Strat headstocks

[ted s]

What's the deal, some are smaller, some seem huge (to my eye)
I prefer the look of the smaller one myself, more Tele-ish maybe ?
Is it particular models that have the larger heads ? I would really like to know.

Thanks all.

ts

 

[wingsdad]

The Strat's had a myriad of subtle design changes since it was introduced in 1954 until Leo Fender sold to CBS in 1965, then the new Corporate owners got less subtle. They started making the larger headstocks (and, btw, less dramatic body contour) in late '65, but the last year for them was 1979, and the return of the 'pre-CBS' sized headstock was 1980.

Any 66-79 vintage Fender Strat (unless itself a reissue of a 54-64 model), or current reissue of a model from those years should have the larger headstock unless the neck was changed.

 

[sunvalleylaw]

I like mine (Pre CBS/modern style) of course, but the big 70's ones are kind of fun, just 'cause they remind me of stylized roof joist ends on tyrolean style ski cabins built in the Pacific NW in the 50's and 60's. Quaint, in a kitschy sort of way. Have a Holly Jolly Christmas and all that. ancake

 

[mrmudcat]

:whatever: There is some thought amongst strat elitists who think the bigger headstock shape helps in the sustain dept.

 

[Adrian30]

Here's a great source that points out all the design changes through decades in Strats. Note the 70's "notch" on the bass side of the neck pocket, (upper cutaway).

http://www.provide.net/~cfh/fender.html

 

[R_of_G]

My Squier strat has the larger headstock. I'd have bought it either way, based on the way it plays, but I have to admit, I personally found the 70's style headstock appealing. It gave it some funk credibility. The black sparkle finish and silver sparkle pickguard helped too.

 

[Tone2TheBone]

I like the bigger Fender headstocks too. They finally grew on me I used to hate them but I don't like the Norlin years Gibson headstocks. I had a 1974 Deluxe Les Paul that had a fat headstock and it was so butt ugly...it was oooogly.

 

[Adrian30]

I like the large Strat headstocks in Teles. The Classic Series '72 Telecaster looks really good with that big headstock.

 

[Tone2TheBone]

I like the large Strat headstocks in Teles. The Classic Series '72 Telecaster looks really good with that big headstock.

Funny you mentioned that. I just saw a video of some dude playing one of those.

 

[TS808]

What is really a cool feature (to me anyway) was the "bullet trussrod" with some of the larger headstock Fenders. It was a nice feature to have it sticking out and not having to dig way in the headstock or the heel of the neck to make a neck adjustment.

 

[Bloozcat]

I've always had an aversion to the large CBS headstocks. I remember when CBS bought Fender and the ensuing decline in quality that went with it. To many who lived through that time period, the large headstock became synonymous with poor quality. Little did we know then that Fender was yet to reach rock bottom with their quality before the turnaround was to take place.

Despite the CBS buyout and the changes that followed, it was a 1968 large headstock Strat that Hendrix is most closely associated with. CBS didn't seem to affect his playing too adversely (no, ya think?).

As an interesting side note to the Fender/CBS model deliniations: I had a Strat that I bought used in 1970 from the original owner, whom I knew. It was a three tone sunburst with a vintage lacquered small headstock neck. It was a one piece maple neck with no skunk stripe and a rosewood fingerboard. The interesting part is that the neck was stamped JAN 66 on the heel, and the body had the original body contours. The neck even had the "original contour body" circular decal on it. By the date stamped on the neck, this was a CBS guitar, yet everything about it said "original Fender". My neck looks exactly the same as a 63-65, right down to the decals.

I wish I had written down the serial number on that guitar before I sold it...

 

[Big_Rob]

:whatever: There is some thought amongst strat elitists who think the bigger headstock shape helps in the sustain dept.

It does. More surface area on the headstock will always give you better sustain.

 

[duhvoodooman]

I've always had an aversion to the large CBS headstocks. I remember when CBS bought Fender and the ensuing decline in quality that went with it. To many who lived through that time period, the large headstock became synonymous with poor quality. Little did we know then that Fender was yet to reach rock bottom with their quality before the turnaround was to take place.

I share that aversion to the large headstock, but not because of the tie to the decline in quality--probably because I only owned a Strat of that vintage for about a year. It was my first electric guitar, so I really had no experiential frame of reference upon which to judge it. I dislike them for a single reason--I think they're UGLY. I find them out of proportion/balance with the rest of the guitar. Looks more like an oddly shaped billboard at the top of the neck than a proper headstock. I find that it draws my eye away from the instrument as a whole, which (IMO) is a bad thing....

 

[Brian Krashpad]

I share that aversion to the large headstock, but not because of the tie to the decline in quality--probably because I only owned a Strat of that vintage for about a year. It was my first electric guitar, so I really had no experiential frame of reference upon which to judge it. I dislike them for a single reason--I think they're UGLY. I find them out of proportion/balance with the rest of the guitar. Looks more like an oddly shaped billboard at the top of the neck than a proper headstock. I find that it draws my eye away from the instrument as a whole, which (IMO) is a bad thing....

I never liked 'em on aesthetic grounds as well. The smaller verison just flat looks better.

:AOK:

 

[Bloozcat]

...well that too....

They are pretty ugly...uke:

 

[R_of_G]

...well that too....

They are pretty ugly...uke:

You callin' my headstock ugly? Them's fightin' words.:rotflmao:

 

[ted s]

ok, since Vood opened the box, when I originally said "I prefer the look of the smaller one myself" what I really meant to say is I think they are ugly.

 

[Spudman]

It does. More surface area on the headstock will always give you better sustain.

Ya but how much? Area might really not be the issue but density. That's why the sell the Fatfinger add-on.

Has anyone done any real research and wouldn't a secure neck/body joint do the same thing?
If it's an issue then why does Ernie Ball, arguably some of the best guitars built, have small headstocks?

I really don't think it matters and we are only talking about 2 cubic inches of extra wood. The fat tremolo block would also make up any difference. I really think the argument about large headstocks = sustain is moot.

 

[Bloozcat]

You callin' my headstock ugly? Them's fightin' words.:rotflmao:

Well, you know what they say (whoever they are): Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder...

 

[hubberjub]

I heard Fender introduced the large headstock to balance out the size of the bell bottom jeans that were in fashion at the time.