| Author |
Topic: Sho-Buds, differences |
Lee Gardner
From:
, Paonia, Colorado, USA
|
Posted 24 Mar 2009 6:14 pm |
|
I have been playing a Mustang for too many years. It's time to move up. I would like to know the difference between Pro-I's, Pro-II's, Pro-III's and SuperPro's. Getting ready to retire from day job and just play!
_________________
Sho-bud, Carvin VTX100, ES-335, Gibson L-6S. |
|
|
 |
Russ Wever
From:
Kansas City
|
Posted 24 Mar 2009 9:04 pm
|
|
What's a
Mustang?
~Russ |
|
|
|
Jeremy Threlfall
From:
now in Western Australia
|
Posted 24 Mar 2009 10:24 pm
|
|
maybe he means Maverick |
|
|
|
Tommy Shown
From:
Denham Springs, La.
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 12:46 am
|
|
| I cut my teeth on the Maverick, for about six months. It was ok to start out with. Tommy |
|
|
|
Lee Gardner
From:
, Paonia, Colorado, USA
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 9:05 am yeah, yeah, yeah, pick on the old man!
|
|
Sorry guys, it is a maverick, the mustang is that other guitar made by that other company that I don't care for. Sorry.
_________________
Sho-bud, Carvin VTX100, ES-335, Gibson L-6S. |
|
|
|
Jim Ives
From:
Los Angeles, California, USA
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 9:33 am
|
|
You don't want a Sho-Bud as a beginer guitar. Their mechanism is too antiquated meaning uneven and difficult to use. Pretty much any guitar that is newer has a smoother more reliable mechanism that is infinetly more user friendly. My own bias is Mullen.I have a Sho-Bud 6139 (a Pro-I) that is currently being gutted and refitted with a Desert Rose mechanism for the above reason.It was unplayable.
-Jim
_________________
Mullen D-10
Fender Stringmaster Deluxe 8 lap steel. |
|
|
|
Tom Quinn
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 11:11 am
|
|
The mechanism is most definitely not antiquated. The old barrel changer can be changed in a jiffy, is stone simple and stays in tune.
Mullen guitars don't sound much to my ears, same as most new instruments. Of course you can play a Sho-Bud. They work great and most of the REAL picking you hear when people actually used pedal steels in C&W were done on either a Bud or an Emmons push/pull.
Short answer? If you like single 10s, go for one. I cannot play them myself but YMMV. I think a D-10 Professional, a Pro II or a Lloyd Green would serve you very well. |
|
|
|
chris ivey
From:
california (deceased)
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 11:16 am
|
|
i totally disagree with jim! sho buds..pro-I, II, and III (and professional, especially) have a very simple fine functioning system that is easy to work on, understand, and fairly bulletproof. you'll do fine getting into a good old sho bud and deals can still be had on them. and many will play and sound just great without spending money on someone 'boutiquing' them!!
mr quinn knows as he plays his beautiful pro II!!!! |
|
|
|
Wayne Morgan
From:
Rutledge, TN, USA
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 11:21 am
|
|
Yep,,,,stay away from those Buds, I have often advised Lloyd, if he had had a better steel, he might have amounted to something.
Wayne
PS I have a original Pro 1, 3 X 4 that has no issues, plays and sounds great and stays in tune for ever, must have got a good one, huh !!!!!! |
|
|
|
Tony Glassman
From:
The Great Northwest
|
|
|
|
Larry Bressington
From:
Nebraska
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 5:24 pm
|
|
If a sho-bud sounds bad, it's you, not the guitar!
_________________
A.K.A Chappy. |
|
|
|
Sonny Priddy
From:
Elizabethtown, Kentucky, USA, R.I.P.
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 6:25 pm Sho=Bud
|
|
| I Have A Sho=bud LDG That Playes Lihe a Dream No Problum What So Ever. Great guitar. SONNY. |
|
|
|
James Morehead
From:
Prague, Oklahoma, USA - R.I.P.
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 6:42 pm
|
|
Nothin' like a good old 'bud. Jim Ive's, let us know how you like the upgrade you are doing--should make it a sweet guitar for you, and that's cool. 
I get along great with the old rack and barrel 'buds----love them. Also, barrels behind two hole pullers system in the old round-front 'bud is my favorite. The newer shobuds do not capture my interest, as that's when some of the potmetal showed up in the later era 'buds. Not my cup of tea. Of course, rope inlay makes them sound better, too. YMMV |
|
|
|
James Cann
From:
Phoenix, AZ
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 6:51 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| I Have A Sho=bud LDG . . . |
As do I (and fortunate others), Sonny, and for it, poor is he who would scorn such holy grail, from which cometh dulcetude that, "as would the lark at break of Spring, sing hymns to heaven's gate," . . . or alternative words to that effect? |
|
|
|
Stu Schulman
From:
Ulster Park New Yawk (deceased)
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 7:16 pm
|
|
"You don't want a Sho-Bud as a beginer guitar. Their mechanism is too antiquated meaning uneven and difficult to use" I gave a forumite a two hour lesson today,There I was staring at his slightly dusty 1973 square front LDG with waffle pedals,and a dust catcher fretboard.He hasn't tuned the pedals since he bought it a couple of years ago so I got out my strobe and went to work,Every knee lever,and pedal tuned perfectly and smoothly,When I watched the strobe nothing ever jumped smooth as glass,This guitar sounds like a million bucks,and plays as well as any new guitar that I've played and I've been playing a long time...I owned the first LDG when I lived in Austin in 1973.The guitar that I played today is every bit as good if not a better one.I own three Desert Rose guitars and love them but there aint nothing wrong with those old Buds if running right.This particular LDG was built by Duane Marrs.The only antique in the room today was me.
