| Author |
Topic: QUESTION re: Excel Frypn tuners & nut problem |
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 2 Jun 2004 10:00 am |
|
I've gotten a bit aggravated with a nature of my recently purchased previously owned Excel JB Frypan and am asking here for any input and suggestion about dealing with it:
(See picture below). The tuner posts are nowhere near in proper alignment with the nut, ...causing (1) the change in string angle behind the nut for strings 1 and 8 to be EXTREMELY sharp if the strings are wound in the proper direction on the tuner posts, and; (2) The 2nd and 7th strings ride on top of the string posts for strings 1 and 8.
The previous owner helped improve this problem by winding strings 1, 2, 7 and 8 backwards on the posts (WHICH IS THE UNINTUITIVELY AGGRAVATING PART while trying to tune) which slightly reduced the string angle change behind the nut ...but doesn't solve the problem of strings 2 and 7 riding on top of the # 1 and 8 tuner posts.
I can round out the inside edge of the nut slots so that the angle change for strings 1 and 8 is not so abruptly sharp departing the back side of the nut; But that doesn't solve the problem of strings 2 and 7 riding on the top of tuner posts 1 and 8; Although an option for that is to raise the string height with newly machined nut and bridge and probably raising the pickup for that.
But before I go trying to "re-invent the wheel", I figure it wise to first ask here what experiences and fixes others might have had and found with this design of the Excel Frypan.
Thank You,
Aloha,
Denny T~
[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 02 June 2004 at 05:17 PM.] |
|
|
 |
Chuck Fisher
From:
Santa Cruz, California, USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 2 Jun 2004 1:56 pm
|
|
roller Ts for strat heads might help the rubbing 2 and 7 strings.
monumentally stupid design, eh? Really neat guitar otherwise. With new Aiello Pickup it would really rock. |
|
|
|
John Tipka
From:
Reynoldsburg,OH
|
Posted 2 Jun 2004 4:37 pm
|
|
Denny, what is the serial number of your Frypan? I wonder if it is older or newer than mine? The serial number of my 22" scale length JB Frypan is 097 and doesn't have the problems that you describe with yours. I have owned mine since early 1996. Last year at the HSGA Convention in Honolulu, Bill Creller and I compared my Frypan with the new ones (about #142 or 143) being made by Fujii. Some differences in finish and dimensions in the thickness and diameter of the body were noted but really didn't see any change in the headstock.
The nut-to-tuner angle for strings 1 and 8 on my guitar is a bit rakish but I have never had any problems tuning and keeping in tune a .014 on the first string and a .068 on the eighth string [ECAGECBbC]. String 1 tightens clockwise; string 8 tightens counterclockwise. Strings 2 and 7 are each 1/8" away from tuner posts 1 and 8 (and, tuner post 8 has a big, big diameter string wound around it); nor do strings 3 and 6 touch tuner posts 2 and 7; and, strings 4 and 5 do not touch tuner posts 3 and 6.
The nut is 13/16" wide with 5/16" above the fretboard and is 2 3/8" long - strings are spaced 5/16" apart at the nut.
Denny, I realize I haven't given you anything concrete but thought I would give you my experience with the same(?) guitar.
|
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 2 Jun 2004 4:47 pm
|
|
Thank You Chuck.
Any roller trees I've ever seen are all for down pull rather than the side pull needed here to pull the string sideways away from posts 1 and 8; and look at the double angles that would induce! I have pondered a custom tree with a vertical and possibly horizontal roller (although, the down pull on this Steel looks like it's OK), ...but that would require some permanant modification which I am shy about until I can get as many ideas as possible; since I would really rather keep any mods at least easily restorable to original. (Where's my Alumalloy rods and torch ? ! ? ! )
YES! ...A real horseshoe pickup will be in the works just as soon as I get the ongoing remodeling construction at the shop here done and thereby able to find some 8 string horseshoe pickups I have to send off to Jason and Rick.
Mahalo
Denny T
[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 03 June 2004 at 02:27 AM.] |
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 2 Jun 2004 5:01 pm
|
|
Thank You John.
My serial number is JA 005 ...which might very well indicate this is an early model that was later corrected.
I will take your data and go do some comparing and see what that might reveal in differences.
I might also try emailing Slim Fujii at Fuzzy; But last time I did that inquiring about another guitar last year, the reply I got was kind and gentlemanly but almost unintelligible english stating my email was similarly not understandable; (sic) "Solly we no can lead oh-ah spreek yurr engrish velly grood".
