Weight of Kluson tuners

[goldtop0]

What does a set of these tulip tuners weigh?

 

[DANELECTRO]

Klusons: 5.1 oz
Grovers: 9.4 oz
Schallers: 9.0 oz

 

[karl1]

And they sound the most natural of them all- I truly believe that anything but tulips suck some of the tone.

 

[DANELECTRO]

And they sound the most natural of them all- I truly believe that anything but tulips suck some of the tone.

I have a couple of vintage Les Pauls that had Grovers and I switched them back to Klusons. I can't say that I hear a difference one way or the other, however the Klusons function just fine as far as I'm concerned and its always nice when you can knock a quarter pound off of the headstock.

 

[Big Al]

My experience has been the opposite. Every guitar,(Les Pauls included), had "better" tone with Grovers or Schallers installed over the stock Klusons.

I think tone is subjective, still the increase of frequency bandwidth as well as sustain/bloom has been undeniable in every guitar I have done. This is well known and documented. It can and has been measured.

What can't be measured is the "attachment" some have for these parts. Most of it is a result of fetish fulfillment of anything 59 and I have seen some real pretzel logic used to justify this almost pathological need to have everything from 59 be seen as the apex or epitome of form/function and tone.

I certainly understand the desire to have cosmetic features for wish fulfillment and mojo vibe, and firmly believe that new R series Historic models should have them, but just as most originals used professionally had Grovers installed for tuning and sonic benefit, so should new models be upgraded by those desirous of such benefits.

I would never champion Klusons as better at anything other than looking like the ones used by Gibson in the 50's. That as I see it is the only real benefit.

 

[Guitar Whiskey]

Pretty good summary!

 

[tdarian]

Curious about this so thanks for the perspectives. I've never thought that the Kluson types were physically super stable or robust on an otherwise iron clad Les Paul. I'm always concerned with how changing hardware changes tone, since I've done a bit of that with tail piece studs and other reversible hardware swaps and it changed the voice of my guitar, a lot.

The Deluxe I had when I was in school (1972-1976) came to me with Grovers, and a few marks. I'd be happier now if I had not foolishly sold that guitar in 1977.

 

[DanD]

I think Al is right on the bandwidth/frequency being broader with Grovers.

If that's a good thing depends on your personal and subjective ideal of "tone".

Personally I'd rather use 21:1 Gotoh Delta series 510s (now available in nickle and in direct bolt on configurations for Grovers). But I am fond of the warmer and less responsive Gotoh vintage style tuners on some guitars.

My LP Jr wasn't the same guitar with Grovers and the conversion bushed Gotohs were back on with the following string change. eace2

 

[Black58]

My experience has been the opposite. Every guitar,(Les Pauls included), had "better" tone with Grovers or Schallers installed over the stock Klusons.

I think tone is subjective, still the increase of frequency bandwidth as well as sustain/bloom has been undeniable in every guitar I have done. This is well known and documented. It can and has been measured.

What can't be measured is the "attachment" some have for these parts. Most of it is a result of fetish fulfillment of anything 59 and I have seen some real pretzel logic used to justify this almost pathological need to have everything from 59 be seen as the apex or epitome of form/function and tone.

I certainly understand the desire to have cosmetic features for wish fulfillment and mojo vibe, and firmly believe that new R series Historic models should have them, but just as most originals used professionally had Grovers installed for tuning and sonic benefit, so should new models be upgraded by those desirous of such benefits.

I would never champion Klusons as better at anything other than looking like the ones used by Gibson in the 50's. That as I see it is the only real benefit.

+1! :salude

From '93 'till '09, I AUTOMATICALLY put 'em on my Lesters, purely from a visual standpoint;
Anyone I really liked, with an original Lester, had 'em! .. an' they jus' looked "right".

In '09, I stalled on putting them in my '09 R8. I had a "wait a minute" .. er, uh ... moment :rofl
It was a REALLY good guitar an' I thought, "Take your time", enjoy it an' all the rest of the "little" changes! .. I did. ... but, something was missing; And it was that "give and take" of certain elements that Grovers do, that I'd inadvertantly given to myself .. and the way I do it! :dude:



*NOTE* - To those with "heroes" that have Grovers on their Lesters,
you will NOT have the exact same tone (if that is what you seek!) without them. :ganz

:2cool

 

[Uncle Gary]

"*NOTE* - To those with "heroes" that have Grovers on their Lesters,
you will NOT have the exact same tone (if that is what you seek!) without them. "

I (and those who listen to me) are quite happy with my guitar tone (and, I hope, my playing). Even with the inferior "Kluson" tuners (actually Gotoh-better quality than the old Klusons ever were).

"From '93 'till '09, I AUTOMATICALLY put 'em on my Lesters, purely from a visual standpoint;
Anyone I really liked, with an original Lester, had 'em! .. an' they jus' looked "right"."

From a "visual standpoint", the Grovers they sell today look nothing at all like the Grovers of old. The face washers are larger, and the new diecast bodies are much bulkier.

 

[Black58]

"*NOTE* - To those with "heroes" that have Grovers on their Lesters,
you will NOT have the exact same tone (if that is what you seek!) without them. "

I (and those who listen to me) are quite happy with my guitar tone (and, I hope, my playing). Even with the inferior "Kluson" tuners (actually Gotoh-better quality than the old Klusons ever were).

