Petrucci's tremelo

[brettlingle]

After owing a JP6 for about a year, I have decided to sell it in preference to a Y2D with a Floyd. My Y2D is on order now, and should take some time to arrive... but it will be worth it.

As Brutalc mentioned, I too am having the slight tuning issues with my JP trem with all the unwounds usually going a few cents sharp after some moderate use. I have tracked this down to the bridge saddles binding... and it's very frustrating. They always snap back after some micro bends, but it just really bugs me. Except my two Strats (which I've gotten to work really well, btw) all my other trems are double locking. I just prefer this over the non-locking type because they do hold their tune better and longer that the non-locking trems in my experience.

Very favorable results can be acheived with any good tremolo system, and it really all depends on your playing style and what you are trying to do with it. Lot's of people like to down tune and many people almost never touch the bar when playing... and I think for most of these players a Strat trem, Wilky or the JP trem is just fine. People who are coping Vai licks or EVH might find themselves having to re-tune between sets or even songs if they are not using a double locking trem.

The double locking system was invented for a reason, and it does work if you know what you're doing and know how to set them up. I think the JP trem works as advertised but just not quite as well as my locking types, IMHO.

Ryan

Well dude I have been playing 20 years and I have played every kind of trem there is IMHO the JP is far superior. And there is one thing you failed to mention. The JP is double locked in a sense its locked with the locking tuners so your getting some tone from the headstock as well. The other end has the ball through the bridge so in a sense it is locked so to speak on both ends. You are right a Floyd will stay in tune or whatever other kind of double locking system but it takes forever to tune and change strings. No need to go into detail about the hassles of that already did in previous posts.
Brett Lingle

 

[Brutalc]

Well, I know I am exaggerating with that Practically you can't hear the difference in tuning, but if you know that it goes a bit sharp, you just can't live with it
Luckily this isn't very often. Today it stayed in tune perfectly, for example. Well, if I don't count those crappy D'Addario strings stretching even after a month and going flat after some time of playing. I have to replace them as soon as possible...
I will also try lubing it and see if that makes any noticeable difference.

 

[brettlingle]

Well, I know I am exaggerating with that Practically you can't hear the difference in tuning, but if you know that it goes a bit sharp, you just can't live with it
Luckily this isn't very often. Today it stayed in tune perfectly, for example. Well, if I don't count those crappy D'Addario strings stretching even after a month and going flat after some time of playing. I have to replace them as soon as possible...
I will also try lubing it and see if that makes any noticeable difference.

Well I don't even think a fixed bridge will stay in perfect tune.
Brett

 

[scottie]

I too am a big fan of the trem on the Petrucci. It was one of the many reasons I picked this model of EBMM guitar.

I wish I had something like it on my others guitars. Would anyone out there be able to sugguest a 3rd party trem that "feels" close to it to put on other guitars? Just curious.

--scottie

 

[jaxadam]

I had some issues with tuning problems when I first got my JP. But after quite a bit of use and tinkering, they have gone away for some mystical reason.

But I've got to agree to the fact that a well set-up double locking trem will take anything you can throw at it.

I'm sure this is common knowledge, but one thing a lot of people forget about is stretching the strings good before a final lock. And I mean good. Not just a few pulls here and there. I guarantee that if you give a set of strings a good stretch, any trem will suffice.

 

[Norrin Radd]

I have had many Floyds over the years, and I find the trem on my JP far superior to any double locking system. Why?

First, there is one less place the string is bound at. When you have a locking nut, and then you use the fine tuners at all, you have just created a situation where the tension is now different on both sides of the locking nut, each side attempting to either pull or release the string to find the equilibrium. In other words - you've just added some instability to the tuning of the string. And don't get me started on clamping down the clipped off ball end of the string and forcing it to stay in place with pure pressure (I'll take my chances with the machine consistency of ball wrapped ends in the ferrules, thanks).

On a system with only locking tuners you keep the tension on the string consistent throughout the length of the string - it really is only anchored at 2 spots with (figuratively) nothing inbetween pulling in a different direction. Sure, you can get saddle burrs and binding nuts - but they are not built in as part of the design and are supposed to be eliminated, if they surface.

SO, it has been my experience, that less is more when it comes to locking trems - and the JP is pretty darn good. The PRS is also nice and, believe it or not, a Fender with locking tuners does pretty darn well too. All of them feature locking tuners and NOT locking nuts, and you don't have to cut off the ball ends.

