| Author |
Topic: Vintage steels |
Bobby Burns
From:
Tennessee, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 8:14 am |
|
I realize that I am setting myself up for a good flaming here. Coming from a guitar background, it amazes me the lack of interest in old steels. The sound and simplicity of the old perms is very attractive to me. When I watch the old youtube clips of Buddy E. and Buddy C. with ET, I think "Man. I want a guitar that sounds like that!" It seems like the only guitars being made with that sort of set up are begginer level, and very plain. A lot of you guys are always trying to talk folks out of buying anything that is not completly adjustable. I notice that there are three pedals and three levers that do the same on everybody's E9 set up. Why would it not be OK for these changes to be permanent? That would not mean that it would not be possible to have other pedals/levers that could be easily altered. It seems that it would be desirable to have the basic changes permanent so that they would be completly solid and that nothing could come loose. I am not saying that I don't care for the modern guitars. I think the level of development in the modern guitars is amazing. I just wonder why nobody makes a high end permanent style guitar that is as nice visually as the old Buds, Bigsby's, Wright's and Marlens. It seems like the young alt-country guys would be attracted to this. Even with all the new modern designs for 6 strings, you can still by a Tele, and new designs that borrow from old designs are common in that market. Why are steel players different?  |
|
|
 |
Jim Ives
From:
Los Angeles, California, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 8:34 am
|
|
Mark Twain: "You can't legislate common sense"
-Jim |
|
|
|
Bob Hoffnar
From:
Austin, Tx
|
|
|
|
Kevin Hatton
From:
Buffalo, N.Y.
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 9:00 am
|
|
| It goes against everything that steel players want. What do they want? They want to change their knee lever setups every 12 months. Also, a permanent setup would decrease the resale value of the guitar. Different players play diferent setups. The old Sho-Buds did sound great though. For those who want it there is the Jackson above. |
|
|
|
Dave Zirbel
From:
Sebastopol, CA USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 9:07 am
|
|
Desert Rose guitars supposedly have a vintage tone/vibe to them.
_________________
Dave Zirbel-
Sierra S-10 (Built by Ross Shafer),ZB, Fender 400 guitars, various tube and SS amps |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 9:39 am
|
|
You bring up two issues (looks and sound) and I'll add one (playability):
1. The looks of the old permanent guitars. That has nothing to do with the welded-in-place system. There's no reason someone couldn't make a guitar that looks like them with an adjustable system.
2. The sound of the old permanent guitars. Are you arguing that the permanent system is what creates that great sound, and that there's no way to get it with a system that's not welded in place? I don't see it, but maybe I'm missing something. I don't see why one couldn't make an adjustable guitar that is otherwise like an old permanent system.
3. The playability and tuning stability of the old permanent guitars. My sense is that modern guitars are much more playable and stable than any old design.
I think if you could clearly show that a permanent system offered superior tonal or playability characteristics, there would be more interest. But short of that, why do it? Everything else is a down side.
| Quote: |
| I notice that there are three pedals and three levers that do the same on everybody's E9 set up. Why would it not be OK for these changes to be permanent? |
Different players place even these essential pedals and levers differently. We talk about the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches frequently. As Kevin says - welding these in place would seriously limit the market if you wanted to sell a guitar like this.
| Quote: |
| Even with all the new modern designs for 6 strings, you can still by a Tele, and new designs that borrow from old designs are common in that market. Why are steel players different? |
I came at this from a guitar background also - all my guitars are of a classic design. It's not that pedal steel players are different, but that pedal steel is different. One can reasonably argue that basic guitar design was fully realized by the 1950s. Archtop, acoustic steel strung and classical guitar design was very mature by this time. In the early 50s, pioneering solid-body designs like the Tele, Strat, and Les Paul pretty well nailed that aspect down. There have been some new features like improved tremeloes, slimmer necks, radically-shaped bodies, and so on - but with a few exceptions, most modern guitar design is based on those 6 basic types, which, to my tastes, have not been improved since then.
Pedal steel is completely different. Designs were in their infancy in the 1950s. The push-pull was really the first 'modern' changer, starting in 1964. The playability of modern pedal steels is radically improved from early pedal steels I've played. To me, modern pedal steels are almost unrecognizable from the earliest designs, and I mean that in a very good way.
