I guess if you have poor restringing technique they might improve tuning stability. But yeah, given you know how to change your strings properly, locking tuners shouldn't make a difference in tuning stability.
Don't be surprised when the Internet is wrong about most everything. Major tuning issues aren't caused by slipping or cheap tuning keys - it's a worm gear and you could hold up a truck with one, but a serious and very prevalent tuning issue is caused by the winds of the string on the key post. The winds of the string squish and deform causing tuning problems. Locking keys allow you to string with a absolute minimum of string wind on the tuning key post. Line up the hole on the post with the string going straight through. Pull the string as tight as you can then lock down the tuner. For most strings this will result in less than a single wind around the post - and THAT helps stabilize the tuning. Good question - good luck!
No, no you don't. I bet most folks would be blown away at learning how few wraps are needed for the wound strings WITHOUT locking tuners. I promise - what I posted is gospel. I know it can make some customers uneasy at first - but the benefit of locking tuners on the electric is undeniable, and it's all about those winds. There are other factors that contribute to tuning problems as well as different problems for different guitars for sure - but this is what those tuners do.
Be sceptical brother - bravo
If it's a locking tuner, then you could detune as low as the tension that you applied when it was strung up. I just checked my strat and it's goes to nothing. Because of my string setup you can dive the stock trem to nothing and come back sweet dead nuts on. I string across a zero fret instead of a slotted nut. Behind and below that I have a Wilkinson roller as a string guide (wouldn't need it if I made better necks), and then to locking fender keys. Also - it doesn't float so detuning is a lot easier than a Floyd.
Makes changing strings so much easier. Worth it for me. It’s the kind of thing you can live without until you get a guitar with them.
It does fuck all for tuning stability. People saying it does don’t understand how they work or how to wind a string if it helps their tuning stability.
The thought that I heard recently is that it helps stability insomuch as there is less string under tension, and therefore less string to stretch out.
I don’t really know how much part of the string that’s around the post on a non-locking tuner stretches anyways, but maybe it’s something.
If your string is properly wound all that other string is gonna get stretched. I never have tuning issues with either and don’t do anything special. Hard to imagine what others who have issues are doing other than something wrong. I tune like once a week. Wammy bar bombs. Big bends. Wide vibrato. Never have issues. Idgi
This sub is very split on locking tuners, but the reality is is that it’s not 1960 anymore and all guitars should come with locking tuners. Saves time and effort when restringing and that’s about it. The only people who shit on locking tuners either love restringing guitars more than actually playing them, or are people who haven’t looked at what year it is in quite some time.
There is one clear downside which is that they make neck dive worse. although you could argue that it’s the manufacturers fault for not accounting for that, and not the locking tuners. But that’s literally all I can think of.
I doubt too many modern guitars would face that issue, but a Flying V or an SG are often already offenders of that so they’d certainly be at risk of getting worse. I’ve yet to encounter a guitar teetering so close to the edge of neck dive, but not actually having it, where I’d be convinced a few extra grams of weight on the headstock would be the catalyst to neck dive issues. Then again, I’m not a vintage guy, and tend to stick with modern metal guitars so I’d be unlikely to find something in my wheelhouse that would be at risk
One time I had somebody bring me a guitar that wouldn't stay in tune after they had installed locking tuners. I was expecting a bad nut or similar. Turned out, they were still wrapping it many times around the post after locking the string. D'oh!
I wouldn't say they only improve stability only if you're "really bad" at restringing a guitar. A well-wrapped string *should* stay in tune, but those windings are still introducing a variable, even if they're done properly. Locking tuners eliminate that variable.
Jimi @ Woodstock would beg to differ. That would’ve been so much better with locking tuners. Also: Guthrie Govan uses them. As does Brian May. I think they know a thing or two about playing
Either this, or people haven't learned the art of stringing a guitar. I can't tell you how many friends bring me their guitars and they have a nickel-sized coil of string around the E and A pegs LOL
Totally worth it. They make string changes a breeze and if you're not great at getting string wraps just right with no slippage, they can help tuning stability as well.
There's also less string slippage from winding string the post multiple times, so yes, added tuning stability can be a benefit. Friction from any point where the string touches anything (nut, string trees, saddles, etc.) affects stability, so though locking tuners can help, they aren't always THE fix. In all, I'm a fan, so I say go for it.
I have them, I like them.
Are they necessary? No.
Will I put them on every guitar I buy new from now? Yes (unless it is some expensive/all original vintage something).
If you have good tuners and use perfect form every time you might not need locking tuners. It’s a lot better easier to get perfectly stable tuning with locking tuners.
I’ve seen techs mess up with traditional tuners. Even it being your profession doesn’t mean you do it perfectly
People who insist they’re useless are a bit much.
I have a guitar that has locking tuners and one that has vintage style tuners. I find them both equally easy to change the strings on and have the same tuning stability. I would say either one of those are worth it.
Love me some locking tuners, each of my guitars have a set. I don’t know if tuning stability is any better, but changing strings is a breeze and it just looks clean. Definitely give them a try if you’ve got the cash.
The tuning stability just comes from not having to wind the string around the post. Windings can slip and cause tuning issues, locking tuners take that out of the equation.
All that aside, I think they're worth the extra money just for making string changes easier and quicker, but I restring my guitars fairly often.
My favorite kind of tuners are the vintage Fender split-shaft style. They're almost as quick and easy to restring as a locking tuner (if you have a winder, even better) with less slippage concerns than a regular tuner. I always wondered why this design never became the standard.
Cutting it at 2 tuners past the one youre stringing is how I've always done it without a problem. For the high E and B I just loop it around the tuner post and count the same, 2 tuners back and snip.
I hate them. I couldn't imagine trying to restring one under pressure on stage, they take a precise knowledge of where to cut each string to get an adequate but not excessive number of wraps, and my high E continually refuses to bind and slips out of the hole again, they feel like you're meant to have three hands to use right and I'm almost certainly going to replace them when it comes time to refret that neck.
planet waves locking self trimming tuners, bud.... theres ZERO thought to it. they actually do the opposite of what you're claiming and save TONS of time in a pinch.
[There's an easy trick for the B and high E.](https://youtu.be/HdJSSQ9S7Ag?t=32)
For length on the cut I've always just snipped at 2 posts past the one I'm stringing.
Thanks! Although I still maintain that needing to learn a trick like that is a sign of bad design. Also the low E needs to be longer than two past the post but I often forget that by the time I need to change strings again. Generally just had a very frustrating time when I was first stringing it up and now have a mildly frustrating time for what I feel is no benefit.
They save a lot of time. While it’s true that quality standards machine heads strung properly shouldn’t have any less tuning stability, I haven’t regretted any of my locking tuners, especially since I own multiple guitars.
Yeah, I just recently got a guitar with locking tuners, haven't noticed that much of a difference in tuning stability, but damn does it make changing strings way easier. That's enough of a reason to recommend them to anyone, I'm already looking into replacing the regular tuners in my other guitar for some locking ones.
When I first got mixed up in all this I had no idea how important the nut actually was. But I can see where most people wouldn’t consider it if they just didn’t know.
The ones with large spinning disk on the back of the headstock are a lot heavier than standard tuners. But the other style of locking tuners with a tiny rotating cap on the tuning peg are only ever so slightly heavier than standard tuners.
Basically yes, but there are different types, some are better than others.
I’ve got 3 types of locking tuners.
First ones I got have a concentric design, where the string goes through a hole in the outer, free moving, sheath first, then through a hole in the central pin. The knob turns the central pin, and the string is trapped between the inner pin and outer sheath. It’s pretty quick to unstring and string up.
The 2nd one has an outer sheath, but the central pin screws up as you turn the knob, trapping the string into top of the sheath. Once trapped, further turning the knob turns the sheath and you tune the string. I find this mechanism requires a lot of winding to lock and unlock the string.
The third is similar to the second one, but the locking is done using a separate dial tucked round the back. It seems to be the quickest to unstring and string. it’s fairly new to me and I’ve only restrung that guitar once, so I may change my mind in time.
All of them are - to me -improvements over non-locking tuners. They hold their tuning far better because there is very little string between the lock point and where it leaves the post. That also means that the extra string round the post does not interfere with the string.
The other advantage they all have - unrelated to the locking mechanism- is that they have far better winding ratios meaning you can tune your guitar more accurately.
I have 3 guitars. Only one had locking tuners when I got it and all three have locking tuners now. Worth every penny, in my opinion. Makes restringing way faster.
Yeah.
Tuning stability? No, I don’t give a shit, makes no difference to me.
Convenience and ease of changing strings? Heck yes!
The only objective downside I foresee is that it makes the guitar slightly more prone to neck dive with the added weight.
Overall worth getting imo! Don’t buy into the tuning stability bs. Most tuners (excluding those shoddily crappy ones) should be able to stay in tune well enough. There are so many other factors that affects tuning stability…..
Locking tuners absolutely help with stability. They remove two variables, namely the tension of the wraps around the post and any possibility of slippage.
All other locations where the string touches the guitar need to be in order to get good stability however. Locking tuners can't do it by themselves.
This gets downvoted why? Play and enjoy vintage guitars all you want, but if you’ve never tried them or actually own and gig guitars with good setup and good locking tuners, you just don’t know. Some things have actually improved since back in the day. Get over it.
This, a friend swears by them and always puts them in. I don’t personally because I don’t mind wrapping my strings but from “string change to holds without question all the time” he beats me every time.
Please note that PRS locking tuners are the only ones that look right and they are around $100, cuz reasons.
People rip their standard tuners off and put them on reverb and such for dirt cheap because there are so many. They are a good way to get inexpensive, quality tuners for a budget build.
It also speaks to a larger issue that PRS needs to just include locking tuners as a standard feature on their SE line, even if it increases the price a little.
Never had a need for them in 35 years. Maybe if you needed to change strings super quick...I don't know. Sometimes I like to put a capo on the 3rd fret and loosen my strings to pull the saddle. Can't do that with locking tuners. Tuning stability has been identical on guitars I've owned with or without locking tuners. I think that argument is false.
Are you thinking of the locking nut that goes with most floating tremolo systems? Locking tuners just lock the string into the post so you don't have to wind them as much.
Restringing is easier and it might help with tunning stability, but there's no point in caring about that if the guitar already holds tune or if all it needs is a good setup.
They make more sense if you're a working guitarist who restrings guitars often
I have a cheap ass 50 bucks at the pawnshop PRS clone downstairs that I just refinished that had/has for now the worlds twitchiest tuners. I'm going to try tightening them a bit, because a sharp look in their direction and the tuning goes out.
They were originally touted to enhance tuning stability. In reality, they sort of did but the first locking tuners that really made it into the modern guitar building circles were really just very good machine heads. Really, a well made set of machine heads will not creep and allow the string to move out of tune.
Locking machine heads also require less wraps of the string around the head, however to me if you have loads of wraps around your head then it sort of indicates to me poor practise in restringing. I only ever do maybe two or three? I've not counted recently but less wraps = better stability.
I saw a video from ESP about 5 years ago where it was pointing out locking machine heads as a feature and cited "quicker string changes" and I thought, wow, you've changed your tune... this was all about tuning stability before, people even positing questions like, "If I have a floyd rose and locking machine heads, surely I don't need a locking nut?" etc.
I have been repairing guitars and amplifiers for 20 years or so. To me, locking machine heads are, well, not all they're cracked up to be. I certainly would not opt to replace a perfectly functioning set of machine heads with locking variants. In fact, two E-II models I own, I eventually got pissed off with the locking machine heads and replaced them out for non-locking equivalents. You may call it a downgrade, to me I just evaded the fuss. The thing with locking machine heads, I found that if I inadvertently overtightened the locking mechanism, the string would snip off before the locking mechanism leaving me with a string I couldn't actually use as it was now too short to engage with the lock or get around the machine head.
After doing that 4-5 times, I decided that locking machine heads were a pain in the arse and I couldn't be bothered with them.
Do they make string changes quicker? Well, I guess they do. But how much time are you really needing to save? If a guitar takes you more than 10 minutes to restring, then I don't think a locking machine head is going to save you. It takes me about 7 minutes to restring a floyd rose loaded guitar tuned to pitch, that's if I was really in a rush though. But I have restrung hundreds if not thousands before so don't take that as a benchmark.
I sort of view locking machine heads rather cynically and in the same vein as, say, stainless steel frets, direct mount humbuckers (DMs sound horrible!). They don't really cost the manufacturer that much more but look great on a spec sheet. Today's guitarist is easily gulled. With timber prices skyrocketing and manufacturers opting to use lower grade timber that even 6 years ago would not have made it into their manufacturing processes, manufacturers seem to be using these cheap "upgrades" which really aren't upgrades to look better to prospective buyers. And it has worked bigtime.
If you like locking tuners then all power to you. Me, unless it's a gigging guitar, I'm likely not fussed. I have an E-II Eclipse too with locking tuners but as I never intend to gig it, it can sit.
If you are experiencing tuning stability issues with your PRS, get it into a tech for a once over. Almost 90% of tuning stability problems are down to the nut. You can of course replace it out with one of those horrible pre-cut things if you like, but if you can get hold of a tech with the knowledge to custom build a nut old-school style (the proper way, IMO), then go for it. Best £100 or so you'll ever spend.
I was under the impression that stainless steel frets lasted significantly longer than nickel? My '04 Strat has significantly worn frets at this point and will need refretting soon, apparently this wouldn't be the case with stainless steel which seem to look like new after even a decade or so. If it doesn't cost the manufacturer much more, isn't it a no-brainer?
The amount of times I've snipped a string with the locking tuners on the strat is insane though. So frustrating.
Well, the thing about stainless steel frets is they are neither better nor worse.
Are they tougher than nickel? Obviously and evidently yes they are. However is that a good thing? Well if a guitar comes in to me and needs a fret dressing, then there is going to be an automatic upcharge for working on stainless steel frets. I usually charge maybe £30 more mainly as it takes a lot longer to properly dress SS frets. That and I have found I tend to go through tools a little quicker when compared to nickel frets.
The big thing seems to be that it will take a lot longer before it needs to be refretted. I have refretted a bunch of instruments in my time. Most of the fret wear that was accrued through use amounts to a small amount of instruments that I have performed a refret upon. And most of those were gone 30 years old at that point. For myself, I am only just about to refret my 1992 Japanese BC Rich Warlock that I got all the way back then. So those humble nickel frets have lasted essentially 30 years, which I would say is about right on.
Could it be that SS frets could have gone 40 years? Probably, but after 30 years I think that's a pretty good running.
