Downsides/Cons of Headless Basses?

[SixtyCycleHum]

They're cool!! I find them to be a pain in the butt, but almost like setting up a Floyd Rose, once you're good you're GOOD.

I felt weird at first on my friend's Steinberger as it's kind of shaped like a broom and weighs nothing. But I quite like it!

 

[BarfanyShart]

I would say the tuners on headless hardware are a little more difficult to deal with. They are significantly harder to turn by hand, and I personally won't ever carry around a wrench just for tuning. It would be great if somebody came up with a more ergonomic way to tune, but IME, the tuners are the most stable I have ever used, so that probably offsets the downside well enough.

Changing strings, of course, is a little fiddly - I put a scratch in the headstock the first time I tried it, learned a lesson. I also had an issue where I "maxed out" the tightness on one tuner and had to scratch my head for a minute before I figured out how to fix it - so, another lesson learned.

 

[Snert]

Apart from that, the only engineering mistake I see on headless basses is tiny little bodies with tiny little upper horns that make them impossible to play on the strap. First position requires a fully outstretched arm, which negates the advantage of the elimination of neck dive in the first place, and breaks the arm of the player anyway.

Strap pin extender on the Spirits. Easy and cheap.

I got to play a borrowed Stein XL2 for a while years ago when I was gigging and it was a revelation in terms of the engineering. It was very difficult to play because of the very poor ergnomics, but the design was really the right way to do a headless instrument.

An original with a pivot plate? Not true at all, these have to have the best ergonomics of any bass ever invented simply because it adjusts to any position instantly. From your previous comment, you did not play an XL2, but an XT2, the Spirit version.

 

[kittywithabanjo]

I love my headless it quickly became my number 1, I love I can bring it in a guitar case, I love not having a headstock on smaller stages, the set and forget intonation, I am sure they are not for everyone, I dont look at my hands when I play so lack of a headstock doesnt throw me off at all.

 

[mmbongo]

I also had to source a new set of ball-tugging jaws

 

[Starthief]

I play sitting down at my DAW/synths and keep bashing my Mikro's headstock into things (and that's not exactly a large bass...)

I would love a shorter-than-30" scale headless bass, but there really aren't many out there. It's all either custom jobs or stuff like the Wing, MUB Miezo, FingyBass etc.

 

[Benj-jammin]

View attachment 4653931

I love my headless it quickly became my number 1, I love I can bring it in a guitar case, I love not having a headstock on smaller stages, the set and forget intonation, I am sure they are not for everyone, I dont look at my hands when I play so lack of a headstock doesnt throw me off at all.

Beautiful bass there, Kitty. Love the rich and warm looking tone woods. if I may ask, what make/brand is it?

 

[Spidey2112]

I've owned both a Steinberger and NS Design... I think they look cool, and playability is there, for the most part... even at 34" scale, the first couple of frets seem 'out of reach'.

Adapt and overcome... cause they do look cool. Lol!

 

[ctmullins]

I would say the tuners on headless hardware are a little more difficult to deal with. They are significantly harder to turn by hand ...

They need lubrication. I use a tiny smear of axle grease on the threads and the thrust washers. Even better are the models (like Nova) that use actual thrust bearings.

These have been my primary axes lately. I just finished up the five-string about a month or so ago, and it is an absolute joy! Especially in the cramped rehearsal rooms I find myself in, not to mention cramped stages!

 

[Mike Marshall]

Been formulating a “dream bass” build in my mind for a time. For some reason, without any significant proof, I’ve fixated on ideas like doing a headless bass (and maybe even multiscale).

For the sake of discussion, I’ll keep the question vague and open ended- what’s the DOWNSIDE to a headless instrument? Seems like the obvious cure for an ugly headstock, and why not have the instrument be a little less lengthy?

Shortly after the Steinberger came out Kramer put out The Duke. I bought one it was headless yet it had regular tuners at the butt end using standard strings. The strings were angled to keep the standard tuners from interfering with each other. I had no trouble adapting to playing it and I liked it a lot. This was over 40 years ago, I sold it because I needed some money. I have been thinking recently I would like to get a headless. At my age it would most likely be the last instrument I ever buy and my first ever custom order if Status starts taking orders.

 

[andvari7]

1. Ideally, I’d like more scales for double ball-end strings, but that isn’t feasible. Ken Smith makes a 6-string set, but it’s only for 34” scale.
2. I have been a grand total of two headless bass trems: The Steinberger Bass TransTrem, and the one found on Andy West’s custom Aria - you can see it in a Henry Kaiser video from 1984. Neither are made anymore; Aria won’t even return my emails concerning it. Nobody else - Hipshot, Nova, Kahler, etc. - will build them. Speaking as an owner of a headless Basslab, this is actually my biggest complaint about headless basses currently produced.
3. Hanging them on the wall can be a bit of a challenge, if you have that option, which I do not (I’ve never met a landlord willing to let me screw wall hangers into the studs).
4. Aesthetics: Quite a few people I’ve met can’t stand the way they look, whereas I prefer headless instruments.