In any event I'll just be patient, see what suggestions come in here, and THINK before doing anything radical to the Steel.
Mahalo,
Denny T~
[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 03 June 2004 at 03:25 AM.] |
|
|
|
Rick Aiello
From:
Berryville, VA USA
|
|
|
|
Dave Mayes
From:
Oakland, Ca.
|
Posted 2 Jun 2004 6:13 pm
|
|
Denny,
Now I'm thinking that I ran string #7 to peg #8 and wound it counterclockwise. Then I ran string #8 to peg #7 and wound it clockwise - seriously.
It's always somethin'! |
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 5:06 am
|
|
Rick,
First let me say that I still like this Steel ALLOT and don't mean to demean it at all; And will surely like it even more when all the personal "fix" touches are done, ...which are quite common with just about any musical instrument. 
Since it seems by posts here that there are differences in different runs of Excel JB Frypans, this discussion chain looks like it might be taking on an archival nature for someone's needs in the future ...as well as mine now; So I too will provide some measurements and info.
Addressing your info:
I put my strong reading glasses on for a real close inspection and realized the serial number is JA 005 (not 003 as is it appears without glasses and previously said but edited / corrected tonight).
Except for tuner posts 1 and 8 on this particular Steel, the tuner posts' / holes' positions in manufacture were obviously plotted so that each string 3 thru 6 would pass immediately adjacent to the next tuner post toward the nut; But they actually barely touch those respective posts ...and a piece of notebook paper will not pass between the string and tuner post it's touching although the strings are not displaced latterally. String 6 is actually displaced latterally by the normal thickness of the string wound on post 7. And as previously said, strings 2 and 7 run / ride on the top of tuner posts 1 and 8.
The tuners' heights are all the same, following a nice and apparantly well engineered down slope / down-pressure of the headstock.
The scale is 22".
----------
Other archival measurements:
NUT:
The nut is aluminum.
String spacing at the nut = 5/16; Registered on string centerline; Quite exact machining.
Nut fore-aft thickness = 1/4".
Nut height above fretboard = 3/4".
Nut width = 2+7/16".
Nut is a separate piece that inserts into a deep nut notch and is secured by a single machine screw centered on the headstock-side of the nut's vertical face, ran through the nut into the neck.
BRIDGE:
The bridge is aluminum.
String spacing at the bridge string root holes = 7/16; Registered on string centerline; Quite exact machining.
However, the bridge saddle-ridge is flat with no seats machined into the SOFT saddle ridge to register / maintain proper strings spacing, ...and this steel has several small self-induced seats in the soft bridge's saddle ridge at each string's bridge / saddle-ridge position where in the past the strings spacings were not hand-set properly during string changes and such, and they dug into the aluminum bridge saddle ridge in slightly different places several times, not aligned to the string root holes and equal string spacing ...but no problem resetting them by hand. Those self-seated burrs are small and can be easily abrased out. Small seats teased into the saddle-ridge would help maintain proper string spacing, ...although ensuring proper hand-set spacing might eventually make a self-induced seat that might be better than trying to cut-in seats.
The bridge is displaced toward the player about 1/8", shifting all strings toward the Player and causing string 8 to hang out slightly beyond the fretboard and neck's edge, BUT considering quite good machining tolerances elsewhere, this might be designed-in for the Player's eye paralax.
The body diameter is 6+5/16".
I don't have calipers readily available to do justice to the body and neck thickness measurement.
----------
There are a number of mold gas irregularities in the aluminum surface, especially around the neck / body junction; But I've read at a number of sources that this is the nature of the beast in most small business aluminum casting.
There are a number of marks in several places on the Steel that are deeper than the final buffing, ...amounting to slight straight gouges, some with right angle marks on their ends much like a written check-mark, suggesting a file being the culprit while finishing the body out of the mold, but were deeper than the buffing that was desired / done.
The aluminum is also rather suceptible to scratches, even fingernails as evidenced on the headstock edges adjacent to the tuner button, and in other places scratching is usually found.
With the overall very smoothe / shiny surface and ease of maintaining it, and for other considerations, I personally view the marks and irregularities as appealing character; Although someone who likes flawless "stuff" might not feel the same.