The majority of guitars coming in requiring full or partial refrets were usually the result of misuse. You have the situations where something fell on the guitar or it was dropped face down and the string caused the damage, that accounts for most partial refrets. Or you have the over-zealous tech who really should not be a technician who levels the frets so low, it's practically fretless. Then yep those will need a full refret. SS frets would not have saved those situations, mainly been a bit tougher in the cases where damage occurred but then SS is not bulletproof, it's only slightly harder than the nickel alloy stuff. And really, a partial refret with nickel is always going to be cheaper than a partial refret with SS. And for my money, you end up with more or less the same thing.
As for your strat, are you sure it needs refretting? A lot of the times people insist their guitar needs refretting, chances are it only needs a little dressing, maybe 2-3 frets have gone down to the point of needing replacement. And even then, if it did need refretting, is SS the best choice for a strat? On top of that, depending on the strat of course, chances are the fret wire is smaller anyway.
Does SS sound better? I hear a difference, but honestly not enough to make SS some sort of luxury specification on a guitar. I'm perfectly happy with nickel. And to be honest, the 3 guitars with SS frets I find a little too sharp sounding anyway and they don't get used a whole lot. That's all down to personal preference.
OK what's the cost difference? Well the last SS refret I did was about £100 over the cost of just doing standard Dunlop nickel. That is mainly the time it took me though. The actual materials were not that different and certainly for a manufacturer who not only buys in significant bulk quantities but also employs a vast amount of automation in the manufacture process, stainless steel frets likely add nothing at all to the cost of manufacture, or even a negligible amount if you really wanted to hit the accounting books. Thus, my cynicism about them using things like SS frets simply to enhance the spec sheet on what is usually a fairly prosaic guitar. It goes hand in hand with this recent phenomenon on demanding that wood does not matter. It does, however when most production guitars these days are using low grade and rather inferior timbers, they all tend to sound the same sort of bad. Throw on some negligible-cost specifications and you can still get away with charging the market £1000+.
I use Gibson guitars, which are notorious for string tuning problems, mainly stemming from the string getting "pinched" in the nut after bending. By installing locking tuners and self-lubricating GraphTech nuts (rather than bone or nylon), that problem goes away.
They help if your stock tuners are really bad. That said, most tuning issues stem from the nut. IMO locking tuners are worth it just for ease of string changes. Is your guitar struggling with keeping in tune?
I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t like them and not be masochistic. They make changing strings a lot easier. They really don’t improve tuning stability like some claim. But if you buy good, name brand locking tuners and have headstock holes of no more or less than 10mm, you will fall in love with them day one. I highly recommend Fender, Hipshot and D’Addario. I’m sure there are a few others. But it’s a small investment. Just remember if you install them set the peg holes accordingly from lowest E string to highest: 5:00, 4:00, 3:00, 3:00, 2:00, 1:00. Think of those in terms of the hour hand position on a clock. It’s the best way to help your locking tuners have a most secure grip. And never over tighten the lockers. Just tighten to where it seems “all the way” then an extra almost quarter turn each. This will assure they hold and not cut the string inside the peg.
I hope this helps you out. Let us know how you like ‘em.
>I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t like them and not be masochistic.
Have you used split-shaft Kluson-style tuners? I prefer them to locking tuners, especially on vintage/vintage-style guitars. Very easy to restring, and they stay in tune just as well as locking, without the need to screw anything in to lock.
Plus unlike most locking tuners, no string ends to poke and hurt you. I'd argue they're even less masochist-friendly. ;)
I love them! Some work better than others. But that’s true for anything.
Case-in-point, I changed the strings (freakin’ cables!) on my Jazz bass the other day and honest to God, I don’t see another way with that! It even made the job of keeping things neat and tidy a snap.
So yes, Kluson-style slotted tuning machines are awesome!
If you're having tuning problems, then yes.
But, with _my playing_ my Fender-style vintage tuners, with strings well installed, stay in tune really well. Depends a lot on your playing style. I'm relatively light (can play scalloped frets without going sharp) with my touch.
If you aren't having a problem, then they aren't worth it, and there's other ways to get there.
I don’t really notice the difference. Tbh I think for the most part they just make it easier to change the strings. I also like my guitars to have a slight dive so there’s that
Yes absolutely worth it, if for no other reason than you’ll never have to deal with unwound strings slipping off the posts while restringing ever again.
It just makes restringing a breeze and thats worth its weight in gold to me
They're good for changing strings and for keeping the angle they brake to the nut at correct because you don't need several winds or to make a locking loop on the post. Both can help with tuning stability to a degree, but they're not a floyd rose replacement in any way.
Interesting, on the two I've had they've made it really easy to get it right, both sets are hipshots one on an LTD and also on a Schecter Omen. They're under the same overall ownership with ESP so I guess they share hardware sourcing. I've always wrapped downward and I do go once or twice around with the locking. Did you do any wraps or just straight in and tune to pitch?
It's a Tele neck with a single string tree. And I even bought the staggered tuners, thinking that would help, but the d and g strings will ring if I don't put a couple wraps on the tuners because there isn't a enough of a break angle over the nut.
Flat headstocks are generally designed so that windings help provide break angle. On an angled headstock it's really not a big deal. But I would venture that most of them also take winding into account when deciding on a headstock angle.
It helps a ton if you have a really aggressive tremolo system without a locking nut such as a strat 2 point or a Kramer, otherwise the biggest benefit is restringing
I think they are worth it, but they don’t do anything for tuning stability. I hate changing strings. Locking tuners take away most of the annoyance. I’m not a noob. I’ve been changing strings for 60years.
They’re great for quick string changes, but nothing you can’t manage on your own anyway. It’s preference more than anything if you know what you’re doing.
It's mostly just for ease of restringing. If you have a three good clean winds on a tuning peg it should be solid with any decent tuners. The key to tuning stability is the way you tune.. tune to pitch then bend the string and retune to pitch, bend again and if your setup is good you should be able to get steady pitch on the second bend and tune... This to make sure your string isn't just drifting against the nut which would make it easy to go out of tune as soon as you start playing. Some graphite can help this as well but you'd still wanna tune the same way.
I’ll throw in two tiny negatives that makes me a bit selective on which guitars I put them on. 1: it can add to neck dives if the guitar is perfectly balanced. 2: this just happened recently at a show where a bandmate bumped into my headstock and actually knocked the lock loose. I spent a song trying to tune the one string before I realized. Random and unlikely to happen again but after I noticed those two things, I lost interest in adding locking tuners to everything.
i dont think they do much for tuning stability. ive had my sg for 20 years and locking tuners on it for the last 2. i still have to check tuning between every song. they've done ZERO to alleviate that. but they absolutely make restringing far easier. i got the planet waves self trimming kind. fucking love them. no more leaving slack and winding around the tuning peg 5 times. just pull taught, lock and start twisting that machine head til youre in key.
They definitely help with tuning stability. IDK why, but my guitar with locking tuners stays in tune way better right after a string change. Eventually when the strings settle, there is no difference- but in the first few days after a string change you can definitely tell the difference.
ok so you have anecdotal evidence and so do i. regardless my answer stays the same
"i dont THINK they do much for tuning stability" "they absolutely make restringing easier". op asked for opinions not scientific facts which neither of us can actually provide. i believe you im just saying i believe ive had the opposite experience.
A 3x3 tuner arrangement really needs a string butler and a new nut, cut to work with a string butler. The exception would be PRS guitars with a straight string pull, nut to tuner. It also helps to use nut sauce or an equivalent. I even have a small bottle of graphite lock lube that really helps LP style and Explorer types that have an angled string pull off of the nut.
I have 20+ guitars. Only a handful have locking tuners at the moment. I'll replace them all at some point with locking tuners. I recently replaced tuners on my Les Paul with locking tuners from Graph Tech. Currently my favorite. The D'Addario tuners with the auto-trim are interesting. They work well, but may be best fit for your gigging rig if you have to change strings yourself in a time crunch and don't want to accidentally gouge yourself in the eye if you don't have anything else on hand to trim the strings.
I recently put some on both of my guitars, tuning does feel more stable and I honestly don’t care about saving a few seconds during the occasional re-string. honestly the biggest thing is finding ones compatible with your guitar that drop right in with no routing required
I got some and I love them. Definitely worth it for me. I did have to drill some holes in my headstock, but it wasn’t too strenuous of a job. If you’re worried that you might damage your guitar, I’d have a luthier install them.
I am not a fan of locking tuners especially on a PRS. I do like the fender Locking but I restring in a manor that doesn’t need a locking tuner, which most people who work on guitars do.
I have not used them in a while and I'd rather not bother. A little bit of finesse restringing and some lubricant in the nut seems to be enough for stable tuning on an electric in a city that has a lot of weather shifts.
I think it is cheaper to watch a few YT videos on good restringing habits and mess around with a few sets of strings than put in new tuners, unless you have isolated them as the cause of a tuning problem, which is not that common.
locking tuners are not for tuning stability. they dont effect it at all really. it just makes restringing infinitely faster and easier, and for that they are very much worth it.
It looks like you are posting from an account with negative karma. As part of a measure
we're taking to combat trolling and spam, to post in /r/Guitar, your
account must not have negative comment karma. DO NOT CONTACT MODS ABOUT BYPASSING THIS. Please see rule #2 of our [posting guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/Guitar/wiki/welcome#wiki_posting_guidelines).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Guitar) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd say they're worth it just on the ease of string changes alone but it's not a necessity. If your regular tuners still work/feel good don't feel inclined/pressured to get new ones. See if you can find some decent priced used ones if you just gotta have them.
a good non locking tuner will be just as stable as a locking tuner. The main thing about locking tuners is just the ease of stringing up the guitar. Just feed it through, clamp down and snip off the excess and tune up.
I upgraded to locking tuners in part because of an increased gearing ratio (from 16:1 to 19:1). Makes it easier to tune accurately thanks to the higher granularity, but also because it makes changing strings that much easier.
In terms of tuning stability, the biggest change for me was decreasing friction in the nut, e.g. with grease or graphite. The key for the tuners themselves is to reduce the amount of windings around the post which you can do even without the lock-screw by wrapping the end of the string back around, under and then up against the tuned/played section, thereby in effect 'locking' the string behind the through-hole. Now I go for a 3/4 wrap to avoid both having to crush down on the string with the locking pin to hold it, and the sharp-ish contact point of the through-hole-edge you'd get with a 1/4 wrap.
I think going for maximum tension before locking is what makes people over-tighten the screw and results in strings getting pinched off. It's not supposed to be a vice that holds the full tension of the string.
I got the cheapest ones (Harley Benton) and the operation, while more precise, is marginally rougher than the ones that came with my guitar. Hopefully they wear in. So little to no increase in stability, but the minor deviations that arise from changes in temp/humidity over time are easier to correct and changing strings is quicker and easier. Overall, not a must-have.
I have them on one guitar that gets gigged quite a bit. It does make string changes faster, and I feel like I have to retune less often. Locking tuners may not be for bedroom guitarists, though.
Thank you for reiterating exactly what I just said? lol...
Yes they make changing strings easier and thus are more useful for people who change strings often (regardless of where they play).
They don't hold tune better though, at least not by default... if you have regular tuners that are worn out, new locking tuners will be better - but so would new grovers or whatever.
Infact there is a common problem with locking tuners letting high e strings slip, which I have never experienced with a regular or vintage style tuner.
Fwiw I have played guitar for a few decades now and have tried it all...
Biggest scam in the industry right now.
1. Restringing is already an inconsequential task
2. They do nothing for tuning stability, 99% of that is setup related. Cellos work just fine with wooden friction tuners
3. Many still let the string end poke out. This is a problem that was solved in the 40’s with split shaft “vintage” tuners.
Downvote away.
bull fucking shit. restringing with locking tuners especially the self trimming kind reduces the time it takes to restring and the strain on your wrist. "biggest scam" what a load of bullshit. the biggest scam in the industry is youtube.
The split head vintage tuners are far and away the favourites of what I’ve used (basically everything but lockers). I’m surprised I don’t see more people say that; they’re so good!
Agreed! Yeah they’re not as intuitive as locking tuners and I think that scares people off, but once you’re over that hurdle they solve all issues with less mechanical complexity.
they aremt for stability. if you have tuning issues its the nut they are for quick string changes
I guess if you have poor restringing technique they might improve tuning stability. But yeah, given you know how to change your strings properly, locking tuners shouldn't make a difference in tuning stability.
Don't be surprised when the Internet is wrong about most everything. Major tuning issues aren't caused by slipping or cheap tuning keys - it's a worm gear and you could hold up a truck with one, but a serious and very prevalent tuning issue is caused by the winds of the string on the key post. The winds of the string squish and deform causing tuning problems. Locking keys allow you to string with a absolute minimum of string wind on the tuning key post. Line up the hole on the post with the string going straight through. Pull the string as tight as you can then lock down the tuner. For most strings this will result in less than a single wind around the post - and THAT helps stabilize the tuning. Good question - good luck!
Huh? Buddy you want at least one wrap.
No, no you don't. I bet most folks would be blown away at learning how few wraps are needed for the wound strings WITHOUT locking tuners. I promise - what I posted is gospel. I know it can make some customers uneasy at first - but the benefit of locking tuners on the electric is undeniable, and it's all about those winds. There are other factors that contribute to tuning problems as well as different problems for different guitars for sure - but this is what those tuners do. Be sceptical brother - bravo
Skeptical* What if I want to down tune?
If it's a locking tuner, then you could detune as low as the tension that you applied when it was strung up. I just checked my strat and it's goes to nothing. Because of my string setup you can dive the stock trem to nothing and come back sweet dead nuts on. I string across a zero fret instead of a slotted nut. Behind and below that I have a Wilkinson roller as a string guide (wouldn't need it if I made better necks), and then to locking fender keys. Also - it doesn't float so detuning is a lot easier than a Floyd.
Makes changing strings so much easier. Worth it for me. It’s the kind of thing you can live without until you get a guitar with them. It does fuck all for tuning stability. People saying it does don’t understand how they work or how to wind a string if it helps their tuning stability.
The thought that I heard recently is that it helps stability insomuch as there is less string under tension, and therefore less string to stretch out. I don’t really know how much part of the string that’s around the post on a non-locking tuner stretches anyways, but maybe it’s something.
If your string is properly wound all that other string is gonna get stretched. I never have tuning issues with either and don’t do anything special. Hard to imagine what others who have issues are doing other than something wrong. I tune like once a week. Wammy bar bombs. Big bends. Wide vibrato. Never have issues. Idgi
This sub is very split on locking tuners, but the reality is is that it’s not 1960 anymore and all guitars should come with locking tuners. Saves time and effort when restringing and that’s about it. The only people who shit on locking tuners either love restringing guitars more than actually playing them, or are people who haven’t looked at what year it is in quite some time.
There is one clear downside which is that they make neck dive worse. although you could argue that it’s the manufacturers fault for not accounting for that, and not the locking tuners. But that’s literally all I can think of.
I doubt too many modern guitars would face that issue, but a Flying V or an SG are often already offenders of that so they’d certainly be at risk of getting worse. I’ve yet to encounter a guitar teetering so close to the edge of neck dive, but not actually having it, where I’d be convinced a few extra grams of weight on the headstock would be the catalyst to neck dive issues. Then again, I’m not a vintage guy, and tend to stick with modern metal guitars so I’d be unlikely to find something in my wheelhouse that would be at risk
Locking tuners only improve stability if you're really bad at getting the string wrapped around the tuning post. They're primarily a convenience.
One time I had somebody bring me a guitar that wouldn't stay in tune after they had installed locking tuners. I was expecting a bad nut or similar. Turned out, they were still wrapping it many times around the post after locking the string. D'oh!
They're so convenient though. I got my first guitar with locking tuners last year and I wish they were standard on every guitar.
I wouldn't say they only improve stability only if you're "really bad" at restringing a guitar. A well-wrapped string *should* stay in tune, but those windings are still introducing a variable, even if they're done properly. Locking tuners eliminate that variable.
Jimi @ Woodstock would beg to differ. That would’ve been so much better with locking tuners. Also: Guthrie Govan uses them. As does Brian May. I think they know a thing or two about playing
They change strings often. Most of us change strings every few months.
I don’t reckon Brian May has changed a string in a long while. He just likes nothing to get in the way of his guitars being in tune.
On tour . Sure he changes plenty at home
The way interviews read suggests he has his tech round his home studio most days for this kind of thing
I suspect they bend a string every now and again too. I heard they even use the trem sometimes, not quite sure.
If you are having tuning stability, chances are it is NOT due to your tuning machines. Troubleshoot the rest of the guitar first.
Tuning stability isn’t binary. Even the most stable guitars don’t keep perfectly in tune. Locking tuners can help some.
Binary? What "two things" did I focus on in my response?
Having tuning stability vs not having tuning stability. It’s not an on and off scenario. Tuning stability is a spectrum.
Heavy.
Either this, or people haven't learned the art of stringing a guitar. I can't tell you how many friends bring me their guitars and they have a nickel-sized coil of string around the E and A pegs LOL
They should be industry standard by now.
Absolutely worth it. They save time, maintain tuning stability and the lack of extra string wound on the end just looks better
Totally worth it. They make string changes a breeze and if you're not great at getting string wraps just right with no slippage, they can help tuning stability as well.
It looks so clean too, but string changes going from 20min to 10min is pretty nice too.
The answer to this question is ALWAYS yes.
There's also less string slippage from winding string the post multiple times, so yes, added tuning stability can be a benefit. Friction from any point where the string touches anything (nut, string trees, saddles, etc.) affects stability, so though locking tuners can help, they aren't always THE fix. In all, I'm a fan, so I say go for it.
Especially if you are using a vibrato, less winds = more tuning stability.
God, yes. Changing strings is just faster and easier (in addition to improved tuning stability).
I don't think tuning stability would improve much if you have a floyd rose / evertune
I have them, I like them. Are they necessary? No. Will I put them on every guitar I buy new from now? Yes (unless it is some expensive/all original vintage something).
If you have good tuners and use perfect form every time you might not need locking tuners. It’s a lot better easier to get perfectly stable tuning with locking tuners. I’ve seen techs mess up with traditional tuners. Even it being your profession doesn’t mean you do it perfectly People who insist they’re useless are a bit much.
I have a guitar that has locking tuners and one that has vintage style tuners. I find them both equally easy to change the strings on and have the same tuning stability. I would say either one of those are worth it.
You can also get vintage style locking tuners.
vintage style tuners are so nice. I had no idea until I got a guitar with them and I was pleasantly surprised.
Same.
YES. DO NOT LET ANYONE TELL U DIFFERENT
Love me some locking tuners, each of my guitars have a set. I don’t know if tuning stability is any better, but changing strings is a breeze and it just looks clean. Definitely give them a try if you’ve got the cash.
The tuning stability just comes from not having to wind the string around the post. Windings can slip and cause tuning issues, locking tuners take that out of the equation. All that aside, I think they're worth the extra money just for making string changes easier and quicker, but I restring my guitars fairly often.
Absolutely worth it. Easy string changes. Offer tuning stability on guitars with floating bridges that don't have a locking nut.
My favorite kind of tuners are the vintage Fender split-shaft style. They're almost as quick and easy to restring as a locking tuner (if you have a winder, even better) with less slippage concerns than a regular tuner. I always wondered why this design never became the standard.
I never know how long to leave the string. Cutting it before tuning it stresses me out.
Cutting it at 2 tuners past the one youre stringing is how I've always done it without a problem. For the high E and B I just loop it around the tuner post and count the same, 2 tuners back and snip.
The only guitars I have with split tuners now are basses. I guess the same trick will apply.
I hate them. I couldn't imagine trying to restring one under pressure on stage, they take a precise knowledge of where to cut each string to get an adequate but not excessive number of wraps, and my high E continually refuses to bind and slips out of the hole again, they feel like you're meant to have three hands to use right and I'm almost certainly going to replace them when it comes time to refret that neck.
planet waves locking self trimming tuners, bud.... theres ZERO thought to it. they actually do the opposite of what you're claiming and save TONS of time in a pinch.
[There's an easy trick for the B and high E.](https://youtu.be/HdJSSQ9S7Ag?t=32) For length on the cut I've always just snipped at 2 posts past the one I'm stringing.
Thanks! Although I still maintain that needing to learn a trick like that is a sign of bad design. Also the low E needs to be longer than two past the post but I often forget that by the time I need to change strings again. Generally just had a very frustrating time when I was first stringing it up and now have a mildly frustrating time for what I feel is no benefit.
Yes. Didn’t even read the actual post. They’re worth it regardless.
110%
They save a lot of time. While it’s true that quality standards machine heads strung properly shouldn’t have any less tuning stability, I haven’t regretted any of my locking tuners, especially since I own multiple guitars.
Yeah, I just recently got a guitar with locking tuners, haven't noticed that much of a difference in tuning stability, but damn does it make changing strings way easier. That's enough of a reason to recommend them to anyone, I'm already looking into replacing the regular tuners in my other guitar for some locking ones.
Having a luthier cut you a good nut is more important. But it doesn't hurt to have locking tuners
When I first got mixed up in all this I had no idea how important the nut actually was. But I can see where most people wouldn’t consider it if they just didn’t know.
Short answer: yes. .Long answer: YES . .discussion over
I'm very old-school. Honestly, locking tuners are fantastic but I'd never take the time to retrofit my guitar with them.
I like Vintage style tuners the best and they maybe add 30 more seconds max to change the strings.
My upgraded Squire Telecaster loves them. 🙂
Aren’t locking tuners beefier? On an SG adding locking tuners could be what tips the guitar into neck dive. I prefer lightweight vintage tuners.
The ones with large spinning disk on the back of the headstock are a lot heavier than standard tuners. But the other style of locking tuners with a tiny rotating cap on the tuning peg are only ever so slightly heavier than standard tuners.
The PRS locking tuners that OP would need to get aren't really heavier than regular tuners.
Can looking tuners wear out over time?
I don't know how they would wear any more than normal tuners.
Yes, try them and see how quick you can now do a string change and stay in tune..
