| Author |
Topic: edwards pedal |
Lee Jeffriess
From:
Vallejo California
|
Posted 10 Feb 2006 11:42 pm |
|
Guys, whats the skinny, on the edwards TV pedal, do they have the swell, and Doowah like a Fender?.
The casting looks pretty Bigsby like.
I sure would like, not to have to depend on 2nd rate pots anymore, seems like no one is making a tough type J these days.
Lee |
|
|
 |
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 11 Feb 2006 4:16 am
|
|
If you are referring to the old Edwards "Light beam" pedal, they had a reputation of changing the tone. They haven't been built for many years.
If you want a "potless" pedal, the best (only option in my opinion) is a Hilton volume pedal. |
|
|
|
Jussi Huhtakangas
From:
Helsinki, Finland
|
Posted 11 Feb 2006 10:06 am
|
|
| Hey Lee, I think Edwards made both; a V&T pedal and ones with just volume swell. The guy I bought my Bigsby from, also had his dad's old Edwards. It looked like a Bigsby but was just a volume pedal. He had a letter from Leonard Statdler of Marlen guitars from the early 70's claiming the Edwards pedal was the "future of volume pedals". |
|
|
|
David Wren
From:
Placerville, California, USA
|
Posted 11 Feb 2006 1:19 pm
|
|
I have two I kept at home for pratice setup with my old '70 MSA D10. They were the future in 1970! However Keith Hilton posted info on the forum last year about the possiblility of electronic compents controling voltage could fail at this old age, with the risk of 110 volts to the metal body.... enough for me to pack mine up for keep-sakes.
I have a Hilton, and am very plesed with it, however Goodrich also offers "potless" VP.
------------------
Dave Wren
'95Carter S12-E9/B6,7X7; Twin Session 500s; Hilton Pedal; Black Box
www.ameechapman.com
|
|
|
|
Al Marcus
From:
Cedar Springs,MI USA (deceased)
|
Posted 12 Feb 2006 10:53 am
|
|
Hi Lee, I had a Edwards light beam pedal in 1972. I thought it was terrifc and didn't take the power out of the amp like the pot pedals, so it seemed I had a lot more power.
The only thing I didn't like about it was , can you imagine of all things, I thought it was just too sensitive and precise.
I have a Goodrich older model light beam pedal with a tone wheel, and I like it...al 
------------------
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus/
|
|
|
|
Jim Florence
From:
wilburton, Ok. US * R.I.P.
|
Posted 17 Feb 2006 2:57 pm
|
|
| I've got one, had it for 35 years. High maintenance though, I had to change the LDR {Light dependant resistor} once. That's all that has been done to it in all these years. It still works, and it's not true that they change the tone as the volume swells. I don't use it anymore now since amps have gotten so much more powerfull, I no longer need the extra power the the light pedal afforded |
|
|
|
Keith Cordell
From:
San Diego
|
Posted 18 Feb 2006 5:55 am
|
|
I am using the Dearmond opto-electric pedal, and LOVE it. I have 3 now, they sell very inexpensively when you can find them. It seems to have a bit of a boost at the top end, but I have noticed little tonal coloration. Coll pedals, usually about $35.
By the way, I like Keith Hilton as much as anyone, but Hilton pedals don't need to come up every time there is a discussion of a product in here- the man was asking about volume/tone pedals, not volume pedals. Keith doesn't make one and neither does anyone else at this point. [This message was edited by Keith Cordell on 18 February 2006 at 05:57 AM.] |
|
|
|
Scott Denniston
From:
Hahns Peak, Colorado, USA
|
Posted 18 Feb 2006 6:26 am
|
|
| I've got one of those Edwards light beam pedals. It came with my Sho-Bud about 22 years ago. It does not have any tone control on it. I think I had plugged it in once to see if it worked but I liked my Goodrich better at the time. Keith, I can hardly imagine a discussion about light beam pedals without the Hilton comming up. It's simply the best (my opinion). I guess I should put that Edwards up for sale as some people really like them. I thought it DID alter the tone though. As I remember it was a little trebley. I guess that's kind of subjective though. |
|
|
|
John Poston
From:
Albuquerque, NM, USA
|
Posted 18 Feb 2006 12:41 pm
|
|
| An Edwards pedal does alter the overall tone, but the tone stays consistent at all volumes in my experience. |
|
|
|
Cliff Kane
From:
the late great golden state
|
Posted 19 Feb 2006 2:23 pm
|
|
| I've been using my Edwards lately as my Sho-Bud pot pedal needs a new internal bumper. I really like the Edwards. The sweep of the swell is longer than on the pot pedal, i.e., it seems more like a linear spread for the travel of the pedal (know what I mean?), and the tone seems cleaner with more presence than with the pot pedal. I prefer the Sho-Bud pedal for its non-electric convenience, and the fact that it matches my Sho-Bud guitar, but I prefer the tone and travel of the Edwards; however, my Match-Box pretty much makes the tone difference between these pedals a moot point. FWIW, Pete Townsend used an Edwards pedal on tour. It's nice that the power cord is hard-wired, no wall wart. [This message was edited by Cliff Kane on 19 February 2006 at 02:24 PM.] |
|
|
|
