Now they are too tight in two ways. First, they can be set at a very narrow string spacing like 12 mm (sorry,don’t know that in inch) but if done so the actual tuning screw – that is jagged – will touch the neighboring ones. This is also true to their BASS bridges, single ones that is needed to fit perfect with a Steinberger neck. If they’re at 17 mm the actual tuners makes contact with each other!

And, my big problem with double ball end strings is that ABM bridges can’t move FORWARD enough to let the whole ball slip into the slot easily while changing strings. It’s too tight, and there may not be enough room to intonate either. I have to turn the strings around so that THE SMALLER SIZED BALL fits into it’s slot. This generates other problems such as lock windings of the strings protrudes over the zero fret and so on. This applies both to their fixed bridges and their single ones. I have a bass with ABM as well, so I know. However, when using single ball end strings, this is no problem.

So there are a slight caveat emptor when buying ABM. ABMs material though, is rock solid, and German high quality steel. And sustains “forever”.

However, ergonomics in headless designs are those that: The body/neck (i e the whole guitar!) should “end” where the strings ends!
Any material, bridge, tuners, etc, that comes behind or in front of that are unefficient, and un-rational. The excess string length that is wound up on tuners of a regular headstock guitar are a complete waste, both in staying in tune, and time to tune it up.