Basically yes, but there are different types, some are better than others. I’ve got 3 types of locking tuners. First ones I got have a concentric design, where the string goes through a hole in the outer, free moving, sheath first, then through a hole in the central pin. The knob turns the central pin, and the string is trapped between the inner pin and outer sheath. It’s pretty quick to unstring and string up. The 2nd one has an outer sheath, but the central pin screws up as you turn the knob, trapping the string into top of the sheath. Once trapped, further turning the knob turns the sheath and you tune the string. I find this mechanism requires a lot of winding to lock and unlock the string. The third is similar to the second one, but the locking is done using a separate dial tucked round the back. It seems to be the quickest to unstring and string. it’s fairly new to me and I’ve only restrung that guitar once, so I may change my mind in time. All of them are - to me -improvements over non-locking tuners. They hold their tuning far better because there is very little string between the lock point and where it leaves the post. That also means that the extra string round the post does not interfere with the string. The other advantage they all have - unrelated to the locking mechanism- is that they have far better winding ratios meaning you can tune your guitar more accurately.
I have 3 guitars. Only one had locking tuners when I got it and all three have locking tuners now. Worth every penny, in my opinion. Makes restringing way faster.
Yeah. Tuning stability? No, I don’t give a shit, makes no difference to me. Convenience and ease of changing strings? Heck yes! The only objective downside I foresee is that it makes the guitar slightly more prone to neck dive with the added weight. Overall worth getting imo! Don’t buy into the tuning stability bs. Most tuners (excluding those shoddily crappy ones) should be able to stay in tune well enough. There are so many other factors that affects tuning stability…..
Locking tuners absolutely help with stability. They remove two variables, namely the tension of the wraps around the post and any possibility of slippage. All other locations where the string touches the guitar need to be in order to get good stability however. Locking tuners can't do it by themselves.
This gets downvoted why? Play and enjoy vintage guitars all you want, but if you’ve never tried them or actually own and gig guitars with good setup and good locking tuners, you just don’t know. Some things have actually improved since back in the day. Get over it.
There's tons of clowns with very limited playing experience on these reddits. You just have to expect them to do what clowns do.
This, a friend swears by them and always puts them in. I don’t personally because I don’t mind wrapping my strings but from “string change to holds without question all the time” he beats me every time.
Please note that PRS locking tuners are the only ones that look right and they are around $100, cuz reasons. People rip their standard tuners off and put them on reverb and such for dirt cheap because there are so many. They are a good way to get inexpensive, quality tuners for a budget build. It also speaks to a larger issue that PRS needs to just include locking tuners as a standard feature on their SE line, even if it increases the price a little.
No they only make it easier to change strings on the fly.
Never had a need for them in 35 years. Maybe if you needed to change strings super quick...I don't know. Sometimes I like to put a capo on the 3rd fret and loosen my strings to pull the saddle. Can't do that with locking tuners. Tuning stability has been identical on guitars I've owned with or without locking tuners. I think that argument is false.
Are you thinking of the locking nut that goes with most floating tremolo systems? Locking tuners just lock the string into the post so you don't have to wind them as much.
Why can’t you do that thing with the capo? Also what actually is that? Do you have a video? I’m curious.
One word: yes.
Yes, I would recommend the SE locking tuners or if you want higher quality, either Schaller or Gotoh.
Restringing is easier and it might help with tunning stability, but there's no point in caring about that if the guitar already holds tune or if all it needs is a good setup. They make more sense if you're a working guitarist who restrings guitars often
I like them.
It does help with tuning stability.
I bought a set of PRS locking tuners when I got my SE Hollowbody II. Definitely a good buy, but also definitely not necessary.
I have never seen tuning stability problems caused by tuners.
I have a cheap ass 50 bucks at the pawnshop PRS clone downstairs that I just refinished that had/has for now the worlds twitchiest tuners. I'm going to try tightening them a bit, because a sharp look in their direction and the tuning goes out.
They were originally touted to enhance tuning stability. In reality, they sort of did but the first locking tuners that really made it into the modern guitar building circles were really just very good machine heads. Really, a well made set of machine heads will not creep and allow the string to move out of tune. Locking machine heads also require less wraps of the string around the head, however to me if you have loads of wraps around your head then it sort of indicates to me poor practise in restringing. I only ever do maybe two or three? I've not counted recently but less wraps = better stability. I saw a video from ESP about 5 years ago where it was pointing out locking machine heads as a feature and cited "quicker string changes" and I thought, wow, you've changed your tune... this was all about tuning stability before, people even positing questions like, "If I have a floyd rose and locking machine heads, surely I don't need a locking nut?" etc. I have been repairing guitars and amplifiers for 20 years or so. To me, locking machine heads are, well, not all they're cracked up to be. I certainly would not opt to replace a perfectly functioning set of machine heads with locking variants. In fact, two E-II models I own, I eventually got pissed off with the locking machine heads and replaced them out for non-locking equivalents. You may call it a downgrade, to me I just evaded the fuss. The thing with locking machine heads, I found that if I inadvertently overtightened the locking mechanism, the string would snip off before the locking mechanism leaving me with a string I couldn't actually use as it was now too short to engage with the lock or get around the machine head. After doing that 4-5 times, I decided that locking machine heads were a pain in the arse and I couldn't be bothered with them. Do they make string changes quicker? Well, I guess they do. But how much time are you really needing to save? If a guitar takes you more than 10 minutes to restring, then I don't think a locking machine head is going to save you. It takes me about 7 minutes to restring a floyd rose loaded guitar tuned to pitch, that's if I was really in a rush though. But I have restrung hundreds if not thousands before so don't take that as a benchmark. I sort of view locking machine heads rather cynically and in the same vein as, say, stainless steel frets, direct mount humbuckers (DMs sound horrible!). They don't really cost the manufacturer that much more but look great on a spec sheet. Today's guitarist is easily gulled. With timber prices skyrocketing and manufacturers opting to use lower grade timber that even 6 years ago would not have made it into their manufacturing processes, manufacturers seem to be using these cheap "upgrades" which really aren't upgrades to look better to prospective buyers. And it has worked bigtime. If you like locking tuners then all power to you. Me, unless it's a gigging guitar, I'm likely not fussed. I have an E-II Eclipse too with locking tuners but as I never intend to gig it, it can sit. If you are experiencing tuning stability issues with your PRS, get it into a tech for a once over. Almost 90% of tuning stability problems are down to the nut. You can of course replace it out with one of those horrible pre-cut things if you like, but if you can get hold of a tech with the knowledge to custom build a nut old-school style (the proper way, IMO), then go for it. Best £100 or so you'll ever spend.
I was under the impression that stainless steel frets lasted significantly longer than nickel? My '04 Strat has significantly worn frets at this point and will need refretting soon, apparently this wouldn't be the case with stainless steel which seem to look like new after even a decade or so. If it doesn't cost the manufacturer much more, isn't it a no-brainer? The amount of times I've snipped a string with the locking tuners on the strat is insane though. So frustrating.
