Guitar copies: 3 on a side headstocks look better than inline 6.

[3-Chord-Genius]

I'm referring to copies of classic guitars, like Telecasters, Les Paul's, etc. They can't copy exactly the Fender and Gibson headstock shapes, so they come up with their own - but it seems that the Fender copies generally have hideous headstocks, whereas the Gibson copies are not great but not terrible either.

Your thoughts?

 

[Toadtele]

I agree.

 

[sk25]

So long as you keep it somewhat symmetrical, 3 on a side is hard to screw up. (Cue a parade of hideous 3x3 headstock designs)

6 inline seems to generally be ugly.

 

[Obsessed]

Can you say, Snakehead?

 

[DougM]

How about the famous 4&2, as seen on all Music Man guitars?

 

[Blazer]

When ESP came up with the Hybrid in the early nineties, they had a Fender style headstock.

But when they brought the model back in the early 2000's they had given it a Gibson style headstock
(image removed)
Which in my own opinion doesn't look right.

 

[3-Chord-Genius]

How about the famous 4&2, as seen on all Music Man guitars?View attachment 675531

I actually like that, because it's weird and has become their look. But I'm referring to headstocks on low-cost Fender and Gibson copies.

 

[3-Chord-Genius]

When ESP came up with the Hybrid in the early nineties, they had a Fender style headstock.

But when they brought the model back in the early 2000's they had given it a Gibson style headstock
(image removed)
Which in my own opinion doesn't look right.

Actually, ESP (LTD) inline headstocks are not too bad, in my opinion.

 

[clydethecat]

How about the famous 4&2, as seen on all Music Man guitars?

The headstock is the least problematic part of that, uh, thing.

 

[telecaster1234]

I am the biggest headstock guy. The headstock shape can make or break a guitar for me. I wish it didn't bug me but it just does, if it doesn't look right to my eye. All I can focus on is how the headstock throws the look and balance off.

 

[Geoff738]

When ESP came up with the Hybrid in the early nineties, they had a Fender style headstock.

But when they brought the model back in the early 2000's they had given it a Gibson style headstock
(image removed)
Which in my own opinion doesn't look right.

That body shape is similar to the Épi Coronet/Wiltshire. Not exact, but close. And the Épis had both three on a side, and a somewhat ugly six in line at various times, so I think this body style actually works ok with either. If I had to choose I’d probably go with the six in line, but I’m mostly a Fender guy.

Cheers,
Geoff

 

[Blazer]

Can you say, Snakehead?
View attachment 675530

Actually that isn't the only time Fender went three to three.

Okay from the most HIDEOUS of all Fender Headstocks to one of the lushest.

Roger Rossmeisl bring some class to a very UN-Fender, Fender guitar, the Montego

Harmony Made Fender branded acoustics, using that Rossmeisl designed shape but in a far less classy form.

Another Harmony made Fender acoustic.

I actually love the way this looks, and I'm actually stoked that fender brought the Maverick back.

 

[clydethecat]

I actually love the way this looks, and I'm actually stoked that fender brought the Maverick back.

I don't have any problem with the headstock, but that nut is odd.

 

[Tele-beeb]

I don’t like turning my wrist upside down to tune... I’ll never in the history of ever have another 3x3 electric.

 

[geoff_in_nc]

I'm sorry but 3+3 on a fender electric looks wrong to me - even a snake head. But they're not asking me to advise them, so I guess they can do what they want.

 

[EsquireBoy]

The original Macmull headstock got a lot of internet bashing, so much that they seem to have changed its design.
That is unfortunate IMO, since I love their first design: very retro-futuristic vibe, quite coherent with the 60’s era, and for once not trying to mimic the Fender design.

 

[EsquireBoy]

NB: definitely best with an S-type, rather than with a T-type, for that « flying spacecraft » vibe.

 

[AndyPanda]

I've got a couple of the 4+2 MusicMan guitars and I really like how they don't need string trees and you still get a straight pull over the nut like a 6 in line. Only issue is how do you go about buying a set of tuners if you want to replace/upgrade them? I figure I would need to buy a set of 3+3 and a single tuner (cheaper than buying 6 singles).

 

[Obelisk]

More Travis Bean headstocks would be cool:

 

[boneyguy]

I am the biggest headstock guy. The headstock shape can make or break a guitar for me. I wish it didn't bug me but it just does, if it doesn't look right to my eye. All I can focus on is how the headstock throws the look and balance off.

I'm the same way. I'll pass up a wonderful playing guitar because the headstock is ugly. I liken it to the human body....a woman can have an amazing body, with all the right stuff, but if the head looks alarming....is not symmetrical....has weird, medically unfortunate protuberances....then the body doesn't matter at all. I guess what I'm trying to say is (A) I'm very shallow and (2) beauty is found in the overall symmetry and compatibility of how all the parts fit together as a whole. Ugly headstock = ugly guitar.