Heritage headstock

[Dick Seacup]

From an aesthetic perspective, the 4+2 Robin headstock is OK. From a mechanical/functional perspective, I have to wonder about the somewhat-less-than straight string pull. Then again...I don't play headstocks.

[jaywolfe]

Then again...I don't play headstocks.

 

Seen Jerry Donahue play his Telecaster headstock a couple times. Mind blowing.....

 

Jay Wolfe

[FredZepp]

my contribution ...

[ledzef]

I call my Heritage Excaliber because I feel like rock royalty when I play it and the headstock is like my crown a sign of regalness.

[brentrocks]

here is another example of design VS looks VS function....WECHTER, former kalamazoo Gibson fella.....

 

 

 

some people love it, some hate it....i think its pretty cool

[Doug]

Now that is some foreshortening.

 

http://www.heritageownersclub.com/forums/i...ost&id=6728

 

By the way - and since I don't believe I have weighed in on this subject, I love the Heritage headstock. It represents quality and understatement. It looks traditional and functional. How bad would that suck if they used the same design as the G-men?

[barrymclark]

* Mass is not good. Large headstocks are "energy sinks" and absorb & dampen vibration & therefore sustain...(who knew?)

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU........

 

I have been kicking that horse for a while now and even had a debate on here about that.

[Doug]

I once had a discussion about headstock shape and design with Abe Wechter. He said many bluegrass players insisted on the plain headstock, similar to those of the traditional martin's.

[Thundersteel]

PLEASE tell me this isn't you're guitar.

Not to worry-- it's definitely not mine!

[ronalr]

I gotta be honest...I never once thought about the headstock...when I bought my first Heritage.....the 2006 H-535 ...it was so beautiful and felt and sounded so great ...I knew I had to have it...headstock? what headstock? .... I don't think it would have ever crossed my mind to be concerned with the headstock......never thought about it till I read all the posts here!!!

[FredZepp]

In some discussions about "tone".. it is suggested that .. sustain=tone, and that is all.

 

There is a reason that the first Gibson solidbodies were a Maple/ Mahogany laminate. They felt that the all maple ones that they tested ( and that "sustained for days" ) did not produce the best tone.

While sustain is a factor in tone .. it is not the only one. There is a balance to be achieved.

 

So would the old D'Angelico guitars produce a better tone with a smaller headstock... debatable , for sure.

 

Not all qualities that make a great tone are easily measurable, some may require the human ear.. and a bit of personal interpretation... the finest guitar may not be designed on an oscilloscope.

 

 

( I bring this up ... because I have a Heritage with a .... fairly large ... headstock... )

[GuitArtMan]

 

Does it get any uglier? Supposedly great guitars, but I can't get past the FUGLY headstock.

 

PS Actually the one I played didn't do anything for me.

[Guest mgoetting]

I think mgoetting originally posted this thread is a relatively new member. Isn't that the guy that started the firestorm over his boss, a guitar dealer, wanting to post his "private collection" on HOC??

 

I suppose evertime we get a new member this topic is going to come up. Personally, I like it when it comes up. The replys and reaffirmation of our ever increasing respect for the brand AND the head stock are always good to hear. We all have to do a better job of promoting this brand. Heritage Guitars must continue to grow and thrive.

 

 

Well, I'm impressed at the passion this topic brings up. I'm glad to see that.

 

I am a relatively new member, but a Heritage has lived in my home for six years now. I never really noticed the headstock. I have heard some moaning about the design from time to time though.

 

I brought the topic up only because of the conversation I had with the Nashville guitar dealer, who is a Heritage player himself. I was surprised that this issue was a dealbreaker for some of his customers.

 

Patrick, I'm not the guy who posted on a "private stock" or even the guy who works for Guitar Center with the H-555 posting recently, but I have been called a trouble maker (and worse) before.

 

I like the Heritage headstock personally. But then I have two headless guitars also, so my opinion is void!

[Dick Seacup]

Here is how Heritage could sell more guitars (Warning: another headstock discussion!)

heritage headstock shape

Heritage headstock sizes?

A Heritage for the headstock-picky....

[peteraltongreen]

Hi 'mgoetting' ,

I've thought long & hard over this for some years.My first Heritage was a C140CM (1986),and the headstock was perfect,to me.It was narrower than Gibson,so the string pull on the tuners was straighter and easier,and also the angle on the nut again,was straighter.My next Heritage was the H575 (1988 ).The headstock was wider,and the sides of it,straight.I was less impressed with this.It reminded me when I got a Gibson catalogue in 1962,they had the S.G. series of Les Pauls on show for the first time.I thought the ultra modern body ( as it appeared to me,then) married to the traditional headstock didn't work for my eyes.( With hindsight,the C140 headstock would probably look better on it ) 50 years have nearly passed,and I don't see the headstock anymore,just an S.G.guitar as a whole unit.I've got used to the Heritage headstock,I like it and recognise it.I love the crown effect in the middle,the opposite if Gibson.It oozes quality,and everyone knows it.Love it !

