Faux truss rod cover?

[Misifus]

While Gibsons may have functional truss rod covers, Martins don’t.

[ataylor]

If memory serves, the guitar in question is a Fender with a Strat-shaped headstock. I would leave it be — a truss rod cover is just going to look out of place given (a) the asymmetrical shape and (b) the iconic Stratocaster silhouette that has never — to my knowledge — employed the use of a truss rod cover.

It’s your guitar, and I think I saw some stickers and stuff on it already, and aesthetics are subjective — but I’d stop putting any more money into that guitar than the occasional set of strings and play it like crazy for several years while you slowly save for something new down the line.

[LeDave]

Originally Posted by ataylor

If memory serves, the guitar in question is a Fender with a Strat-shaped headstock. I would leave it be — a truss rod cover is just going to look out of place given (a) the asymmetrical shape and (b) the iconic Stratocaster silhouette that has never — to my knowledge — employed the use of a truss rod cover.

It’s your guitar, and I think I saw some stickers and stuff on it already, and aesthetics are subjective — but I’d stop putting any more money into that guitar than the occasional set of strings and play it like crazy for several years while you slowly save for something new down the line.

I removed the inlay stickers because it made my guitar look cheap. Also I have no idea why I asked this question. I forgot my stockhead is not a ordinary one right after I posted this question. Lol I feel like a old man at times.

[Acousticado]

Although I’m a fan of custom TRCs, a Strat-like headstock is so unique and of such an iconic shape that I agree a trc of any kind would look out of place.

[zmf]

Originally Posted by LeDave

I have no idea why I asked this question. Lol I feel like a old man at times.

Finally, something in this thread that I can relate to.

[Wade Hampton]

Dave wrote:

Originally Posted by LeDave

I have no idea why I asked this question. I forgot my stockhead is not a ordinary one right after I posted this question.

Yes, but we’ll fight to the death for your right to acquire and use an unneeded and aesthetically inappropriate truss rod cover anyway!! Unnecessary but inexpensive and easily reversible modifications are OKAY with (at least a few of) us.

Next, let’s add a gear shift knob - maybe a chrome skull with glowing red eyes!

Wade Hampton "No, Man, Keep It, It Looks Cool!" Miller

[Brucebubs]

You need theses bad babies to go with your skull Wade.

[Wade Hampton]

It's not MY skull, Bruce - it's Dave's, provided he can ignore the negative comments from the naysayers and install a red-eyed skull gearshift knob on his guitar.

It's not always easy being a pioneer making these bold artistic statements, though...


whm

[Mandobart]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

You said it before I could - having an attractive truss rod cover is an easy way to fancy up a guitar with a little bit of affordable flash. But it remains small, and usually won’t visually overwhelm the rest of the guitar.

There’s quite literally no need for it, but for that matter, strictly speaking there’s no actual need for me to swap out the stock metal buttons on my guitar tuners for ebony or snakewood buttons instead. Which is something I routinely do.

But I like the dash of élan and elegance that those contrasting aftermarket buttons provide in their own small way, and I see Dave’s interest in truss rod covers as originating from a similar impulse.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

Wade I share your fondness for wooden tuner buttons and arm rests - I've swapped out the buttons on 7 instruments so far and added nice wooden arm rests to 11.

But...ebony tuner buttons and wooden arm rests look nice while serving an actual purpose. A vestigial cover for a non-existent truss rod access just seems superfluous to me.

[Wade Hampton]

Originally Posted by Mandobart

Wade I share your fondness for wooden tuner buttons and arm rests - I've swapped out the buttons on 7 instruments so far and added nice wooden arm rests to 11.

But...ebony tuner buttons and wooden arm rests look nice while serving an actual purpose. A vestigial cover for a non-existent truss rod access just seems superfluous to me.

Maybe so - I don’t disagree with you on that. But the point I was trying to make is that if a superfluous modification doesn’t permanently damage an instrument and remains easily reversible, then it doesn’t hurt a thing and is simply a matter of personal preference.


whm