All things guitar, Les Pauls, Strats, Teles, Tokai, Ibanez etc. etc. etc.

Moderators: Slowy, Capt. Black

User avatar
BY codedog
#814091
Is it just me or are large Strat headstocks rarely seen around this forum? I have never actually picked up a Strat with the larger headstock. Do they weigh noticeably more? I don't like the large headstock shape at all, but that's purely the aesthetics.

What's the general opinion around the forum?
User avatar
BY AiRdAd
#814092
Love the big headstock strat necks the most - purely for looks
User avatar
BY Single coil
#814093
Needs the big logo or it’s a no go
User avatar
BY codedog
#814094
AiRdAd wrote:Love the big headstock strat necks the most - purely for looks


Wow... fancy that. Do they weight much more? Does it affect the balance at all? I'm guessing not...
User avatar
BY philly
#814097
big fan here
User avatar
BY Lawrence
#814098
Ive always preferred the small headstocks...on anything. I seriously dislike the giant headstocks on some Gibsons and the D'Angelos and similar jazz guitars. I guess 30 years of owning a Steinberger will do that to ya!
Oh and I hated the rise of giant logos...on everything from Marshall amps, to Mesa, Fender, etc...at least Gibson didn't go big (actually there was the short-lived metal Gibson logo on some ...was it on Vs??)
User avatar
BY Molly
#814099
I too prefer the big headstocks when they have the larger logo. Then again, I saw a Hendrix album cover the other day and he was playing one with the old logo so that makes it cool. ;-) I've a CS '66 Strat which I take to represent some sort of transition year. It is what it is I suppose. Less common so maybe more interesting for it.

Image

I read in a 'Strat Bible' magazine the other day that CBS used some lame excuse about the larger headstock reducing the chance of warping. That's got to be bullshit. It also said the big logo was more about TV exposure. Robin Trower claimed more sustain as a result of the larger headstock but I also think that that's a load of bollocks.
User avatar
BY WellyBlues
#814101
I prefer the Fender headstocks over the Suhr and Page ones. If that helps.
User avatar
BY Danger Mouse
#814107
Small headstock for me. I've played large headstock strats and there's not enough extra wood to affect balance.
User avatar
BY Molly
#814108
And I think they look better still with a bit of age to them (and the absence of a signature).

These were both mine. The old one sounded great but weighed about 11lbs. The Malmsteen was a POS.

Image

Image
User avatar
BY Molly
#814109
WellyBlues wrote:I prefer the Fender headstocks over the Suhr and Page ones. If that helps.


The Page is nicer than the Suhr I reckon but for elegance I don't think you can beat the pre-CBS one.
User avatar
BY willow13
#814110
I have both and I prefer the small headstock. The large one does not add any noticeable weight to the guitar and does not effect the balance
User avatar
BY jeremyb
#814130
I think it's partly due to them traditionally being CBS era headstocks when the build quality was crap, original is the best to my eyes, looks more balanced with the neck width :)
BY foal30
#814133
willow13 wrote:I have both and I prefer the small headstock. The large one does not add any noticeable weight to the guitar and does not effect the balance


Size doesn't matter