Locking tuners and string slack

Non-double locking trem systems are the primary beneficiaries of locking tuners. They're not going to make as much difference on a hardtail guitar other than faster string changes.

Kluson style tuners on Fenders are a snap. Just pull the string tight and cut it about 2 inches past the post (2 tuning posts down) for the wound strings and about 2.5 to 3 inches past on the plain strings. Poke it down in the hole, bend it over clockwise and wind away. They're also super fast to remove the string too once you fully slack them. Just pull up and all the winds come right off.
 
Last edited:
nathan_393 said:
I just watched this video:



I’m curious about this stringing method. To me, all the slack with two fingers seems like it defeats the purpose of locking tuners. But am I missing something?

I’m not generally a huge fan of PRS’ strings and would like to replace them on my new C24 with NYXLs, but this video has me second guessing how I assumed one would do this with locking tuners.
Click to expand...

All my PRS have locking tuners, and I use NYXL or Paradigm strings, depending on what I have on my shelf. I’ve pulled the strings all the way through, I’ve left a bit of slack so there’s a partial winding, a full wrap, and two wraps, and they still sound the same to me. The only real difference I notice is the amount of time it takes to bring them to pitch as I’m first tuning them, beyond that, if there’s a difference it’s so small I don’t notice so I don’t care.

And IF I broke a string when playing I’d pull it tight and lock it down just so I could begin tuning and stretching the string more quickly.
 
marsonic said:
The only tuners I don't like are the slotted vintage-style Fender tuners where you stick the extra string into the tuner...and that's just because I've never figured out exactly how long to cut the high e string and don't like that you have to cut them before you install them. I used to buy extras of that one string because I was going to screw it up too often. Eventually, I got rid of that guitar....but...at this point, if I have to buy another guitar that comes with those tuners for some reason, I'd replace them on day one. I really hate them. But locking vs "everybody but Fender" post hole tuners....I don't really care.
Click to expand...
I had a guitar with them and it took a couple times of changing the strings before I got used to it, and once I got used to them I actually preferred the slotted head. They’re fast when changing strings.

I was talking to my guitar tech one day as he was working on a guitar with them and he just flew through the wrap and tuning, and he agreed, he prefers them and recommends them.

The downside with locking tuners is where they pinch the string to hold it. Too many people over-tighten it and cut into the string and then it’s weaker and will break there, and when it does there’s not much chance of reclamping it unless there are a couple wraps around the post. And we’re back where we started. :)

Don’t over-tighten the locking tuners, and do what makes sense to you.
 
Until recently, I always pulled strings tight on guitars with locking tuners. However, I shop owner recently told me that putting a few wraps around the posts -- even on guitars with locking tuners produces better resonance. I tried this on my latest string change on my EBMM Stingray with locking tuners. Works well. (I also assume that in the event a locking tuner were to become loosened and a string were to slip the wraps would hold the string in place).
 
Putting multiple wraps on a locking tuner completely defeats the purpose of using locking tuners. Added resonance is bunk. The string does not really vibrate beyond the nut on open strings or the fret when fretting a note. Test it for yourself. Stuff a piece of cloth or soft foam under the strings at the headstock so they can't vibrate at all. Do you notice a difference in tone or sustain when playing? Nearly all of the string's energy is either transferred through the nut or fret into the neck, reflected back into the string or transferred through the bridge and into the body at the other end.
 
Greg Ferguson said:
I had a guitar with them and it took a couple times of changing the strings before I got used to it, and once I got used to them I actually preferred the slotted head. They’re fast when changing strings.

I was talking to my guitar tech one day as he was working on a guitar with them and he just flew through the wrap and tuning, and he agreed, he prefers them and recommends them.

The downside with locking tuners is where they pinch the string to hold it. Too many people over-tighten it and cut into the string and then it’s weaker and will break there, and when it does there’s not much chance of reclamping it unless there are a couple wraps around the post. And we’re back where we started. :)

Don’t over-tighten the locking tuners, and do what makes sense to you.
Click to expand...

Yeah....I know a lot of people prefer them. But....a G&L Legacy with those tuners was the only guitar I played for a long time, and I never got used to it.

I prefer other tuners. To each their own.
 
I go for less than one wrap with locking tuners for a few reasons:

1. It is faster than using multiple winds.
2. Though I have not personally tested it, supposedly you get better tuning stability this way.
3. This is how both John Suhr and Tom Anderson recommend that locking tuners are used.
4. I have done it this way for years and have had no issues.
 
OrganicZed said:
This is how both John Suhr and Tom Anderson recommend that locking tuners are used.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it was from Suhr (or maybe PRS) that I first saw instructions on using locking tuners.

They said to pull the string tight and then lock.

As @mr_fender said, having the string wrap the post defeats the purpose of locking tuners.
 
mr_fender said:
Nearly all of the string's energy is either transferred through the nut or fret into the neck, reflected back into the string or transferred through the bridge and into the body at the other end.
Click to expand...
But not 100%. Some vibrational energy is transferred lengthwise through the string even past fretted notes and nut. Hold a D chord, and strum the strings behind the nut.
 
True, there is some very small amount of transfer, but nothing that more wraps on a tuner would change. The string terminates at the post in either case. You can't make a more solid termination than clamping the string in place to the post.
 
I've been using locking tuners on my guitars since the mid 90s. Literally the only issue I've ever had is when the guitar hasn't been intonated yet and I need to pull the saddle back. If you don't leave a little bit of wind you can run out of space pretty easily.

Once the guitar is set up though, I just pull 'em straight through and clamp them down
 
True, funny and sad story. The first guitar I bought after my divorce about 25 years ago was an Ibanez S. I loved the thin body. It had locking tuners on it, but I didn't know locking tuners existed being away from the guitar world for so long. So when it came time to change strings, I was one confused fella.
 
Tonedeaf said:
True, funny and sad story. The first guitar I bought after my divorce about 25 years ago was an Ibanez S. I loved the thin body. It had locking tuners on it, but I didn't know locking tuners existed being away from the guitar world for so long. So when it came time to change strings, I was one confused fella.
Click to expand...

That's not that weird. The first time I saw the phrase "locking tuners", I honestly thought they worked more like a locking nut to keep the string from moving rather than just making it a little easier to change strings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom