| Author |
Topic: Early Zum ? |
James Quackenbush
From:
Pomona, New York, USA
|
Posted 20 Dec 2016 1:17 pm |
|
Hi Guys ,
Over the years I have owned quite a few pedal steel guitars ....All colors , and brands .. I own a few Uni 12's now as this is what I ended up playing after all the many steels that I bought and sold ....I had a nice I would guess late 80's Uni 12 Zum that was a very full sounding , and a very easy playing pedal steel ...It was a nice steel , but I was still trying out as many steels as I could to check out the differences in the various brands of steels that were on the market... Here is my question
For you guys that have owned ZUM'S in the past , and now in the current day ZUM ...What were the Kansas City Zum's like ? ....Where they as easy to play as the newer ones ? ...Did they sound the same ? .... Were the mechanics that different ? ..How many raises and lowers did the KC Zums have ? ....Please tell me as much as you can about the early KC Zum's ....Thanks a lot guys ....Jim |
|
|
 |
Mike Perlowin
From:
Los Angeles CA
|
Posted 20 Dec 2016 2:16 pm
|
|
There's a Zum U-12 on E-bay, that does not have appear to have split tuning screws. Wasn't Bruce Zumsteg the inventor the split tuning system, in the early 80s?
_________________
Please visit my web site and Soundcloud page and listen to the music posted there.
http://www.mikeperlowin.com http://soundcloud.com/mike-perlowin |
|
|
|
Jack Hanson
From:
San Luis Valley, USA
|
Posted 20 Dec 2016 5:45 pm Re: Early Zum ?
|
|
| James Quackenbush wrote: |
| ....Please tell me as much as you can about the early KC Zum's .... |
Much of that and more is covered in this little book that Mr. Zumsteg himself put out a while back:
 |
|
|
|
Dennis Detweiler
From:
Solon, Iowa, US
|
Posted 20 Dec 2016 6:16 pm
|
|
This is my U-12 ordered at the convention in 1982 and received a few months later. It's triple raise and triple lower with compensators on strings 4, 8 and 12 and no split tuning screws. It has adjustable helper springs on the raises to make the raises easier. The only experimental difference for a couple of years (on mine) was narrow spacer fingers instead of washers that were held tight against the body of the guitar with springs to create tone and sustain contact between the changer and the wood body. Enough players thought that it created overtones and made it hard to tune and Bruce dropped the idea. I don't hear that problem. The only upgrade, in my opinion, would be a better gear ratio tuner to make it easier to fine tune. My 1976 MSA has a higher ratio and easier to tune.
_________________
1976 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics 427 pickup, 1975 Birdseye U-12 MSA with Telonics X-12 pickup, Revelation preamp, Carbon Copy Delay and Hall Of Fame Reverb, Crown XLS 1002, 2- 15" Eminence Wheelhouse speakers, ShoBud Pedal, Effects Pedals. 1949 Epiphone D-8. |
|
|
|
James Quackenbush
From:
Pomona, New York, USA
|
Posted 21 Dec 2016 3:56 am
|
|
 |
|
|
|
James Quackenbush
From:
Pomona, New York, USA
|
Posted 21 Dec 2016 3:57 am
|
|
 |
|
|
|
James Quackenbush
From:
Pomona, New York, USA
|
Posted 21 Dec 2016 3:58 am
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 21 Dec 2016 7:12 am
|
|
Bruce always made a good guitar. The earliest ones I've seen had a 3/2 changer, and looked similar to the MSA Classics, but with a larger center support and big (machined) slotted pullers. I've only played one, but all the ones I've heard sounded fine.  |
|
|
|
