Pardon my ignorance, but what's the big deal about tuners?

[Pablo Fanque]

I notice a lot of folks seem to be willing to spend time, money and effort swapping out tuners, not because the stock tuners are broken but for reasons that don't always seem very clear.

I'm not flaming anyone, but can you tell me why you'd scrap tuners that work well for others that work just as well?

Aesthestics?

Do stock tuners tend to wear/break easily?

[JimiLL]

Well at least as far as fenders are concerned they get another $200 for a model with upgraded tuners...............

[Goatee220]

Don't some tuners add mass to the headstock, thus increasing sustain?

[line6man]

Originally Posted by Goatee220

Don't some tuners add mass to the headstock, thus increasing sustain?

Usually the opposite is desirable. Lightweight tuners to help with neckdive.

[BigOldHarry]

Originally Posted by Goatee220

Don't some tuners add mass to the headstock, thus increasing sustain?

*sigh*

If they increase sustain, it is *trivial*. And Since when is "sustain" important on bass?

The only reason to upgrade tuners is to either lose weight (to avoid neck dive) or to just have more precision in tuning. I can say from experience that the tuners on my Lakland and Zon do a MUCH better job of getting in tune and *staying* in tune than the tuners on the Squier I bought my nephew.

However, most tuners used be decent builders are perfectly fine. The only reason I bought any tuners was when either building my own bass or adding a Hipshot d-tuner to a bass.

[RBrownBass]

Originally Posted by Pablo Fanque

I notice a lot of folks seem to be willing to spend time, money and effort swapping out tuners, not because the stock tuners are broken but for reasons that don't always seem very clear.

I'm not flaming anyone, but can you tell me why you'd scrap tuners that work well for others that work just as well?

Aesthestics?

Do stock tuners tend to wear/break easily?

I've seen many posts about replacing so-so stock tuners with excellent Hipshot tuners.

Aside from replacing tuners (and some other parts) so that the bass has more of a 60s vibe, I've never seen any posts about tuner replacement when the stock tuners are just as good.

Are you certain that you have?

[Essen]

I've notice that the tuners on my jag are very uneven. I keep turning, but the string wont stretch, and suddenly I've turned it too far! I guess that's one of the reasons why more expensive tuners may be better in other terms than weight.

[snyderz]

Never have, and won't, unless the headstock is run over by a truck or something.

[JTE]

I've only changed tuners on two of my instruments since 1974. One was a Yamaha FG-160 acoustic guitar which got new tuners around 1984 because the original ones weren't tuning smoothly. The other was a brand new Fender California Precision Bass Special around 1998 or so. The bass was very well made, but the stock tuners were woefully inadequate. They were imprecise, they were grinding, and they were jumpy. It was an expense I included in my planning right from the beginning because FMIC used such crappy tuners on the bass.

I don't see much talk here about folks replacing "... tuners that work well", but rather folks replacing tuners that aren't very good to start with.

[GlennW]

Originally Posted by Essen

I keep turning, but the string wont stretch, and suddenly I've turned it too far!

That could be because the string is hanging up in the nut slot. Sometimes they get snagged, then just enough tension will make them "jump". Try smoothing the slot some and see if it helps.

[Floyd Eye]

Gears get loose and slip. Some machine heads are just crap straight from the factory.

Occasionally original crappy tuners are worth much more than the really good Schallers that some idiot stuck on your ( used) 4001 instead of fixing or replacing the wavy Grovers that came on it.

[Bardley]

I replaced the tuners on my Charvel with Hipshot Ultralites because they look better, are smoother turning, more precise in tuning, and hold tune better than the stock ones. They are also lighter which helps with neck dive. It was an easy change and a worth while upgrade IMO.

[NKUSigEp]

Replacing stock tuners is either a) an issue with weight b) an issue with staying in tune or c) an issue with aesthetics.

[Essen]

Originally Posted by GlennW

That could be because the string is hanging up in the nut slot. Sometimes they get snagged, then just enough tension will make them "jump". Try smoothing the slot some and see if it helps.

I wish that was the case with mine, but even without strings attached my tuners are anything but smooth. The "teeth" on the two cogs are of different size, and have different space between them, thus resulting in uneven tuning. (Sorry for the bad english)

[megadan]

Higher quality tuners have better tuning ratios (the amount the actually peg moves versus how much you turn the tuning key), which can mean better fine tuning - my strobe tuner is no good being accurate within .03 cents if my tuners only let me adjust a .1 cent increment (hypothetical example)

[Yerf Dog]

This is TalkBass. Everything's a big deal!

[Pablo Fanque]

Originally Posted by Auriaprottu

I've seen many posts about replacing so-so stock tuners with excellent Hipshot tuners.

Aside from replacing tuners (and some other parts) so that the bass has more of a 60s vibe, I've never seen any posts about tuner replacement when the stock tuners are just as good.

Are you certain that you have?

I meant (and I believe said) work as well, in terms of function. "Just as good" could bring in more subjective considerations like looks. If I created confusion on that, I apologize.

But, yes, I've read a lot around here like (to paraphrase), "I had to swap out the tuners on my SX for retro Fender ..." I'm wondering why the urgency on tuners for some people here.

[Pablo Fanque]

Originally Posted by megadan

Higher quality tuners have better tuning ratios (the amount the actually peg moves versus how much you turn the tuning key), which can mean better fine tuning - my strobe tuner is no good being accurate within .03 cents if my tuners only let me adjust a .1 cent increment (hypothetical example)

OK, now this makes all kinds of sense to me.

[Goatee220]

Originally Posted by BigOldHarry

*sigh*

If they increase sustain, it is *trivial*. And Since when is "sustain" important on bass?

The only reason to upgrade tuners is to either lose weight (to avoid neck dive) or to just have more precision in tuning. I can say from experience that the tuners on my Lakland and Zon do a MUCH better job of getting in tune and *staying* in tune than the tuners on the Squier I bought my nephew.

However, most tuners used be decent builders are perfectly fine. The only reason I bought any tuners was when either building my own bass or adding a Hipshot d-tuner to a bass.

I never thought sustain was important - I just remember seeing those ads for Fat Fingers. They are marketed to increase sustain, alleviate dead spots, etc. I was just suggesting a reason for the difference between different tuners.

[SamanthaCay]

For me the difference in gear ratios is huge. I find it way easier to get in tune with a 22.1 as apposed to a more common 20.1 and i tune by ear. also on the note of cheap tuners, it should be known that although they may work just fine there is often an issue of reliability. they might work fine for a year and then you find yourself at a gig with a bass that won’t tune. my cheap plastic delay pedal works great but I would never trust it on a gig. a good set of tuners will last a lifetime.