----------
The black paint / "ink" used in "silkscreening"(?) the fretboard appears to be the same paint used on the back of the neck and rear body plate (same tone and sheen seen with strong reading glasses). This paint appears to be vinyl; Very flexible and rather strong (although a bit thin) as evidenced in places it has bubbled on the back of the neck and can be manipulated and flaked areas where it's characteristics can be judged: Where the previous Players' left leg touched the back of the neck, it seems apparant that body moisture / oil / salts seeped into breaks in the paint and migrated under the paint dislodging the tooth grip of the paint and leaving it bubbled and flaked off in an area about 8" around where the left leg rests the guitar. Since the fretboard appears to have been printed with the same paint I am going to research whether a sealer was used and exactly what kind, so I might apply a thicker coat, ...or otherwise find / use a sealer to protect the printing on the fretboard, carefully keeping originality in mind.
Not plugged into an amp, the open low E string is very resonant to the high open E string note being played, ...whose half-wave harmonic is VERY noticeably induced into the low E string at idle while playing the high E open, ...while none of the other strings do that. This indicates to me that the aluminum alloy used by Excel is quite conductive ...at least in the nut and bridge where I suppose the string / nut / bridge tone loop just happens to be linearly resonant at that high open E wavelength. (Unamplified, the body is most likely not able to provide that resonance to that degree). The Guitar also sounds very resonant while being played amplified.
The pickup sounds good (but NOT as good as a real horseshoe) and sorta like the NON-horsehoe pickups used by the later Rickenbacker triangular lap steels ...although more pronounced, a bit like but not as much as most very high impedence pedal steels; Probably due to an impedence higher than those later Rick pickups, both of which I haven't read with a meter yet. (My meter is swallowed by the remodeling construction black hole at the house & shop). MAYBE SOMEONE WITH AN EXCEL JB FP AND A METER CAN GIVE US A STATIC IMPEDENCE READING. I also wonder if this pickup might be one used on Excel Pedal Steels. It would also be nice to hear any additional known tech data on the Excel pickup so I can better analyze it and mark same on it's package when it gets taken out and packed away in favor of a Lollar / Aiello Ferrari !
----------
THANKS a mil to all for all the info. Liking this Steel so much, I really do want to gather as much data as I can as well as the originally requested info for determining the best way to "fix" the tuner / nut geometry "problem".
Mahalo,
Aloha,
Denny T~
[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 03 June 2004 at 06:20 AM.] |
|
|
|
Rick Aiello
From:
Berryville, VA USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 5:37 am
|
|
DC resistance = 14.2 K ohm
Alnico Pole Pieces ... 0.25" in diameter
These large pole pieces ... which are steel backed (faux magnets) ... produce a surface flux density of 1100 gauss (on average).
The polarity is (S) "up".
To compare ...
Non-steel backed alnico 5 usually runs about 800 to 900 gauss ....
Neodymium-Iron-Boron magnets surface readings usually run about 4500 gauss.
|
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 5:45 am
|
|
THANKS Dave,
That would make the strings run to the tuners truer.
But I HOPE I can find a reasonable way to solve the "problem" without such aggravations ... to help the billy-goat gruff in me that shows more and more with age! Having a number of Steels, it can get pretty aggravating trying to trim out fine tuning when the tuners aren't congruent to normal standards. After all that can be done is done, I'll still be a quite happy camper that gets used to the resulting setup.
It occurs to me that finding tuners that tighten with the nobs turned non-standard clockwise, ...could fix most of the "problem" with only having to remember to reverse-wind certain tuner posts when installing strings.
I don't think that the strings touching the wrong posts will be a problem, ...unless harmonic cross-communication or shunting might have some negative effect. It's pretty common knowledge now that the mass of a headstock plays a BIG part in sustain and tone; So we can reasonably interpolate that the strings communicating with the headstock is congruent in those physics; Worthy of investigating in this Steel's case.
Mahalo,
Aloha,
Denny T~ |
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:33 am
|
|
I guess it's a good place / time to mention that sharp angle changes of strings from the nut to the tuners will shorten the tone life of strings. That's because the string molecules are bent-stretched at that point, and the sharp angle contact point rubs, bends and slightly stretches the string as the string moves back and forth across and upon it while tuning and vibrating.
