The Steel Guitar Forum
Pedal Steel Archive
Cables versus rods (Page 1)
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
profile | join | preferences | help | search
Steel Guitar Strings Strings & instruction for lap steel, Hawaiian & pedal steel guitars http://SteelGuitarShopper.com |
Ray Price Shuffles Classic country shuffle styles for Band-in-a-Box, by BIAB guru Jim Baron. http://steelguitarmusic.com |
This Forum is CLOSED. |
|
|
The Steel Guitar Forum
Pedal Steel Archive
Cables versus rods (Page 1)
profile | join | preferences | help | search
|
| This topic is 2 pages long: 1 2 This topic was originally posted in this forum: Pedal Steel |
| Author | Topic: Cables versus rods |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 16 April 2001 04:30 AM
I would like to know when, and why 1/16" aircraft cable fell out of favor in its use, an was replaced by rods in the construction of steel guitars? Does anyone know who first initiated this course of action? |
|
Jack Stoner Sysop Posts: 8119 |
posted 16 April 2001 05:03 AM
I don't know when, however my own thought is it occured when the Push Pull changer was introduced. You can't hardly "push" with a cable. I had a Fender 2000 with cables. Although it had some pluses, including quick change of the pedal setup, one of my happier days was when I got rid of it. |
|
C Dixon Member Posts: 5912 |
posted 16 April 2001 05:44 AM
I owned one of the first Fender 400's. Which of course was cable. The first recall I have of a rod pulling system was the Sho-Bud. There may have been others, I don't know. But the Sho-Bud had to be among the first I believe. My second PSG was an Emmons' P-P in the fall of 69. Like Jack, I loved the cable system for its simplicity of making instant changes. I NEVER cared fot the manner in which raises and lowers were accomplished on a P-P. In fact because of the constraints of raising if a string was also lowered, I felt the P-P was not at all as easy as the Fender 400. Of course there was no comaparison to the sound. The Emmons' definitely had THE sound when relating to my Fender. But I still loved the pedal action on the Fender far better than the Emmons. Nowdays of course with all-pulls, they are head and shoulders above the Fender cable system. And on some guitars like a Carter, they are a dream. Too bad indeed that progress has to use us mortals as guinea pigs. But that is the way it has to be. God bless you, carl |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 16 April 2001 05:53 AM
Hello Jack, Thank you for the reply. Please keep in mind that rods pull in a straight line, and to my knowledge have no ability to negotiate curvatures.I'm also inclined to notice that virtually every industry utilizing cables,aircraft,dentistry, automotive,etc.,have found endless uses for the little fallen prince. I appreciate your response. Bill |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 16 April 2001 07:52 AM
Mr.C.Dixon. Thank you for relating past experiences Thanks again, Bill |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 16 April 2001 09:57 AM
Jack Please allow me to slow the impetuous notion that there is a world of difference between automobiles, and steeel guitars. Both depend on accurate adjustments to function properly. I need to hear from someone who has actual verbatim concerning when the decision was made to do away with the use of cables. I once saw a man pick up a slouch hat, after trying it on, he tossed it away. Another, picked up the hat and quickly located a $20.00 bill tucked beneath its band. There is a lesson to be learned from that experience. Discard does not necessarily signify the end. Quite often, mechanical difficulties can be reversed by simplification. Many problems can be resolved by a different approach. This has been proven time, and again amongst mechanics. Bill |
|
richard burton Member Posts: 1337 |
posted 16 April 2001 10:50 AM
On the first few steels that I made, I used push bike brake cable. Unlike some of the cable operated steels I have seen on the forum, I also used the outer cable as well. This enabled me to route the cables where I liked (so the bell cranks did'nt have to be in line with the changer fingers) and I could also use threaded adjusters (just like on a push bike brake). However, it did get quite convoluted when it came to the lowers as my steels were P/P. On later steels I used rods , but found no difference in playability. I gigged the cable operated steels for years with no problem. Richard. |
|
C Dixon Member Posts: 5912 |
posted 16 April 2001 11:09 AM
