Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

[mirrormind]

Hello,
I am building my first guitar but a little confused when it comes to the floyd rose tremelos.

I am considering getting a licensed FR that is single locking, also a fender roller nut and sperzel locking tuners. I'd like to know if this combination would work and whether it would hold the tuning better or worst than a double locking licensed FR.

The main reason I am put off with having double locking is that you have to cut the ball ends off the strings. I'd like to eliminate the locking nut as it seems it can be a major problem of tuning difficulties (on cheaper models at least) and it would also require me to have a 1 5/8" nut width rather than 1 11/16" nut width (like most of the fender necks).

I would imagine that having the single locking/roller nut/locking tuners would make it act more a standard strat tremolo but without any place for the strings to catch or tuners to slip, it would have the tuning stability of the FR. Although as I don't have any experience on the subject I'm probably wrong.

Thanks for your help,
Robert.

 

[AzCat]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

I am considering getting a licensed FR that is single locking, also a fender roller nut and sperzel locking tuners. I'd like to know if this combination would work and whether it would hold the tuning better or worst than a double locking licensed FR.

Worse. If having a tremolo and tuning stability are both important to you there's no substitute for a double-locking setup and it's not a close call.

The main reason I am put off with having double locking is that you have to cut the ball ends off the strings. I'd like to eliminate the locking nut as it seems it can be a major problem of tuning difficulties (on cheaper models at least) and it would also require me to have a 1 5/8" nut width rather than 1 11/16" nut width (like most of the fender necks).

Not true on either count. If you don't want to be bothered with cutting the ball ends off of your strings you could use a double-locking Kahler rather than a Floyd Rose style unit. And Floyd nuts come in 1 9/16", 1 5/8", 1 11/16", and 1 3/4" widths so you're definitely not constrained to a 1 5/8" neck width at the nut.

I would imagine that having the single locking/roller nut/locking tuners would make it act more a standard strat tremolo but without any place for the strings to catch or tuners to slip, it would have the tuning stability of the FR. Although as I don't have any experience on the subject I'm probably wrong.

Roller nuts are OK but they're tone leeches. I've owned several Strats equipped with roller nuts and locking tuners and come to that conclusion with each. There's a reason, aesthetics aside, that they're not commonly used.

That said if you really dislike locking nuts that much the combination of locking tuners, a roller nut, and a properly set up tremsetter can greatly improve the usability of Strat-style trems. Heck you could even try to locate one of those short-lived Fender/Floyd locking vintage trem units and avoid having the big clunky Floyd bridge though you'd still have to whack the ball ends off of the strings.

 

[tc]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

there are floyds that look like vintage trems?????? thats always been my dream...probably they were short lived cause they sucked though...

 

[D-EJ915]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

roller nuts suck and cut the ball ends off, if you string that end through the tuner you'll be hurting your string life by messing up the tuners.

That being said, locking tuners + properly maintained nut is very stable for light vibrato.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

I'd like to eliminate the locking nut as it seems it can be a major problem of tuning difficulties....

You need to do more research on locking trem systems.

 

[AzCat]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

there are floyds that look like vintage trems?????? thats always been my dream...probably they were short lived cause they sucked though...

Yes there were:

The only guitars I've ever seen them used on are the Fender Custom Shop Contemporary Strats. Fender did, for a while at least, sell the trems separately through their web site. Nothing wrong with 'em at all, they're a significant improvement over a regular vintage style trem IMHO but y'know, most Strat players are afraid of set screws and the like. :nana:

 

[theodie]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

roller nuts suck

WTF are you talking about? They might not be everyones bag but, they do not "suck" at all. They do the job they are designed to do and IMO, they do not chnage or rob tone drastically like the nay-sayers think.

 

[theodie]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

You need to do more research on locking trem systems.

+1

 

[ErikH]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

AzCat, that's the recent Floyd Rose for Fender. I remember that one. Very smooth trem. I wish I got one back when they were available. It was also on a set-neck Strat they did in the mid-90's.

Now, go check out the "original" original Floyd Rose.
http://www.vintagekramer.com/parts6.htm
Check out the 3 picks right above the one of Eddie.

+1 to Theodie and roller nuts. Installed properly and maintained well, they do their job. I like the LSR roller nut a lot even though I don't use the trem bar on my Strat much at all.