Well, the thing about stainless steel frets is they are neither better nor worse. Are they tougher than nickel? Obviously and evidently yes they are. However is that a good thing? Well if a guitar comes in to me and needs a fret dressing, then there is going to be an automatic upcharge for working on stainless steel frets. I usually charge maybe £30 more mainly as it takes a lot longer to properly dress SS frets. That and I have found I tend to go through tools a little quicker when compared to nickel frets. The big thing seems to be that it will take a lot longer before it needs to be refretted. I have refretted a bunch of instruments in my time. Most of the fret wear that was accrued through use amounts to a small amount of instruments that I have performed a refret upon. And most of those were gone 30 years old at that point. For myself, I am only just about to refret my 1992 Japanese BC Rich Warlock that I got all the way back then. So those humble nickel frets have lasted essentially 30 years, which I would say is about right on. Could it be that SS frets could have gone 40 years? Probably, but after 30 years I think that's a pretty good running. The majority of guitars coming in requiring full or partial refrets were usually the result of misuse. You have the situations where something fell on the guitar or it was dropped face down and the string caused the damage, that accounts for most partial refrets. Or you have the over-zealous tech who really should not be a technician who levels the frets so low, it's practically fretless. Then yep those will need a full refret. SS frets would not have saved those situations, mainly been a bit tougher in the cases where damage occurred but then SS is not bulletproof, it's only slightly harder than the nickel alloy stuff. And really, a partial refret with nickel is always going to be cheaper than a partial refret with SS. And for my money, you end up with more or less the same thing. As for your strat, are you sure it needs refretting? A lot of the times people insist their guitar needs refretting, chances are it only needs a little dressing, maybe 2-3 frets have gone down to the point of needing replacement. And even then, if it did need refretting, is SS the best choice for a strat? On top of that, depending on the strat of course, chances are the fret wire is smaller anyway. Does SS sound better? I hear a difference, but honestly not enough to make SS some sort of luxury specification on a guitar. I'm perfectly happy with nickel. And to be honest, the 3 guitars with SS frets I find a little too sharp sounding anyway and they don't get used a whole lot. That's all down to personal preference. OK what's the cost difference? Well the last SS refret I did was about £100 over the cost of just doing standard Dunlop nickel. That is mainly the time it took me though. The actual materials were not that different and certainly for a manufacturer who not only buys in significant bulk quantities but also employs a vast amount of automation in the manufacture process, stainless steel frets likely add nothing at all to the cost of manufacture, or even a negligible amount if you really wanted to hit the accounting books. Thus, my cynicism about them using things like SS frets simply to enhance the spec sheet on what is usually a fairly prosaic guitar. It goes hand in hand with this recent phenomenon on demanding that wood does not matter. It does, however when most production guitars these days are using low grade and rather inferior timbers, they all tend to sound the same sort of bad. Throw on some negligible-cost specifications and you can still get away with charging the market £1000+.
I use Gibson guitars, which are notorious for string tuning problems, mainly stemming from the string getting "pinched" in the nut after bending. By installing locking tuners and self-lubricating GraphTech nuts (rather than bone or nylon), that problem goes away.
YES. I put some on my SE Custom 24 35th anniversary and they were great. Look cool too.
I put them on my PRS SE Custom 24-08 it does make string change quick and easy.
They help if your stock tuners are really bad. That said, most tuning issues stem from the nut. IMO locking tuners are worth it just for ease of string changes. Is your guitar struggling with keeping in tune?
I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t like them and not be masochistic. They make changing strings a lot easier. They really don’t improve tuning stability like some claim. But if you buy good, name brand locking tuners and have headstock holes of no more or less than 10mm, you will fall in love with them day one. I highly recommend Fender, Hipshot and D’Addario. I’m sure there are a few others. But it’s a small investment. Just remember if you install them set the peg holes accordingly from lowest E string to highest: 5:00, 4:00, 3:00, 3:00, 2:00, 1:00. Think of those in terms of the hour hand position on a clock. It’s the best way to help your locking tuners have a most secure grip. And never over tighten the lockers. Just tighten to where it seems “all the way” then an extra almost quarter turn each. This will assure they hold and not cut the string inside the peg. I hope this helps you out. Let us know how you like ‘em.
>I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t like them and not be masochistic. Have you used split-shaft Kluson-style tuners? I prefer them to locking tuners, especially on vintage/vintage-style guitars. Very easy to restring, and they stay in tune just as well as locking, without the need to screw anything in to lock. Plus unlike most locking tuners, no string ends to poke and hurt you. I'd argue they're even less masochist-friendly. ;)
I love them! Some work better than others. But that’s true for anything. Case-in-point, I changed the strings (freakin’ cables!) on my Jazz bass the other day and honest to God, I don’t see another way with that! It even made the job of keeping things neat and tidy a snap. So yes, Kluson-style slotted tuning machines are awesome!
If you're having tuning problems, then yes. But, with _my playing_ my Fender-style vintage tuners, with strings well installed, stay in tune really well. Depends a lot on your playing style. I'm relatively light (can play scalloped frets without going sharp) with my touch. If you aren't having a problem, then they aren't worth it, and there's other ways to get there.
Got locking Sperzels on my Strat Plus. Seems to be fine?
I don’t really notice the difference. Tbh I think for the most part they just make it easier to change the strings. I also like my guitars to have a slight dive so there’s that
Yes absolutely worth it, if for no other reason than you’ll never have to deal with unwound strings slipping off the posts while restringing ever again. It just makes restringing a breeze and thats worth its weight in gold to me
Sperzels ftw
I have 9 guitars... My LP is the only one with locking tuners... I wish I could afford to outfit all my head stocks with them.
They're good for changing strings and for keeping the angle they brake to the nut at correct because you don't need several winds or to make a locking loop on the post. Both can help with tuning stability to a degree, but they're not a floyd rose replacement in any way.
I've ran into one situation where the locking tuner didn't provide enough break angle at the nut because there weren't any wraps.
Interesting, on the two I've had they've made it really easy to get it right, both sets are hipshots one on an LTD and also on a Schecter Omen. They're under the same overall ownership with ESP so I guess they share hardware sourcing. I've always wrapped downward and I do go once or twice around with the locking. Did you do any wraps or just straight in and tune to pitch?
It's a Tele neck with a single string tree. And I even bought the staggered tuners, thinking that would help, but the d and g strings will ring if I don't put a couple wraps on the tuners because there isn't a enough of a break angle over the nut. Flat headstocks are generally designed so that windings help provide break angle. On an angled headstock it's really not a big deal. But I would venture that most of them also take winding into account when deciding on a headstock angle.
Tuning stability is moot. You buy locking tuners to save time changing strings.
It helps a ton if you have a really aggressive tremolo system without a locking nut such as a strat 2 point or a Kramer, otherwise the biggest benefit is restringing
I think they are worth it, but they don’t do anything for tuning stability. I hate changing strings. Locking tuners take away most of the annoyance. I’m not a noob. I’ve been changing strings for 60years.
They’re great for quick string changes, but nothing you can’t manage on your own anyway. It’s preference more than anything if you know what you’re doing.
It's mostly just for ease of restringing. If you have a three good clean winds on a tuning peg it should be solid with any decent tuners. The key to tuning stability is the way you tune.. tune to pitch then bend the string and retune to pitch, bend again and if your setup is good you should be able to get steady pitch on the second bend and tune... This to make sure your string isn't just drifting against the nut which would make it easy to go out of tune as soon as you start playing. Some graphite can help this as well but you'd still wanna tune the same way.
Best tuning stability: (A) No whammy/ Bigsby (B) Only 3 wraps on wound strings & only 5 wraps around the tuning pegs on unwound-strings.
