Have you tested the Fatfinger?
- Thread starter Voxman
- Start date
Voxman
New member
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
Product Description
The Fatfinger increases sustain by adding physical mass to the headstock of your instrument. It helps add tone, sustain, and overall tone balance. It works on electric and acoustic instruments and installs in seconds without tools. Fatfinger will not damage your instrument.
Product Description
The Fatfinger increases sustain by adding physical mass to the headstock of your instrument. It helps add tone, sustain, and overall tone balance. It works on electric and acoustic instruments and installs in seconds without tools. Fatfinger will not damage your instrument.
Butch Snyder
ObsoleteChickenPickingologist
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
It's funny that one company believes bigger headstocks, more mass, and this and that add sustain. There ared players and companirs out there who believe the opposite; that smaller headstocks help sustain. Who do you believe???
It's funny that one company believes bigger headstocks, more mass, and this and that add sustain. There ared players and companirs out there who believe the opposite; that smaller headstocks help sustain. Who do you believe???
Voxman
New member
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
I`m not sure. But i have tested some teles with great sustain!:laugh2:
I`v been thinking alot of that yngwe interview latley and wonder if his right...
i dunno..
Maby it will be great in less balanced instruments!!!
Butch Snyder said:
I`m not sure. But i have tested some teles with great sustain!:laugh2:
I`v been thinking alot of that yngwe interview latley and wonder if his right...
i dunno..
Maby it will be great in less balanced instruments!!!
Last edited:
Butch Snyder
ObsoleteChickenPickingologist
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
Very interesting... Allan Holdsworth thinks differently. He thinks that a smaller headstock is the way to go. Most of the time, he plays a guitar with no headstock. I have thought of trying the Fat Finger though....
Very interesting... Allan Holdsworth thinks differently. He thinks that a smaller headstock is the way to go. Most of the time, he plays a guitar with no headstock. I have thought of trying the Fat Finger though....
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
Holdsworth's Carvin sig model guitar's headstock is pretty tiny... smaller than my Music Man's actually. Nevertheless the tone and sustain of that instrument was REALLY nice.
I've found the effect of fatfingers vary on instrument to instrument. It helped somewhat on the Ibanezes and Jacksons I used to own, but not so much on the Fenders. Fooling with the positioning can have a slight effect as well.
Experiment. See what works for you.
Butch Snyder said:
Holdsworth's Carvin sig model guitar's headstock is pretty tiny... smaller than my Music Man's actually. Nevertheless the tone and sustain of that instrument was REALLY nice.
I've found the effect of fatfingers vary on instrument to instrument. It helped somewhat on the Ibanezes and Jacksons I used to own, but not so much on the Fenders. Fooling with the positioning can have a slight effect as well.
Experiment. See what works for you.
frankfalbo
In Fluence Y'all
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
In a way both schools of thought are right. If you shrink a headstock, there's less mass there to sway back and forth, so more energy should stay in the neck and string. If you enlarge a headstock, it could be more mass flapping in the wind, but usually it then tends to become it's own entity, governing it's own vibrations more, and generally remaining more rigid as a unit, having a similar affect. More energy stays in the neck and strings. There's no hard rule to it. A rubbery neck would probably be helped by the fat finger, but a stiff neck with an ebony board would probably get a little thinner sounding. Any neck or headstock vibration you choke off reduces the open midrange associated with a bolt on.
In a way both schools of thought are right. If you shrink a headstock, there's less mass there to sway back and forth, so more energy should stay in the neck and string. If you enlarge a headstock, it could be more mass flapping in the wind, but usually it then tends to become it's own entity, governing it's own vibrations more, and generally remaining more rigid as a unit, having a similar affect. More energy stays in the neck and strings. There's no hard rule to it. A rubbery neck would probably be helped by the fat finger, but a stiff neck with an ebony board would probably get a little thinner sounding. Any neck or headstock vibration you choke off reduces the open midrange associated with a bolt on.
Butch Snyder
ObsoleteChickenPickingologist
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
That is exactly Carvin's & Holdsworth's opinions...
frankfalbo said:
That is exactly Carvin's & Holdsworth's opinions...
Re: Have you tested the Fatfinger?
I have one
I got it for $5
It's nice, it darkens and fattens up the guitar about 15% I would say. It does add some sustain.
I ike my guitars for the most part, so I prefer not to use it, I don't need tone change from the sound the wood already gives. I feel like the harmonic signature changes a tad.
I have one
I got it for $5
It's nice, it darkens and fattens up the guitar about 15% I would say. It does add some sustain.
I ike my guitars for the most part, so I prefer not to use it, I don't need tone change from the sound the wood already gives. I feel like the harmonic signature changes a tad.
