2-point trems are in and double locking trems are... less in than before. Why?

[cardinal]

i have 0 tuning stability issues on my 2-point trem and don't have to unlock the nut to switch from B standard to drop A

to each their own

If you're able to change the tuning on your guitar without it going out of tune, then you must have the trem blocked to dive only. Otherwise a floating trem of any type will go out of tune if you drop tune a string.

And FWIW, when I have a blocked Floyd, I set them up so that I can drop tune the low string with just the fine tuner.

 

[cardinal]

If you live where I live where good luthiers are scarce, and the better ones inconsistent, a Floyd has its place in that if you tune down, you don't have to worry about filing the nut. The bridge can be blocked if you can't be arsed about locking the nut, and I'd wager most here don't use the trem bar.

That said, have we consensus on how to best block Floyd type bridges? I know the idea is to wedge it on both up and down pitch sides but I haven't figured out how to keep the wedges there non-moving.

What kind of block? If it's just for string changes, I go to an office store and buy a stack of index cards (bonus if they're hole punched on a key ring) and use those behind the block. Just adjust the number of cards until the thickness is right. I pull a tremolo spring so that the strings at pitch pull the trem tight against it.

If it's for keeping it blocked while playing, I like those things that screw in parallel with the springs. Then tighten the springs real tight and/or run four high tension springs. That trem is not going to move.

 

[CrushingAnvil]

I think it's a combination of things:

- Floyds were indeed a fad. I have played them since 2008 and they really boomed in around '84 and were common up until the present day.
- The main factor I believe is more refined usage of the tremolo arm in heavy music. Flutters and vibrato are way more common than huge pullups and divebombs, so Gotoh trems like the one on Aaron Marshall's Schecter or the single-locking OFR on Guthrie Govan's Charvel are a lot more common.

To be honest I haven't actually noticed this but now that you mention it I believe it's true. I think a lot of people have actually come around to the idea of Floyds. John Mayer has a USA Jackson Soloist with an OFR, and Wes Borland has a King V with one as well.

 

[Shask]

Floyds have their place but after I got a Charvel DK24, it was over. My main gripe with floyd roses is the locking nut, in addition to being clunky and hitting my hand sometimes, it adds extra tension to the strings when it's locked down. Removing the locking nut and it makes the guitar play way better. I'd much rather have locking tuners and a 2 point tremolo these days, it stays in tune just fine if your tremolo is set up properly and the nut is cut correctly.

I have been saying this for years, and people think I am crazy, lol. I do think Floyds and the locking nuts add tension to the feel of the strings. Of course, I still own tons of Floyds....

 

[oracles]

That was mine, definitely my favourite of the 6 or so I owned. The OFR on that was mega solid, held tuning like an absolute champ, even when it was less than 10ft away from a wildfire in the bed of my truck

 

[Bloody_Inferno]

Having recently been using the trem on an Ibanez AZ more frequently, I do like these a lot, and they stay in tune almost if not just as well as all my guitars with locking trems despite how much abuse I give it. But due to the wider pitch range, I won't be abandoning locking trems any time soon.

And yes, setup is key. I've got a Talman with a Gotoh 101TS 6 screw vintage style trem, and that also stays in tune just as well, and I'm not kind to it either.

 

[Lemonbaby]

Has tech evolved to the point where double locking systems are obsolete or are 2-point trems that you see on most every current modern shred guitar just a fad?

No. Double locking is double locking.

 

[Emperoff]

Someone already mentioned, but the "in" thing lately is the Suhr design. Everybody is copying it and that includes the bridge choice. No more, no less.

Most people don't even use a trem outside light vibrato since Van Halen style wankery doesn't have much room in modern music. So I guess the 2-point trem is good enough for regular use. I'm fine with either design since I'm not a trem abuser, but tuning stability on a OFR can't be beat.

So yeah, as long as it's not a top mounted Floyd or a TOM (me hates angled necks) I don't really mind.

 

[Opion]

I have been saying this for years, and people think I am crazy, lol. I do think Floyds and the locking nuts add tension to the feel of the strings. Of course, I still own tons of Floyds....

It’s not a theory, it’s a fact. Clamping down strings at the nut creates more tension.

