So happy to start off a new series for you guys! Let me know how I did with this first one (my camera settings were off, so sorry for the noise and exposure). What would YOU want to know about guitar building?
Ive looked everywhere for this information and could not find it till i came across your channel and its explained in easy terms that even i can understand , many thanks bud 😁😁🤘🤘
I have always started with a center line, and a half design that can be flipped over. Use a sharp pencil. Use a silver colored pencil on ebony or rosewood veneers. Head stocks are easy. Make up several possibilities, chose the one that catches your fancy. Save the rejects for future ideas. Too much fun is to be had.
To simplify this somewhat, for a six in line headstock with straight pull (generally speaking), for the fairly standard nut widths of 1-11/16" to 1.703" and string spacings of 1-15/32" and 1-17/32", respectively, the angle of the tuner side should launch from the center line at 15°. Accounting for the touch points of the strings to the tuner posts, position the center points of the through holes between 15/32" and .500" from the edge of the tuner side, spaced at roughly 1" to 1-1/32" along a centerline of the holes. This is very close to what Fender has been doing for decades. Edit: Use a draftsman's circle template. Also, consider the proximity of the tuner closest to the nut, and try to make sure it isn't too close. This is to accommodate the tuner body, and also to make sure there is not insufficient string between the nut and the tuner. For most six in line headstocks, there should be about 1.500" from the nut to the nearest tuner.
@@IPGuitars I liked your video quite a bit. I started developing a basic line of instruments about a year ago, and by far the hardest part has been nailing down the headstock shape. It is quite hard to match one headstock to a variety of body designs. Another area to touch on is tilt-back versus flat headstocks and how the neck to headstock transition works in either case. I personally prefer the Fender approach because it is simpler, is less likely to break and saves on wood. I'm going to subscribe to your channel, as I greatly appreciate people who explore design and engineering. Incidentally, are you Dutch, or maybe South African? I'm trying to place your accent.
Glad you liked the video and I totally agree. Headstock design is a royal pain to get looking right. As for angled vs. scooped, I am right there with you. While I prefer the look of the angled headstocks, the benefits of making a scooped headstock greatly outweigh it. And actually no, I'm neither :) I'm Finnish. Accent comes from going to an American school while living in England. An odd amalgamation of the two I suppose.
@@IPGuitars That's quite funny, when I lived in Montreal a few years ago I worked with a Finnish woman named Taina, who I also mistook for Dutch. Finns are great. Nice meeting you. I'm going to be uploading a video of a finished guitar in the next few weeks. I'll be sure to let you know when I do.
Interesting. For straight string pulls, where do you plan the location of each tuner peg in relation to the peg's string line? - Put the centerline of the peg on the string line? - Put the tighten edge of the peg (during righty-tight tuner turns of the tuner knob) on the peg's string line? - Or some other placement of the tuner peg in relation to the string line? Do you need to account for the diameter widening as the more of the string wraps around the peg? During design, what diameter do you use for the peg (not the hole to be drilled) in order to properly place the machine head in relation to its string line?
Fantastic question! So essentially I account for the first string wrap, so from the point of view of the side of the tuner shaft. The exponential diameter growth or added string winds I haven't come to notice as making all that much different to necessitate taking into the equation. I'd rather have the tuners look more cohesive between one another and the edge of the headstock than have to worry about all of them being incrementally at different distances. So simply put: commonly the shaft of the tuner where string wraps around is 6mm, so account for 3mm away from the point at which you drill the whole.
I actually have videos on both of these :) specifically a video about figuring out a neck angle and then for the volute I'd check out a video where I carve a neck.
First time headstock designer here. Are you measuring 12mm from the edge of the tuner side to edge of the 10mm tuning key hole, or to the center of the tuning key hole?
Yes at the nut for sure :) the thicker gauge, of course you'll need to take into account the size so that you don't have the strings essentially sit on the very edge of the fretboard
@@IPGuitars thanks... so, just want to make sure my understanding is correct... the string to string distance (edge to edge, not center to center) is the same value?
Not sure I understand what you meant, but basically what I would do in the case of thicker gauged strings is to find the distance from the edge of the nut on both sides and then use the string spacing rule to find the rest. The string spacing rule compensates the distances between slots (or string centers as it were) to allow for even spacing between the different gauge of string. I hope that answers atleast some part of your question😅
The string spacing rulers don’t create equal spacing at the nut. They are meant to take relative string gauges into consideration. Therefore, you cannot take the spacing generated from the ruler and extend the lines up to the break angle and expect to get equally spaced tuner locations. If you are looking to achieve equal tuner spacing, you will have to live with a compromise on the straightness of the strings. Its a small difference but I think it should be noted for those who are wondering about this or who are looking for perfection. If I’m missing the mark on this please feel free to correct me. I found out the hard way BTW.
Hello sir! Designing a inline headstock has never been a problem for me. It’s so easy because it has a straight line on the edge as a guide. But how do you make sure the 3+3 headstock shape works with actual tuning machine perfectly? Some model of tuning machine don’t come with accurate blueprint (missing some important dimensions) Do you make several testing template and mount the tuning machine on then adjust the design accordingly?
When working with designing a headstock in general, it's good to have the tuners you are planning on using ready. This will help with figuring out what works. Seeing as I predominately use Schaller or similarly dimensioned tuners, I know to keep 13mm from the edge and atleast 25mm apart. Then combining that with aiming for straight string pull, I have my rough dimensions to base the shape upon :)
I would note a couple of problems with these designs, just to make sure no one else accidentally repeats the mistakes. The first is just minor and has to do with the shape of the 6-in-line shape. Your cutout opposite of the tuners is too deep. You probably shouldn't be crossing the string with the desired shape line. I mean you could, I suppose... it probably wouldn't hurt anything directly, but it leaves the E string exposed with no protective wood around it. If you bump something within that scoop design, it's going to hit the string before the headstock. Like I said, kind of minor. Don't hit the headstock, and it'll be fine. The other is an issue with the 3+3 design. You've used two conflicting thoughts here. You made a curved shape, but then just aligned the tuning machine holes in a straight V pattern. The tuning machine holes, as you stated with the 6-in-line headstock (5:54), need to be a specific distance in from the edge of the headstock. They should follow the shape of the headstock, while also remaining at an equal offset distance from the edge of the headstock. In your example, the D and G machines for sure, and likely also the A and B machines, are not going to function, because the handles/buttons/whatever-they're-called are going to be directly under the wood of the headstock. Two solutions to this dilemma are seen between a Les Paul headstock and a Flying V headstock. Form vs function. On a Les Paul (a pretty typical 3+3 style) the D and G strings break out at more severe angles away from center due to the distant tuners needing to maintain the edge offset of the heastock design. On a Flying V, the shape of the headstock is modified to an atypical arrow head shape in order to keep the strings straight while maintaining the edge offset. This is actually more analogous to a 6-in-line style. Musicman's 4+2 headstock uses the same intersecting angle style (triangular), but they have a little more design leeway still, due to the offset number of machines on each side. It leaves room for a sort of bubble area to make the shape move outside of just a triangle. On a Flying V triangle style, the only place to make any innovation is to vary the overall length of the headstock, stretching or squishing the triangle, so to speak, or by adding a sort of ornamental design to the tip of the triangle (Sort of like an Ovation headstock, or your preliminary axe-head style shape before you modified it to be shorter).
Thank you for your comment :) To the first minor bit: Totally agree on the exposed E-string, but the actual shape of the headstock was not really the point of the video, so they are what they are unfortunately. While I should've actually pointed that out more clearly as well. And you are completely right again about the 3+3 headstock. Again, I should've clarified that the main focus was the distances between tuners and the offset from the edge. Also, admittedly I should've actually PROPERLY designed headstocks here instead of just drawing a random shape for a "sort of" reference on what to do. And I still maintain that the horrendous 3+3 shape I drew is well.. just that. Soyeah, fully agreed with you that had I done a proper job of actually making headstocks that work instead of the surface-level technicalities, this would have been a much more helpful video. One which (now looking at it) I really should remedy.
