|
Author
|
Topic: Why the Sudden Interest in Fender Pedal Steels?
|
C Dixon
Member From: Duluth, GA USA
|
posted 17 February 2004 10:09 AM
profile
"I wonder whether the reputation that fender has for six string guitar and bass building disposes guitar players towards fenders if they haven't heard of anything else...?"Nicholas, I do believe there is a great deal of wisdom in your words. I would like to share with you the following. When I was a young struggling RCA technician, RCA came out with a TV set that I believed with all my heart was the best. Because our wages were very low back then, I could not afford it; even at employee discount prices. But I dreamed for years about it; and said to myself, "someday I am going to find a used one in mint condition and buy it". Well it happened, and I did. But ya know what? Within just a short time, I realized why my precious Savior had lead me NOT to get it when it first came out. It turned out to be NOT at all what I had dreamed of. This TV set was B & W. The same exact thing (will I never learn?  ) happened to me after color TV was out a few years. And I again went through the same scenario. My point is, nostalgia an preassumed ideas are often big letdowns once reality sets in. There ARE those who might like an ole clunker Fender cable PSG in today's world. But I believe there is no way in hallelujah that more than a just a few would care for its sound and/or mechanics when compared to a modern all pull PSG. For those who aspire to own one, more power to ya. And I pray Jesus bring you untold joy with it. But I would urge you to play it and a modern one, before ya plunk down dem buckaroos pahdnah. carl A Better Way
|
John Bechtel
Member From: Nashville, Tennessee,U.S.A.
|
posted 17 February 2004 12:34 PM
profile
I believe the very best sound that I ever heard from a PSG was Buddy Emmons playing a Fender 1000 on E.T.'s I Love You So Much It Hurts Me! “Big John”------------------
“Big John” Bechtel
http://community.webtv.net/KeoniNui/BigJohnBechtels
|
Fred Glave
Member From: McHenry, Illinois, USA
|
posted 17 February 2004 07:05 PM
profile
We should be thankful that the tuba, and violin, have retained that modern, cutting edge sound for 350 years, without new technology.  By the way, see my post on the "Tuba Forum". |
Rainer Hackstaette
Member From: Bohmte, Germany
|
posted 18 February 2004 04:28 AM
profile
Fred,the tuba is only an off-shoot of the "lure" (13th-7th century B.C.) with added valves. We should call it a "valve lure", instead of that new-fangled term "tuba", and pay our deepest respect to the multitudes of ancient lure players that came before us who made the evolution of this wonderful instrument possible. Oops - I think I got my threads all tangled up ...  |
Jack Anderson
Member From: Scarborough, ME
|
posted 18 February 2004 05:18 AM
profile
Let's not overlook the improvements made to the tuba by John Philip Sousa. click here He really brought it into the 19th century![This message was edited by Jack Anderson on 18 February 2004 at 05:20 AM.] [This message was edited by Jack Anderson on 18 February 2004 at 05:23 AM.] |
Fred Glave
Member From: McHenry, Illinois, USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 06:28 AM
profile
Yes Rainer, the addition of valves on the tuba is on an engineering parallel with the steel guitar's addition of pedals. So, I guess we should be careful of where we place our threads on the Tuba Forum. It's either "tuba", or "no valvers", especially if we start talking about installing "knee valves".
