Is there a manufacturing advantage? I have some ideas why loopend could be better ...
I bought some D'Addario loopend plain guitar strings, they're longer than the usual plains and can be used for the high end of a ERB, by adding a ferrule. This got me thinking how loopend strings save resources, are cheaper, create less waste, by having the 'ferrule' as part of the instrument.
Also, the anchoring points of a single or double loopend string can be much more simple and compact than a large shaped cavity that has a lot of outward force exerted on it by the ferrule, also sometimes the core wire gets trapped between ferrule and cavity edges and get damaged.
For headless basses and guitars the compactness of the nut-end anchoring points helps a lot where the strings are close together. At the bridge the linear-pull tuners don't need to be a wide claw shape but just a small and strong vertical rod you hook the loop over.
I bought some D'Addario loopend plain guitar strings, they're longer than the usual plains and can be used for the high end of a ERB, by adding a ferrule. This got me thinking how loopend strings save resources, are cheaper, create less waste, by having the 'ferrule' as part of the instrument.
Also, the anchoring points of a single or double loopend string can be much more simple and compact than a large shaped cavity that has a lot of outward force exerted on it by the ferrule, also sometimes the core wire gets trapped between ferrule and cavity edges and get damaged.
For headless basses and guitars the compactness of the nut-end anchoring points helps a lot where the strings are close together. At the bridge the linear-pull tuners don't need to be a wide claw shape but just a small and strong vertical rod you hook the loop over.