"From '93 'till '09, I AUTOMATICALLY put 'em on my Lesters, purely from a visual standpoint;
Anyone I really liked, with an original Lester, had 'em! .. an' they jus' looked "right"."

From a "visual standpoint", the Grovers they sell today look nothing at all like the Grovers of old. The face washers are larger, and the new diecast bodies are much bulkier.

Are you actually reading/understanding what I said,
or are you more comfortable with your own point of view blinding you? :hmm

 

[TM1]

Here's what it comes down to for me with tuners:
I have one of those crazy Groove Tubes "FatFingers" that my pal Aspen Pittman gave me when he first developed them.
I will take a guitar with Kluson's and if I put the FFinger on it and the tone/sustain improves, then I know a set of vintage Grover's will sound good on the guitar. If there's not much of a change I leave it be.
My `02, R-0 has vintage Grover's, my 2010 R-8 has the vintage style TonePro's Kluson's and the guitar sounds friggin' amazing. The FFinger made no difference with it attached. My 1959 L.P. Special however sounds like dog crap with the Kluson strip tuners. With a set of vintage Grover's it sounds F'ing amazing!
I use to own a couple of PRS's from 1990 that I bought right from Paul. I ended up taking off those crappy Schaller/PRS tuners and putting on a set of Kluson's. It sounded so much better(but not great and I ended up selling the guitar in 1993. Just couldn't bond with one of them and I don't like 24 fret necks as the neck pickup needs to be where the 24th fret is..).
So, to me it just depends on the guitar. But I've found Aspen's FatFinger to be a real asset in figuring out if a guitar will improve with heavier tuners.

 

[Pearly Grapes]

I had a '78 LP that had Grovers when I bought it. I prefer the looks of the tulip tips so I found a set that fit the enlarged holes. I was doing it strictly for the look. To my surprise the guitar sounded better! It had more overtones & was less sterile.
To my ears increased mass increases sustain but decreases overtones & you hear more of the fundamental. IMO this is good for hi-gain tone, but not good for most classic rock overdrive tones.
But I don't think Grovers or Klusons will vastly affect your tone either way; maybe 10%. Again IMHO.

 

[Big Al]

I had a '78 LP that had Grovers when I bought it. I prefer the looks of the tulip tips so I found a set that fit the enlarged holes. I was doing it strictly for the look. To my surprise the guitar sounded better! It had more overtones & was less sterile.
To my ears increased mass increases sustain but decreases overtones & you hear more of the fundamental. IMO this is good for hi-gain tone, but not good for most classic rock overdrive tones.
But I don't think Grovers or Klusons will vastly affect your tone either way; maybe 10%. Again IMHO.

They have a greater effect on tone than bridge posts, tailpiece, studs or anchors, or nuts. I NEVER have noticed a loss of overtones with Grovers. I have noticed a shift into too much overtone and harmonic content when wound wrong. The osts are longer and stick up more so you need to wind more string on the post for the D and G string, a bit less on A and B and you benefit from winding both E strings normal 2-3 wraps in my experience this gives a more pleasing harmonic spread to the overtones produced by the harp tones as well as allowing greater adjustment of string angle behind the nut.

Lighter and looser Kluson types always subtract from tone and add little that I've ever heard. Some higher ratio closed back lock down types of Kluson look alikes offer some increase in tone and sustain over the push in style bushing loose and light Kluson.

Taking away tone and sustain will change the sound of a guitar. It may even be a preference. Not IMO, but opinions vary. It has nothing to do with high gain or "tightening" up for high gain use. I see that logic used all the time with Norlins, or heavier Customs.

Most every single Burst of note, the ones used on all those records and concerts, the tones we still hold up as exemplary, damn near everyone had Grovers or Schallers. The famous players are all on record as stating they did it for tone and tunning stability and where they are still being used, the still have them on.

Kinda makes you wonder.

 

[TM1]

Al; It all comes down to the piece of wood used for the neck. Grover's work great on some and Kluson's work great on others.
You just have to let your ears and personal preferences be the judge of what works for what you want to hear.

 

[BIG Dave]

I really tried to like Grovers. I had put Grovers on guitars in the past and never cared for them. The reason I wanted to like them was because they "personalized" the guitar. Still couldn't warm up to them.

Sincerely,
David Grover (hence, the "personalizing").

 

[mistersnappy]

Cant quantify a tonal change but I felt a change in the feel of response when I went from Grovers to Klusons. On this particular fiddle, I like the results. Keeping the old Grovers around, too.

 

[mistersnappy]

Taking an inventory of famous players and their Lesters, I think it just depended on the player and the guitar more than some kind of inherent failing on the part of Kluson. For instance, Pearly Gates, Duanes CherryBurst and Eric's SummersBurst all had Klusons and all were obviously on seminal recordings. Grovers wear out, as well, no?

 

[Flavum]

Grovers wear out, as well, no?

No, they don't "wear out" (whatever that means). They'd have to undergo some serious damage for the worm gear and pinion to malfunction. Normal use won't cause this.

 

[Gold Tone]

The tone is different due to significant difference in mass AND because of the different style bushing. One is an insert that really does nothing to "change" the headstock while the Grover's are clamped on with a large washer screwed down tight and compressing.

The tone is affected