Anyone surprised by the return of headless popularity?

[BarfanyShart]

For me, headless has nothing to do with fashion, and everything to do with ergonomics. Far better balance, far more stable tuning, decreased overall weight (especially when using the aluminum Nova hardware) and better manageability on a cramped stage are big wins for me.

They don’t have to be ugly either.

I love the Tele, that's a classy design!

 

[BarfanyShart]

I never thought I'd own a headless, but since I got a EHB 1005SMS last, I don't think I want a headstock ever again.

 

[dkelley]

Not surprised at all. Headless are a superior design, as long as you are smart enough in your builds to lower the weight of the right side of your strap as well so it balances. Many builders aren't. Steinberger was.

 

[devnulljp]

You'll know headless has truly arrived when a model is made by Fender.

Gibson have been doing it for decades

 

[singlemalt]

I had a Zon Vinnie. It should have checked all my boxes, played great, sounded awesome, light weight, dead silent with a great active eq….it was a top tier build.

Try as I might, I could not love that thing. From the driver’s seat, the headless thing just didn’t work for me. After a year or so of trying to bond with it, I gave up and sold it.

 

[Chrisk-K]

I prefer heads.

 

[evs]

It's not surprising to me.
I am probably typical of those looking at headless and also 80's style basses.

I was a teenager in the 80's and all the guitars back then were so cool.
I couldn't afford them.

Now I am in my mid-40's, have spare money and want back into the gear I couldn't have back then.

 

[Dr Zee]

I have a question. Do headless Basses eliminate Dead spots ?

 

[groooooove]

i kinda am..

when the kiesel (may have still been carvin at that time?) vader came out i kinda liked out weird it was, and wanted a 30" 6 string.

never bought one, and still am a bit confused by how popular headless has gotten. it's just not for me i think.

 

[lomo]

Headless design makes more ergonomic sense, sounds just as good and allows for a shorter instrument . Now that headless basses no longer restrict string choice, I am not surprised at all.

 

[lomo]

I have a question. Do headless Basses eliminate Dead spots ?

IME headless are far less prone to dead spots, although I guess no design provides a guarantee against such defects.

 

[CryingBass]

Not me

 

[micguy]

26919154[/URL], member: 345046"]I have a question. Do headless Basses eliminate Dead spots ?

Nope. A headless bass probably won’t have a dead spot in the usual spot, but the worst dead spot I ever encountered on a bass was the open A string on a headless. The note didn’t last long enough to even get a sense of pitch - it was just a dull thud.

A bass neck has resonances - it’s a bar; it’s resonances depend on the density and stiffness of the materials, along with the geometry - length, cross sectional geometry, etc. If you have a headstock with tuners, it’s a mass load on the end of the bar - that changes the resonances, but it doesn’t create or get rid of any.

Most basses, if you tune your A string lower, at some point, that open string will lose sustain - it’ll become a dead spot. I had a bass I kept in D standard for a while - the subsequent open G was a minor dead spot. When you remove mass from the headstock, that resonance moves up in frequency, sometimes making your open A string a dead spot.

The thing that surprises me about headless basses is that I see gobs of them for sale, yet I haven’t really seen any out in the wild. During the Steinberger era, I saw a fair number of them out and about, but this time around, I just never run into them.

 

[Standalone]

Not surprised at all. The only two I haven't tried are the Keisel and Ibanez.

Riis

I am very pleased with my EHB1000s. Ibanez did it very right.

 

[Zooberwerx]

I am very pleased with my EHB1000s. Ibanez did it very right.

I have two Soundgears (headed) and hoping the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. I see a gazillion of them on Reverb and wondering which 5 string model would work best for me.

Riis

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

I am not surprised. With the length of bass necks, increase in extended range instruments (i.e. bigger headstocks and more tuners) and the extra leverage attributed to them, it makes sense to remove it if it can be done well. With more and more players continuing to play as they get older, it is understandable that they would want to do that in as much comfort as possible.

 

[Standalone]

I have two Soundgears (headed) and hoping the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. I see a gazillion of them on Reverb and wondering which 5 string model would work best for me.

Riis

SR’s are my happy place. You will like the EHB’s.

Multiscale feels fine in my fretting hand, but I feel cramped in my plucking hand… so I wouldn’t naturally recommend the MS versions.

If you want a short scale, the 1000s is really great. I really like the more vintage tone profile of the “Bart” MK1’s (which I understand to be Bart liscenced? They work. I like them.)

My experience with the 1000s tells me that I’d like the 34” 1000 as well. The higher number ones are mostly multiscale models. Maybe those would feel better in my hands than the other Ibanez multis I’ve tried.

I highly recommend the EHB’s — I’m an Ibanez FanDude, but I don’t automatically love everything they come out with. These are great, though. And have a finer fit and finish than the other Indonesian 800 and up level SR’s I’ve picked up in stores recently. Much better attention to fret ends (or maybe less fret sprout…)

 

[Lownote38]

Eeek!! Headless basses feel like I'm playing on the edge of a cliff. Then, there's the whole '80s stigma. No thanks.

 

[CryingBass]

@B-Mac I got it in a trade, so no ordering from Chowny. Thanks for the number!

I am not surprised. With the length of bass necks, increase in extended range instruments (i.e. bigger headstocks and more tuners) and the extra leverage attributed to them, it makes sense to remove it if it can be done well. With more and more players continuing to play as they get older, it is understandable that they would want to do that in as much comfort as possible.

Right! A lot of guys swap tuners for saving what - an ounce? What about the weight of all that wood behind the tuners?

( yeh I know, instead of the Kubicki I will show an XL2 next time )

 

[Gilmourisgod]

The demise of the original Steinberger design had almost everything to do with the whims of Fashion, and almost nothing to do with the playability and tone, as any Steinberger owner can attest. The double ball string and stright-line micrometer tuner system is simply superior to.any of the traditional headstock tuners, but as the platform waned, the strings got harder to find. The last time I bought a set for my XP-2, they didnt fit! The correct lengths are nearly unobtanium. The single tuners like the Nova system make it possible to set your own string spacing, but all the "clamping" headstock devices I've seen either tend to break the strings or leave razor sharp nubs sticking out. The Kubicki and NS Design bridges take care of that problem, but both are pretty complex, fiddly, and hard/impossible to get replacement parts for. Ditto to all the mentioned advantages in ergonmics, size, tuning accuracy, etc. IMO Steinberger got it right 35 years ago, combining in line tuners, double ball strings, and a solid-state carbon graphite neck that simply doesnt move in response to any normal range of temperature and humidity. I can leave my XP-2 in the case for upwards of 6 months and it will come out PERFECTLY in tune. I havent felt the need to build a headless, no way I can top that, though @ctmullins Ric inspired headless builds have tempted me. If you want to look.and sound like everyone else, get an FSO.