to find a pic small enough to show staggered-down posts, one tree and fit within the board's specifications.
Older, two neat string trees one with a higher bushing, and one with a lower bushing, for more downward pull, correct. Not that it matters, but so I don't get razzed, ha ha, the pic is a home made lic., no plastic or walnut sleeve, or bullet truss rod.
Like a bird on the wire,
like a drunk in a midnight choir
I have tried in my way to be free.
by Blue Jay
Hi... a reply to your notes on the Fender and the Estaban.
Okay, when you want to lower your saddle on the acoustic, you pull it out and run the bottom over a flat file, and give it the slightest forward facing angle, if you stand it on a flat surface, such as your counter or a table, because the strings will pull it forward towards the nut and it is best if the entire flat/angled bottom of the saddle contacts length of the bridge 'cavity'.Thank You however if the bridge for strings is already tapered in a direction shouldn't it just be improved on after making that line?(bottom of saddle must mean how much to take off)bridge is not one piece it differs with each one on the acoustic. Chinese humor I guess.if I do one at a time there should be no intonation issue right?the thing was setup once already.they said the did the best they could with such an expensive guitar :lol: the Fender has two trees what can I say... no problems with it since 67
Heroes Don't wear capes.They wear Dog tags
Right, you would have two, I guess I'd call them half saddles to file on the bottom. Stick with the stock angle, yeah.
Intonation should be okay, never be perfect, and can hypothetically change on non-adjustable bridges, with string gages.
I can't think of what else to say unless you have string tension issues, or still have high action, try Newtone Aussie strings!
Like a bird on the wire,
like a drunk in a midnight choir
I have tried in my way to be free.
i'm not sure if you mentioned this, but string trees are used more on guitars with a shallower headstock angle to keep the string approach to the nut lower. the reason to have a shallower headstock angle is that if the neck is all from the same piece of wood, you save wood because you don't have to cut as thick a piece to make the headstocks. martin's also been making thinner headstocks, or 3 piece headstocks recently, for the same reason, to cut down on expensive or endangered wood use.