As has already been said - there are some makers that focus on getting a vintage tone and vibe. I just don't see any advantage to welding the parts in place. |
|
|
|
b0b
From:
Cloverdale, CA, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 9:48 am
|
|
With 6-string electric guitars, the concept was perfected in the 50's. Pedal steel design didn't reach maturity until triple raise/lower changers and tunable splits came along (mid-80's?). An older pedal steel is more limited in it's mechanical capabilities.
Some players don't mind, but many of us want to be able to move harmonies in complex ways. We want to be able to get 4 different notes on our E, B and G# strings. You can't really do that on a Bigsby.
Vintage instruments work very well for stylized, vintage music. They sound great. I love playing them in that context. But there are a lot of musical things that are difficult, if not impossible, to do on vintage instruments.
I think there are a lot of players who have both: an old instrument for recording the classic sounds, and a new one for versatile bandstand work and more modern recordings.
_________________
-πππ- (admin) - Robert P. Lee - Recordings - Breathe - D6th - Video |
|
|
|
Chris LeDrew
From:
Canada
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 10:37 am
|
|
| Don't forget that a significant contribution to that great steel sound back then was the tube amplifier, namely Standel and Fender. Those old Sho~Buds and Emmons did have a great sound, but the guitar-amp combination has to be considered as a whole when discussing sound. |
|
|
|
Steve Waltz
From:
USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 10:43 am
|
|
My early 60's permanent does have welded pullers but the rods aren't welded to the pullers. I don't think they ever did that. So even with welded pullers you can put a rod into a different finger or remove pulls. The rods might be at a strange or obstructed angle but originally some of those rods were at strange angles since the A pedal has one puller and two rods go to it. You also can adjust travel by using the different holes in the puller. It is true that you can make them do more but you have to add and change a few things.
The other point being that only one aspect is welded. The rest isn't, so really there isn't an increase in stability because the other parts can and do move or break. The sound of the guitar is different from a modern guitar, in a good way.
Last edited by Steve Waltz on 10 Apr 2009 12:06 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Tom Quinn
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 11:11 am
|
|
No one has more love for vintage amps than old Tq, but I gotta say that I have never heard a better steel amp than my '74 Session 400. It beat all of my Twins, from a 54 cathode-based honey up to a '72 with EVO's (!!!) and about five Twins in between.
At low volumes, my tweed Pro sounds great, but a 400 is the deal. |
|
|
|
Tom Quinn
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 11:16 am
|
|
And... here we gooooo! :- )
To me, the new all-pull guitars are like so-called Super Strats with a Floyd Rose trem installed. They sound thin and toneless to me. You can tweak the amp and add stuff to them digitally, but they never have the natural fat tone of an old Bud or a push/pull, a ZB or a Marlen.
There is a huge segment of the steel playing population that is more interested in the engineering aspect than the actual playing part. When I play so good that I can play everything Buddy and the guys played in the '50s, '60s and '70s I'll look to get a so-called modern guitar. In the meantime I'm happy as a clam with my Pro II.
YMMV nd no problem!
Tq |
|
|
|
Joel Meredith
From:
Portland,Oregon, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 11:44 am
|
|
I play a Fender 400 and I don't use it for "vintage" music at all.
In fact, I just got done recording a psychedelic-country album with it and was able to get some pretty weird sounds.
I prefer older steels myself overall to new steels, not because I really enjoy old music, but I find that most older steels actually sound better than the new steels I've encountered. More character.... |
|
|
|
Ben Elder
From:
La Crescenta, California, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 12:30 pm
|
|
I'm not much of a player but I cut my teeth (let's say instead "trained my ears") on vintage acoustics, resonators and Hawaiians. I've listened to vintage country music and fell in love with much more of the stuff before 1970 than after. No small part of that love is attached to the steel. (My whole family flipped over my discovery of "Charley Pride Live at Panther Hall" decades before I was to find out that it was the Ultimate Vinyl Icon of pedal steel connoisseurs. Good on ya, Lloyd.)
The old guitars simply have an extra something--Sho-Bud, Emmons, ZB. (I'm pretty in the dark about MSAs but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they belong alongside those other august brands.) But when I go to Mike Perlowin's annual jam, the sounds I like are inevitably the old Sho-Buds and Emmonses. (Very high marks to Frank Carter's Infinity, however.) I haven't seen any old ZBs there, but own a handful myself. It's just that I won't have chops or karma enough to join the circle in this or the next five lifetimes--even if I donate all my old Martins to a Rwandan orphanage and Weissenborns to an animal-rescue organization.
