Are Gibson acoustic headstocks more fragile than Taylor/Martin?

Discussion in 'Acoustic Instruments' started by still.ill, Dec 6, 2016.

  1. still.ill

    still.ill Member

    Messages:
    2,838
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    People always say Gibson electric headstocks are more prone to breakage than Fenders... does the same hold true for their acoustics?
     
  2. Astronaut FX

    Astronaut FX Member

    Messages:
    6,320
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Location:
    Midwestern Hellride
  3. EricPeterson

    EricPeterson Member

    Messages:
    49,093
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Location:
    Under the Big Sky
    I think it would have to do with the break angle, Gibson electrics have a steeper break angle than fenders and thus more prone to breakage. I dont know how their break angle on acoustics stack up.
     
    Outlaw likes this.
  4. mc5nrg

    mc5nrg Member

    Messages:
    8,562
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    Location:
    DC, Philly, Asquared, Upper Michigan
    Depends somewhat on where the truss rod access is located, or in the case of Martin, whether it has an adjustment. But Gibson electrics and acoustics have generally similar necks-angled headstock, truss rod adjustment behind nut. No scarf joint for Gibson.
     
  5. Phila67

    Phila67 Member

    Messages:
    1,620
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2012
    Martins might be more durable with their big diamond volutes plus some models have a head plate veneer.
     
  6. Jayyj

    Jayyj Supporting Member

    Messages:
    3,735
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    The big problem with Gibson headstock is that the one piece design means the grain orientation once the headstock kicks back isn't ideal for strength, which is made more of an issue on Gibsons due to a lot of wood being removed for the trussrod access. The design is the same whether acoustic or electric. Two piece joints are inherently stronger and Martin don't take any wood away beyond the nut for the trussrod channel so they're a bit tougher.

    You see a lot less broken headstocks on Gibson acoustics than electrics but then they're lighter, they can lie flat on their back without putting all the weight on the headstock and generally you could argue they get looked after better (no falling off the strap mid windmill! )
     
    eclecticsynergy likes this.
  7. lamenlovinit

    lamenlovinit Member

    Messages:
    3,341
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    You've heard the statement "the glue is stronger than the wood itself" no doubt. I vote taylor as stronger than gibson

     
    JustinReagin likes this.
  8. rickenbackerkid

    rickenbackerkid Member

    Messages:
    5,521
    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Both Taylor and Martin are two piece necks (or have a Volute) And therefore would be far stronger than a Gibby.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice