|
|
Joined:
May 2004
Posts: 2850
Location: Midland, MI | This is a question, more out of curiosity, than anything else, but I recently read that Kaman experimented with headstock design until settling on the familiar, rounded crown we know and love.
So, is there some fundamental engineering principal behind the headstock design? I can understand the self-reinforcing design of the back (I think Ovation should do a series of ads, like those VW ones with the New Beetle, where they show a bowl back juxtaposed against an arch) and even appreciate the novel top bracing (if for no other reason than Martin X bracing is trite, if effective ).
But, what's the real story with the headstock? Whimsical design concession, or solid mathematical reasoning? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 1817
Location: Minden, Nebraska | I like the look of the Ovation headstock, but I just shipped off the third guitar in a month for getting a damaged headstock ear repaired. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2003
Posts: 13996
Location: Upper Left USA | Whatever you do, do not tell OSHA! They'll slap so many regulations on the headstock to make sure that when they chip you don't poke your eye out!
I need to find a tighter string winder as well. On the CL12 the generic one I have kept hanging up on adjacent knobs and the flair of the headstock.
In "The Book" they discussed the design and subtle modifications of the headstock.
Prone to damage when leaned up against walls and chairs! In the case, in the stand, on the wall or worn with the strap! Repeat after me!
It does look cool though! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | The first ones had martinny heads. Then they changed to something like it is now. I guess the thought was th have the strings go straight to the posts, but they missed this.
There is a rumor that the Marketing Department wants to change all the headstocks to the new Tagament design, the 4 and 2 (not the 2 and 4 that Music Man sent them a letter over, DUH!!). The thinking is that this is more "cool" or whatever and would give it a new, "modern" look. Yeah, Right. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2004
Posts: 2850
Location: Midland, MI | W2- Thanks for the insight. I noticed on my Elite that the three high strings do, indeed, run straight to the post, but that the three lower strings have about, oh I'd guess a five degree offset to them. I never decided whether it was intentional or just something with my particular guitar...either way it blows the symmetry so I try not to look at it too much. However, just like an accident on the highway.... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 1817
Location: Minden, Nebraska | CWK: Let's push for those offset peghead designs and see if an EVH model can be produced.....
Was there similar discussion about headstock changes during the 'Jackson' style headstock era of the '89 Collectors' and the Thunderbolt? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2002
Posts: 1196
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana | CWK2, say it isn't so! I can't believe Ovation would ever consider changing its classic headstock. And to think of an Ovation like a Custom Legend with that horrible Tangent/MOB headstock makes me sick. Leave that headstock on the MOB. That guitar is ugly as sin, and that headstock fits it well! :rolleyes: |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2003
Posts: 4619
Location: SoCal | Paul B. said "I just shipped off the third guitar in a month..."
Maybe that's why they went to the oiled neck...the 1997-N Collector's that I have is missing both "wings"...appears one broke, someone just took the other off. Actually looks good and, with the oiled walnut neck, no one yet has noticed the difference until I point it out. Since the rest of the guitar is pristine, I question whether it is necessary to send back for repair ($150 plus shipping plus time for repair.)
I like the current headstock but the "wings" are vulnerable to damage.
Offset to tuners or removing "wings" - no problem; major change to headstock - will make a better market for discontinued market. |
|
| |
Making amends, or, real Ovation content!
