Jackson Blackjack Changer Mechanism ?

richard burton · From: Britain

I've been looking at photos of the Blackjack changer, and am having some difficulty understanding how it works.

Is it some sort of a variant of a pull-release mechanism?

I can see the lower return springs at the far end of the steel, but that's where the similarity with a pull-release ends.

Click Here for photos

Mac Knowles · From: Almonte,Ontario, Canada

Richard, I too have puzzled over the pics of the Jacksons. Seem to be different systems for different guitars. If you notice there are only 5 or 6 return springs at the left end shown on some of them. Also each has a separate rod going to the changer. This seems to me to be just a variant of a pull-release. If in fact it is, then we have the same problem as all the other pull-release changers...no splits, and the required amount of "slop" for strings that both raise and lower. It'd be nice to have someone who owns one of these guitars chime in with their thoughts.
Mac

Bobby Burns · From: Tennessee, USA

I looked at this design pretty hard a while back. They are a lot like some of the Marlen pull release guitars, except the finger hinges in the middle. The lower rod holds the two pieces together in the neutral position. When you lower the rod, the parts of the finger separate. This lets the finger lower the string, without the slack in the raises. I actually made a test piece that worked the same way one time. It worked really good, but I didn't use it on a guitar because it was more complicated to make, and didn't have enough advantage over a well thought out pull release set up. With the pulls set up right, and all the springs balancing everything, a pull release can feel pretty good. What you gain by not having the slack, you lose by having more travel, you have more parts, and the string pull feel is not as direct as it is on the Marlen. I like the feel of the Marlen. The Blackjack is a very good system, and it works pretty smooth, but it has more parts on the changer. If I you needed splits, and three raises and several lowers, I'd rather have an all-pull. Otherwise, I rather have a one piece finger.

Bobbe Seymour · From: Hendersonville TN USA, R.I.P.

The Black Jack does not use a "Pull Release" system.
It is a total different variation on the "All Pull" system.

The system on this little guitar is wonderful and only goes to show what a great thinking man David Jackson is in this steel guitar world where everyone seems to copy everyone year after year.

David is to desiging steel guitars what Buddy Emmons is to playing. Very Happy

Earnest Bovine · From: Los Angeles CA USA

Ryan Barwin · From: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

I've been looking at photos of it...it still doesn't make sense to me about how it works...can someone explain?

_________________
www.pedalsteel.ca

Bo Borland · From: South Jersey -

There are some very good animated slides on the Jackson website. It appears that raises happen at the bridge end and lowers happen at the key-head end.

Bobby Burns · From: Tennessee, USA

That is a different Jackson model that lowers at the head.
I agree, it is a different type of mechanism than a pull-release, but it's not really a conventional all-pull either.

richard burton · From: Britain

I think that I'm understanding it now:
The bottom part of the finger achieves the raise by levering against 'something' on the rod that holds the whole assembly in the neutral position (with the springs at the keyhead end of the steel).

To achieve a lower, said rod is moved towards the right (as you sit at the steel)

Mac Knowles · From: Almonte,Ontario, Canada

Richard.. I'm still looking at these changer pictures. I see different setups depending on which picture you look at. Some pictures have the springs on some strings and another picture the spring is not there. The thing that puzzles me is for instance string 4 (the E string) I see the spring.. and two pull rods only. The spring rod has a sleeve on it that butts against the angle bracket and presumably stops the upper part of the finger from moving any further left. So either we don't have an "F" lever or we don't have the pedal 3 pull on this string. But I imagine we have the E to Eb lower. What I can't figure out is how the "pull rod" determines if it is a raise or a lower when it arrives at the changer. Perhaps the hinge in the finger only rotates one way...or only so far one way??
Cute puzzle!! And a clever one too!
Mac

richard burton · From: Britain

This is my best guess

Earnest Bovine · From: Los Angeles CA USA

Richard, I think you have it right.
The lower rods are push rods, as you see here:

The rods push against the force of the spring that pulls the long rod from the other end of the guitar

And for the strings that have no lower, the changer must be held by a screw and nut; otherwise the string would pull the changer from neutral to lowered:

The strings that do get lowered are kept from lowering by a 1" long cylinder arougn the push rod.