I’m sorry but the commentary about “tension” of strings beyond the nut seemed like nonsense to me. In my mind, the key consideration is the break angle and downward pressure at the nut. Thinner strings require more break angle/downward pressure at the nut. That is why Fender 6 in line headstocks typically require string trees. A reverse headstock eliminates that concern. So does the MusicMan 4x2 approach, although the G string could still be problematic if the tuning machine is too far from the nut. You also left out a critical consideration: what are the dimensions of the back of the tuning machines? Will they interfere with each other?
Good points made, but the gauge of string argument for why Fender uses string trees is a bit invalid. As the Fender style headstock is a scoop, the tuner poles sit "upright" and the string does not get enough of an angle when wound. String trees help create the angle and downward pressure on the nut, but this would be exactly the same were the string a set of 9s or 13s :) You had the right idea for the downward pressure on the nut for sure! And you make a good point that I did not mention tuner dimensions. This can differ depending on what brand of tuner you go with and whether they have pins or if the screw holes are to the side or "down" (for lack of a better way to put it). I should have rectified this by saying that you should check the dimensions and specs for the tuners you use, before designing. For instance with my own headstocks I have the tuners 13mm in from the side, but on. 3-3 headstock they are 30mm apart and 6-in line they are 25mm apart.
Great question, and really depends. Two/three ways you can go about it: 1) 6-in line on both sides 1.5) 3+3 smaller/offset on both sides 2) 3+3 and then 3+3 between with holes in the middle of the headstock as you you find on a classical acoustic And then apply the same principles as with a "regular" headstock
Just staret watching your videos, and I think your content is great! Keep up the good work. I would like to learn more about the neck (break) angle for a set-neck guitar. I am about to embark on my first guitar building journey, and the thing I am currently most concerned about is getting the correct neck angle for my bridge. How do I find the correct angle for the heel, and how to I apply it in practice?
Thank you very much :) As a matter of fact, I have video coming out where I draw out a guitar 1:1 and I'll tackle this as well. But usually, the neck angle sits around the few degrees mark. So say a trem/hardtail bridge, you're looking at about 2-3 degrees. A tune-o-matic would be around 5 degrees. Quite honestly, the easiest way to figure that out is the draw the guitar full-size :) working out the angle is fairly simple when you know your bridge height, where the neck connects with the body, and the fretboard thickness.
How would you work out where to place the tuning machine holes for the 3x3 design? I'm going for the same design were the machines go steadily inward. 😅 Preferably I don't want to mess this up.
With the 3x3 work out your string spacing and draw where your strings would be. Figure out the distance between each tuner post. You can start working out where the tuner posts will land. You'll want the tuners to be marked on the side of each "string line" instead of on the line. This is because when you're stringing up, the string doesn't go straight into the tuner post. It wraps around it, therefore you want that to be a reference on where to place the tuner posts (or where to drill). Essentially, you can get really specific about it if you want to, but in general due to your strings wrapping around the tuner post a few times, you can easily work it out just by drawing it out carefully. If it helps and you have access to one, have a look at a guitar headstock and use it as reference for planning out your own.
So happy to start off a new series for you guys!
Let me know how I did with this first one (my camera settings were off, so sorry for the noise and exposure).
What would YOU want to know about guitar building?
Ive looked everywhere for this information and could not find it till i came across your channel and its explained in easy terms that even i can understand , many thanks bud 😁😁🤘🤘
So glad to hear you found this useful!
this video deserves more likes
I have always started with a center line, and a half design that can be flipped over. Use a sharp pencil. Use a silver colored pencil on ebony or rosewood veneers. Head stocks are easy. Make up several possibilities, chose the one that catches your fancy. Save the rejects for future ideas. Too much fun is to be had.
Great comment!
I have actually come to enjoy headstock design since. Was a pain back in the day for sure
To simplify this somewhat, for a six in line headstock with straight pull (generally speaking), for the fairly standard nut widths of 1-11/16" to 1.703" and string spacings of 1-15/32" and 1-17/32", respectively, the angle of the tuner side should launch from the center line at 15°. Accounting for the touch points of the strings to the tuner posts, position the center points of the through holes between 15/32" and .500" from the edge of the tuner side, spaced at roughly 1" to 1-1/32" along a centerline of the holes. This is very close to what Fender has been doing for decades.
Edit: Use a draftsman's circle template.
Also, consider the proximity of the tuner closest to the nut, and try to make sure it isn't too close. This is to accommodate the tuner body, and also to make sure there is not insufficient string between the nut and the tuner. For most six in line headstocks, there should be about 1.500" from the nut to the nearest tuner.
Thank you for this :) slightly better worded than my ramblings
@@IPGuitars I liked your video quite a bit. I started developing a basic line of instruments about a year ago, and by far the hardest part has been nailing down the headstock shape. It is quite hard to match one headstock to a variety of body designs.
Another area to touch on is tilt-back versus flat headstocks and how the neck to headstock transition works in either case. I personally prefer the Fender approach because it is simpler, is less likely to break and saves on wood.
I'm going to subscribe to your channel, as I greatly appreciate people who explore design and engineering.
Incidentally, are you Dutch, or maybe South African? I'm trying to place your accent.
Glad you liked the video and I totally agree. Headstock design is a royal pain to get looking right.
As for angled vs. scooped, I am right there with you. While I prefer the look of the angled headstocks, the benefits of making a scooped headstock greatly outweigh it.
And actually no, I'm neither :) I'm Finnish. Accent comes from going to an American school while living in England. An odd amalgamation of the two I suppose.
@@IPGuitars That's quite funny, when I lived in Montreal a few years ago I worked with a Finnish woman named Taina, who I also mistook for Dutch. Finns are great. Nice meeting you.
I'm going to be uploading a video of a finished guitar in the next few weeks. I'll be sure to let you know when I do.
Haha, nice meeting you too :)
Oh awesome, do let me know, I look forward to seeing it!
Interesting.
For straight string pulls, where do you plan the location of each tuner peg in relation to the peg's string line?
- Put the centerline of the peg on the string line?
- Put the tighten edge of the peg (during righty-tight tuner turns of the tuner knob) on the peg's string line?
- Or some other placement of the tuner peg in relation to the string line?
Do you need to account for the diameter widening as the more of the string wraps around the peg?
During design, what diameter do you use for the peg (not the hole to be drilled) in order to properly place the machine head in relation to its string line?
Fantastic question!
So essentially I account for the first string wrap, so from the point of view of the side of the tuner shaft. The exponential diameter growth or added string winds I haven't come to notice as making all that much different to necessitate taking into the equation. I'd rather have the tuners look more cohesive between one another and the edge of the headstock than have to worry about all of them being incrementally at different distances.
So simply put: commonly the shaft of the tuner where string wraps around is 6mm, so account for 3mm away from the point at which you drill the whole.
How do you figure out the neck angle? That's what my issue has been, and also would like to know about cresting a volute? Thanks great video.
I actually have videos on both of these :) specifically a video about figuring out a neck angle and then for the volute I'd check out a video where I carve a neck.
@@IPGuitars ok ill look for the video. Thanks
First time headstock designer here. Are you measuring 12mm from the edge of the tuner side to edge of the 10mm tuning key hole, or to the center of the tuning key hole?
I am measuring 12-13mm from the side of the headstock to the middle of the hole-to-be-drilled :)
@@IPGuitars Thanks!
do you take the string guage into consideration for string spacing at the nut/bridge?
Yes at the nut for sure :) the thicker gauge, of course you'll need to take into account the size so that you don't have the strings essentially sit on the very edge of the fretboard
@@IPGuitars thanks... so, just want to make sure my understanding is correct... the string to string distance (edge to edge, not center to center) is the same value?
Not sure I understand what you meant, but basically what I would do in the case of thicker gauged strings is to find the distance from the edge of the nut on both sides and then use the string spacing rule to find the rest. The string spacing rule compensates the distances between slots (or string centers as it were) to allow for even spacing between the different gauge of string.
I hope that answers atleast some part of your question😅
@@IPGuitars yes, you did answer my question, many thanks again.
The string spacing rulers don’t create equal spacing at the nut. They are meant to take relative string gauges into consideration. Therefore, you cannot take the spacing generated from the ruler and extend the lines up to the break angle and expect to get equally spaced tuner locations. If you are looking to achieve equal tuner spacing, you will have to live with a compromise on the straightness of the strings. Its a small difference but I think it should be noted for those who are wondering about this or who are looking for perfection. If I’m missing the mark on this please feel free to correct me. I found out the hard way BTW.
Same process on 7s?
Exact same process :) just one string more to take into account
Hello sir!
Designing a inline headstock has never been a problem for me.
It’s so easy because it has a straight line on the edge as a guide.
But how do you make sure the 3+3 headstock shape works with actual tuning machine perfectly?
Some model of tuning machine don’t come with accurate blueprint (missing some important dimensions)
Do you make several testing template and mount the tuning machine on then adjust the design accordingly?
When working with designing a headstock in general, it's good to have the tuners you are planning on using ready. This will help with figuring out what works. Seeing as I predominately use Schaller or similarly dimensioned tuners, I know to keep 13mm from the edge and atleast 25mm apart. Then combining that with aiming for straight string pull, I have my rough dimensions to base the shape upon :)
I would note a couple of problems with these designs, just to make sure no one else accidentally repeats the mistakes.
The first is just minor and has to do with the shape of the 6-in-line shape. Your cutout opposite of the tuners is too deep. You probably shouldn't be crossing the string with the desired shape line. I mean you could, I suppose... it probably wouldn't hurt anything directly, but it leaves the E string exposed with no protective wood around it. If you bump something within that scoop design, it's going to hit the string before the headstock. Like I said, kind of minor. Don't hit the headstock, and it'll be fine.
The other is an issue with the 3+3 design. You've used two conflicting thoughts here. You made a curved shape, but then just aligned the tuning machine holes in a straight V pattern. The tuning machine holes, as you stated with the 6-in-line headstock (5:54), need to be a specific distance in from the edge of the headstock. They should follow the shape of the headstock, while also remaining at an equal offset distance from the edge of the headstock. In your example, the D and G machines for sure, and likely also the A and B machines, are not going to function, because the handles/buttons/whatever-they're-called are going to be directly under the wood of the headstock. Two solutions to this dilemma are seen between a Les Paul headstock and a Flying V headstock. Form vs function. On a Les Paul (a pretty typical 3+3 style) the D and G strings break out at more severe angles away from center due to the distant tuners needing to maintain the edge offset of the heastock design. On a Flying V, the shape of the headstock is modified to an atypical arrow head shape in order to keep the strings straight while maintaining the edge offset. This is actually more analogous to a 6-in-line style. Musicman's 4+2 headstock uses the same intersecting angle style (triangular), but they have a little more design leeway still, due to the offset number of machines on each side. It leaves room for a sort of bubble area to make the shape move outside of just a triangle. On a Flying V triangle style, the only place to make any innovation is to vary the overall length of the headstock, stretching or squishing the triangle, so to speak, or by adding a sort of ornamental design to the tip of the triangle (Sort of like an Ovation headstock, or your preliminary axe-head style shape before you modified it to be shorter).
Thank you for your comment :)
To the first minor bit: Totally agree on the exposed E-string, but the actual shape of the headstock was not really the point of the video, so they are what they are unfortunately. While I should've actually pointed that out more clearly as well.
