Gibson SG Slotted headstock- Why?

[bassexplorer]

Hi everyone.
I have always assumed slotted headstock was an earlier feature of the SG basses, but it actually is a later evolution.
Does anyone have a clue about why after producing EB SG's with regular headstocks in the sixties, Gibson decided at the end of the decade to produce a slotted headstock for a few years (around 1970)?
I m thinking - To lower the attachment point of the strings to their poles, and increase the angle at the head nut for an increaded sustain. Was that a problem with previous models?
Any other ideas?

 

[Bassdirty]

My guess..(only a guess, based on ..no evidence) Is they did it to minimize any neckdive.
I certainly hope it wasn't for looks..

 

[Interspace Station]

Production cost? No painted headstock and a logo that wasn’t inlaid = time and money saved perhaps.

1970 Gibson EB0 Bass Guitar >> FlyGuitars

 

[dmt]

Surely, to try to mitigate neck dive of the EB-0/3 (aka SG bass).

An obvious alternative would have been to extend and widen (round off) the end of the upper horn and attach the neck-side strap button there. However, that would have compromised the SG shape. If sticking with an uncompromised SG shape and back-of-the-neck-heel strap button placement, the best way to deal with what would otherwise be a resulting neck dive tendency is to lighten the headstock. Nowadays people tend to use Ultralites or other lightweight replacement tuners (Gibson itself is using Hipshot Ultralites on its current Les Paul Jr. DC Tribute bass) to lighten the headstock for just this purpose. Prior to Ultralites, someone at Norlin-era Gibson had the idea of cutting out headstock wood, with a classical guitar providing an aesthetic guide for a classic way to do that.

(Just my opinion as an SG bass [and long time SG guitar] owner. Could be more to it, but that’s my dos centavos)

 

[ajkula66]

I m thinking - To lower the attachment point of the strings to their poles, and increase the angle at the head nut for an increaded sustain. Was that a problem with previous models?

You're close, but in a sort of a reverse way.

From what I've been told by someone who was considered to be one of Europe's premier Gibson experts back in the '80s, it was to actually minimize the headstock breaks. And - as counter-intuitive as that approach may seem at first - it did work. You'll find far fewer "slotheads" than pre-70 EBs with a snapped headstock. Please note that I'm not implying that one can't break a "slothead", just saying that it's a bit harder to do so without major force involved.

Unfortunately, due to the increased angle that you were referring to, these models are prone to suffering from "wolf notes" which was the main reason that this line lasted for only two years.

Surely, to try to mitigate neck dive of the EB-0/3 (aka SG bass).

By re-designing the neck profile and joint for Series II in 1967, Gibson pretty much cured the neck dive on these basses. The nut went from 1.65" to 1.5" and the neck profile itself was slimmed dramatically.However, that design didn't last long.

When Series III - aka "slotheads" - came out, the neck joint was re-designed once again, as was the neck itself going from 1-piece to 3-piece, still mahagony at the time. The neck angle was also revised along with the joint. The body shape was changed as well. While the short-scale examples won't dive all that bad if at all, the long-scale ones are Stukas, plain and simple.

Once these were buried in late '72, Series IV (finally) introduced a neck volute and a 3-piece maple neck, both aimed at minimizing the headstock snaps once again.

Why Gibson went back to the chunky neck profile and wide nut close to the specs of the early EBs with their SG Bass, knowing full well that it could neck dive is beyond me. No volute either. But who am I to say anything...

 

[dmt]

You're close, but in a sort of a reverse way.

From what I've been told by someone who was considered to be one of Europe's premier Gibson experts back in the '80s, it was to actually minimize the headstock breaks. And - as counter-intuitive as that approach may seem at first - it did work. You'll find far fewer "slotheads" than pre-70 EBs with a snapped headstock. Please note that I'm not implying that one can't break a "slothead", just saying that it's a bit harder to do so without major force involved.

Unfortunately, due to the increased angle that you were referring to, these models are prone to suffering from "wolf notes" which was the main reason that this line lasted for only two years.




By re-designing the neck profile and joint for Series II in 1967, Gibson pretty much cured the neck dive on these basses. The nut went from 1.65" to 1.5" and the neck profile itself was slimmed dramatically.However, that design didn't last long.

When Series III - aka "slotheads" - came out, the neck joint was re-designed once again, as was the neck itself going from 1-piece to 3-piece, still mahagony at the time. The neck angle was also revised along with the joint. The body shape was changed as well. While the short-scale examples won't dive all that bad if at all, the long-scale ones are Stukas, plain and simple.