To lessen the effect, the angle change should be made less sharp by creating a larger radius for that point of angle change. Example: An ideal nut would be radiused BEHIND the point of contact with the Playing side. The playing side would have as abrupt an angle change as possible (90 degrees "microscopically") because a vibrating string's movement would actually touch a radiused surface slightly before the apex point of contact, thereby slightly deadening the string. Even though that also occurs on a tone bar, ...a moving tone bar actually exites the string vibration when moving upscale ...similar to a ping-pong paddle moving downward on a bouncing ping-pong ball, ...and why tone bar vibrato increases amplitude in sustain; And the reason tone and volume is slightly accentuated in front of a tone bar moving upscale, and vice-versa moving downscale, ...and harmonics are accentuated behind the bar moving downscale and vice versa moving upscale. (Take your blocking fingers off the strings behind the bar and you can actuall hear this happening slightly).
Jeeeesh; Just seemed like the right time / place to throw that goo-goo gah-gah in.
DT~ |
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 6:59 am
|
|
Yah-Hooooo, Rick. THANKS ... ALLOT. That info means allot right off, but will take some time to ponder the abstract. That's actually stronger signal than I had supposed. Do you happen to know what the winding wire gauge is?
I really enjoy comparing such data with what I hear and suppose.
That makes me wonder / ask:
(1) Does the metal backing reflect / drive the flux that high or is it inherent in the pole magnet itself?
(2) Is the cosmetic horseshoe in direct contact with the bottom metal backing ... or IS it the metal backing? And if so in either case then I suppose it's polarity above the strings would remain North at a much reduced gauss?
(3) Would 1100 pull down string sustain if the pickup were unwittingly too close to the strings? And would a North polarity on the cosmetic shoe above the strings counteract / float that "gravity" to some degree? With your answer I'll just HAVE to play with the height adjustment and listen for it!
MAH-HAH-lo, ...an army of Tanks.
DT~[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 03 June 2004 at 08:05 AM.] |
|
|
|
Rick Aiello
From:
Berryville, VA USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 7:33 am
|
|
I don't know the gauge of the wire.
1) Any permanent magnet exhibits higher flux density when backed by steel or another ferromagnetic material. Basically it is a function of the permanent magnet "enlisting" the domains of the steel.
2) The faux horseshoes ARE the steel back. The mounting plate is mearly a narrow strip of aluminum.
| Quote: |
| I suppose it's polarity above the strings would remain North at a much reduced gauss |
It is best to think of magnetic lines of force as "Closed Loops" ...
Think of a water fountain ... in bar/rod magnets ... the lines leave the magnet ... fountain up ... and then bend back and around ... returning to the opposite pole ... completing the loop.
Basically the strings are sitting in the "fountain" in conventional pickups.
The top flange of the Excels "faux" shoe measures zero gauss ... its not involved ... what-so-ever.
The higher flux density of the Excels pole piece vs any other conventional magnetic pole piece ... is soley a function of the steel backing ...
Some pickup makers ... include and/or offer as an "add on" ... steel backing plates to "bump up" their output.
3) That 1100 reading is from direct contact of my probe to the surface of the magnet ... as you move away from the surface ... the flux density drops dramatically ... so properly adjusted ... the strings are exposed to a downward pull of about 300-400 gauss.
| Quote: |
| And would a North polarity on the cosmetic shoe above the strings counteract / float that "gravity" to some degree |
Unlike a real horseshoe magnet pickup ... there is no "pull up" ... to counter-balance of the pole pieces.
Disclaimer: These responses are intenteded to answer questions asked of me ... and should not be taken as any type of promotion for my wares. |
|
|
|
Rick Aiello
From:
Berryville, VA USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 8:45 am
|
|
| Sorry ... [This message was edited by Rick Aiello on 03 June 2004 at 12:47 PM.] |
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
|
|
|
Rick Aiello
From:
Berryville, VA USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 2:01 pm
|
|
I had a link to a site explaining steel backed magnet behavior ... and I suspected it maybe the source of a "Troj Revorp.F" virus ...
My PC-Cillin caught it ... but figured matbe some of y'all may not be "up-to-date" virus wise ...
Turned out to be from a "Physics/Chemistry Forum" I hang at ....
Teach me to help those kids out with their homework 
Heres a better one anyway ...
Magnet Tools
|
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 3 Jun 2004 2:39 pm
|
|
WHEW ! .... Thought my day was de-railed trying to figure out what I might have said wrong .....again!
BUT then you post that magnet link and now I'm happier'n a Poi dog cleaning up after a Luau!
(Done used up my happy-face allocation here!)
MAHALO Loa,
DT~
[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 03 June 2004 at 03:42 PM.] |
|
|
|
opposite ... just my way. Do it on all mine steels ...
