Significant Tonal Improvement Changing Klusons for Grovers

ErictheRed

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
5,333
Reaction score
6,565
your statement is completely erroneous with regard to the topic discussed. slight additions or subtractions off mass are irrelevant. It is the improvement in the coupling of the stings to the headstock which creates the tonal difference or improvement noted.
Read my previous post, that's what I said as well. It's others that have been claiming that they can hear the difference in mass.
 

Wrench66

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
541
Reaction score
298
A set of Kluson tuners weighs about 5 ounces, and a set of Grovers about 8.5 ounces. Are we seriously suggesting that someone can hear the 3.5 ounce difference in tone...?
What I'm suggesting is that you watch the videos yourself. Johan has done experiments with different woods, weights, bridges, tail pieces, tuners, etc.

I have no idea if 5 oz of weight will make a difference, but a change in tuners could for all the different reasons mentioned above.
 

ErictheRed

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
5,333
Reaction score
6,565
It can’t be done. We can’t ‘hear’ the same psychoacoustics.
I'm actually skeptical that humans can strum or pick exactly the same way for two different takes. Some tonal change would be due to variation in where the string is struck, how hard, at what angle, with what kind of edge/surface, etc. Think of the huge difference in sound between a pinch harmonic and a simple pluck, or fingers vs. pick, or picking the string near the bridge vs. closer to the neck, etc. It's not entirely easy to do a proper comparison, and it would be very easy to fake a difference in tone if you wanted to by varying those things.
 

Pageburst

Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
91
Reaction score
220
Read my previous post, that's what I said as well. It's others that have been claiming that they can hear the difference in mass.
Sorry, my bad then. In all honesty, I can‘t speak on tonal differences based solely on mass. I did try adding weight to the headstock but any difference in tone was subtle and was certainly not an improvement.

Again, my assertion (based on my experience) is that a more rigid, solid, “massive” tuner will provide a “better“ couple of string to headstock reducing energy dissipation through the tuner thereby allowing the string to more “cleanly“ ring out as was intended by the guitar‘s design.
 
Last edited:

boola1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2017
Messages
159
Reaction score
205
I'm actually skeptical that humans can strum or pick exactly the same way for two different takes. Some tonal change would be due to variation in where the string is struck, how hard, at what angle, with what kind of edge/surface, etc. Think of the huge difference in sound between a pinch harmonic and a simple pluck, or fingers vs. pick, or picking the string near the bridge vs. closer to the neck, etc. It's not entirely easy to do a proper comparison, and it would be very easy to fake a difference in tone if you wanted to by varying those things.
I bet Clapton coud do 2 identical takes of You look wonderful tonight.
 

GySgtFTL

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
823
I'm a horrible guitar player so tone is not really a factor. However, I would swap tuners for the Grovers except that I can't get around the fact that there's an extra hole above each tuner. I have locking tuners on my Strats and I dig the ease of changing strings.
 

PermissionToLand

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
630
Reaction score
347
I could easily reply:
"You should listen to actual musical instruments instead of the consensus of your pseudo-scientific friends."
And that could develop into the useless argument we've seen so many times around here.

As I was implying.
Some get it, some don't.
Some hear it, some don't.

I respect that you obviously don't, although I wish for you that you could.
Just respect others that do.
That will be all.
Have a good night!
Yes, I suppose you could but it would not make any sense, considering I am talking about ACTUAL physics professors, not your buddy who made a rant that you thought sounded sciencey.

My point is clear; the human brain is a powerful thing and the placebo effect can seem incredibly real to those affected by it.

One test is worth a thousand theories.

Some people say that they can't hear a difference in tone between various tuners and others claim they can. I've found that when doing listening tests, some people just don't have the necessary attention span, and others just don't care. To make matters worse, most guitar amplifiers, cables, and speakers don't have excellent resolution and have so many sonic problems that can make it difficult to hear subtle differences in guitars.
You realize that science works by testing theories repeatedly until they are proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, right?

That you think listening to something with your ears is a more rigorous, empirical test than recording and analyzing waveforms says everything.
 

Scott A Novak

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2018
Messages
83
Reaction score
47
You realize that science works by testing theories repeatedly until they are proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, right?
It's been my experience that many proclaiming scientific test methods are far from scientific with their conclusions.

That you think listening to something with your ears is a more rigorous, empirical test than recording and analyzing waveforms says everything.
A perfect example of "scientific" interpretation gone wrong is the use of steady state harmonic distortion measurements used as a measure of fidelity. Unfortunately, when negative loop feedback is used, while it reduces the steady state harmonic distortion measurement, the lower the steady state harmonic distortion measurment is the WORSE the amplifier sounds, because the negative loop feedback increases the transient distortion.

Likewise, steady state frequency response measurements are meaningless because they don't take into account phase response. It was very common for cartridge manufacturers to NOT load their cartridges electrically until they were critically damped, as the cartridge would measure showing a higher frequency response, when it fact what was happening is that the cartridge was resonating with severe phase shifting. The sound was overly sibilant and harsh. When you loaded the cartridge to critically damp it, the steady state frequency response rolled off faster at the high frequencies, yet it sounded like the high frequencies were more extended. This is because when critically damped, the cartridge wont be shifting the phase so severely. The human ear is not very sensitive to frequency response variations, but it is extremely sensitive to phase shifting.

Scott Novak
 

Scott A Novak

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2018
Messages
83
Reaction score
47
While everyone is arguing Gibsons use of Klusons Vs Grover Rotomatics, consider that Gibson also sold guitars with Robotuners! Robotuners have got to be far more massive than the Rotomatics and I suspect that there would be a significant tonal difference if they were replaced with Rotomatics.

Scott Novak
 

JCM900MkIII

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
4,046
Reaction score
4,002
7 pages, didn't read everything...

Changing tuners comes down to also changing strings (a new set).

New strings always give me more sustain, clearer sound etc.
Could it be perception because of the string change?
 

Deek

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2015
Messages
68
Reaction score
104
Not the same thing but I noticed a huge improvement in my Ibanez PM2 with new $100 Gotoh tuners. Made it a better guitar in every way. I did not expect it, but it happened!
 




Top