Ulf Edlund · From: Umeå, Sweden

Interesting.
_________________
1983 Emmons D10 SKH, Carter SD10, Nashville 112, Session 500, ProfexII, Lapsteels, GT-Beard reso, guitars of all kinds...
http://www.myspace.com/ulfedlund

Danny Bates · From: Fresno, CA. USA

A push/pull ... very cool Smile

Mac Knowles · From: Almonte,Ontario, Canada

That is pretty clever. I just wonder how you fine tune the lowers. If it's with the "neutral" hex nut then I would imagine the neutral setting, hence the open tuning would be affected. Otherwise I think you've probably got it figured out. The fingers themselves would be more complicated to make unless you've got good milling equipment etc. which they most likely do have. I still like my double changer though as you can see on my site www.mkguitars.com
It sure is amazing how many folks have worked on changers of all sorts over the years.....to accomplish the same end result!
Cheers, Mac

Bobby Burns · From: Tennessee, USA

Richard's got it figured out. The lowers are tuned by a row of screws at the top of the endplate, like a Maverick, or a Marlen, or most any pull-release. The bellcranks pull the raises on one side, and pull agaist the springs to release the lowers on the other side. So, I guess you could say they are all pulls, but the lowers release the same as a lot of Marlens do, as far as the bellcranks and rods are concerned. It's kind of a combination of a lot of old ideas, and some very clever new ideas. It is another good way to do the same old thing in a new way. I just like fewer parts on the changer, when I can acheive the same results.

Bobby Burns · From: Tennessee, USA

Now before you accuse me of saying that a Blackjack works like a Maverick, or Marlen, let me say that I recognize this as a much more refined system than a Maverick, or most Marlens. But there are some similarities in what things actually do. The Blackjack works a lot slicker than either one of those ever did, without some thoughtful modification..

richard burton · From: Britain

It's got a lot in common with the pull-release system (IMO), with the advantage of not having any excess movement in the raise rods (when a finger lowers) because of the hinge in the finger.

A nice bit of latersl thinking from Jackson Very Happy

Brad Malone · From: Pennsylvania, USA

So, I guess you could say they are all pulls, but the lowers release the same as a lot of Marlens do, as far as the bellcranks and rods are concerned. It's kind of a combination of a lot of old ideas, and some very clever new ideas. It is another good way to do the same old thing in a new way. I just like fewer parts on the changer, when I can acheive the same results<<

Yes it seems like a very complicated mechanism..like you have to be a master machanic to tune the thing. I agree, fewer parts is the way to go, as long as you can achieve the same results.

Brad Malone · From: Pennsylvania, USA

So, I guess you could say they are all pulls, but the lowers release the same as a lot of Marlens do, as far as the bellcranks and rods are concerned. It's kind of a combination of a lot of old ideas, and some very clever new ideas. It is another good way to do the same old thing in a new way. I just like fewer parts on the changer, when I can acheive the same results<<

Yes it seems like a very complicated mechanism..like you have to be a master machanic to tune the thing. I agree, fewer parts is the way to go, as long as you can achieve the same results.

Tony Glassman · From: The Great Northwest

Richard excellent job with the diagrammed explanation. I think you pretty well solved the mystery.

So, would you call it a split finger pull-release mechanism? I guess you get the benefit of changer/body contact with raises (body) and lowers (screws-to-endplates) but not in neutral. I know the Jacksons are into that old solid-changer-finger permanent sound, so maybe this mechanism is closer to that concept than a standard all-pull changer would be.
I imagine it tunes up similar to a p/p. I wonder how they set up F-lever and 1/2 stops. Like a p/p too?

When you think about it, there are probably a similar number of parts as in an all-pull system:

- changer fingers = 2 pieces and a rivet.
- return springs & tubular spacers are only on strings that have lowers + screws w/ nuts on the others
- rods for raises and lowers, bell-cranks

Very cool and innovative!

Bobby Burns · From: Tennessee, USA

You also have contact with the body in nuetral. The triangle in Richard's diagram is a plate that attaches to the body. The finger contacts this point at all times, except on raises.

Forum Index > Pedal Steel		Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic