[SwellJoe]

Cheap locking tuners are inferior to quality non-locking tuners. I would pick a good set of non-locking over cheap locking tuners any day, unless I absolutely needed to do dive bomb tremolo swings.

Also, you can usually solve tuning problems by replacing the bridge and nut with something hard and smooth like Graphtech TUSQ (they call them "self-lubricating", whatever that means).

That's not to say locking tuners are bad, it's just that I don't have problems with tuning on any of my guitars that have decent nuts and decent tuners. I even used to play my Schecter (old 1990 California model Super Strat) without the Floyd Rose nut locks in place because I wanted to be able to switch back and forth between alternate tunings without the hex wrench. No problems with tuning, at all.

[wyclif]

I agree with your comment about quality hardware. I don't have fancy locking tuners, I only have a vintage Fender Telecaster with old-school Kluson "split shaft" tuners where the end of the string is bent and inserted into the shaft. Once you get used to properly stringing the guitar (it helps if you change strings often), it's not hard to avoid string slippage or going out of tune. The trick is to have enough winds around the post and for the windings to wrap progressively lower on the post until the string leaves the post lower than the nut.

Here's a great video on stringing up Klusons: https://youtu.be/GqYrXh4D6wI

[beat]

Split-shaft (safety post) Klusons are my favorite tuners, if they're maintained correctly. A little dab of sewing machine oil in the gears can quickly loosen up stiff Klusons.

I'm always stabbing myself on sharp string ends sticking out of tuners. Safety posts really reduce the bleeding in my life.

[wilsonnb]

A self lubricating nut has a lower friction than other nut materials (usually plastic or bone). It'd be more accurate to call it a no-lubrication-needed nut but I guess that doesn't roll off the tongue as easily.

It's my experience that locking tuners do help with tuning stability but I've also seen plenty of guitars stable enough without them.

Even if they don't help a guitar with tuning stability, they definitely speed up the string changing process which is worth it for me.

edit: I've just noticed that the link in the parent comment is for "gotoh style" tuners, not tuners made by Gotoh, and I have to say I agree with you about the low quality of cheap tuners. That said, a good set of locking tuners should only cost you $50-$70. Not a bad price.

[SwellJoe]

Yeah, the way Gotoh locking tuners work on string changes is great. And, Gotoh parts are top notch. Their high end bridges are beautiful chunky things (I have a G&L bass and guitar because I love a big ol' chunky bridge).

So, sure, it's nice to have more convenient string changes. But, I don't want cheap tuners, no matter what. It's one of the big things that tells me immediately whether the guitar I'm playing is cheap or expensive. I used to think Klusons looked cheap and old, when I was a kid, but I have grown fond of them after so long playing. It's what's on both of my really expensive guitars (came from the factory that way), and I've never felt the need to change them because they've worked great for decades.

That said, if you've got a cheap-ish guitar and want to improve it, tuners, nut, and bridge are where I'd start (after getting a proper setup, and getting the frets in shape, of course). Also, while I'm ranting about the onion on my belt...bone is a poor choice for nut/bridge material. It has wildly inconsistent density and hardness, and just plain isn't as good as modern materials (and we can note that many of the very best and most expensive guitars today, like PRS, do not use bone).

[wilsonnb]

I am a huge fan of G&L basses. I recently sold a fretless L1000 that was one of the best basses I have ever played because I stopped playing bass and started focusing on guitar. Haven't gotten a chance to play a G&L guitar yet.

Depending on the specific guitar I'd also look into swapping the pickups. That usually gives the best sound improvement but does nothing for the playability. Luckily, the playability of a lot of cheap guitars today is very, very good.

I agree that bone is a terrible material. It's only still used for historic reasons, I think. Guitar players are a notoriously superstitious bunch and often times dont necessarily want the best when they can instead have what we thought was the best in the 70s.

[SwellJoe]

Agreed. I've been amazed at how good cheap guitars have gotten in the past ~10 years or so. Fender is making incredibly great cheap guitars. Even their Chinese made stuff is good. Yamaha, too. Probably others, as well, but I've had hands on both of those in recent months and been really impressed.

The quality improvements that come from heavily automating the process are hard to overstate. CNC machines, and improved metal fabrication methods, have revolutionized guitar making. They're still putting cheap hardware and electronics on the low end stuff, and it shows in the longevity, tuning stability and some other areas, but as you note they mostly play really great right off of the rack.

They're still using cheap-ish wood that doesn't age very well, also. Fret sprout and various sorts of warping is, as I understand it, still much more common on cheap guitars. My 29 year old Schecter has never had a setup or adjustment, and still plays beautifully (frets are a little worn and could probably use a touch up, but still very little buzz). The G&L L2000 bass I have is 31 years old and has maybe had a couple of turns of its truss rod in the time I've owned it. I dunno about any other setup or adjustments in its life as I've only owned it for about half of its life. But, I get the impression that cheap guitars are needing attention within a year or two, mostly because the wood is fresher when they build them and so they aren't as stable.

My G&L ASAT guitar is actually a Tribute, so it's one of the cheapish ones made in Indonesia. It's in need of attention already (quite a bit of fret buzz even without really low action), and it's only a few years old, so it seems to bear out my theory. It's not a "cheap" guitar, and it's not poorly made, but it's not an expensive guitar, either, and I'm guessing the wood was aged/dried for a much shorter period than my American G&L or the Schecter. The only other American-made instrument I have is a Gibson J-45, and it's holding up very well, too, but it's much newer...a 2008, I think.

[wyclif]

I'm a big fan of those Kluson tuning machines that were on the early Fenders. In terms of design it's a case of "they got it pretty much right the first time." It's superior design and simplicity (split shaft). They are easy to use once you get used to stringing them up, and I've found they don't go out of tune. They are small, light, streamlined, and the oval grips are aesthetically pleasing from an industrial design perspective, particularly when set off against the Telecaster or Stratocaster headstock.

[SwellJoe]

Yep, the vintage stamped steel Kluson style tuners really are my favorites. I don't think you can improve on the simplicity of them or the neatness of having the string end tucked inside the tuner. And, yes, they're the right size...they don't look as fancy as a lot of other tuners, but I think they look right. They've also proven to be stupidly reliable. You can find 50 year old Klusons that still work well.

Even my Gibson J-45 has them; it hasn't always been common for Gibsons to use Klusons, and while the stuff Gibson usually uses is also fine, I prefer the Kluson style. They're aesthetically pleasing in a functional, not showy, way.