Headed vs Headless

[M-Bass-M]

I've got a fairly desperate case of GAS that I'm looking to tame by acquiring a new bass. One possible option could be a headless bass. Now obviously there's the looks factor of a headless bass, but I'm keen to understand what they are like to play.

For example, I would expect movement around the neck and general fretting to be easier becuase you're not having to support the weight of a heavy headstock. On the other hand, I'm also wondering if the lack of a headstock results in balance issues that makes it harder to play?

Any experiences with headless basses would be much appreciated.

Cheers

Mark

[crez5150]

Hi Mark

Can only give my experience from playing Status basses as that is what I'm using currently. My experience is no problem at all with balance, they sit pretty much how you need them to. Obviously no head dive either.

I was playing a Warwick Thumb 5 string through neck before these which was a weighty beast, great sound though. I switched pretty much due to the weight issue and my back not liking heavy basses. Can't recommend Status enough.

J

[witterth]

Status basses stay in tune even after being chucked down a rusty fire escape (metaphorically speaking)
If you can rise to the quite high price tag, I'd wholeheartedly reccomend them. they record REALLY well too, though when you DI them sound engineers usally go,"Bloody Hell ....where's all that signal coming from?!?"
good kit, though, on the eye? not for everyone.
I'm talking about the headless ones BTW
EDIT
really early 80's ones the "thick" necks,again not for everyone,modled on p bass I'm told

Edited December 23, 2009 by witterth

[M-Bass-M]

Thanks for all the comments. Strangely enough a Status is exactly the bass that I have in mind, and given that there is no price differential for a head or headless, I'm severely tempted.

Another Status-related question, what the heck does the "Bendwell" do? It suggests that it allows vibrato effects, which implies that you can't otherwise get vibrato effects from a headless bass. Can somebody clarify this for me?

Cheers

Mark

[Mr.T]

One thing that I noticed when I first played a headless Status....

If I didn't pay attention, I would naturally put my fretting hand two frets further up the neck,
although the neck is in exactly the same position as my headed Status.

It took a few plays to get used to not having the headstock...

[crez5150]

Yes I have the Bendwell on both my basses.... it's basically a gap between the nut and where the string are retained..... it allows you to push the string back and forth to create Vibrato type effects... can come in handy.... I mainly use it on playing harmonic chords then bend one or two strings up a tone/semi-tone to create a new harmonic chord.... works quite well. Bear in mind that if you go for the Bendwell you will end up with a 32" scale instrument... which you may or may not like.

[Kiwi]

I have a headless Shuker 6 string bass and a headless Shuker guitar with Steinberger parts. I've never owned a headless Status bass, but I can assure you the balance thing is a bonus for 5+ string basses.

[Golchen]

I think that the headless thing is really just a case of whether you go for that look or not, as there are plenty of basses with no neck dive. I’ve had a couple of headless as I really liked the look of them at first, but I eventually realised that I prefer a trad look really which is why I’m sticking with a Jazz bass now. To me, a jazz or precision will always look right in any context, whereas a headless doesn’t in the same way.

Status = great playability.

[Cat Burrito]

Personally I'm with Golchen here. I've played a couple of headless basses that belonged to different Basschatters & they were set up great & played perfectly well. I don't think it's an issue other than personal taste

[gazhowe]

I´d agree with all of the above comments on balance, playability and the stable tuning on Status headless basses. I´ve played headed basses for years and had no problems (other than my duff playing ) in switching to a Status headless.

[mrcrow]

i used to fancy one...for size mainly...d
i dont know how the idea came about but its still a nut to bridge tensioned piece of bass string with pups to catch the signal

i think they look a bit strange and dont have any protection for bashing the 'headstock' against peoples heads... ^_^

[Paul S]

[quote name='Mr.T' post='692110' date='Dec 23 2009, 09:46 AM']One thing that I noticed when I first played a headless Status....

If I didn't pay attention, I would naturally put my fretting hand two frets further up the neck,
although the neck is in exactly the same position as my headed Status.

It took a few plays to get used to not having the headstock... [/quote]

+1 - I had a Hohner B2A and found that a real issue - my brain was obviously wanting that extra bit of wood at the end so moved my hand to compensate. Plus it had 2 more frets than my fender - the combination of the two did my head in, I couldn't get used it it and moved the bass on. Shame really as I thought it looked the business and the whole headless concept seems to make such good sense.

Edited December 23, 2009 by Paul S

[gazhowe]

[quote name='mrcrow' post='692439' date='Dec 23 2009, 04:51 PM']i used to fancy one...for size mainly...d
i dont know how the idea came about but its still a nut to bridge tensioned piece of bass string with pups to catch the signal

i think they look a bit strange and dont have any protection for bashing the 'headstock' against peoples heads... ^_^[/quote]

But when you do ´accidentally´ bash them against someone´s head (usually the singer) they [u]always[/u] stay in tune.