 

[shogunlegend]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

i've owned both and i don't think the locking trem is much better. i love the lsr nut and the locking schallers, but the standard 2 point trem that comes on american deluxes are just fine.

 

[guitarded]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

No problem with the LSR here either. It actually improved the feel on my Strat which came with a Wilkinson nut. Didn't notice any difference in tone, but then again..... I replaced a metal nut with a metal nut, so how would I know?

WTF are you talking about? They might not be everyones bag but, they do not "suck" at all. They do the job they are designed to do and IMO, they do not chnage or rob tone drastically like the nay-sayers think.

 

[JacksonMIA]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

If you're worried about cutting the ball ends off (I don't know why??) you can always string it backwards.

Honestly, for the price of a good set of locking tuners, a roller nut and a licensed floyd bridge you can probably get a double locking OFR and there will be no problems with tuning. I know it wouldn't cost much more. If you're serious about tuning stability under heavy abuse there is really no substitute.

That said, a good set of tuners, a roller nut, and a good bridge would be a great setup - one I've thought about doing to a cheap strat. Honestly with a Calaham vintage style bridge and a good setup you're going to probably get more tuning stability than a licensed FR bridge, depending on the brand.

 

[ErikH]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

I don't understand the "worry about clipping the ball end" either when it comes to locking trems. You're gonna need to make two cuts anyway (locking nut or no locking nut), at least on the wound strings. On the unwound strings, I just string it backwards (so the ball end as at the tuners), lock the string in the bridge, wind it up and cut the excess off.

DO NOT let the ball end rest on the tuning peg and string around it. That can put dents in the peg leaving little burrs and then you have problems.

 

[mirrormind]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

I was only considering the Fender LSR as the other roller nuts don't seem to have the same quality.

Honestly, for the price of a good set of locking tuners, a roller nut and a licensed floyd bridge you can probably get a double locking OFR and there will be no problems with tuning. I know it wouldn't cost much more.

Even if it's the same price, I would still need to get the tuners as well as the FR, however going this option means that I already have the tuners. Also I can move the tuners and nut over to another guitar if I ever need to (which I can't do if I make another guitar without a FR).

I'll only be doing light stuff with the tremelo, so it won't be that important to get the sort of quality you get with the OFR.

But surely, if the FR is single locking (so the strings only slide through the FR and not lock onto it) won't it be more like how a standard tremolo works?

 

[ErikH]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

No, the FR is a double-locking system. The strings lock in to the bridge. Keep in mind that the LSR nut is a little bigger than a conventional nut. The slot needs to be cut by a professional.

 

[JacksonMIA]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

But surely, if the FR is single locking (so the strings only slide through the FR and not lock onto it) won't it be more like how a standard tremolo works?

The traditional Floyd Rose bridge locks down on the strings to prevent them from moving at that end. Unfortunately, with many of the licensed FRs, the metal is soft and the locks will wear more quickly causing tuning problems. Schallers and a few other high quality licensed FRs are made with a stronger metal like the OFRs.

If that's the case, I'd spend the money on a good Fender style bridge. When properly set up it will stay in tune very well throughout it's normal range, especially when you have a roller nut and good tuners. Plus, if, as you say, you are considering the possibility of moving some of the hardware to another guitar in the future, a Fender bridge is going to be the most likely to fit it without extra modifications.

The FR was designed, like Erik said, to be a double locking system - to use the locking nut to hold the string perfectly in tune. It will work without the locking nut (a lot of people leave theirs unlocked, especially if they change tunings a lot), but you are defeating its purpose.

 

[mirrormind]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

The reason I need a FR is that I bought a guitar body and it's been routered for a FR.

However, I can't afford an OFR so I'd have to buy a licensed FR. But I'm aware that the cheaper ones use a soft metal which can cause problems, but in order to eliminate these problems, I had the idea of getting a single locking FR, a Fender LSR roller nut and Sperzel Locking Tuners.

If you look at that picture, you can see that the strings just go straight through, which is a similar principle to the strat trems (where they go through the body). And when coupled with the locking tuners and roller nut, I would think it would keep the tuning pretty well, without the need to lock at the bridge and nut.

 

[JacksonMIA]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

Ahhh. I see what you're talking about. That should work. Be sure to take care of those knife edges and it'll probably last you a long time.

 

[ErikH]

Re: Locking tuners, roller nut, single locking FR vs double locking FR?

I'm always leary about licensed Floyds. So many of them are just pure garbage.