| Visit Our Catalog at SteelGuitarShopper.com |

Post new topic Steel fingers, more mass better?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Reply to topic
Author Topic:  Steel fingers, more mass better?
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 12:31 pm    
Reply with quote

I have always noticed that the mass of a slide bar makes a pretty huge difference in tone/timbre, and most of the time it just sounds better with to terminate the string with a heavier bar..Soooo...going from there, I am guessing that more massive fingers, more mass in the changer in general is most likely going to be a better idea.

Perhaps steel instead of aluminum would be a better choice? And also (inertia issues aside) more massive fingers would be a better idea.

What are your individual thoughts on the sonic character of more massive changers as opposed to lightweight aluminum?

And going further, perhaps even the roller nut could somehow be made to impart more "gravitas"

Thoughts?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Earnest Bovine


From:
Los Angeles CA USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 12:37 pm    
Reply with quote

Changer should be on the left, and the bridge should be one heavy hunk.
View user's profile Send private message
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 1:06 pm    
Reply with quote

Earnest Bovine wrote:
Changer should be on the left, and the bridge should be one heavy hunk.


I don't see any reason that the bridge should not be massive other than the design challenge of "solidifying" the rollers. No doubt a lot of energy gets channeled away to no real advantage on both ends of the strings.

I had a Fender 2000 here before I sold it due to weight. It does have great tone. I think most of that tone was due to better/different termination methods at the ends of the strings more than the pickups and overall mass
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Donny Hinson

 

From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 1:42 pm    
Reply with quote

The heavier bridge/changer will likely sound brighter, emphasizing the sound of the string itself, and negating the resonances of the body. Lighter bridge/changer assemblies will pass more string vibration into the body, which usually results in a rounder and smoother tone. (Think: the sound of a pull/release.)

My2cents, anyway. Neutral
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dennis Detweiler


From:
Solon, Iowa, US
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 1:50 pm    
Reply with quote

Fat fingers, fat tone. I suggest steroid injections into the fingers. Whoa!
_________________
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.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 2:06 pm    
Reply with quote

Donny Hinson wrote:
The heavier bridge/changer will likely sound brighter, emphasizing the sound of the string itself, and negating the resonances of the body. Lighter bridge/changer assemblies will pass more string vibration into the body, which usually results in a rounder and smoother tone. (Think: the sound of a pull/release.)

My2cents, anyway. Neutral


Rounder smoother tone is certainly the tone I am after, but I have seen a lot of round smooth solid body guitars of all persuasions. I suspect the real enemy is "deadness" due to loss of energy at the ends of the strings. The resonance of the body is certainly worth investigating after I figure out the "mass" issue.


Last edited by Paul Leoni on 1 Jul 2021 2:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
David Ball


From:
North Carolina High Country
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 2:09 pm    
Reply with quote

From what I've observed, at least to my ears, a big steel axle and a thin aluminum finger gives me the tone I like. Early Sho Bud permanents and Emmons guitars share this configuration. I think that the big axle adds a lot to the tone, but I think that the thinner aluminum finger is what brings it all home.

Dave
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ian Rae


From:
Redditch, England
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 2:13 pm    
Reply with quote

Donny mentions pull-release. We lost something when we moved on. I have never felt that aluminium is a very musical metal. Steel fingers for me, and save weight elsewhere. I sense a danger in this thread of "bridge" and "nut" getting confused, so be precise please Smile
_________________
Make sleeping dogs tell the truth!
Homebuilt keyless U12 7x5, Excel keyless U12 8x8, Williams keyless U12 7x8, Telonics rack and 15" cabs
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Scott Denniston


From:
Hahns Peak, Colorado, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 2:26 pm    
Reply with quote

On my Dekley the fingers are chromed and with some hardening process done in the chroming. It does have great sustain but I guess that's a combination of different things. I like Dennis's suggestion of steroid shots in the fingers though. I might look into that.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 2:41 pm    
Reply with quote

David Ball wrote:
From what I've observed, at least to my ears, a big steel axle and a thin aluminum finger gives me the tone I like. Early Sho Bud permanents and Emmons guitars share this configuration. I think that the big axle adds a lot to the tone, but I think that the thinner aluminum finger is what brings it all home.