I have an Ibanez RGT3120 that I’ve thought about putting some locking tuners on and leave the locking nut off. I know people would probably look at me funny, but for the way I play I enjoy the slinky feeling of doing bends on a guitar with a 2PT tremolo and no locking nut. That extra play you get when the tremolo pulls up from doing bends is so much fun to lean into, and having a locking nut reduces the amount of fun you can have stretching a note. But that’s just me 🙃

 

[Crash Dandicoot]

I will forever associate this trem with DirtyPuma

Don't do the Sophia dirty like that! It's a great bridge that unfortunately got a lot of exposure here via the DirtyPuma Saga®.

What an absolute legend for all the wrong reasons.

 

[tedtan]

It’s not a theory, it’s a fact. Clamping down strings at the nut creates more tension.

I have an Ibanez RGT3120 that I’ve thought about putting some locking tuners on and leave the locking nut off. I know people would probably look at me funny, but for the way I play I enjoy the slinky feeling of doing bends on a guitar with a 2PT tremolo and no locking nut. That extra play you get when the tremolo pulls up from doing bends is so much fun to lean into, and having a locking nut reduces the amount of fun you can have stretching a note. But that’s just me 🙃

It may feel like it’s adding tension, but it’s not. If it were actually adding tension, the pitch of the string would change.

 

[bostjan]

Frankly, whammy tricks that were cool in the 1980's have just all been done before. And cheap guitars in the 80's had no business being used to make the horsey sound or the boioioing sound or the kamikaze dive bomb attack sound. By the late 2000's, cheap guitars were already 1000x better and it wasn't necessary to have a fancy trem system to make those noises, and even less necessary to even make those noises. So, here we are.

I still love a good floyd-style trem, though - to me, it just feels better than a vintage system. And Kahler makes a great product and I'm glad they exist and make cool stuff, but I just can't jibe with them. I tried many times, but I just can't.

 

[Shask]

It may feel like it’s adding tension, but it’s not. If it were actually adding tension, the pitch of the string would change.

It is preceived tension vs actual tension. This has been discussed a ton over the years. Basically, the tension from nut to bridge is the actual tension which produces the pitch, but the extra length of string that is behind the but and bridge effect the perceived tension, which can change the feel during fretting and bending.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

It is preceived tension vs actual tension. This has been discussed a ton over the years. Basically, the tension from nut to bridge is the actual tension which produces the pitch, but the extra length of string that is behind the but and bridge effect the perceived tension, which can change the feel during fretting and bending.

Yeah, but it's still mostly in folks' heads, since the amount of string behind the nut is incredibly minimal, even in "ideal" cases.

It's like when people say they have more room between the frets on very slightly longer scales. It's true, but the change is so miniscule that if you didn't know it was there you wouldn't feel it.

See also: 1mm difference in nut width or a few millimeter difference in radius.

But it's harmless, so if folks need to think it, let it happen.

 

[Emperoff]

It's like when people say they have more room between the frets on very slightly longer scales. It's true, but the change is so miniscule that if you didn't know it was there you wouldn't feel it.

See also: 1mm difference in nut width or a few millimeter difference in radius.

But it's harmless, so if folks need to think it, let it happen.

Not sure what do you mean exactly with "slightly longer" scale, but going from 25.5" to 27" makes a massive difference on the higher frets when playing leads. I'd say people who wouldn't notice it are probably rythm players.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Not sure what do you mean exactly with "slightly longer" scale, but going from 25.5" to 27" makes a massive difference on the higher frets when playing leads.

No it doesn't, but it's totally fine you think it does.

Again, harmless.

 

[Emperoff]

No it doesn't, but it's totally fine you think it does.

Again, harmless.

It doesn't to you.

Just because you can't notice it doesn't mean others can't. A longer scale is so obviously noticeable on the highest frets that only rythm players wouldn't notice.

 

[bostjan]

It is preceived tension vs actual tension. This has been discussed a ton over the years. Basically, the tension from nut to bridge is the actual tension which produces the pitch, but the extra length of string that is behind the but and bridge effect the perceived tension, which can change the feel during fretting and bending.

"Stiffness" is the generally used term.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

It doesn't to you.

And yes, harmless.

It doesn't in general.

Adding 1.5" inches across the whole scale, not just the fretboard, is a <6% gain. On a 24 fret guitar, the amount added to just the fretboard is <4%.

I'm real terms, it's the equivalent of moving a few frets over. That's it.

 

[Emperoff]

I'm real terms, it's the equivalent of moving a few frets over. That's it.

Which is a lot when you're cramming your fingers above 19th fret