Suhr Headstock.....Love it or Hate it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimbo72
  • Start date Start date
Surely that's how everybody feels about Tyler headstocks? I guess you know the guitars are incredible when you have that disaster hanging at the end.. :lol: :LOL:

And oh god yeah, the 'new' clubby looking headstocks Suhr have done are just awful..
 
spliffsperlunk":34e96uhu said:
I like suhrs standard headstock but not so much the new styles that they've introduced lately.....

rfoo2d9ejt5g6kgonhdk.jpg

man thats almost as ugly as the ones charvel changed to :cry:
 
Actually, I'd say that's worse. The Charvels were 'thinner' than that..
 
neilli":1lcl30eb said:
Actually, I'd say that's worse. The Charvels were 'thinner' than that..

this x10,000- those are hideous

As for the regular headstocks, I like them when they are painted to match the body much more than when they're natural on a painted body - to my eye, it kinda cheapens the look
 
Tone Zone":1f6un0ko said:
I love the regular ones....normal or reversed. Looks good to me.
+1

The normal ones look great to me - In any flavor.

That new shape however...yikes, no thanks.
 
Like the original.
Reverse looks titty.
Hate the new version.
 
The original Anderson headstock was awesome, but they stopped using it because of overtures from you-know-who. Thing is, I see other boutique Strat builders using headstocks that I think are much closer to the Fender design than the original Anderson shape. Maybe they just decided to roll the dice.
 
It's ok. I prefer Anderson's to Suhr's. I think the both look better reversed.
 
Prefer the Anderson shape, but it doesn't stop me from buying them; same goes for Tyler.

It's a headstock. :lol: :LOL:
 
Before I had a Suhr, I hated them.

Not that I've got 4, I really like them. I go back and forth on Tyler headstocks though. The new Suhr headstock options are terrible. They need to do away with those...
 
Nothing is more ugly than this.

BF%2BHeadstock.JPG



but turn that shit around and I'm lovin it.

images
 
Back
Top