"The Fender 1000 most assuredly would best the 400. Both of their resale values are surging skyward at this time." They are? Wow. I do NOT mean this to be disrespectful, but I cannot imagine ANY one wanting a cable PSG after sitting behind a new Carter, Zum, Mullen, Emmons', etc. But then stranger things than that happen all the time. I saw a website yesterday about the 10 worst cars ever built. And the worst of the 10 was the late 50's Volkswagen Buss. I have to agree a 1000%. That car had to be the worst excuse for an automobile I ever saw. Again with all due respect, a cable PSG like the Fender and the Carver (I believe it was a Carver), are not even close to a modern day PSG in my opinion. The PSG's being built today are refined like many modern automobiles. They have evolved into some mighty fine instruments that older models cannot even come close to them, IMHO. Having been closely aligned with the "underneath" part of a PSG since its inception almost, I can invision NO cable system EVER being as good as a rod system. Maybe so. But I just don't see it. carl |
|
Tele Member Posts: 965 |
posted 16 April 2001 11:54 AM
Carl I can 100% agree with your opinons about rod vs. cables - but not as far as the late 50s VW buss ( I think you mean the Van? called type 2) is concerned...but thats too much off topic. time will tell and it already do - at least here in Europe !! Andy ------------------ |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 16 April 2001 12:49 PM
Richard, I felt very strongly when I first read Bill |
|
Chris DeBarge Member Posts: 811 |
posted 16 April 2001 12:49 PM
Carl, I feel like a cad disagreeing with you, your posts are always the most educational. But I think the Volkswagen bus is a great analogy. Sure, if you look at it from a purely objective point of view, you could complain all day about the brakes, lack of power, lack of heat etc. But that doesn't take into consideration the subjective - they're a fun vehicle to drive, look funny, easy to fix, loads of personality. Same goes for cable driven steel. From the purely mechanical/engineering side, sure, they are antiquated. But they still play and sound good. I like Bill's parable about the hat. Still, I completely understand the reasons for abandoning the cable system(breakage, tolerances, action), though it's still an acceptable way of playing the PSG. And it's a good thing they don't make the VW bus anymore, how many people died in those things? (mostly from freezing to death) Fun thread! |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 16 April 2001 01:26 PM
Jack, I beseech you to steer clear of the presumption that my cable driven ten string E9th chromatic resembles a Fender Steel Guitar. Try to envision an all pull changer that is set up to total accuracy. It can accomplish any changes, both raises and lowers, from a half step to one and one half steps, sharp or flat. Diminished sevenths, minor sixes, flatted fourths, or any of the passing chords, are attainable. The changer is foolproof. However, I sincerely wish to pursue the scant information directly associated with the discontinued cable use. Whoever threw in the towel, must have glanced back over his shoulder to see who was watching. Just a thought. Bill |
|
Donny Hinson Member Posts: 9192 |
posted 16 April 2001 05:05 PM
I had a 1000, and used it for many years. The few drawbacks I noticed were... 1. The turnbuckles had a habit of loosening. Fortunately, it was a only 10 second exercise to tighten all of them up again. 2. Fender didn't offer knee levers, but they were very easily added. 3. The "2-string pull limitation" could be overcome with ganged pulleys. 4. It was possible to pull the sleeve solder joint loose if you hit a pedal very hard. 5. The cables has a slight "spongey" feel...not a positive as rods. On the plus side... 1. Changing setups was a snap. 2. The cables cut down on weight and manufacturing cost. 3. Repairs/fabrication could be done without machinery. I always wondered why someone (like the Japanese) didn't "refine" the cable system a little more, and produce a Fender-clone student guitar. It could be made VERY cheaply...even today, due to the mostly stamped-steel parts. |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 16 April 2001 05:57 PM
Donny Thank you for the on target input. I've been down that road with the Fender 1000. Those little turn buckles, left and right threads, should have been equipped with a lock nut on each to facilitate a locking of the unit. The O.D. size of the nut would be 5/16". I've read accounts whereby Leo Fender had a few other heads involved in the construction of the Fender 1000. Whoever was responsible for the soldering of the cables that were inserted into the pulleys, overlooked a vital trouble
|
|
Doug Beaumier Member Posts: 2346 |
posted 16 April 2001 07:14 PM
Hey Bill, it looks like you've opened quite a can of worms here! I knew you'd make a splash when you arrived... welcome to the forum. Chris, when I read your post about the old VW bus and how it was not the most efficient vehicle on the road but it had character... I immediately thought of Sneaky Pete Kleinow and his old Fender 400 cable driven steel, and that beautiful, rich sound that he got on the Linda Ronstadt and Flying Burrito Bros. recordings. Talk about character! He played that guitar for most of his career and the cables worked fine for him... although it's hard to imagine him or anyone starting out today with cables. ------------------ [This message was edited by Doug Beaumier on 16 April 2001 at 07:16 PM.] |
|
Sage Member Posts: 525 |