[Guido]

I posted this in another thread in the forum.

It's about how to make a Heritage look like a Gibson.

The thread is more about the pickguard, but I think you will get the message!!!

 

Here's what I wrote in that thread:

 

First of all: it's a Heritage and not a Gibson!

 

Personally I can't understand why somebody wants a Heritage to look like a Gibson. Then you should buy a Gibson. Just my opinion!

It's not that I cant understand you. The first time I got my H150 I was irritated by the look of the pickguard and the missing poker chip (and the headstock).

But I think it's only because most of the people are used to the Gibson look.

The cutaway and the headstock will tell everybody immediately that it's not a Gibson. And I am proud that it's not a Gibson. And that's the reason why my H150 wears the original pickguard. Personally I think it emphasizes the body curvature much better than the Gibson pickguard.

 

Guido

[jaywolfe]

I never give the headstock a thought, unless I'm changing strings, or those rare times I'm letting the drummer know what were gonna play & I swivel to face him & slam the headstock into his CYMBAL........ (You'd think I'd learn after all these years!!!)

I actually sell more Heritage's than anyone in history & I can tell you that it's exceedingly rare for anyone to EVER mention it.

Can't remember the last time actually. Used to get those type comments frequently in the 90's, but rarely anymore. Most common remark today, thanks to the 'experts" on the internet......... "Is Heritage still in business?........................Were they bought out by the Koreans?.........................and my personal fav: My teacher told me that Gibson no longer makes a good guitar & if you want a good Gibson- get a Heritage." We DO hear this more & more these days, and it makes our job more enjoyable. Time to go home & see who's yet to blow-up in the 24 hrs. of LeMans. Thanks SpeedTV.

 

Jay Wolfe

[peacemaker]

my personal fav: My teacher told me that Gibson no longer makes a good guitar & if you want a good Gibson- get a Heritage."

 

That's actually how I found out about Heritage for the first time . . . my teacher is a Heritage artist. And he actually sent me to you, Jay . . .

[TalismanRich]

Anyone who doesn't buy a Heritage because it's not like a Gibson, didn't want it in the first place. Let them buy a Love Rock instead. Personally, I don't need "wings" glued to the sides of my headstock.

 

I wonder if the same comments happen with Anderson, Suhr, Zion, Carvin, G&L etc. They don't LOOK the same as the Fender headstock so who would ever buy one???

 

I will make one comment.. I MUCH prefer the bound headstock on the 157 with little diamond for looks. The Milli is nice too. I like bound headstocks although on the 140, without the neck binding, it wouldn't necessarily work. If the neck has binding, the headstock should too.

[Patrick]

Well, I'm impressed at the passion this topic brings up. I'm glad to see that.

 

I am a relatively new member, but a Heritage has lived in my home for six years now. I never really noticed the headstock. I have heard some moaning about the design from time to time though.

 

I brought the topic up only because of the conversation I had with the Nashville guitar dealer, who is a Heritage player himself. I was surprised that this issue was a dealbreaker for some of his customers.

 

Patrick, I'm not the guy who posted on a "private stock" or even the guy who works for Guitar Center with the H-555 posting recently, but I have been called a trouble maker (and worse) before.

 

I like the Heritage headstock personally. But then I have two headless guitars also, so my opinion is void!

 

You misinterpret my posting if you think I consider you a trouble maker. I just though I recognized your handle as that of the other guy. I think your posting and reintroducing this topic was great. So do all the others that have responded. Just look at the trail of replies to this and the previous thread on this topic. You hit it on the head . . . it's a passionate matter. And I don't think anyone can deny, the first impression one gets when he first sees the snake head is . . . . UGH!! What's that??? Then after you own one or 2 for a while, it not only grows on you . . . but you can't ever picture a Heritage guitar without it . . . . except maybe for Fred's Centurion. But then again, one of those is unique and beautiful. Many of them would probably be too much and distract from the uniqueness that is The Centurion.

[Kuz]

I have probably posted 20 different times on this topic, so this time I will keep it quick and to the point.

 

If they (Nashville guitarsists) are that ignorant, self-serving, status-seeking, premadonas, then F**K them if they don't like the headstock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JeffB]

I disconnected the computer in my guitar room and packed it away in the garage yesterday.

Just grabbed my daughters lap top to check some emails and out of habit clicked on the HOC.

Headstock thread number ????