Once these were buried in late '72, Series IV (finally) introduced a neck volute and a 3-piece maple neck, both aimed at minimizing the headstock snaps once again.

Why Gibson went back to the chunky neck profile and wide nut close to the specs of the early EBs with their SG Bass, knowing full well that it could neck dive is beyond me. No volute either. But who am I to say anything...

You da man!

Great info as usual, thanks

 

[bassexplorer]

I certainly hope it wasn't for looks..[/QUOTE]

Well that is a matter of taste. Just bought a EB3 as a matter of fact, I can't say it is particularly nice looking (I find the keys are too modern, out of the style of the bass) but definitely cool looking to me, give it a rustic, more "acoustic" touch.
The regular SG look is definitely an immortal classic, no question about that. Surely, the slots makes it look a bit wierd ... like a Pacer car .

And I'd read something about neckdiving in the L series, but my slotted EB-3 SG is not Long scale.

 

[ajkula66]

Well that is a matter of taste. Just bought a EB3 as a matter of fact, I can't say it is particularly nice looking (I find the keys are too modern, out of the style of the bass) but definitely cool looking to me, give it a rustic, more "acoustic" touch.

Feel free to stop by at the club...I'll leave the congratulations for your NBD post.

SG & EB Bass Club

 

[bassexplorer]

Thank you ajkula66 for your insight.

I also find it counter intuitive, but how knows.
The fewer breakage of slotted head could also be due to the lesser production, that is quite difficult to quantify, don't you think?
Your source is surely right if you say so, but it would be interresting to know if it is the slotting in itself that makes the headstock less fragile, or for instance the machine heads type, their placement, the drilling,

As for Wolf notes, my slotted EB3 has not that issue, and I was not aware an increased angle could do that. Thank you.

 

[ajkula66]

The fewer breakage of slotted head could also be due to the lesser production, that is quite difficult to quantify, don't you think?
Your source is surely right if you say so, but it would be interresting to know if it is the slotting in itself that makes the headstock less fragile, or for instance the machine heads type, their placement, the drilling,

I think it's a little bit of everything. Stuff like this is next to impossible to quantify, IMO.

As for Wolf notes, my slotted EB3 has not that issue, and I was not aware an increased angle could do that. Thank you.

Not all of the "slotheads" exhibit it, but I did hear that complaint more than once. Some types of strings will make the problem more audible as well IMO

On a bright note, that generation has a lovely neck profile - for my hands anyway - they are such a joy to play.

 

[bassexplorer]

Thanks Interspace Station
I am not sure slotheads are cheaper to produce, they imply 2 operations : for the 2 slots and then drilling for the machine head.
And mine has the inlay logo.
But no paint job I give you that.

Production cost? No painted headstock and a logo that wasn’t inlaid = time and money saved perhaps.

1970 Gibson EB0 Bass Guitar >> FlyGuitars

 

[bassexplorer]

Thank you, I'll do that.

Feel free to stop by at the club...I'll leave the congratulations for your NBD post.

SG & EB Bass Club

 

[GretschWretch]

It was a bone tossed to players who smoke on a gig. Cigarettes would fit between the E string and the headstock above the nut, but cigars would not. Voila! The slotted headstock to accommodate big tobacco.

 

[ajkula66]

Voila! The slotted headstock to accommodate big tobacco.

Shame on them for discriminating against the pipe smokers...

 

[GretschWretch]

Shame on them for discriminating against the pipe smokers...

and the dippers.

 

[mongo2]

I like the look of a shortscale slothead.

 

[bassexplorer]

Thank you GretschWretch,
I don't smoke myself, but if I sell my slothead I'll remember to mention that outstanding cigar holding capability to potential buyers !

 

[George Dennis]

While the short-scale examples won't dive all that bad if at all, the long-scale ones are Stukas, plain and simple.

Late to the party but have to give you cudos for the best description of neck dive on TB.

 

[Funk With Me]

The fewer breakage of slotted head could also be due to the lesser production, that is quite difficult to quantify, don't you think?

A major cause of broken headstocks is neck dive. This was especially true in the days before strap locks were common. You could be standing there between songs and all the sudden your strap on the upper end lets go and bang. Broken headstock. Cure the neck dive and you prevented a lot of broken heads.

 

[Funk With Me]

Increase the angle of the string over the nut and you have a happier string without string trees.