 

[Williethump]

Oh I’m absolutely open to talks about positives too. I mean, to me, it seems that headstocks are sometimes ugly, often a bit weighty, stick out further to allow for more chances of whacking them into a mic stand or a bandmate on stage, AND I’ve read that tuning down by the bridge can actually be a better tuning experience.

I guess I just wonder why headless designs still seem unusual or out of the ordinary, and why makers still only do some of them. Is it all mostly a matter of taste, or are there much more practical pros/cons? Same situation with multiscale fretboards- are we all mostly just stuck in the past, or is there a darn good reason why the old fashioned instrument designs are truly still the best?

Because musicians, while politically all over the map, are basically conservative over musical matters. Hence the maintenance of traditional conservative instrument construction like giant old headstocks, tube amps and burst finishes. If it was good enough for Bill Haley... Plus, you need a vintage looking ax to grab that star mystique. Headless would be a good look for Devo however. The future is here, man.

 

[kittywithabanjo]

Beautiful bass there, Kitty. Love the rich and warm looking tone woods. if I may ask, what make/brand is it?

This is a custom made by Vancouvers Reimer Guitars.

 

[Snert]

2. I have been a grand total of two headless bass trems: The Steinberger Bass TransTrem, and the one found on Andy West’s custom Aria - you can see it in a Henry Kaiser video from 1984. Neither are made anymore; Aria won’t even return my emails concerning it. Nobody else - Hipshot, Nova, Kahler, etc. - will build them. Speaking as an owner of a headless Basslab, this is actually my biggest complaint about headless basses currently produced.

Wow. I've never even thought about a trem on a bass, but I suppose not being able to get a headless one is only really an issue if you have 1 bass.

 

[Isaac_James]

Been formulating a “dream bass” build in my mind for a time. For some reason, without any significant proof, I’ve fixated on ideas like doing a headless bass (and maybe even multiscale).

For the sake of discussion, I’ll keep the question vague and open ended- what’s the DOWNSIDE to a headless instrument? Seems like the obvious cure for an ugly headstock, and why not have the instrument be a little less lengthy?

Harder to hang up on the wall, at least if you rely on the traditional string swing type that holds it by the headstock.

Then there's the aesthetics of it, the headless look is great for some (sounds like you might be this type of person if you're considering getting one). I'm in the don't like it camp, but of course that's totally subjective.

 

[bass12]

Negatives? A headless might feel weird to you balance-wise if you're not used to it (though this would depend partly on the body design). String selection is more limited. And, yeah, some band leaders might not be a fan of the look. If you like to bend harmonics then that option is out (unless you get a Bendwell-equipped Status). Oh, and the idea that headless basses are immune to dead spots is nonsense. The worst dead spot I ever came across was on a headless (and graphite-necked) bass.

 

[N. Kentucky Bass]

I've owned several headless basses. Generally pretty cool. Very handy for travel. etc. However, you can't use a clip on headstock tuner. Another positive note if you are a smoker: very handy as a cigarette holder.

 

[Medicine Man]

One of my bandmates used to play a headless guitar sometimes and the other guitarists didn't like it because they said they found it harder to figure out what he was playing by watching his hands. So I suppose if you have guitarists who watch the bass player's hands to figure out, say, the key of a song or jam, they might gripe about a headless bass. But I dunno: Are there guitarists who do this?

Yes, I have had a guitarist who complained about my 5 string (and me playing up and down the neck) because it made it hard for him to see what root im playing.

 

[Snert]

Yes, I have had a guitarist who complained about my 5 string (and me playing up and down the neck) because it made it hard for him to see what root im playing.

He should know the material before getting on stage. But, the nut is at the same place, so I'm not seeing what's so difficult here is he's looking for a visual cue and I fail to see why you need to change instruments to get pas his issue.
I've never looked at a guitarist for a key cue.

 

[luciens]

Strap pin extender on the Spirits. Easy and cheap.

Much better if the bass were designed properly to begin with.

An original with a pivot plate? Not true at all, these have to have the best ergonomics of any bass ever invented simply because it adjusts to any position instantly. From your previous comment, you did not play an XL2, but an XT2, the Spirit version.

No, it was an XL2 and its ergonomics are terrible. The pivot plate doesn't solve the main problem - the neck is positioned way too far out. So the fretting arm has to be nearly fully extended to reach the lower frets. You can see this with any of the pictures of Geddy Lee from the Steinberger days, for example. No pictures of me when I was playing the one I had, but I definitely had the same problem with it.

But this is a general design problem with basses with small bodies and short upper horns like the Spector, etc., Even the Fender has this problem to a slight degree, but not nearly as bad as those basses I mentioned or the "Stein".

The polar opposite for comparison would be the Brian Bromberg sig bass from Carvin/Kiesel, whose body design positions the neck exactly in the optimal place, both on the strap and when played seated....

L