# Locking tuners



## Ti-Ron (Mar 21, 2007)

To me, locking tuners where a gadget in the same catagory as Floyd Rose.
Can be usefull to some, but I can't deal with the hassle and can't see the real purpose of it.

So, for those who have installed locking tuners on a guitar, can you tell me why?
Wich problem(s) did you solved?
Do you like the improvment or no real difference?

Get it right, this not a rant againt locking tuners, I'm just curious about the use of them!

Thanks and have a good week-end!


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

after reading your post, the question that came into my mind was, "does Jeff Beck use locking tuners?" I could be wrong here, but I don't think he does.


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

Ti-Ron said:


> To me, locking tuners where a gadget in the same catagory as Floyd Rose.
> Can be usefull to some, but I can't deal with the hassle and can't see the real purpose of it.
> 
> So, for those who have installed locking tuners on a guitar, can you tell me why?
> ...


Why?
Changing strings has never been quicker/easier. A few seconds to remove the old string, a few more seconds to put the new one on and cut it, then maybe a minute to get it stretched and tuned. All 6 strings replaced, stretched, tuned, and fully playable in less than 10 minutes.

Which problem did it solve?
If the guitar has/had a tuning problem, I would look to the nut, intonation, and other causes before I would look at the tuners. Then again, I don't use my whammy bar much and I think that's where the biggest benefit would be. Improved tuning stability for those using big bends and whammy tricks.

Do you like the improvement or no real difference?
I can't say I notice much of a difference. My guitars didn't have tuning issues before I added the locking tuners. It is purely a convenience factor for me.

Other Comments: There's really no hassle in having locking tuners. If anything, it is a convenience with a potential benefit if you frequently use big bends and whammy tricks.


----------



## Ti-Ron (Mar 21, 2007)

jbealsmusic said:


> Why?
> Changing strings has never been quicker/easier. A few seconds to remove the old string, a few more seconds to put the new one on and cut it, then maybe a minute to get it stretched and tuned. All 6 strings replaced, stretched, tuned, and fully playable in less than 10 minutes.
> 
> Which problem did it solve?
> ...


Wow, thanks for the answer! Really clear and detailled!
Didn't know changing strings with those would be that fast!


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

LOVE them, and put them on anything I mod.
-quicker changes
-no string slippage around post later, VERY stable tuning. Strings still stretch of course, but it's one less variable if the string won't move around the post.

Downside, more wear parts, I did have a couple on my 20 yr old G&L lock up permanently and need replacing.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

I put them on guitars when I can. Just easier to change strings.

I bought a very light drill for changing strings, so it doesn't matter much anymore though.


----------



## Ti-Ron (Mar 21, 2007)

keto said:


> Downside, more wear parts, I did have a couple on my 20 yr old G&L lock up permanently and need replacing.


Was one of concern as well. More moving parts, more wear.
But if you used them for 20 years, still long enough.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Locking tuners are fine. I'll take them over vintage style tuners any day of the week.

Floyd Rose was no gimick.

I just restrung my FR equipped Jackson a few days ago.

I have lots of guitars, some costing a number of times what I paid for the Jackson (parts guitar).

None of them, regardless of the style of bridge or tuners come anywhere near the tuning stability I have with the Floyd.

Also, just so you know, I restrung it sitting on a lazy boy while listening to some Queen. Took about fifteen minutes and that included tightening up the tuners with a nut driver.

Very easy, very quick, very effective.

Hassle? Not nearly as much of a hassel as tuning between songs.

Tuning is not a yes / no question. It's a matter of HOW stable the tuning is, not if it is or isn't.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Any tuner can crap out after time, I have some Grovers that are toast on a Gibson of mine.

Yes, quick and easy string change, no winds on the posts, more stable setup with less tuning issues.
Preferable on a trem epuipped guitar, but I have them on fixed bridge guitars too.

A FR may be a bit of a pain to setup, restring, compared to a regular guitar, but once locked in, it's hard to beat.


----------



## LydianGuitars (Apr 18, 2013)

I have a few guitars, with and without locking tuners. I've tried the Planet Waves, Steinberger, Fender/Schaller, Grover & TonePros*Kluson. 

My favorite is the Planet Waves. They are the least finicky to deal with and tend to hold their tuning best but you do have to align the holes on the tuner post before inserting the string in. The Steinbergers come in a close second just because they don't look right on all guitars. Locking tuners a generally a little heavier and bulky than non-locking tuners and the benefit is marginal in terms of tuning stability. The ones I like the least are the Fender/Schallers.

Now, I just install non-locking tuners with a Tusq XL on my trem equipped guitars. The nut is where the bulk of the tuning stability lies. With a strat style headstock (non-angled), a Tusq XL, a few drops of Big Bends nut sauce, I can dive bomb and come back in tune. I don't wrap the strings around the post too much either. 2 - 3 turns max. There's a bit of pride in setting up the guitar like that and have great tuning. That being said, every guitar is different and locking tuners can be beneficial in some situations.

In terms of solving tuning problems, they do help somewhat because the string isn't wrapped around a post so it doesn't loosen and come back differently, but really, you'd have to do some crazy trem action or put a lot of string turns on the tuner posts. There are so many variables to tuning stability, its hard to say whether locking tuners are always a good thing. Sometimes, they are and other times. Look at the nut first, how you wrap the strings around the post, whether the string tees are catching (if you have string tees).

In terms of stringing faster, I'm really surprised that some of you say that they're faster. I can't say that stringing with locking tuners is that much faster or even faster at all. 

For the Floyd Rose and its derivatives, I'm sorry but they are hard to beat for tuning stability. I have a few guitars with them and they have their place.


----------



## BMW-KTM (Apr 7, 2015)

Count me in with the folks who liked the lockers. As far as I am concerned they have no down side other than the initial expense of swapping them. Like the Milkman I'll take them over vintage Klusons every single time.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

I love locking tuners for string changes. I dont use a drill, so non-locking guitars take me half an hour. String changes are the bane of my guitar-playing existence haha.

I recently got Hipshot locking tuners for my les paul studio (image link didnt work, damn facebook)

They work well, but my B string slipped out. I dont normally do the 2-3 winds with locking tuners, but I'm going to try that approach when I put the replacement string on later this afternoon. I did it for faster string changes, and if it helps tuning stability then that would be great. I'm told the guitar has a bone nut, but i'm rough on it and I tune between every song at shows :frown-new:.

the ajc has klusons, the prs has their locking tuners, the strat has planet waves auto-trim (that used to be the #1 guitar in sparrows). I prefer locking tuners by far.


----------



## Ti-Ron (Mar 21, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Locking tuners are fine. I'll take them over vintage style tuners any day of the week.
> 
> Floyd Rose was no gimick.
> 
> ...



Hi Mike,
Maybe I didn't express myself correctly. I don't think Floyd Rose are a gimmick, but for me they aren't the thing. I am not a manual guy and too many things to adjust, or think, move... just make crazy. That is why I like Tele and Les Paul, less things to worry.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Ti-Ron said:


> Hi Mike,
> Maybe I didn't express myself correctly. I don't think Floyd Rose are a gimmick, but for me they aren't the thing. I am not a manual guy and too many things to adjust, or think, move... just make crazy. That is why I like Tele and Les Paul, less things to worry.


I can understand that.

It's a little extra attention before the show, but such a huge confidence factor once you're on stage, knowing you can play as agressively as you like and still be happy playing clean open position chords a few measures later.

Although I don't use Floyds much lately, I can sure say it's worth the trouble.


----------



## JBFairthorne (Oct 11, 2014)

I'm not really a trem guy. All my strats are set up with the trem block flush mounted and tightened down. Locking tuners? Never had 'em, never felt like I was missing anything. Never had trouble stringing on standard tuners. Never had trouble with slippage. When I restring I put tension on the string manually while winding on the post. I think it helps create a more stable string/post connection and prevents slippage.


----------



## Tone Chaser (Mar 2, 2014)

I have locking tuners on 3 guitars.

The G&L S-500 came with them and the guitar stays in tune, even while using them trem. Abuse it, and it just plain stays in tune. This is a very good guitar.

I added a set to my daily use Strat, and now the guitar stays in relative good tune, even when the trem is used. I may need a little nut sauce on the b or g string.

The Fender American Deluxe came with locking tuners from the factory. I appreciate having them on the guitar.

I would like to have them on every guitar that I own; but that would be silly and cost prohibitive. I think that they help on a guitar that you play aggressively, often, and expect consistent performance out of.


----------



## Ti-Ron (Mar 21, 2007)

I was curious, since I don't have a guitar with trem.

Basicly locking tuner help when trem is abused, but probably useless on a fixed bridge guitar?


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Not at all. Like I said, my string changes are *much* faster. 20 minutes times 3 is an hour. If you make $15 an hour, my tuners have paid for themselves in 12 changes. On tour, thats 22-24 shows. Voila, they have paid for themselves in time spent on string changes.

Ps: im damn slow at string changes :lol:


----------



## Ti-Ron (Mar 21, 2007)

lol, interessing way to see it!


----------



## BMW-KTM (Apr 7, 2015)

I seriously doubt it takes me 20 minutes to change strings with locking tuners. Unless you're including a wipe down of the guitar while the strings are off.


----------



## Gizmo (Aug 7, 2008)

My 3 Bigsby equipped guitars all have locking tuners….string changes with Bigsbys are a pain without them.

So does my main gigging guitar and string changes are fast, reliable and consistent.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Im saying its 20m with traditional tuners, for me.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

BMW-KTM said:


> I seriously doubt it takes me 20 minutes to change strings with locking tuners. Unless you're including a wipe down of the guitar while the strings are off.


I suppose it's not a race, but I can restring a Floyd in 15 minutes.

If I take time to polish and generally clean up the guitar it would take a little longer of course.

Then again, I rather enjoy restringing and do it a lot.


----------

