A 5-string bass obviously has an odd number of tuners, so it’s not exactly easy to get symmetry on the pegboard as far as how to place tuners are concerned.
Fender still does make 5-string models with all five tuners “on top”, inline style. However, the problem with doing that is that on full (meaning not short) scale models, there are many players who literally cannot reach the 1-string tuner and have to pull the bass towards them just to tune the thing.
The solution to this was to move the 1-string tuner to the opposite side of the pegboard, and this is a 4/1 setup as seen above…
…however, some players really don’t like the look of it, as the 1-string tuner according to them looks like a tacked-on afterthought rather than something that’s supposed to be there.
Other companies like ESP with their LTD line opt to go with a 3/2 setup, like this:
And sometimes you will see other models from other companies that opt for 2/3.
We asked our Facebook audience about this, and many comments came in saying 3/2 and 2/3 was the preferred tuner positioning of choice.
What do you think? Is the 4/1 ugly? Is 3/2 and 2/3 better overall? Post a comment and let us know.
And by the way, yeah we sell tuners. So if you’re building your own bass (and we hope you are), you can position your tuners however you like!
It doesn’t matter to me. The main issue is whether the tuner for the B string is far enough away from the bridge to make sure its is really tight coming over the zero fret as to be nie and tight.
I totally agree with the B string angle importance you mentioned. that is why my 5 sind is 2+3 with a longer distance been the nut and tuner, with more wraps when singing it, to maintain a good break angle on the angled headstock.
I do need the B string to be a good distance from the nut, but more because I don’t want to have to wrap the full girth of the string around a post. That’s a broken string waiting to happen.
I’m partial to 3/2 or 2/3, primarily because I don’t like 4 (or 5) in-line on top or bottom, due to the reach issue. My 5’s (&6’s) have 3 on top, but I think there is merit in having 2 on top for the B-string to have a longer length past the nut, like the Foderas (someday…..).
3/2
3/2 LIKE!
Like 3/2
I prefer the 2/3 setup like on the Ibanez ATK’s.
I used to prefer 3/2 and now prefer 2/3 so the B string tuner post can be as far north of the nut as possible.
3/2 – 4/1 looks really goofy
I like 2/3, because my first 5 was like that (and all subsequent 5s as well).
I have a 5/0 and a 3/2. I like ’em both.
I like the 3/2 set up the best
3/2 or 4/1 will do
2/2 or 3/3…I only play 4string or 6string electric bass.
As a long time MusicMan Stingray player, I always liked the 3/1 look – it’s what caught my attention about the bass in the first place. So, when I got an OLP 5 string, the 4/1 just seemed like a logical extension of the original concept. I have a long enough reach that the 4/1 does not bother me, and I tune the bass from E to C, so I have no B string issues.
One of my Jazz basses has all 5 tuners on one side. The other one is a 4/1 arrangement. A friend has a very nice Yamaha 5-string that I play frequently. Based on my experience with these 3 basses, I, for whatever reason, couldn’t care less about the tuner arrangement.
Don’T really care. I have owned all 4 types. The best b-string definition comes frm my fender jazz V which is 4+1. But I have always assumed this was more a function of the dual string retainers.
3/2 absolutely!
I prefer all 5 up like my 99 Jazz(Amer. Dlx.) and I hate 4 up and one down like the newer Fenders. On other basses,I prefer 3up and 2 down.
I love 3/2 peg position!
I dont know why I b othered to post on this. Tuner placement does not matter on bit to me.So long as it plays well and sounds good all is well.I love my Warmoth gecko bass5 even if the neck is a baseball bat.
3/2 on a 35″ scale and 2/3 on a 34″ scale.
3/2, otherwise the headstock is too long.
Hipshot headless 5 tuning gears at the butt end for the win!
I don’t know what I’ll do if & when I build another 5.
In all the cases, I prefer tuning at the bridge (yes, thx Mr Steinberger;)
4+1 is just plain ugly. And the single tuner somehow looks like it’s more likely to be damaged. 3+2 looks best.
I like the 4+1 on my Roscoe Beck V, but it’s such a great bass it could have anything & I wouldn’t care.
I think the most important thing is to have enough space between the back of the nut and the low B tuner for a good string tree. Second preference is to minimize the length of the peghead to reduce neck-dive (it’s a physics thing called moment-arm). My Lakland 55-02 (3/2) and Ibanez GWB-35 (2/3) do it right and my Fender Jazz V-24 (4/1) does it wrong. I think the Ibanez GWB heads are just about perfect for a five-string, save for the slight lateral bend on the low B.
I play 5-string and I prefer 3 on top & 2 on the bottom.
I’m waiting for tuners that are small enough to allow five fit on one side a little closer to the nut. My next pick, though, is the 3/2 with a headstock other than a Fender style.
I pretty much make all my basses with 2/3. don’t care much for the 4/1 style, looks too much like a 4 with the 5th as an afterthought and slapped on.
3/2 looks great !!
Whatever looks good for the shape of the headstock. So bass-ically it makes no difference to me.
3/2 all the way
2+3 or 3+2 either way, ok,
but with some B strings at 38″ from ball to end of top wrap, some string makers think a 34″ bass should be made to fit the strings instead of the other way around. 2+3 usually can use their strings also.
3+2 gets a better break angle over the nut, but some B strings are too long unless thru-body, and that’s not recommended for most flats. Why have to build a bass to fit the strings?
I personally like the 3/2 configuration. It looks more balanced to me.
Just saw Cowboy Mouth recently and while the bassist was playing an old fender 4 string his d string tuner was mounted upside down for a funky looking 2+1+1 – messed with my head all show! When I ask him what the purpose was of it after the sow he said he had taken it apart years ago and used what he had to get it playable again and just never changed it back!
Aren’t the 5 on top, & 4 +1s a lot more guilty of neck diving than the 2 + 3, or 3 +2? That should be considered also!