Dave

"The big steel axle" probably provides the termination mass in that case.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 2:46 pm    
Reply with quote

Ian Rae wrote:
Donny mentions pull-release. We lost something when we moved on. I have never felt that aluminium is a very musical metal. Steel fingers for me, and save weight elsewhere. I sense a danger in this thread of "bridge" and "nut" getting confused, so be precise please Smile


Pull release is absolutely the way to go. Raises/lowers on opposite ends is a good trick imo, but I intend to have *less* moving parts
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Georg Sørtun


From:
Mandal, Agder, Norway
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 3:41 pm    
Reply with quote

That the bridge should be one heavy chunk…
https://www.gunlaug.no/msc/smc-090617.html
… actually works quite well sustain and tonewise, even with the changer in its – by now – usual place as part of that bridge.

And aluminum (aluminium) can be quite "musical" when properly tamed and tuned Smile
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ian Rae


From:
Redditch, England
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 4:01 pm    
Reply with quote

I'm sure they're both lovely - please disregard my mindless prejudice.
_________________
Make sleeping dogs tell the truth!
Homebuilt keyless U12 7x5, Excel keyless U12 8x8, Williams keyless U12 7x8, Telonics rack and 15" cabs
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 5:01 pm    
Reply with quote

There are truly fantastic machines available, and done a lot of different ways. When I say "That's the way to go" ,I am speaking of the economic advantages. One thing that does not need to be compromised is tone. Overall Tone is simply a matter of design and costs nothing extra to achieve. Imo of course.

Last edited by Paul Leoni on 2 Jul 2021 3:57 am; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 5:04 pm    
Reply with quote

Pickups, rigidity, mass at the string ends will get you where you need to be.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 5:18 pm    
Reply with quote

Duplicate
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Georg Sørtun


From:
Mandal, Agder, Norway
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 5:58 pm    
Reply with quote

Earnest Bovine wrote:
Changer should be on the left, and the bridge should be one heavy hunk.
I agree that the changer should be behind the nut, as that is the only sensible place to have it without having to compromise on tone. Keyless or keyed, changer mechanism only have to stretch/slacken the string hook-up max +/- 3mm (0.118 in) to cover all changes found on today's (more or less) standard length PSGs.

As for the bridge part; I'd prioritize controlled rigidity over chunkyness.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 6:22 pm    
Reply with quote

I agree on controlled rigidity. Mass may be the only viable way to do it considering the fingers have to move.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Chris Lucker

 

From:
Los Angeles, California USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 8:52 pm    
Reply with quote

The first Sho-Buds had skinnier axles than later. The first Seventeen Emmons guitars had skinnier axles than later. The first Emmons fingers were fatter cast fingers. In November and December 1964 Emmons transitioned to a fatter axle and the “normal” Emmons fingers.
The reason why the first Emmons Bolt-Ons from October 1964 did not have a ledge on the tailpiece, as commonly seen on later Bolt-ons, is that the axle was so skinny a ledge was not necessary.
I prefer the sound of the skinny axle Permanents and the skinny axle Emmons guitars. But the other variables, such as solid nuts on the Sho-Buds and the closed rollers on the Emmons Keyheads, and the far fewer moving parts, in my opinion, lend to what I hear as a preferred sound. I like the sound of guitars with few moving parts (solid fingers) and not much screwed into the cabinet.
_________________
Chris Lucker
Red Bellies, Bigsbys and a lot of other guitars.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Chris Lucker

 

From:
Los Angeles, California USA
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 9:11 pm    
Reply with quote

Mass and solid bridge is Les Paul thinking, vs Stratocaster thinking. I think one of the keys to the Emmons Wraparound sound is that it is the only Emmons where the changer is not solidly connected to the endplate. But, that too is it’s weakness. On the earliest wraparounds the bass side of the E9 neck changer and the treble side of the C6 changer will move or flex when pedals exert a change. These ends of the changers are not given the support of the front and rear aprons. But they sound great, but you need to compensate with the bar. Fall 1964 Wraparound changers had longer feet on the axle pillows, or axle supports, to minimize the can opener effect. Subsequent Emmons designs fixed the changer to the neck, which is bolted to the endplate (typical post October 1964 Bolt-on design) or connected the changer to the endplate ( cut tail design.)
_________________
Chris Lucker
Red Bellies, Bigsbys and a lot of other guitars.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ken Byng


