Anyone ever do a Hendrix style reversed bridge pup ?

Re: Anyone ever do a Hendrix style reversed bridge pup ?

Whats your take on the reverse headstock aspect ?

Mumble. I can imagine headstock size and positioning of the heavy tuners playing a role. But I can't think that the individual strings can "feel" their individual length past the nut.
 
Re: Anyone ever do a Hendrix style reversed bridge pup ?

I can't quantify it, but in my admittedly limited experience with such things, I feel it does. It seems logical that you'd you get more, or at least different, sympathetic vibrations north of the nut depending on string length. Perhaps it's subtle, but basic physics says it has "some" effect. If you strike the strings north of the nut, you get little high tones. The pitch of those will change based on the length of the string on the tuner side. If nothing else, you're gonna have a bit less downpull at the nut due to a reduce string angle across it since you're terminating further out on the headstock. I really don't know, and am far form an expert, but hey, it is fun to think about. Perhaps a Jimi guru can chime in. Anyone ?


Mumble. I can imagine headstock size and positioning of the heavy tuners playing a role. But I can't think that the individual strings can "feel" their individual length past the nut.
 
Re: Anyone ever do a Hendrix style reversed bridge pup ?

regarding the headstocks, I guess at the very least even if it doesnt make any sonic differences it does make for a rather unique looking strat
 
Re: Anyone ever do a Hendrix style reversed bridge pup ?

Here's the theory on the headstock... While scale length at a certain tension will get you a specific pitch (so no difference) when you bend a low E on a standard guitar there's only an inch of extra string to "give" so it feels "stiffer". On a reverse headstock, the increased length behind the nut gives you more slack to stretch when you are bending. I can see how that can affect pick attack, as you are basically stretching the string a little when you pluck it, especially if you have a hard attack.

If it's a locking trem, it's irrelevant.
 
Re: Anyone ever do a Hendrix style reversed bridge pup ?

Here's the theory on the headstock... While scale length at a certain tension will get you a specific pitch (so no difference) when you bend a low E on a standard guitar there's only an inch of extra string to "give" so it feels "stiffer". On a reverse headstock, the increased length behind the nut gives you more slack to stretch when you are bending. I can see how that can affect pick attack, as you are basically stretching the string a little when you pluck it, especially if you have a hard attack.

If it's a locking trem, it's irrelevant.



By that logic then bending on the higher strings would be that much harder then ?

It certainly makes sense, however on a typical 3+3 headstock, the G and D strings would have the longest length behind the nut but they certainly don't feel any different.

As such it makes me wonder if it really matters that much, for if it did, I would expect everyone to use either an inline or reverse inline headstock because string length matters, but given we also have 3+3 which is equally popular, it makes me thing its pretty much null.

Still would look cool of course
 
Re: Anyone ever do a Hendrix style reversed bridge pup ?

why doesnt fender make a reverse headstock, reverse ala stevie ray bridge, and a reverse pickup with an s1 series parrelel switch that would be the best of all worlds
 
Back
Top