If all there were in the world were new-style pedal steels, the planet would still be a great place. They sound wonderful. But not as thrilling as the old ones.
Put a Nixon-era Sho-Bud or ZB into a Fender Twin, a Great Society Emmons into about anything*, it's game over. It's the '27 (Roaring Harding) Yankees versus my Camelot Little League team.
A disclaimer: Part of the reason I probably haven't fallen under the spell of metal and mica is that I have to have a raised (2") psg and don't often find a new or recent guitar that I can get under and still move my left ankle up and down. As a mechanical idiot having to tangle (literally) with the imposing undercarriage of my ZBs, I don't think I ever saw a more thrilling sight than the clean, elegant simplicity of an upskirt view of a GFI. The new ones, Modern Marvels that they are, still haven't proven to me that they deserve a place standing shoulder-to-shoulder sonically with the Classic Names. (Easy for me to say, the problem of lugging a D-10 ZB or Sho-Bud and Twin Reverb to and from gigs or sessions will never be a challenge in my remaining 80 years or so on the planet.)
*In early April, Doug Beaumier listed a circa-1970 Emmons Student model (sold fast). But listen to his mp3 of "Invitation to the Blues." That's what I'm talkin' about.
_________________
"Gopher, Everett?" |
|
|
|
Alan Brookes
From:
Brummy living in Southern California
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 2:01 pm
|
|
I don't get any impression from the Forum that there's no interest in vintage steel guitars. There's always plenty of conversation about them. It's true that you're not going to see MultiKords at the Grand Old Opry, but a lot of steel guitarists have vintage instruments in their collection. When they play in public they're more likely to play a modern instrument with better facilities.
When it comes to non-pedal, Fender Stringmasters are still in frequent use at public performances, and are much sought-after. A lot of elderly artists have used the same instrument their whole careers. Put an old Rickenbacher up for sale and see how quickly it sells. I think old steels are treasured by their owners. I certainly wouldn't part with my National New Yorker. |
|
|
|
b0b
From:
Cloverdale, CA, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 2:12 pm
|
|
| Joel Meredith wrote: |
I play a Fender 400 and I don't use it for "vintage" music at all.
In fact, I just got done recording a psychedelic-country album with it and was able to get some pretty weird sounds. |
'Psychedelic country' is vintage music, in my book. 70's era. |
|
|
|
Tom Quinn
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 2:58 pm
|
|
| Oh b0b, you are such a card! :- ) |
|
|
|
Jim Sliff
From:
Lawndale California, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 2:59 pm
|
|
I think he was referring to vintage country music - that was pretty obvious.
There have been threads in the past where discussion has centered on most steel builders concentrating on mechanics and tonally only aiming for one "common denominator" "steel tone". The take seemed to be that builders - and most players - would prefer that all modern steels sound the same. One good, solid, sustaining, clear sound.
To me that's an incredibly boring idea.
When I play modern steels I'm constantly frustrated by the lack of basic tone and volume controls (in a 6-string-like circuit...and a volume pedal does not serve the same purpose, nor do amp controls). When I play 6-string I do not use one tone (in fact, at gigs I don't use one guitar, as I can't get everything I need tonally out of one instrument).
My Fenders have a distinctive sound...and actually, not "a" distinctive sound, because each one sounds slightly different due to differences in body wood, pickup windings, etc.
My GFI Ultra is a love/hate guitar: it plays great and has a superb, Fender-on-steroids type tone...but no controls!
Many of the players who contact me looking for Fenders (or for setup advice) got them not for collectable reasons, or because Sneaky Pete played one - it's because of the tone and controls on the guitar.
Then again, I had an MSA Classic with tone and volume controls, and managed to get a wide variety of tones...just none of them any good. It was either the construction or the pickups or both.
But it would be wonderful to see builders create a tremendous *tone* platform - then work the mechanics around that. Instead, we get mechanics building guitars with all kinds of changer capabilities, with tone as an afterthought.
The tail wagging the dog.
_________________
No chops, but great tone
1930's/40's Rickenbacher/Rickenbacker 6&8 string lap steels
1921 Weissenborn Style 2; Hilo&Schireson hollownecks
Appalachian, Regal & Dobro squarenecks
1959 Fender 400 9+2 B6;1960's Fender 800 3+3+2; 1948 Fender Dual-8 Professional |
|
|
|
Joel Meredith
From:
Portland,Oregon, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 3:24 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| 'Psychedelic country' is vintage music, in my book. 70's era. |
That's like saying rock and roll is vintage 1950's music. Come on! 
Everyone's already done everything, I suppose... |
|
|
|
Ben Jones
From:
Seattle, Washington, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 3:30 pm
|
|
had to get a fender after hearing em. it was that strange and awesome tone. as a bonus i love the old mechanics just cause.
I like the idea of those sho-pros. that a smart concept IMHO.
not to sidetrack but im curious about psychedelic country...bOb mentioned the seventies, would that be stuff like Nesmith or maybe New Riders? is that "psych country"? im intrigued...psychedlic country sounds like just my cup of tea. how does it differ from whats commonly refered to as country rock?
Joel, I look forward to meeting you some day. harley has told me a bit about you. Maybe at the next Portland jam. I know you said you just did this recording but do you perchance have any samples online? feel free to pm me if you'd rather not go public with em just yet  |
|
|
|
b0b
From:
Cloverdale, CA, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 5:20 pm
|
|
Well, maybe I don't know what you mean by "psychedlic country". To me, it conjures up the 70's steel sounds of Jerry Garcia, Ben Keith or Sneaky Pete.
I don't mean anything derogatory when I say "vintage". I play a lot of vintage music myself. Maybe "classic" is a better word. I like to emulate the styles of the past, but I also think that it's good to have a lot of options to draw from when creativity is required.
_________________
-πππ- (admin) - Robert P. Lee - Recordings - Breathe - D6th - Video |
|
|
|
Bobby Burns
From:
Tennessee, USA
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 5:45 pm
|
|
| I really didn't intend to start a vintage is better debate. I find plenty to admire in nearly every guitar design I've had the chance to get a good look at. The Jackson perm is exactly what I was wondering about. That is a beautiful guitar. enough of the old design, with enough new to make it easier to tune. I bet it sounds great. I also have been admiring pictures of Kevin Hatton's retro ZB style guitar, although I must say the weight is my biggest problem with my ZB. I'm OK with the ZB changer. I also really admire the beautiful Show Pro guitars. If I could afford it, and had the space, I'd have a Jackson perm, a Retro ZB, and a Show Pro. Actually, if I were to buy a new guitar, I would have to get a Show Pro just because Jeff is so kind and helpful. |
|
|
|
Kevin Hatton
From:
Buffalo, N.Y.
|
Posted 10 Apr 2009 6:26 pm
|
|
| Jeff Surratt and his wife Gloria are two of the nicest and helpful people you will ever meet. Jeff is a master builder. He bulds a great vintage sounding cutom shop guitar. |
|
|
|
Ulric Utsi-Γ
hlin
From:
Sweden
|
Posted 12 Apr 2009 2:22 am Hey Joel...
|
|
The term "Psychedelic Country" sounds good enough to
me ; in my book,it represents a timeless fusion of
mind sets,musical & pictorial...and elusive,but
when YouΒ΄re there You know it.McUtsi |
|
|
|
Jussi Huhtakangas
From:
Helsinki, Finland
|
Posted 12 Apr 2009 6:41 am
|
|
| What is the modern complex music that you can't play on an old 60's Sho Bud??? Buddy recorded SGJ album with a permanent using just four pedals. I really can't think of anything recorded in these days that would be so much more complex ( musically ). And please don't say that we're not all Buddy Emmonses!! I do understand that modern mechanics give you more options but if you're brain ain't makin' music it won't get you far. |
|
|
|
b0b
From:
Cloverdale, CA, USA
|
Posted 12 Apr 2009 8:15 am
|
|
| Jussi Huhtakangas wrote: |
| What is the modern complex music that you can't play on an old 60's Sho Bud??? |
I don't know of any, but it sure is a lot easier to come up with new inventive lines when you have 3 or 4 notes on each string at each fret.
Any two-note harmony can be played on a lap steel, but it's hard work. Pedals and knee levers are there to make the instrument easier to play, not just to make "modern complex music" possible.
_________________
-πππ- (admin) - Robert P. Lee - Recordings - Breathe - D6th - Video |
|
|
|