Yesterday after getting the computer out of the room I then sat and played guitar (Heritage with fucked up deal breaking headstock)for 3 hours. Then I called up the keyboard player to come over and we wrote and recorded a tune. I used my Heritage to lay down the guitar parts. After 8 hrs the keyboard player went home.

I played the guitar for 10-11 hrs. I havnt done that since........I 1st plugged in the computer and found guitar forums.

Coming back today and reading headstock thread number???? made me realise that this(headstock design) only matters in cyber space and has no bearing on inspiration and playability in real time.

I really like my Heritage. Thats all I need to know about the headstock or any of it as individual features. As a whole it is perfect.

Daughter wants her lap top back. Gotta go and play guitar.

[mtpatty]

I disconnected the computer in my guitar room and packed it away in the garage yesterday.

Just grabbed my daughters lap top to check some emails and out of habit clicked on the HOC.

Headstock thread number ????

Yesterday after getting the computer out of the room I then sat and played guitar (Heritage with fucked up deal breaking headstock)for 3 hours. Then I called up the keyboard player to come over and we wrote and recorded a tune. I used my Heritage to lay down the guitar parts. After 8 hrs the keyboard player went home.

I played the guitar for 10-11 hrs. I havnt done that since........I 1st plugged in the computer and found guitar forums.

Coming back today and reading headstock thread number???? made me realise that this(headstock design) only matters in cyber space and has no bearing on inspiration and playability in real time.

I really like my Heritage. Thats all I need to know about the headstock or any of it as individual features. As a whole it is perfect.

Daughter wants her lap top back. Gotta go and play guitar.

 

I love the head stock! and I name all my guitars- some guys names, some girls- just depends...does that make me bi? Damn, my wife told me

I was a lesbian....

[Bombassa]

I love the head stock! and I name all my guitars- some guys names, some girls- just depends...does that make me bi? Damn, my wife told me

I was a lesbian....

 

I like the head stock too. Actually I prefer the headstock small and functional. (Martin, Telecaster, old LP goldt.....)

Just strange that nobody has mentioned that the Heritage headstock is very similar to Gibson.

Take a look at their mandolins: http://www2.gibson.com/Products/Acoustic-I...rd-A-style.aspx

[Patrick]

To those of you who may think that this topic has been run in a hole and would like it to go away . . . I believe that it is probably the single most important issue I've seen discussed here on the HOC forums. It's also my favorite thread to participate/argue within. Just the entertainment value I derive from hearing the passion expressed in concern, anger, frustration etc., is worth its' weight in gold. Let's, for at least a brief minute, take all of our personal feelings and emotions out of the discussion;; the owners at Heritage, through their passion for the brand, their love for guitar building, their committment to quality . . . and yes . . . their sheer stubborness, have stumbled upon something that I've seen corporations spend hundreds of thousands, and in some case millions of dollars in search of . . . . AN IDENTITY!!! Large corporations seek out the assistance of 5th Ave., New York City consulting firms to help them discover who and what they are. Heritage's "identity" is . . . their history, their quality and . . .yes . . . their headstock. Cudos to Jim, Marv, JP and now Vince for not acquiesing to the repeated requests/demands for a change in headstock design. However, from a business aspect, they don't quite know how to go about marketing their "identity". They need help with that. Kuz . . . think about your last post. Basically what you are saying is that if the target customers don't like our product then fuck them . . . let them buy something else. No company can stay in business with that attitude/philosophy. If Heritage is building guitars purely as a hobby and only to satisfy those of us here in the HOC, who love their guitars . . . headstock and all . . . . then I would totally agree with you. However, it's a business. First and foremost, it's a business. Heritage needs to find a way to convert those who can't bring themselves to look beyond the headstock design. If Heritage had received an order for a guitar from everyone, players and dealers alike, who chose not to buy because of the headstock design . . . they would have the problem that every company dreams about . . . more orders than they could handle. Some of you say that there are uglier headstocks out there . . . and some have even posted pictures of them here in this thread. How many guitars are they selling? How predominant is their brand? Think back a half a centry ago (you young'uns are excused). Did we ever see ANYTHING as god awful ugly as the Volks Wagon Beetle? People didn't buy it . . . they ridiculed it. Then the Germans did a masterful job of marketing it and getting its' story out to the target audience. Shortly there after, they couldn't build enough of them. As tired as some of you are of this subject coming up constantly . . . you can't deny the fact that . . . . this subject comes up constantly. That should tell you something. That should also tell Jim Deurloo something. He, as President of Heritage Guitars, needs to recognize that it is indeed an impediment to their growth . . . and needs to address it as such. Digging in and holding fast on your beliefs is great. But not recognizing and addressing a problem is not so great. It doesn't go away just by ignoring it.