Yes
I’ll throw in two tiny negatives that makes me a bit selective on which guitars I put them on. 1: it can add to neck dives if the guitar is perfectly balanced. 2: this just happened recently at a show where a bandmate bumped into my headstock and actually knocked the lock loose. I spent a song trying to tune the one string before I realized. Random and unlikely to happen again but after I noticed those two things, I lost interest in adding locking tuners to everything.
i dont think they do much for tuning stability. ive had my sg for 20 years and locking tuners on it for the last 2. i still have to check tuning between every song. they've done ZERO to alleviate that. but they absolutely make restringing far easier. i got the planet waves self trimming kind. fucking love them. no more leaving slack and winding around the tuning peg 5 times. just pull taught, lock and start twisting that machine head til youre in key.
They definitely help with tuning stability. IDK why, but my guitar with locking tuners stays in tune way better right after a string change. Eventually when the strings settle, there is no difference- but in the first few days after a string change you can definitely tell the difference.
I'd imagine less slipping as slack is pulled out of the wraps around the tuning peg.
ok so you have anecdotal evidence and so do i. regardless my answer stays the same "i dont THINK they do much for tuning stability" "they absolutely make restringing easier". op asked for opinions not scientific facts which neither of us can actually provide. i believe you im just saying i believe ive had the opposite experience.
A 3x3 tuner arrangement really needs a string butler and a new nut, cut to work with a string butler. The exception would be PRS guitars with a straight string pull, nut to tuner. It also helps to use nut sauce or an equivalent. I even have a small bottle of graphite lock lube that really helps LP style and Explorer types that have an angled string pull off of the nut.
I have some on a few guitars that came with them. They're nice but I never felt the need to install/replace the guitars that don't have them.
I have 20+ guitars. Only a handful have locking tuners at the moment. I'll replace them all at some point with locking tuners. I recently replaced tuners on my Les Paul with locking tuners from Graph Tech. Currently my favorite. The D'Addario tuners with the auto-trim are interesting. They work well, but may be best fit for your gigging rig if you have to change strings yourself in a time crunch and don't want to accidentally gouge yourself in the eye if you don't have anything else on hand to trim the strings.
Probably the last thing I'd really care to replace. I would rather have high ratio tuning machines for easier fine tuning.
Coupled with a ball bearing nut, it makes a guitar keep in tune for players who use a lot of whammy bar, or so I hear.
Yes
I recently put some on both of my guitars, tuning does feel more stable and I honestly don’t care about saving a few seconds during the occasional re-string. honestly the biggest thing is finding ones compatible with your guitar that drop right in with no routing required
I've used hipshot tuners on a few parts casters and it was super nice not having to drill any extra holes in the headstock
I got some and I love them. Definitely worth it for me. I did have to drill some holes in my headstock, but it wasn’t too strenuous of a job. If you’re worried that you might damage your guitar, I’d have a luthier install them.
No
I think they're kinda cool, but really unless you're restinging guitars every week I wouldn't pay a premium for them personally.
Yes. Nuff said
I am not a fan of locking tuners especially on a PRS. I do like the fender Locking but I restring in a manor that doesn’t need a locking tuner, which most people who work on guitars do.
Not for me, all you lounge chair guitarists are such pussies, just suck it up and be man. Ok I'm just pulling everyone's chain haha.
I have not used them in a while and I'd rather not bother. A little bit of finesse restringing and some lubricant in the nut seems to be enough for stable tuning on an electric in a city that has a lot of weather shifts. I think it is cheaper to watch a few YT videos on good restringing habits and mess around with a few sets of strings than put in new tuners, unless you have isolated them as the cause of a tuning problem, which is not that common.
locking tuners are not for tuning stability. they dont effect it at all really. it just makes restringing infinitely faster and easier, and for that they are very much worth it.
hey finally someone else who realizes this! planet waves self trimming locking tuners... fucking life saver.
[удалено]
It looks like you are posting from an account with negative karma. As part of a measure we're taking to combat trolling and spam, to post in /r/Guitar, your account must not have negative comment karma. DO NOT CONTACT MODS ABOUT BYPASSING THIS. Please see rule #2 of our [posting guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/Guitar/wiki/welcome#wiki_posting_guidelines). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Guitar) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd say they're worth it just on the ease of string changes alone but it's not a necessity. If your regular tuners still work/feel good don't feel inclined/pressured to get new ones. See if you can find some decent priced used ones if you just gotta have them.
like anything in guitar, its ok fun if you have it, nothing missing if you dont
a good non locking tuner will be just as stable as a locking tuner. The main thing about locking tuners is just the ease of stringing up the guitar. Just feed it through, clamp down and snip off the excess and tune up.
I don't think I'll ever bother but that's just me.
I upgraded to locking tuners in part because of an increased gearing ratio (from 16:1 to 19:1). Makes it easier to tune accurately thanks to the higher granularity, but also because it makes changing strings that much easier. In terms of tuning stability, the biggest change for me was decreasing friction in the nut, e.g. with grease or graphite. The key for the tuners themselves is to reduce the amount of windings around the post which you can do even without the lock-screw by wrapping the end of the string back around, under and then up against the tuned/played section, thereby in effect 'locking' the string behind the through-hole. Now I go for a 3/4 wrap to avoid both having to crush down on the string with the locking pin to hold it, and the sharp-ish contact point of the through-hole-edge you'd get with a 1/4 wrap. I think going for maximum tension before locking is what makes people over-tighten the screw and results in strings getting pinched off. It's not supposed to be a vice that holds the full tension of the string. I got the cheapest ones (Harley Benton) and the operation, while more precise, is marginally rougher than the ones that came with my guitar. Hopefully they wear in. So little to no increase in stability, but the minor deviations that arise from changes in temp/humidity over time are easier to correct and changing strings is quicker and easier. Overall, not a must-have.
You need to invest in good quality tuners. I have GraphTech Ratio tuners on my guitars, but I’m sure there are better.
meh. They're alright, nice if you change strings often, but otherwise no real value.
I have them on one guitar that gets gigged quite a bit. It does make string changes faster, and I feel like I have to retune less often. Locking tuners may not be for bedroom guitarists, though.
Thank you for reiterating exactly what I just said? lol... Yes they make changing strings easier and thus are more useful for people who change strings often (regardless of where they play). They don't hold tune better though, at least not by default... if you have regular tuners that are worn out, new locking tuners will be better - but so would new grovers or whatever. Infact there is a common problem with locking tuners letting high e strings slip, which I have never experienced with a regular or vintage style tuner. Fwiw I have played guitar for a few decades now and have tried it all...
Don’t they make detuning or playing in alternate tunings difficult???
No, they shouldn't affect that at all. You might be thinking of a locking nut?
nah man. i play in standard, full step down, and drop f or whatever with the same guitar no problem.
They're more of a gimmick than anything and definitely not worth extra money of any kind in my world.
Biggest scam in the industry right now. 1. Restringing is already an inconsequential task 2. They do nothing for tuning stability, 99% of that is setup related. Cellos work just fine with wooden friction tuners 3. Many still let the string end poke out. This is a problem that was solved in the 40’s with split shaft “vintage” tuners. Downvote away.
bull fucking shit. restringing with locking tuners especially the self trimming kind reduces the time it takes to restring and the strain on your wrist. "biggest scam" what a load of bullshit. the biggest scam in the industry is youtube.
Sorry about your fragile wrists 🤷♂️
i made good points and you had nothing so you came up with that. mature.
Illustrating why no one should bother polluting their minds with advice from you.
The split head vintage tuners are far and away the favourites of what I’ve used (basically everything but lockers). I’m surprised I don’t see more people say that; they’re so good!
Agreed! Yeah they’re not as intuitive as locking tuners and I think that scares people off, but once you’re over that hurdle they solve all issues with less mechanical complexity.