Why This Obsession With The Fender Headstock?

[David Jayne]

Why? Because it's the best looking headstock ever? Show me an equally or more attractive headstock. I really don't think you can.

 

[KingRazor]

Why? Because it's the best looking headstock ever? Show me an equally or more attractive headstock. I really don't think you can.

I can think of half a dozen headstock designs that I prefer over the Fender headstock.

But, obviously, you love it; so, I doubt I could find one that you prefer.

 

[David Jayne]

I can think of half a dozen headstock designs that I prefer over the Fender headstock.

But, obviously, you love it; so, I doubt I could find one that you prefer.

Well, for the heck of it, why don't you name them?

 

[David Jayne]

btw, i agree about the alleva coppolo headstocks. respect to the rest of the bass because it's a damn fine bass, but the headstock looks like a foot without the toes.

So true, lol... looks like a 'flip-flop.'

 

[KingRazor]

Well, for the heck of it, why don't you name them?

I prefer all of these to the standard Fender headstock:

 

[David Jayne]

I prefer all of these to the standard Fender headstock:

Ha! OK, well, I'll admit I like the Gibson an awful lot as well. That leaves the Ibby and the SX, cuz the Fender is a, um, Fender. The Ibby does have a sleek, purposeful look, but IMO doesn't hold a candle to Fender for sex appeal.
The SX is, well, 'somewhat less attractive?' Sure, IMO. But lots of folks are with me here.

 

[SurferJoe46]

I think it's some kind of statement on marketing, branding and public relations the way headstocks have turned into corporate logos. I started out on an upright bass and no upright player ever gave a moments thought to the shape of the headstock. All basses (more or less) had the same shaped headstock and you pretty much expected them to.

Then Leo comes along and just copies the general "feel" of an upright stock for his bass and other guitars and suddenly it's now "his" logo. Well, yeah, his adaptation of a traditional design was new but it's still a derivative work. But now viewed as a logo the issue of "public confusion" arises. Say two companies both create derivative headstocks based upon the upright scroll headstock. Now the lawyerly question would be is the public confused between the two brands.

So now headstocks are things to keep lawyers in their expensive cars and a simple common traditional decoration is forgotten. Personally I hate the look of headless instruments but I must admit that they certainly do put an end to all this nonsense.

What do we as musicians have to deal with, musically?

Just seven notes plus a few flats/sharps and look at all the variety and differences in music with just those building blocks.

My point? Well, you said that the Fender head is just a 'adaptation of a traditional design was new but it's still a derivative work'.

What else could it be but a derivative of something that proceeded it?

Solomon said that there's nothing new under the sun - and I add: 'just variations on a theme'.

You are, of course, correct - but that's kinda moot - right?

 

[WardEarth]

why stop at the headstock...what about that body?

 

[SurferJoe46]

What's not to like?

 

[sanchorb]

I love many headstocks and hate many others, but being my favourite the Steinberger, I can say I don´t have the problems commenter in this thread... Being Ned such a creative guy, I identify with the headstock = neckdive premise he used...aesthetics weren´t his main goal on eliminating the headstock, but nevertheless he resolved the issue being discussed...go headless, baby!!

 

[bassbenj]

I prefer all of these to the standard Fender headstock:

Whoa! You prefer the SX "dixiecup" mod headstock to a Fender Stnd.?

I guess I can see that. It's basically the G&L (which I really like generally) without the "eyegouger" (which I hate).

 

[fourstringdrums]

i honestly perfer the original P basses headstock ,the "tele" shape.

+1 Me too. I don't hate the Fender headstock but I prefer the tele.

 

[bassbenj]

I love many headstocks and hate many others, but being my favourite the Steinberger, I can say I don´t have the problems commenter in this thread... Being Ned such a creative guy, I identify with the headstock = neckdive premise he used...aesthetics weren´t his main goal on eliminating the headstock, but nevertheless he resolved the issue being discussed...go headless, baby!!

Of course this is all about personal opinion, but I think headless instruments are the worst looking things on the planet! Every time I see one they always remind me of some sort of agricultural implement rather than a musical instrument.

But on the other hand, I LOVE the technical reasons behind headless instruments. And the idea of having a Floyd-style trem with fixed end strings is truly nifty. I love the idea of removing the headstock weight to kill neckdive. I love the compactness of combining bridge and tuners.

But I have seen the ANSWER. Jens Ritter has solved the problem! Check out his "headless" Royal collector series. His solution of the "vestigial" headstock without tuners is positively GENIUS!

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[Legattabass]

Come to think of it, there's got to be more to Leo Fender's decision to implement a big honkin' headstock than just "2D Upright Copy." Maybe it was a manufacturing consideration? A piece of wood to clamp down? Something else I'm not foreseeing?

 

[SurferJoe46]

How about a TSA requirement? It keeps someone from trying to conceal a bass in their pants and fly to a gig with no extra baggage fees?

 

[KingRazor]

Whoa! You prefer the SX "dixiecup" mod headstock to a Fender Stnd.?

I guess I can see that. It's basically the G&L (which I really like generally) without the "eyegouger" (which I hate).

What I like about it is how simple it is.

Also, not pointy, very round. I like a bit of an "organic" look. (yet for some reason I don't like natural finishes )

 

[carlthegroover]

I love many headstocks and hate many others, but being my favourite the Steinberger, I can say I don´t have the problems commenter in this thread... Being Ned such a creative guy, I identify with the headstock = neckdive premise he used...aesthetics weren´t his main goal on eliminating the headstock, but nevertheless he resolved the issue being discussed...go headless, baby!!

If I had the money, rest assured I would have gotten a Steinberger by now. But I don't want all my basses to be headless. As I said before, I like headstocks. And apparently, so do many others.

Besides: headstock =/= neckdive necessarily. Some headstocks are small enough to avoid this.

 

[Bernin]

 

[FunkMetalBass]

I feel the Fender design appeals to that sense of balance and design like a Roman column and it's 18:5 ratio:::

Why 18:5 and not the golden ratio?

 

[martyman5000]

I really like the look of the Fender Telecaster or Vintage Ibanez headstocks...most of the new style head stocks just look like butchered versions of those.