posted 17 April 2001 12:18 PM
This is way too much fun. Bill- Thank you for starting this thread because I've been wondering the same thing. I believe that the engineering principle behind cable is as sound as rod, and has it's own set of advantages. The pedal steel I've just started working on will be cable pull. Carl, I love reading your posts and you offer a lot of wisdom. The VW bus analogy cuts both ways, though. I am the proud owner of an '86 Volkswagen Syncro Westfalia Bus. They stuck with the concept for 30 years and worked it out. My late model bus has two heaters, toasty even on the coldest Minnesota nights. Factory four wheel drive that will negotiate things that will strand a jeep and with 30 seconds of work you can set it up to sleep four comfortably. Did somebody mention character? http://www.concentric.net/~Sxs/SyncroPage.shtml My point is that nobody to my knowledge has revisited the cable concept with the advantages of the modern era. I'm not even going to use steel. Both Kevlar and Spectra have roughly equivalent elasticities to steel, and are much lighter and easier to work with. Veterans of the cable guitars- would you please continue to come forward with problems encountered on cable systems? It might help me avoid some mistakes on the one I've started on. Thanks again- Sage ------------------ [This message was edited by Sage on 17 April 2001 at 12:34 PM.] [This message was edited by Sage on 17 April 2001 at 12:48 PM.] |
|
Bobby Lee Sysop Posts: 14849 |
posted 17 April 2001 03:21 PM
I broke a cable once. I've never broken a rod. |
|
Sage Member Posts: 525 |
posted 17 April 2001 03:35 PM
Where did it break? At a terminal or in the middle somewhere? [This message was edited by Sage on 17 April 2001 at 03:36 PM.] |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 17 April 2001 05:01 PM
Avoiding misrepresentation is at the core of this thread. I must say the tensile strength of the 1/16" cable is unbelievable. It will only break if it is subjected to a hairpin turn, and is constantly flexed or teased. Only then would it be susceptive to failure. No man living has the strength to break the 1/16" cable on a stright pull. A rod would be easily broken if it was scored 20%, and then bent one time on a 45 degree angle opposite the score. Rods also take a beating by constantly moving shaft collars while adjusting travel. The little Allen set screws bite into the rods, and the burs make it difficult for the shaft collars to pass over the rods surfaces. It's time to get out the file. Bill [This message was edited by Bill Hankey on 18 April 2001 at 04:13 AM.] [This message was edited by Bill Hankey on 18 April 2001 at 04:22 AM.] [This message was edited by Bill Hankey on 18 April 2001 at 04:24 AM.] |
|
C Dixon Member Posts: 5912 |
posted 17 April 2001 05:40 PM
Please Bill indulge me to deviate from your fine thread's theme to explain about the "VW bus" comment. Folks, I thought about it later after posting. Please hear me. I saw this on the internet. The title of the website was, "The Ten Worst Cars in history". http://cartalk.cars.com/About/Worst-Cars/results1.html And they showed a picture of the VW bus and captioned it as the worst of the ten. Other cars as I recall were the French "Le Car" and the Cadilac "Cimarron" and 7 others I dont recall. So did not in any way create the article. I was only relating my own experiences with this car. And I had to agree with the authors of the website. It clearly WAS the worst auto I EVER saw. I am proud it found fondness from others, because I certainly saw a bunch on the road and still do occassionally. So I hope its existance was not totally in vain. Again Bill forive me for taking time to talk about something that had NOTHING to do with your thread. I shall try and not do that in the future, carl [This message was edited by C Dixon on 21 April 2001 at 04:34 PM.] [This message was edited by C Dixon on 21 April 2001 at 04:35 PM.] |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 18 April 2001 07:23 AM
Bobby, your post was short, and sweet.I would appreciate reading a much longer post about the "breakage". It's like walking near a buffet food counter. A hungry man would find it difficult to just leave. I'm anxious to read, should you be so kind to elaborate upon the incident further. Were you at home, or at a "gig" when the misfortune occured? Did you have two pieces of cable, or did it simply disconnect? How did you repair the problem? Would you want to reveal the instruments identity? I would find any additional information about this subject to be enjoyable, to say the least. Bill |
|
Sage Member Posts: 525 |
posted 18 April 2001 07:36 AM
Bill, FYI- 1/16" dia. stainless cable has a normal break strength rating of 480 lbs. I'd like to see your guitar. Do you have pictures you can put up? ------------------ |
|
Bobby Lee Sysop Posts: 14849 |
posted 18 April 2001 09:12 AM
It was a very long time ago, on my first pedal steel. I swore off cables when it happened. As I recall, the cable broke at a pulley. It wasn't a Fender guitar - it was something similar to a Harlen Bros. Maybe it was just a bad design. ------------------ |
