• New Sponsor: ShipNerd, Ship Your Gear with Us... for less! Click Here.

Are you a headstock snob?

NoahL

Member
Messages
1,423
I guess I am. Not a snob -- to each his own -- but sensitive to how they look. I think the coolest headstock ever is a Tele. Perfect proportions, sleek, no extra wood, no weird curves, just perfect. Strats look to0 "violin-y" to me, too classical. And the big-ass 70s Strat headstocks -- ugh. Hate 'em. Looks like they stole the headstock off a cello.I actually like G&L's take on the Strat headstock; the little "tit" at the bottom gives it a better balance and a modern look.

I love the Gibson headstock because it's classic and stylish but still tough-looking. I can't quite warm up to PRS headstocks, because they're too tapered -- too Halloween-like. But I'm starting to get it with PRS's, just a little bit.

Hamers I like -- I like the moderate taper and the slight "open book" scroll on the top. Reverends are cool -- but pretty aggressive: to me, you have to be a good player to step up there with that headstock. I'd look like a poser. Most non-Fender Fender copies don't do it for me -- you can tell they're just trying to avoid a lawsuit. But I like the old Peavey Predator headstocks -- Tele-esque and nicely proportioned.

Some headstocks are too plain. The Xaviere headstocks on their humbucker guitars are just too smooth and boxy. Same with a Canvas I had a few years ago. Headstocks need a little bit of fancy -- it's just a matter of how much. If all this doesn't sound absurdly arbitrary, let me add this: I think the new Collings electrics are gorgeous, but I just don't like that offset notch at the top of the headstock -- one element too many.

My least favorite headstock of all? Probably on the Seagull acoustics. Way too small, no style, no texture -- looks shrunken. You need to go all the way down to a Seagull parlor guitar before they start to look okay.

I know what you're thinking: this guy's out of his mind. But I bet a few of you are just as aware of headstocks as I am. It's a hard road. You spend way too much time being agitated by unsatisfactory headstocks -- and way too much time wanting to buy those guitars whose headstocks make you happy.

I'd like to hear from someone who can honestly say, "I don't give a rat's ass about headstocks." Count your blessings.
 

XKnight

Member
Messages
11,087
The only headstock I can honestly say I don't care for is Tyler. It wouldn't stop me from owning one though.
 

NoahL

Member
Messages
1,423
+1. A bit too beefy and the repeating logo is hard on the eyes.

I didn't even get into logo typefaces. ;-)
 

jazzandmetal?

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
8,700
I love the regular Tyler headstock. I don't like the Tyler Classic headstock though.

I used to not like tele headstocks though either. I always thought they looked weird compared to the strat.
 

dmgcaster

Member
Messages
92
Yeah...I guess I'm a headstock snob too. Tele headstocks are just about the most perfect looking headstocks.

I mean really! Does anyone here really like the three to a side, paddle headstock on the J5 tele? Hell, I've never seen any footage of the man playing his namesake Telecaster or Tel Deluxe!

-David
 

EADGBE

Senior Member
Messages
12,338
I have my favorites too. Kramers (hockey sticks, pointy), B.C. Richs (not the widow), Hamers (pointy), Les Paul, etc. Fenders seem too old fashioned to me.
 

Pietro

2-Voice Guitar Junkie and All-Around Awesome Guy
Messages
16,448
I've become a bit of a snob. 90% of the tie lately I'm playing with a Tom Anderson headstock.
 

PixMix

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
2,341
Usually I'm not too picky, but Carvin strat headstock is the one that I'm not too crazy about.
 

GarrettPSU

Member
Messages
53
I think you could put the Tele headstock on almost any guitar and it would look cool.

I gotta say +1 on the PRS. That's probably my least favorite headstock. I used to dislike the new Crook headstock but now I think it's pretty cool.
 

blueshawk1

Member
Messages
418
I guess I am. Not a snob -- to each his own -- but sensitive to how they look. I think the coolest headstock ever is a Tele. Perfect proportions, sleek, no extra wood, no weird curves, just perfect.

Some headstocks are too plain. The Xaviere headstocks on their humbucker guitars are just too smooth and boxy.
Yes, they just changed their headstock on those guitars this year, now they look like boat paddles - ugly!
Another disappointing one was Rondo's guitars, Agiles and SX, they just changed the headstocks on their fender-ish guitars, now they look like the Xavieres, Tursers and a number of others - a totally cheap and generic look.

It's funny now to read what people say about tele headstocks because at one time I thought they were so ugly. But that was a long time ago, now teles are my favorite and I am quite fond of the headstock design now.
 

5150gtrmonkey

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
281
Thanks for starting this post! Yes, I will admit that I can be somewhat of a headstock snob. If all things were equal on guitars, with tone and playability being the most important factor, then the visual design comes next.

For me, the stratocaster headstock is my all time favorite. And yes, I love the large 70's style a lot! Of course the classics such as the tele and Gibson LP are beautiful designs too.

For contemporary builders, I love the designs of Grosh, Anderson and Vinetto. At first I hated them, but I don't mind/like the design of Tyler and D'pergo now. Kinda grew on me over the years. For some reason, the D'Pergo heastock looks a lot nicer in person than in the photos.
 

DonW

Velocity Town Angel
Double Platinum Member
Messages
5,478
Depends on how it makes me feel. It's not a brand issue but how it appeals to me cosmetically. Some just don't look right to me but I'd say the majority look just fine. Tyler being one of the more unconventional but I find it appealing. I'm a huge fan of the split headstock.
 
Messages
11,596
no, i'm not. and i really don't get why people would be so closed minded to a guitar that they'd let the headstock get in the way. especially something as normal looking as PRS, G&L, Epiphone, and Carvin.

there are threads here all the time about "man, i just played the most awesome guitar ever. it was a G&L. but i didn't buy it because of the headstock." :messedup
 

lamenlovinit

Member
Messages
3,843
I don't know if snob is the right word. The way I feel about it some are so iconic, that "nothing else will do". Like the tele. I love G&Ls. But owning a tele gives you the "real" headstock. It's like loving prints of sunflower paintings. You may have many, you may even prefer other ones (G&L, Crook, etc), but is your collection complete without Van Gogh's Sunflower?

Guitars are strange things. There are factual things we can measure, then there are other things, some of them total ********. Things like "Mojo", feel, tone (Tone isn't ********, but you can't measure it). So liking a guitar for its appearance, and finding a great playing and sounding one with the "right" look, doesn't necessarily make you a snob.

Then again you would never touch anything other than classic Fender, Gibby, Gretsch... You may be a snob :rimshot
 

Zero

Member
Messages
2,855
I suppose I'm not. My favorite headstock is the Explorer - just the headstock, not the guitar. I like them on Strat type bodies or super strats. I say I'm not (snob) because though it's my favorite I don't have a guitar with one. But if I were to spend a gazillion dollars and have my primo, ultra-custom guitar built, it would have an Explorer headstock.
 

ABKB

Member
Messages
3,167
Depends on how one defines "snob". I love some (Strat, Tele, LP, Dano), am ambivalent about others (Hammer, PRS), HATE others (Explorer or almost any other "pointy headstock" guitar). If that makes me a snob, so be it. And yes I would, and have, turned down guitars because of the headstock. To me a guitar in order to be a great guitar, has to do all I ask it to do (within reason of course), and looking cool even if it's just in my own eyes, is one of those things I want a guitar to do.
 




Trending Topics

Top Bottom