_________________
Steeltronics Z-pickup,Desert Rose S-10 4+5,Desert Rose Keyless S-10 3+5... Mullen G2 S-10 3+5,Telonics 206 pickups,Telonics volume pedal.,Blanton SD -10,Emmons GS_10...Zirctone bar,Bill Groner Bar...any amp that isn't broken.Steel Seat.Com seats...Licking paint chips off of Chinese Toys since 1952. |
|
|
|
Brint Hannay
From:
Maryland, USA
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 8:27 pm
|
|
Lee, the main factor that makes a difference between Sho-Buds that ISN'T discussed in the otherwise excellent website that Tony linked to was touched on by James M.: "pot metal".
There have been lots of discussions about this topic on the Forum, but as you may not be familiar with the subject:
A number of the mechanical parts on Sho-Buds after 1977 were made of pot metal, rather than aluminum as before. Pot metal, unfortunately, is a weak metal significantly more subject to wear and breakage--breakage may be an accident waiting to happen, and given that all Sho-Buds are at least 25 years old, wear has a good chance of being present on some of these parts. But the good news is that these later Sho-Buds generally sell for a bit less than the coveted earlier models, there are more of them so they're not as hard to get, and replacement parts of good to great quality (NOT pot metal) are readily available. Fitted with replacement parts where needed, these 'Buds are fine instruments that will serve as well as any other, IMHO. |
|
|
|
Tom Quinn
|
Posted 25 Mar 2009 8:45 pm
|
|
| Could be made out of compressed doggie doo but an old Bud still sounds better to MY ears than all the cookie-cutter all-pull stuff that came after... |
|
|
|
Lee Gardner
From:
, Paonia, Colorado, USA
|
Posted 26 Mar 2009 2:47 am
|
|
Thanks Tony and Brint for the info. I think I will look for a SuperPro and to the nay sayers, it is the sound that matters most to me, not how easy it is to play. I think I would rather work hard on a great sounding guitar that work easy on no souunds. tks all.
_________________
Sho-bud, Carvin VTX100, ES-335, Gibson L-6S. |
|
|
|
James Morehead
From:
Prague, Oklahoma, USA - R.I.P.
|
Posted 26 Mar 2009 6:09 am
|
|
Well that's what a super pro is all about--pot metal. Sure that's what you want 
Believe, me, we are definately NOT sacrificing tone by stearing clear of the pot metal guitars, infact, most cases, it's just the opposite. |
|
|
|
Herb Steiner
From:
Briarcliff TX 78669, pop. 2,064
|
Posted 26 Mar 2009 7:22 am
|
|
Re: pot metal on Sho~Buds
In 1977 I had Sho~Bud update the undercarriage of my 1970 Professional with all new parts. Part of the job was replacing the aluminum changer fingers, using pin string holders, with the pot metal changer fingers using the slot to hold the string ball ends.
The result was that 1) the tone of the guitar was somewhat diminished, IMHO, 2) the slot method of attaching the string to the changer finger was VASTLY inferior to the pin method, and 3) knee levers, still scalloped but now pot metal, were much more prone to cracking and breakage.
The updating of parts did make the guitar more versatile and easier to tune, but at great sacrifice to component quality.
_________________
My rig: Infinity and Telonics.
Son, we live in a world with walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with steel guitars. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? |
|
|
|
Tom Quinn
|
Posted 26 Mar 2009 10:28 am
|
|
Herb-san, you are a well-known exponent of all things push/pull. But we Budsters still love ya anyway! :- )
Last edited by Tom Quinn on 26 Mar 2009 11:20 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Ronnie Boettcher
From:
Brunswick Ohio, USA
|
Posted 26 Mar 2009 11:16 am
|
|
I have a LDG, and it is still the same as when new. I never had a issue with it, and it is a sturdy, great E9, that stays in tune. It is a mid 70's, and don't think I'll ever need a new one. Only thing that bugs me is when a string pops, I have to turn it upside down to shake the ball, and piece of string out. That is very rare though.
_________________
Sho-Bud LDG, Martin D28, Ome trilogy 5 string banjo, Ibanez 4-string bass, dobro, fiddle, and a tubal cain. Life Member of AFM local 142 |
|
|
|
Sonny Priddy
From:
Elizabethtown, Kentucky, USA, R.I.P.
|
Posted 26 Mar 2009 1:47 pm Sho-Bud
|
|
| Super pro Plays easy if it Is set up Right I Had one Played like Butter. Great Guitars. SONNY. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Threlfall
From:
now in Western Australia
|
Posted 26 Mar 2009 8:25 pm
|
|
My experience would lean me towards advising you NOT to shy away from pot metal Sho-buds.
I will take on Herb's observations about tone etc, but my Pot metal Pro 1 has performed flawlessly and nothing has ever broken on it. If something does break, then I am prepared to replace it with another pot metal part, or an upgraded part.
It gets a fair old hiding too, a few times a week, and the owner before me was a 300lb big fella who plays a lot more than I do, and nothing broke on it while he had it either.
My 84 model is the nice short compact body and it is wonderful.
 |
|
|
|
Alan Brookes
From:
Brummy living in Southern California
|
Posted 27 Mar 2009 6:50 am
|
|
| chris ivey wrote: |
| ...you'll do fine getting into a good old Sho Bud ... |
After forty years playing non-pedal I started into pedal with a Carter Starter. Within a few months I'd bought a Sho-Bud and the difference was unbelievable. The Starter has been in its case now for many years. Long may it stay there.
My only reservation about learning to play with pedals on a Sho Bud is that if you pick a Crossover you only have one knee lever, which can be frustrating.
But it's like learning any instrument. If you buy a $10,000 classical guitar it's going to be easier to play than a $5 junkheap with high action. A good quality PSG is going to be easiest to learn on. |
|
|
|
