Headstock Bias

[JakobT]

I voted no. Form follows function. Fender style is cheaper to manufacture, but functionally provides a suboptimal string break angle at the nut.

But I could have voted yes, because I'm conditioned to see the 4 inline fender headstock as the "correct" look for a bass guitar, in spite of its functionally inferior design.

I'm a man of contradictions. That's where the truth and beauty lie.

It depends. Some form follows function, some doesn't. The OPs point, as I understand it, is a purely aesthetic one. There is absolutely no functional difference between the headstock of a Fender, a Sire or a G&L - the differences are completely superficial.

Now, the Fender headstock isn't necessarily functionally inferior, it just solves the problem of the break angle with a string tree rather than angling the headstock. You might as well argue that the angled headstock is functionally inferior because it's weaker and prone to breaking. But the fact is that both solutions work perfectly well, they're just designed with different priorities in mind.

I voted yes, as feel much the same way as the OP - I find some headstock shapes much easier on the eyes than others. Unlike many others, I have no problem with G&L headstocks, and even the Sire ones are growing on me to some extent. But I tend to prefer the more traditional ones like the Fender and the 2+2 Gibson headstock.

 

[Deleted member 165050]

Some of my favourite headstocks:

 

[CallMeAl]

It matters, but only a little. Not a deal breaker.

I'm a sucker for Fender's aesthetic. IDK if G&L or Musicman are good examples for contrast, they're also Fender instruments, right? I just like classic, well-respected designs. The headstock kinda sends a message you know what you're getting. But if a bass plays and sounds great, I'll take others into consideration.

There are some, however, that would be a hard pass:

 

[Ostie]

I don't like pointy HS. Nor do I like a V.

The Roman Ogee design that Leo borrowed is thousands of years old. It's classical design. Love the backwards F font too. Leo got so many things right. Stratocaster, Telecaster, Precision, Jazz, Jaguar....

 

[hbarcat]

I've really don't like the Fender bass headstock shape. It's the main reason why I've never owned a P or J bass.

I have two frankenbasses with Fender necks but I modified the headstocks on both to a much more streamlined shape.

 

[Killing Floor]

85, maybe 90% of headstocks look exactly like Fender headstocks. Fender's headstock design is why your A string always buzzes. It's also a contributor to your 7th fret G string dead spot. But I love Fender basses anyway.

 

[devnulljp]

I have a completely baseless, nonsensical, and unfair bias against the G&L headstock shape. Several other non-Fender or non-2+2 headstock shapes suffer from a similarly superficial encumbrance to a full embrace in my admittedly flawed estimation. I once felt the same way about the Ernie Ball Music Man 3+1 thing but that has slowly evolved through the acceptable and into the desired category because my bias does not seem to hold up to multiple encounters with fine instruments.

Is this a common neurosis? Yes, yes, I know - we should all be focused only on such pure musical elements as tone and feel, but I find myself after all a bit priggish about these matters.

Get you a vintage wunkay

 

[Pauly 4001]

And now for something completely different:

Which is to say I am open to other possibilities.
The only kind I don't like so much are the maimed and butchered:

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Hard to say whether the G&L "hook" or the Sire "topknot" are the more neurosis-triggering headstock shapes, both get a lot of (imho, silly) hate. Though there are headstock shapes out there too extreme for me, neither of those is.

How about the bulbous Reverend head stock?

 

[kmon]

I have fewer bass hang ups than I used too, but headstock shape has never been a major one. I like the G&L shape better than traditional fender. I can say I recoil at the boxy sire headstocks but it wouldn't prevent ownership. I also hate pointy 80s ones and scroll headstocks.

ok I guess I hate lots of headstocks but again not enough that I'd refuse to buy something

 

[2tonic]

Always hated the G&L puppet show curtain, like they let a drunk loose on the scroll saw.
It strikes me as nebulous, uncertain, almost random.
It has a lack of purpose which tears at my insides.

I like others, to differing degrees, but this is the only one that generates such a visceral dislike.
YMMV.

 

[Deleted member 165050]

Always hated the G&L puppet show curtain, like they let a drunk loose on the scroll saw.
It strikes me as nebulous, uncertain, almost random.
It has a lack of purpose which tears at my insides.

I like others, to differing degrees, but this is the only one that generates such a visceral dislike.

Are you sure you're not transferring a deep-rooted inner resentment of the basic injustice and fundamental futility of human existence in a vast, uncaring universe to the headstock scenario?

 

[jamro217]

I don't obsess over it, but I do like the headstock shape to be consistent with the body shape. A futuristic looking instrument with a stodgy headstock looks odd, like it was thrown together. The same is true for a traditionally shaped bass with a pointy space aged headstock. These instruments look like blunders rather than purposeful designs, especially with the commonality of bolt on necks. You wouldn't see as many neck through designs (or set neck models) with obviously mismatched themes. If the bass doesn't suffer from extreme neck dive from an overly large headstock it shouldn't be a concern. I like simple designs that don't compete with the band for attention.

 

[WI Short Scaler]

There's nothing wrong with having preferences in aesthetics, whether it be headstock shape or finish color. If I am going to buy an instrument, I want to like looking at it.

This is how I feel. I want to like how it plays AND how it looks.

 

[rashrader]

Without Carrots, this Poll means nothing.

 

[Londo Molari]

Shingles doesn't care.

 

[Remoman]

I voted no, as I have never found myself liking a bass and then saying "but no way" based on the headstock. However, as it turns out, all my basses are 3+X headstocks and now I feel I have a preference to that design.

 

[whero]

I feel like I've been here before.

Who here writes off a bass due to headstock/tuners configs?

 

[Phalex]

I'm not a fan of inline tuners or string trees, my main player has both.

 

[dzcandemir]

I don't like g&l but Marcus Miller headstocks are alright. Those don't bother me. Everything on an instrument matters, function and form.