|
ebb Member Posts: 1045 |
posted 18 April 2001 05:01 PM
i have the same question as bill since the technology of cable must have made some strides since fender. |
|
Buck Grantham Member Posts: 1874 |
posted 18 April 2001 06:05 PM
I bought a Fender 2000 from Roy Thomas (of pedal master guitar co. ) I put 5 stainless knee levers on it and played it 13 years.Had the best playing time of my life with it . It did not break strings hardly at all. I put 2 showbud pickups in it and used a Fender Super Reverb amp which I put a D-130f JBL speaker in. It had a great sound with the tube amp. Great guitar for learning on . I made all of my new cables in my shop. |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 18 April 2001 11:46 PM
Buck, Please allow me to pass on to you,that Bill [This message was edited by Bill Hankey on 19 April 2001 at 02:33 AM.] |
|
Donny Hinson Member Posts: 9192 |
posted 20 April 2001 03:36 PM
My own suggestion would be to use 5/64" (7X7) SSAC instead of 1/16". It's about 35% stronger (650 lbs. breaking strength) and would give a more "solid" feel. The size and weight difference is negligible, and there is little difference in the flexibility as well. The cables in my old 1000 actually miked out .068-.069". Also, the turnbuckles (if there are any) should have a spring-type lock instead of lock nuts. The fewer tools needed for adjustments, the better!  In the course of using my 1000 (almost 8 years) I never broke a cable or a pulley. I did pull several apart at the sleeve, and broke a couple of loops (which I made from choke-wire) but resoldering/repairing was a simple job. I used to carry a 250-watt soldering gun when I was on the road---just in case! (Left the durn thing at the Dover AFB NCO club one night, though. [This message was edited by Donny Hinson on 20 April 2001 at 03:46 PM.] |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 20 April 2001 05:44 PM
Donny, I enjoyed reading your post. It is very interesting. It's nice to hear that the 1/16" cables survived eight years of constant stress. I realize that you were not constantly playing for eight years, but I would say that it is still strong evidence in terms of cable tenacity. My feelings about some of the things you mentioned are : personally, I would not opt for larger cables. The quality of the cable is an important consideration. Even more important is protecting the cable from oxidation. The Fender cables were magnetic. Moisture would gradually cause an oxidation problem if subjected to dampness. Therefore, a nonmagnetic cable would be advisable, if a user/builder was seeking decades, and decades of service. When soldering, try to include a good fan to keep the fumes away from you. Another method to prevent cables from pulling out of pulleys is to utilize adjustable stops between the pulleys and the bell cranks. The adjustable stops will control any impact that causes the cables to pull free of the pulleys. Bill |
|
Donny Hinson Member Posts: 9192 |
posted 20 April 2001 08:56 PM
Bill, the cables actually lasted 15 years, since both Weldon Myrick and Stu Basore had used it before me! Stainless steel aircraft cable (called "SSAC" in the trade) virtually eliminates oxidation problems. Also, harder silver-soldering (as opposed to soft-soldering with lead or tin) would probably eliminate the "pull-out" problems. (Just a personal observation...I am dubious of the ill-effects of occasional lead solder exposure---because HAMS seem to live longer longer than most any group I know of!) |
|
Ric Epperle Member Posts: 1490 |
posted 21 April 2001 09:17 AM
quote: ROTFLMAO... Ric.. KE7MK [This message was edited by Ric Epperle on 21 April 2001 at 09:24 AM.] |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 21 April 2001 01:33 PM
The dangers of lead poisoning was too slow in coming to the attention of the average worker. The truth is, all metals,especially white, and red are poisonous when heated to the melting point.I avoid the smoke, and fumes by using a good fan to keep them out of my breathing space. Numerous solders have replaced the use of lead. If you choose to avoid soldering altogether, no big problem. The variable methodologies of cable attachments is endless.Discard any poisons, and proceed with a fun project that excludes the use of harmful materials. I'll be experimenting soon to achieve that end result. |
|
chas smith Member Posts: 3168 |
posted 21 April 2001 04:32 PM
quote: Cable stretches in part because it's woven or wound, so when it's relaxed to when it's under tension involves more travel and makes it feel less positive. |
|
Sage Member Posts: 525 |
posted 21 April 2001 05:14 PM
Chas- Do you think that by using 300# wire and keeping it under tension, that you would gain a more positive feel? If it has less of the elasticity curve to go thru I would think that it would help with the inherent sponginess of cable or cord. What do you think? ------------------ |
|
Mike Bagwell Member Posts: 219 |
posted 21 April 2001 09:45 PM
Sage, I think the somewhat loose pedal action of the Fender cable guitars was due to the lack of pedal stops. Unlike more modern steels the Fender only used the changer to stop pedal travel. IMO a proper adjustable pedal stop would also stop cable breakage. Mike |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 23 April 2001 06:48 AM
Sage, I cant allow your comment to be swept beneath a rug. I'm referring to, quote, " inherent sponginess of cable." It is important for me to note that there is no scientific proof available to support that statement. The mythical notion that there is no positive feel, in the use of cables, should be relegated into obscureness for the good of posterity. I refer to it as going from tension to tensionless, much like experiencing a first time tooth extraction. Properly adjusted cables are light years ahead of rods in connection to "feel." It has much to do with absorbing vibrations. |
|
Sage Member Posts: 525 |
posted 23 April 2001 07:40 AM
Thanks for your comments, Bill. What I was referring to was what chas smith had mentioned earlier in his post. Because cables are wound or woven, some initial travel is required to bring them into their correct tensional range. This allows the individual strands to nest with one another before the actual work of the cable is properly begun. I believe that what he was referring to was this principle being exacerbated in larger diameter cables, making them less desirable even though they have a higher breaking strength. As it as also (thankfully) pointed out, the old cable instruments did not have pedal stops aside from the changer, putting undue stress on the system. It is my humble opinion that cables could very well operate with comparable elasticity and "feel" to rods as long as they are properly gaged, and kept under pre-loaded tension all of the time. I don't quite understand your references to the differences in vibrational response of cables vs rods, and would be interested in hearing more of your thoughts on that. Thanks, Sage ------------------ |
|
chas smith Member Posts: 3168 |
posted 23 April 2001 11:52 AM
quote: For the past dozen years I have been involved with motion-controlled camera rigs, actually it's more like 22 years. These things are programmed to make a 'move' and then they have to repeat it frame for frame to within tolerances like .005" over 12 feet. How to drive them was always the problem and of course cable, because it's an off-the-shelf item, lightweight and inexpensive was a first choice. But because cable stretches, it wouldn't repeat, so chain, toothed belts and precision gears are used. Another problem was that it work-hardens and so when the cable broke and $150,000 worth of camera equipment augered into the pavement... There is a rig that uses multiple wraps of cable under a lot of tension that's lightweight and is used for high speed moves, but it doesn't track exactly. What's this got to do with steel guitars, well, if the cable is under tension, how do you keep it from pulling the changer? I submit that a cable under tension is going to act like a rod, with the exception of under compression, so why not just use a rod, the difference in weight is negligible and it's going to be a lot more predictable. |
|
Bobby Lee Sysop Posts: 14849 |
posted 27 April 2001 01:03 PM
There are some good pictures of the underside of a cable-driven Wright Custom on this EBay page. |
|
C Dixon Member Posts: 5912 |
posted 27 April 2001 02:32 PM
I do NOT mean this post to be disrespectful. What my problem is. IF, cables are a preferred way, why do all the foremost PSG manufacturers not use them? Why did they not continue them following Leo's lead (Fender)albeit with improvements? But more importantly, everything else being the same, what would a cable PSG give a player that a rod system did not? carl |
|
Bill Hankey Member Posts: 1680 |
posted 27 April 2001 02:34 PM
Bobby, Thanks so very much for pointing out the Wright Steel Guitar to me. The bird's-eye is gorgeous. I'm amazed at the incredible cable arrangement. I must be honest, I'd have to do something with those cables. They resemble power lines draped across roadways and drive ways. I would avoid the right angle turns of the cables. It's much too sloppy. If the maker was opting for special changes, the neck nearest the player should be the one for mechanical effects. There's simply too much cable span for practical purposes. Even as I write this, a feeling of unfairness for resorting to criticism sweeps over me, due to the fact that the construction of the steel is magnificent. Thanks again for pointing this out to me. Bill [This message was edited by Bill Hankey on 28 April 2001 at 05:46 AM.] |
| This topic is 2 pages long: 1 2 All times are Pacific (US) | This is an ARCHIVED topic. You may not reply to it! |
Note: Messages not explicitly copyrighted are in the Public Domain.
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46
Our mailing address is:
The Steel Guitar Forum
148 South Cloverdale Blvd.
Cloverdale, CA 95425 USA
Support the Forum
Bobby Lee - email: 
)