Please remember - this is just my opinion - but I have been thinking about this for years too. Take it for what it's worth to you.

 

[Chad]

..
in my experience the easiest way to balance the bridge is to start with the low e and tune, then the a and back to the e...e, a, d...e, a, d, g and so on...this seems like a long process and in the beginning, it is; but once you're used to it..it doesn't take any longer that setting anything else up.
Sorry for the long post...
Kevin

I actually find it easier to go E, E, B, A, G, D. Doing that counterbalances in each direction and gets it tuned quicker.

 

[jaxadam]

I have had many Floyds over the years, and I find the trem on my JP far superior to any double locking system. Why?

First, there is one less place the string is bound at. When you have a locking nut, and then you use the fine tuners at all, you have just created a situation where the tension is now different on both sides of the locking nut, each side attempting to either pull or release the string to find the equilibrium. In other words - you've just added some instability to the tuning of the string. And don't get me started on clamping down the clipped off ball end of the string and forcing it to stay in place with pure pressure (I'll take my chances with the machine consistency of ball wrapped ends in the ferrules, thanks).

On a system with only locking tuners you keep the tension on the string consistent throughout the length of the string - it really is only anchored at 2 spots with (figuratively) nothing inbetween pulling in a different direction. Sure, you can get saddle burrs and binding nuts - but they are not built in as part of the design and are supposed to be eliminated, if they surface.

SO, it has been my experience, that less is more when it comes to locking trems - and the JP is pretty darn good. The PRS is also nice and, believe it or not, a Fender with locking tuners does pretty darn well too. All of them feature locking tuners and NOT locking nuts, and you don't have to cut off the ball ends.

Please remember - this is just my opinion - but I have been thinking about this for years too. Take it for what it's worth to you.

From the nut to the saddles is what you're dealing with once it is locked down. You can pretty much negate any factor from the nut to the neck.

I'd rather have a locking nut than a binding nut, and I'd rather take my chances cutting off the ball end and incorporating a consistent saddle to nut tension without any inhibitions.

 

[Norrin Radd]

From the nut to the saddles is what you're dealing with once it is locked down. You can pretty much negate any factor from the nut to the neck.

If that's true, try cutting all your strings behind the locking nut after you get the new strings set up right and then see what kind of tuning stability you have. I'd wager very little, although, it would be an interesting experiment to try. Anybody with a Floyd want to try? I may have an exrtra set of 9s lying around......

I'd rather have a locking nut than a binding nut, and I'd rather take my chances cutting off the ball end and incorporating a consistent saddle to nut tension without any inhibitions.

I don't understand what makes the ball end cause there to be inconsistent saddle to nut tension. Seems to me the tension would always be the same, even more so, because I think it would be impossible to lock the cut strings into the exact same place each time, of cousre this is also true of the ball end too. Maybe we're splitting hairs on this one? I honestly don't know.

 

[Chad]

From the nut to the saddles is what you're dealing with once it is locked down. You can pretty much negate any factor from the nut to the neck.

Agreed. This also causes guitars with a locking nut to have a different "feel". The strings generally have a tighter feel as compared to a non-locking nut guitar.

To further expand, on guitars with a locking nut, tilt-back vs. non tilt-back headstock and reverse vs. normal headstock from a feel standpoint don't matter. I have an ESP Mirage with a locking nut and a tilt-back headstock.....it's a nice guitar, but the tilt-back headstock is totally pointless because of the locking nut. It just makes the neck more prone to breakage near the headstock. Plus, they added a volute which I wish wasn't there (and wouldn't be there on a non tilt-back headstock).

 

[jaxadam]

If that's true, try cutting all your strings behind the locking nut after you get the new strings set up right and then see what kind of tuning stability you have. I'd wager very little, although, it would be an interesting experiment to try. Anybody with a Floyd want to try? I may have an exrtra set of 9s lying around......

I've never thought about it, but that will be a good experiment, I'll give it a shot.


I don't understand what makes the ball end cause there to be inconsistent saddle to nut tension. Seems to me the tension would always be the same, even more so, because I think it would be impossible to lock the cut strings into the exact same place each time, of cousre this is also true of the ball end too. Maybe we're splitting hairs on this one? I honestly don't know.

I don't know how much the ball end would do with it, I'm just thinking of a point-on-point locked down system.

In all honesty, I can't really answer these questions with a definitive answer.

I just know I've owned plenty of Floyd's and many variations, and I have the most stability with my OFR's. Bar none. Tunings have never affected them, weather, abstract conditions, nothing. A good set-up goes a long way.

I'm not knocking the JP trem. I think it's a great trem.

 

[Chad]

A non-locking nut can cause inconsistent *string-to-string* tension depending on the design of the headstock. Comparing a Fender-style non-locking headstock in both reverse and standard versions, the reverse headstock guitar's low strings will feel slinkier than the low strings on the standard headstock.....this is due to the elasticity caused from the extra string length behind the nut. Slap a locking nut on there and it no longer matters. The two guitars would feel the same.

 

[brettlingle]

I too am a big fan of the trem on the Petrucci. It was one of the many reasons I picked this model of EBMM guitar.

I wish I had something like it on my others guitars. Would anyone out there be able to sugguest a 3rd party trem that "feels" close to it to put on other guitars? Just curious.

--scottie

I'm not sure because I never played one but I think the Wilkinson tremelo is alot like the one on the JP.
Brett Lingle

 

[Kevan]

If that's true, try cutting all your strings behind the locking nut after you get the new strings set up right and then see what kind of tuning stability you have. I'd wager very little, although, it would be an interesting experiment to try. Anybody with a Floyd want to try? I may have an exrtra set of 9s lying around......

Heh heh. I played for about 4 hours with a headstock that had been snapped just behind the locking nut (I was hungover and didn't notice it). No tuning change, even with moderate whammy usage.

 

[dav2321]

My experience so far has been up and down with my JP7s trem. Of all my guitars (hardtails/floyds) I have more tuning instability with the JP. I'm getting some Big Bends Nut Sauce to try to help this. I really would like to get this improved as otherwise this is a great guitar-the piezo is fantastic and the cuts are very comfortable, ect.

 

[SteveB]

I'm sure this is common knowledge, but one thing a lot of people forget about is stretching the strings good before a final lock. And I mean good. Not just a few pulls here and there. I guarantee that if you give a set of strings a good stretch, any trem will suffice.

Amen to that, brother!

When I put new strings on a guitar, I stretch them by trying to bend up two whole steps on every string, every fret. Then I'll re-tune and do it again. Add a few major dive bombs with the trem, and that usually does a decent job of stretching the strings uniformly.

I don't know what other people's expectations are in a locking trem, but I'm the type who has to check my tuning after every few songs at a minimum. Not that I'm out of tune that often, but hearing things our of tune really bothers my ear. (I blame this on 4 years of music theory classes which began each day with ear training.) For me, if a guitar can stay in tune for several songs (which include soloing with lots of string bending), then I'm happy. I can't imagine expecting a guitar to remain in tune for weeks on end if it's being played. But hey, if anyone has those results, more power to ya!

 

[Bungo]

I play JPs and I wouldn't describe myself as a heavy trem user, but I would expect to have a minor tune up every two or three songs.

What I have started doing now is using one guitar for the first set (1 hour-ish), with tune up tweaks every two or three songs, and then swap to another guitar for the second set, so I can start with another new set of strings and then follow the same pattern.

Being a bit of a heavy sweater (mmm...nice!), I do believe that one set used for a whole gig (2 hours plus), will sound deader in the 2nd set than in the first.

Or am I just being over the top?

 

[Tim O'Sullivan]

Just my 2p. As you all know I use hardtails, but my strings are always ancient yet never go out of tune. Check the tuning twice. Once at the start of each set and rarely have to adjust it.

 

[blackspy]

If that's true, try cutting all your strings behind the locking nut after you get the new strings set up right and then see what kind of tuning stability you have. I'd wager very little, although, it would be an interesting experiment to try. Anybody with a Floyd want to try?

I've had that happen on a couple of occasions. Back when I was too broke to replace strings all the time, I'd tie a busted string to end up at the headstock, tune and lock it. Sometimes it'd break where I joined it. Of course it wasn't on purpose, and it wasn't all strings. It usually was in tune perfectly though, and stayed that way until I restrung it.

Of course, this wasn't my EB guitar, but my old Kramer w/ Floyd. However, based on that experience I think I can safely say I'd do it, just to see how it'd work with all strings cut. I'm quite sure it'd be fine.

 

[Chad]

I've never done a full on experiment of snipping all 6 strings behind a locking nut, but I have had single strings break before. I have a guitar that has a sharp spot on the headstock side of the nut and occasionally it will snap a brand new string when I tighten the clamps for the first time. I've left it that way for days and it keeps tune fine.