Perhaps I'm daft, but how can a reverse headstock help this situation? It seems to me that there would be no significant difference. why not just get some "heavy bottom" bass strings. here is my logic (and I am really just shooting in the dark, so please correct me):
1) string tension is a function of three things a) scale of neck b) thickness of string c) note the string is tuned to
2) any increase in string thickness requires more tension to tune to the same note (that's why it's so dang hard to bend jazz guitar strings)
3) any increase in scale length would increase the tension necessary to tune to the same note (longer waves). this seems very difficult to do
4) as the scale of a guitar is a function of where the strings mount (ie bridge and nut), and tension on the string is constant for any scale length on a given string it shouldn't matter how much is above the nut before you get to the machine head. Essentially, you need a certain amount of tension for a string that is a certain length to produce a certain note. for example: say we need 30lbs of tension on a string so that it plays a low e when out hit the open string. There is still 30lbs of tension on the string when you fret the 5th fret producing an "a" note. The distance is just shorter.
I could get a guitar string 10ft long, and as long as I put 30lbs of tension on it, and put it onto a guitar with the bridge and nut at that standard scale it would still play a low e (if you can picture it, think of a guitar that is 10ft long and there is a capo where the nut would normally be. 30lbs of tension would still produce a low "e" note as long as the capo was at the same spot as a nut would be on a regular guitar.
On the other hand, if you put on some fat bottom strings you would have to up the tension on the strings (quite a bit actually) in order to get your low "e" note. Now that added tension should stop the flubber.