From:
Southampton, England
Post  Posted 1 Jul 2021 11:55 pm    
Reply with quote

Ian Rae wrote:
Donny mentions pull-release. We lost something when we moved on. I have never felt that aluminium is a very musical metal. Steel fingers for me, and save weight elsewhere. I sense a danger in this thread of "bridge" and "nut" getting confused, so be precise please Smile


Back in the 70's I worked as an agent in the UK for ZB guitars. Zane Beck owned the company first, and eventually Tom Brumley bought it. Tom sent over 20 changer roller caps to Eric Snowball, owner of ZB (UK). ZB's were using stainless steel roller caps, and Tom had a number of polished 'aloominum' roller caps made. He felt that they would not make much difference to the tone of the ZB guitar.

Eric asked me to try them out, and report back to Tom on my observations. Once on the guitar, the aluminium caps being highly polished looked no different to the stainless ones. I played my guitar through my amp using my usual settings, and couldn't hear a scrap of difference. The new caps had the same musicality as the old stainless steel ones. They were cheaper to make, and their functionality was fine.

If, and I saw no evidence of this, the polished aluminium caps developed grooves being made from softer metal, it was a 5 minute job to replace them and get more years of use.
_________________
Show Pro D10 - amber (8+6), MSA D10 Legend XL Signature - redburst (9+6), Sho-Bud Pro 111 Custom (8+6), Emmons black Push-Pull D10 (8+5), Zum D10 (8x8), Hudson pedal resonator. Telonics TCA-500, Webb 614-E,
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Chris Lucker

 

From:
Los Angeles, California USA
Post  Posted 2 Jul 2021 12:39 am    
Reply with quote

When in the case, was the weight of the ZB on the changer, or were their blocks to suspend the changer fingers away from the case? Did the first ZBs go into the case strings down or strings up?
Actually, that is a good question. Which guitar company was first to have their guitars go into the case strings down and when?
_________________
Chris Lucker
Red Bellies, Bigsbys and a lot of other guitars.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul Leoni

 

From:
Mississippi, USA
Post  Posted 2 Jul 2021 4:17 am    
Reply with quote

Thank everyone for helping me in estimating this. I will add this. That old Fender D10 (1968) by far had the best overall tone I have heard. Obviously it weighed a ton.
I do think I will go with steel for reasons of longevity.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Richard Sinkler


From:
aka: Rusty Strings -- Missoula, Montana
Post  Posted 2 Jul 2021 10:57 am    
Reply with quote

Chris Lucker wrote:
When in the case, was the weight of the ZB on the changer, or were their blocks to suspend the changer fingers away from the case? Did the first ZBs go into the case strings down or strings up?
Actually, that is a good question. Which guitar company was first to have their guitars go into the case strings down and when?


Both ZBs I owned in the 70s (a 71 S10 and mid 70's D10) went intlo the case upside down with the body supportec on blocks in thd case. Can't say about prior years.
_________________
Carter D10 8p/8k, Dekley S10 3p/4k C6 setup,Regal RD40 Dobro, Recording King Professional Dobro, NV400, NV112,Ibanez Gio guitar, Epiphone SG Special (open D slide guitar) . Playing for 54 years and still counting.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ian Rae


From:
Redditch, England
Post  Posted 2 Jul 2021 3:16 pm    
Reply with quote

Interesting what Ken says about those caps. You'd think that the softer aluminium would sound dull compared to stainless. This suggests that it's not the caps that matter but what's underneath.
_________________
Make sleeping dogs tell the truth!
Homebuilt keyless U12 7x5, Excel keyless U12 8x8, Williams keyless U12 7x8, Telonics rack and 15" cabs
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website

All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Jump to:  
Please review our Forum Rules and Policies
Our Online Catalog
Strings, CDs, instruction, and steel guitar accessories
www.SteelGuitarShopper.com

The Steel Guitar Forum
148 S. Cloverdale Blvd.
Cloverdale, CA 95425 USA

Click Here to Send a Donation

Email SteelGuitarForum@gmail.com for technical support.


BIAB Styles
Ray Price Shuffles for Band-in-a-Box
by Jim Baron