[4000]

In a practical sense they're great; smaller, potentially lighter, easier to carry. Changing strings is a doddle. I think they look cool too. One thing I will say (and I'm not sure if this has any basis in fact; its something I want to talk to Martin Petersen about if I remember), is to me the feel (in a tension sense) seems slightly different. Not sure it's as noticeable on a Status though; carbon fibre and all that! Great concept though.

Edited December 23, 2009 by 4000

[mrcrow]

[quote name='gazhowe' post='692448' date='Dec 23 2009, 05:01 PM']But when you do ´accidentally´ bash them against someone´s head (usually the singer) they [u]always[/u] stay in tune. [/quote]



i was sort of thinking that as i cant sing...either

[M-Bass-M]

Thanks for all the great comments.

A headless bass definitely appeals to me, but given my limited experience with other basses and the role that I want my new bass to play, I think I'd much rather stick to a headed bass this time around.

Next time, perhaps!

Cheers

Mark

[martthebass]

[quote name='M-Bass-M' post='692458' date='Dec 23 2009, 05:25 PM']Thanks for all the great comments.

A headless bass definitely appeals to me, but given my limited experience with other basses and the role that I want my new bass to play, I think I'd much rather stick to a headed bass this time around.

Next time, perhaps!

Cheers

Mark[/quote]

Before you make your final decision I'd try and get hold of one to try it out. The pros and cons have been put well above. I go back and forth between a headless Status and a Ray for gigs. Yes I find I need to 'adjust' for headless (the 2 frets thing) which takes about 5 minutes but as long as I'm not swapping mid gig that aint an issue.

Last night I went to a jam night and at the last minute I ended up taking my Status instead of the Ray. There were no other bassists in the house so I ended up playing pretty continuously for 3 hours. By the end of the night I was glad I'd made the switch.

I can't think of a role that a headless bass couldn't perform that a headed one could (unless you intend to take the guitarists eye out ), the only reason to go headed is if you want something that looks more conventional. This I understand as for some gigs I 'have' to use a Stingray......

Edited December 23, 2009 by martthebass

[RAY AGAINST THE MACHINE]

My first 'learning' bass,was a hondo 2 (precision copy).
It was basically an oversized treetrunk with wire.
My first 'proper' bass was a Washburn Status ,which I still have.

I got it in 88' or 89 ,when they were all the rage.

I had a hohner 'stick' bass , but the sound wasn't as good as the Washburn.
Sold that,and now I have a Steiney XM2 .

Headless are great. You should try one out.

[witterth]

[quote name='mrcrow' post='692455' date='Dec 23 2009, 05:16 PM']

i was sort of thinking that as i cant sing...either [/quote]
I thought you could!!!!

[Lorne]

The only downside with a headless bass, is you can't hang them from wall hangers

I've had at least 8 Washburn Status basses,and if another comes along no biggie LOL

As for Sei,my personal opinion,I would immediatley turn down a headed one in favor of a headless one,I have a thing about having to like a headstock style

[Bassassin]

[quote name='gazhowe' post='692448' date='Dec 23 2009, 05:01 PM']But when you do ´accidentally´ bash them against someone´s head (usually the singer) they [u]always[/u] stay in tune. [/quote]
So - battering the singer round the head with a headless bass actually helps them to achieve or maintain correct pitching? Excellent - this should prove a breakthrough both on stage & in the studio - can't wait to try it at next rehearsal!

Jon.

[karlfer]

The drummers cymbals will thank you for headless!

[OutToPlayJazz]

I've been using my no.1 Status S2-Classic for the last three weeks in panto in Sheffield (actually pronounced "Siberia"!) and even in severe sub zero temperatures (I make sure I take it home every night) there's been no movement in the tuning at all, even according to my Korg Pitch Black tuner.

The headless necks really are wonderful to play on with zero neck dive and excellent balance, whether sitting or on a strap. There's also zero pressure on the left wrist, so you can concentrate on fingering rather than supporting the weight of a head.

What's not to like?

[Lfalex v1.1]

Pros: Lighter, Shorter, better balanced, fewer obvious deadspots. Can't knock them out of tune so easily. You can lean them against walls.

Cons: Can be odd if you're not familliar with them. If you move around a lot as you play, the lack of headstock may mean that the neck bounces around without the added mass of a headstock to damp the movement. You can't use wall hangers very easily. They won't stay in some stands.

[Chris2112]

I am very much a supporter of headless basses. My first incredible bass was a Kubicki Ex-Factor, which isn't truely headless, but feels so in a sense. It had a thumb volute on the back of the "headstock" which made it really nice to hold, but there was no weight in the headstock because the tuners were by the bridge.

I was a bit of a headless snob for a while, probably because the majority of the bass playing community unfairly called them a relic of the 1980's. As it happnes, I find that headless is still the smartest way to build a bass, however, a lot of the basses I like are simply headed. The Kubicki is long gone (sadly) but then the only other bass that compares to my Kubicki in terms of feeling "just right" is a Warwick Thumb, which is headed!

So at the end of the day, in the great scheme of things I don't really think a bass being headed or headless matters! You'll find things that sound and feel great either way!