And you are completely right again about the 3+3 headstock. Again, I should've clarified that the main focus was the distances between tuners and the offset from the edge. Also, admittedly I should've actually PROPERLY designed headstocks here instead of just drawing a random shape for a "sort of" reference on what to do. And I still maintain that the horrendous 3+3 shape I drew is well.. just that.
Soyeah, fully agreed with you that had I done a proper job of actually making headstocks that work instead of the surface-level technicalities, this would have been a much more helpful video. One which (now looking at it) I really should remedy.
@@IPGuitars Looking forward to the reboot. 😜
I’m sorry but the commentary about “tension” of strings beyond the nut seemed like nonsense to me. In my mind, the key consideration is the break angle and downward pressure at the nut. Thinner strings require more break angle/downward pressure at the nut. That is why Fender 6 in line headstocks typically require string trees. A reverse headstock eliminates that concern. So does the MusicMan 4x2 approach, although the G string could still be problematic if the tuning machine is too far from the nut.
You also left out a critical consideration: what are the dimensions of the back of the tuning machines? Will they interfere with each other?
Good points made, but the gauge of string argument for why Fender uses string trees is a bit invalid. As the Fender style headstock is a scoop, the tuner poles sit "upright" and the string does not get enough of an angle when wound. String trees help create the angle and downward pressure on the nut, but this would be exactly the same were the string a set of 9s or 13s :)
You had the right idea for the downward pressure on the nut for sure! And you make a good point that I did not mention tuner dimensions. This can differ depending on what brand of tuner you go with and whether they have pins or if the screw holes are to the side or "down" (for lack of a better way to put it).
I should have rectified this by saying that you should check the dimensions and specs for the tuners you use, before designing. For instance with my own headstocks I have the tuners 13mm in from the side, but on. 3-3 headstock they are 30mm apart and 6-in line they are 25mm apart.
and for 12 strings?
Great question, and really depends. Two/three ways you can go about it:
1) 6-in line on both sides
1.5) 3+3 smaller/offset on both sides
2) 3+3 and then 3+3 between with holes in the middle of the headstock as you you find on a classical acoustic
And then apply the same principles as with a "regular" headstock
Just staret watching your videos, and I think your content is great! Keep up the good work.
I would like to learn more about the neck (break) angle for a set-neck guitar. I am about to embark on my first guitar building journey, and the thing I am currently most concerned about is getting the correct neck angle for my bridge. How do I find the correct angle for the heel, and how to I apply it in practice?
Thank you very much :)
As a matter of fact, I have video coming out where I draw out a guitar 1:1 and I'll tackle this as well. But usually, the neck angle sits around the few degrees mark. So say a trem/hardtail bridge, you're looking at about 2-3 degrees. A tune-o-matic would be around 5 degrees. Quite honestly, the easiest way to figure that out is the draw the guitar full-size :) working out the angle is fairly simple when you know your bridge height, where the neck connects with the body, and the fretboard thickness.
@@IPGuitars Thank you in return! Looking forward to more content in the future :-)
or use chequered paper as an easy guide
That is a very good point as well 👌
How would you work out where to place the tuning machine holes for the 3x3 design? I'm going for the same design were the machines go steadily inward.
😅 Preferably I don't want to mess this up.
With the 3x3 work out your string spacing and draw where your strings would be. Figure out the distance between each tuner post. You can start working out where the tuner posts will land. You'll want the tuners to be marked on the side of each "string line" instead of on the line. This is because when you're stringing up, the string doesn't go straight into the tuner post. It wraps around it, therefore you want that to be a reference on where to place the tuner posts (or where to drill).
Essentially, you can get really specific about it if you want to, but in general due to your strings wrapping around the tuner post a few times, you can easily work it out just by drawing it out carefully. If it helps and you have access to one, have a look at a guitar headstock and use it as reference for planning out your own.
@@IPGuitars Thanks allot, that's essentially what I ended up doing, wasn't to sure whether it was correct 😅 I appreciate it.
lol, I think your designs are just the opposite...the first one is way worse looking than the second.
Haha, well there you go. A matter of personal tastes :D