Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

[Chistopher]

Has anyone here tried the NFT Floyd Roses that are so rarely mentioned on the internet? I don't think too much of the floating tremolo crowd wood like it, but it looks useful for people who want down only action and for some reason don't want a locking nut.

I was thinking about getting one to add more downward range to my double fat Strat. It's tuning stability is perfect as is, I only feel the need to tune it about once a week. I figure the nut is well enough cut to handle the extra range.

 

[Zarg]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

Just very recently a guy on another forum got one and posted an NGD with some of the issues with the guitar and for such a high price it's a very.... specific instrument. I love Guthrie but this guitar seems to be a bit weird: http://www.sevenstring.org/threads/ngd-charvel-govan-baked-ash.328314/

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

I'm not referring to the guitar itself, I too agree that it was horribly conceived. But I'm wondering if anyone has tried the style bridge that it has.

 

[Ayrton]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

The NFT Floyd with locking tuners is a great option for mild trem use. The lock nut is really for the '80's and Dime fanatics. :d

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

Has anyone tried the Schaller 3801? It's pretty similar to this but it has rolling saddles instead of locking.

 

[6stringerguy]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

The NFT Floyd with locking tuners is a great option for mild trem use. The lock nut is really for the '80's and Dime fanatics. :d

Dime fanatics indeed, just use a double locking because then can be gentle AND crazy, worried about tuning issues if you break a string, top mount and trem stoppers exist for a reason

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

I used one when Floyds first came out back in the 70s. Switched to a finetuner when those became available. But I still have the old one in a parts box and lately I've been tempted to put it back on and see if there's a difference in the tone or sustain.

Maybe the thing to do would be to get another guitar for it and go without the locking nut... Locking tuners should be enough; I'm not divebombing like I used to.

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

I agree with the part about the locking nut being more of a hassle than it should. Specifically I dislike how the strings become stiffer as a result of the string's part behind the nut being locked away plus, I hated how I'd bang my hand on them if I wasn't paying attention.

However I strongly disagree with the trem part itself as, barring an initial period of getting to know the unit, I haven't banged my hand on the fine tuners in years no matter how crazy I'd get. I even find them incredibly useful WITHOUT a locking nut for, well, fine-tuning a string as I am incredibly sensitive to harmonics and hate it when two strings are not exactly on the same pitch.

Hence why my two go-to guitars have a Gotoh 1996 trem sans the locking nut:

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

And you have no issue with tuning stability without the locking not? And what about your tuners, do they lock?

 

[STLMTLHD79]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

I know that Alex Lifeson used the original non-fine tuner OFR back in the 80s on this strats. He did alot of mild "surf-style" trem action on it back then and seemed to have good tuning stability.

 

[dystrust]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

As long as the guitar has a straight-pull headstock you probably don't need a locking nut for mild to moderate trem use. I wouldn't try completely decking the Floyd, but most other things should return to pitch fine.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

On strats with trems, tuning problems are most commonly coming from the nut, not the bridge. So I'd say that the nut is a major part of the double locking thing. I have been messing with my new strat for over 2 months (changing bridges, nuts, etc) until it managed to get some decent tuning stability. The nut was the major part of this.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

My stability is currently almost perfect. I was testing the tuning stability of my guitar by pushing down on the bar to slack the strings, removing the neck, and then reversing the process. The guitar remained within 2 cents of in tune on all strings. The guitar in question has a baked maple neck and I wrap the strings to self lock, so that probably has a bit to do with it. I guess I'm going to do the mod as soon as I get the money to buy a Floyd and a new custom pickguard to accommodate it.

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

And you have no issue with tuning stability without the locking not? And what about your tuners, do they lock?

As long as the guitar has a straight-pull headstock you probably don't need a locking nut for mild to moderate trem use. I wouldn't try completely decking the Floyd, but most other things should return to pitch fine.

THIS. You might notice from the photos that both guitars have 6-in-line headstocks that are angled backwards.
That means the strings have a straight line from the bridge to the tuning peg (so they won't bind) and the backwards angle makes sure that they stay inside the nut's groove without the need for a tension bar or staggered tuning pegs.
Add locking tuners (which both guitars have) and you eliminate the other stability issue i.e. the strings stretching and slipping when they're wound around the tuning peg.

Like dystrust said, barring any extreme acrobatics, both guitars will stay perfectly in tune even after extensive albeit moderate use of the trem. And you just can't beat the smooth feel of a Floyd!

 

[greekdude]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

^^^ change the string gauge and the tuning problems will come back. The angle works against strings return to perfect pitch since it adds friction. Roller string trees might overcome that. But the worse part is the wear on the (non-locking) nut. You don't have this problem with locking nuts.

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

Based on my experience with these two particular guitars, one of which was custom-built in that configuration from the start, I will disagree with your assessment.

The headstock angle is shallow enough (between 14 and 17 degrees) that, in conjunction with a properly cut, self-lubricating nut, the chances of binding are greatly minimized.
Similarly, the angle is also too shallow to appreciably affect the wear of the nut when compared to an otherwise similar guitar with a hardtail bridge.

Not gonna pretend that it is as good as the near-perfect tuning stability of a double-locking system but the difference is so small that in my eyes it is not worth the tradeoffs, specifically the stiffness of the strings, particularly during bends and the plinkyness of the resulting tone.

BTW, on the natural guitar, the one that wasn't originally built like that but that was modded after the fact, I have alternated between 9 and 10 gauge strings with no appreciable change in tuning stability (after the change in setup required to compensate for the difference in string pull, obviously).

 

[greekdude]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

Similarly, the angle is also too shallow to appreciably affect the wear of the nut when compared to an otherwise similar guitar with a hardtail bridge.

The wear on the nut is a result of the strings, especially the wound ones, working like a file against the nut slot. One the methods of Dan Erlewin for making DIY nut files is this : using strings.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

But the worse part is loss of sustain when trying to do Dimebag Darrell-type harmonics.

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Any Love For Non-Fine Tuner Floyds?

The wear on the nut is a result of the strings, especially the wound ones, working like a file against the nut slot. One the methods of Dan Erlewin for making DIY nut files is this : using strings.

I fail to see how this otherwise interesting piece of information in any way contradicts what I have stated above.

Even on a hardtail, strings will still move when you're tuning and even when you're doing bends. It is inevitable. Self-lubricating nuts will slow this process down considerably when compared to a plastic nut but will still wear down. Then again even a locking nut made out of metal will eventually get burs that will cause string breakage. Neither is indestructible and may, at some point, depending on the frequency and intensity of usage require replacement.
Same can be said about a lot of other guitar parts, including the neck's nickel-silver frets.

If we wanted a completely indestructible instrument we'd have switched to all-metal guitars with epoxy resin fretboards and titanium frets a long time ago...

But the worse part is loss of sustain when trying to do Dimebag Darrell-type harmonics.

The NFT Floyd with locking tuners is a great option for mild trem use. The lock nut is really for the '80's and Dime fanatics. :d