posted 28 August 2001 10:56 AM         

quote:

---

I maintain that by
proceeding to counteract the design, by
relieving the stress area, we will find
a course of action that would remove
doubts, and restore confidence to a new
level.

---

That means just leave off the third string. I think I'll try that on my new tuning which I call "Suckered Steel".

Bobbe, I love you, man!

posted 28 August 2001 11:08 AM         

------------------
Have a good 'un! JH U-12

[This message was edited by Jerry Hayes on 28 August 2001 at 11:16 AM.]

posted 28 August 2001 02:06 PM         

I have the string tension tester in my
work area. It consists of three major
automated parts. Just snap a switch, and
presto, the machine does all the work.
If you like, I'll be taking pictures of
the creation, which can be posted.

The vise test was a mere preliminary
test to obtain information on the
effects that occur, after a series of
bending. I'm satisfied that the real
causative malfuntion is not solely in the much purported location. Bill H.

Jerry Hayes,

Thank you for your comments. I'm sure
that they will benefit me in some way.

Bill Hankey

posted 28 August 2001 02:57 PM         

BTW,
Nice Zebco!

posted 28 August 2001 04:42 PM         

This would seem to make it clear that enough of the "causitive malfunction" rests in the "much purported place" to allow for the total disappearance of the initial problem, once the stress of this location is removed. In my inexperienced opinion, any further research into the problem would have value, outside the sphere of personal amusement, only if a tonal deficiency could be demonstrated in the aforementioned designs. In this vein, Bobbe's idea seems impressive, if it is true that the basics of the standard configuration remain necessary for good tone.

[This message was edited by Jeff A. Smith on 28 August 2001 at 04:46 PM.]

posted 28 August 2001 09:07 PM         

THE SOLUTION
THE SOLUTION

[This message was edited by Jon Light on 28 August 2001 at 09:23 PM.]

posted 29 August 2001 07:07 AM         

The length of your threads would suggest that many of us, in an indirect way, also derive "personal amusement" from your endaevors. I hope you accepted my comments in the positive, if somewhat straight-ahead and logical, spirit they were offered.

posted 29 August 2001 08:19 AM         

quote:

---

Tony Davis
Member
From: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
posted 20 August 1999 09:42 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike,my Emmons.."Old Rattler" seems to break 11 guage before I've even got them out if the packet,always break right on the changer..must be the angle is too sharp,so I made up a 'Gismo' which I've used with sucess for years and they last for ages with it.
All you need is a piece of 3/16 aluminium rod,if you go to a music store and ask for a flute cleaning rod they should have wooden and aluminium...the alloy one will be less than $5. Cut off 1 inch of this.About 1/8 from the end cut it 1/2 to 2/3 through,leave this 1/8 round and file the rest flat,also file the back flat.Drill a hole longways through the round bit to take the string,and through the flat bit drill a hole for the changer pin to fit through leaving enough room for the ball end to sit on the flat bit..this gives you like a little tailpiece for the string and slightly alters the angle of pull.If you try it make up a few spares to put in your pick pocket.
If you cant figure it from this E-mail me

---

...you might have to share your patent with Tony...

...but you can patent anything you want, you aren't going to sell it when Jon Light has the hands-down winner in functional and cosmetic design...

posted 29 August 2001 10:10 AM         

...Bobbe, the correct answer was "They sound like a choir of angels"...The concept sounds good to me, I'll get on line and order some from you...by the way, you didn't perchance ply your trade as an aeronautical engineer at Morton-Thiokol, did you?

...oops, after reading back, I'll get on line next week and order some...no wonder I'm not rich, I always buy high and sell low...my wife is right, I am a puckerhead!....

[This message was edited by Pat Burns on 29 August 2001 at 10:32 AM.]

posted 29 August 2001 10:42 AM         

quote:

---

Yes , there is a way to greatly extend the life of the string! AND keep a smaller radius,and that is to move the point of contact where the string bends every 500 pulls or so with a variable string hooking device that lets the string move on the radius at the contact point to a "fresh" contact point.Then retune the string with the tuning key,equivelant to putting on a new string. This is brutally simple and the ONLY way to "Extend the life of the string".

---

I was reminded of a post I made a couple of years ago, only semi-facetiously, in the context of a thread regarding a wish-list for new techno- developments for steel guitars in which I wished for a coiled reel of .011 wire to be mounted under or beside the guitar to be drawn from, like a dental floss dispenser, to be pulled, clamped, tuned and played.
Then god whispered Zebco[ in my ear and the rest is hysteria.
But I'm afraid I don't have the time.

posted 29 August 2001 11:03 AM         

...hey! This is post # 100 on this topic...do I get a free .011 string, or a gismo or a Zebco or something?...

[This message was edited by Pat Burns on 29 August 2001 at 11:09 AM.]

posted 29 August 2001 12:03 PM         

Would it require a lot of gymnastics
to produce the post of two years ago?
I have an enormous interest in this
invention, and it would be overwhelming
to read the original post. Thanks Jon...

Bill Hankey

posted 29 August 2001 02:56 PM         

There is no likeness when you compare
the "Gizmo" and the Lucky 7. The main
reason is that my device has no right
angles or 90 degree abrupt turns. The
"Gizmo" (sp) utilizes the original pin
(I do believe) to attach to the string.
The Lucky 7 uses the pin aperture to
receive a tiny machine screw. I've
stated that the string travels on a
virtual level plane, with the exception
of a slight dip before entering the
Lucky 7 aperture. The differences are
the chosen materials, configurations,
and the abandonment of rule #1, which
is discounting the leverage conundrum.

I couldn't be more impressed with the
"gizmo" (sp.) , however, I'm sticking
with the concept that "undue leverage"
needs to be looked into further.
Bill H.

posted 29 August 2001 03:55 PM         

Jon - I still have an old 202 that I got back when I was a kid. Do you think it would work as well as a 404?

posted 29 August 2001 07:51 PM         

http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum1/HTML/009946.html

...another question I wanted to ask...I'm not sure, but I think pedal harps simply pull on the strings with either a single or double pull to raise the string a half or a whole tone...I don't believe the string is bent over a radial component or a wheel...I think it's a direct straight line pull, because the instrument is played vertically instead of horizontally while the player is seated, so it is an "all pull" instrument, although I guess it can't lower a tone, only raise it and then release it...the tone of the harp is certainly acceptable, and I've never heard a harpist scream out in agony in the middle of a performance because a string broke while her face was right next to it...just wondering if there are any parallels in the mechanics of a pedal steel and a pedal harp?...

[This message was edited by Pat Burns on 29 August 2001 at 08:39 PM.]