And Jack, your point is well taken. But I must ask; Is the Sousaphone really a tuba? |
Rainer Hackstaette
Member From: Bohmte, Germany
|
posted 18 February 2004 07:22 AM
profile
The original lure (made of real bronze by Ragnar "Blackface" Fenderson):
 The valve lure (a cheapo brass copy):
 |
b0b
Sysop From: Cloverdale, California, USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 10:38 AM
profile
Hey! This is a steel guitar forum!  |
Earnest Bovine
Member From: Los Angeles CA USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 10:52 AM
profile
Where is the photographer's reflection? |
Michael Johnstone
Member From: Sylmar,Ca. USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 12:26 PM
profile
I got a pretty nice 6 pedal Fender 800 off E-Bay for $650 a couple years ago and have added 6 knee levers and w/some help from Chas Smith and his machine shop,replaced the stock pickup with a pair of Lollar 10 string Stringmaster style pickups w/blender.This is now my "Bakersfield" guitar and it was intended to sound like a Stringmaster with pedals and a modern copedant and still look like it was made by Fender.I've recorded and gigged with it and it comes close to my fantasy and I'll be using it on the new Red Simpson CD. However it's still a big heavy,clunky ax with some issues. I didn't mind so much the timing quirks Carl mentioned but what bugs me was that I never could get the levers that lower strings to have anything but a real long throw and it was nothing to do with my design - it has to do with the lowering mechanism in the changer. I tried gearing up the lever w/a large pulley and deeper fulcrum pionts but it made the lever too stiff. I finally found a happy medium which is playable but still ridiculous compared to modern standards.Some have asked me about how I did the knee levers and wanted to see pictures etc and since I don't have a way of posting those pix,I've e-mailed lengthy descriptions and pictures to a couple guys and could do the same for anyone else who's interested.Maybe someone else could post them. In retrospect,I think it was a worthwile project and I have a totally unique guitar but I doubt you could pay me enough to do it again. -MJ- |
Fred Glave
Member From: McHenry, Illinois, USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 01:22 PM
profile
Sorry bOb, you're right. The analogies we're using to discuss this topic actually speak to the "bigger picture", about individuals who choose to (or just happen to)play musical instruments from various periods, or even instruments that are closely related to each other. Right or wrong? Good or bad? I'm biased. I bought my Fender partly because I studied Cindy Cashdollar's instructional videos, where she plays a Fender D10 non-pedal. She seduced me! I figured, if a pro like her plays one, it's gotta have something going for it. Besides, Fender is an old trustworthy name. Especially pre-CBS. I've owned several Fender 6 strings, and loved them. I'm very happy with my 2000.
The way I see it, at one end of this large steel guitar spectrum we have musicians playing non-pedal steel, which in the opinion of some, is a far more "primitive" guitar than the cabled Fenders from the 60's. And how about those 6 string lap steels? Are we saying that these instruments are "undesirable" also? 
My soap box is now so high up off the ground that I may be able to see the mirrored image of the tuba photographer, which by the way, is actually "sucked up" in a reflective vortex created by the conical shape of the tuba horn. See what ya done?  |
Jack Anderson
Member From: Scarborough, ME
|
posted 18 February 2004 01:35 PM
profile
I thought we were just hijacking the thread -- but Carl started it! |
Tim Whitlock
Member From: Arvada, CO, USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 01:51 PM
profile
Having little or no experience with modern PSG's, I view my Fender 1000 as a marvel of engineering ingenuity, eminently playable, tone to die for (sorry for the preposition)and possessing an historic vibe unavailable in modern guitars at any cost. I will continue on, in ignorant bliss, exploring the limitless possibilities of this wonderful machine. No apologies to the technologically obsessed!------------------
Tim Whitlock
'58 Fender 1000, '56 Fender Stringmaster, '65 Twin Reissue, Niomi lap steel, old Magnatone tube amp. |
jsaine
Member From: Charlottesville, VA
|
posted 18 February 2004 07:12 PM
profile
I was wondering if there is a big difference in the tone of the Fender 1000/2000 model guitars and the Artist series or Sho-bud Fenders. Obviously there were differences in neck design, changers and bridges, but were the pick-ups similar? I assume also that the pick-ups on the Fenders made by sho-bud were wound by Fender?
Wonderin,
Jeff
|
Fred Glave
Member From: McHenry, Illinois, USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 07:44 PM
profile
As far as I know, the fundamental differences between the 1000 and 2000, are that the 1000 is a D8 with fixed position bridges that ground and snapped strings at an alarming rate. The 2000 is a D10 with moving roller bridges that preserve strings very well. I don't think there's much more difference, but what do I know. I too am in ignorant bliss. |
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 18 February 2004 08:42 PM
profile
quote:
Maybe someone else could post them.
Send them on in, Michael, & I'll do it. This Postman don't ring twice! |
David Coplin
Member From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
|
posted 18 February 2004 09:12 PM
profile
Fred,
Fender did make a D8 with the roller bridges
and the Sho-Bud type moving rear bridge. I don't know what years they were built but I have one. This same model came with a rubber pad behind the pickup that could be raised and lowered for a dobro kind of sound.When I got this guitar they had been removed. I have had the same set of strings on for over 4 months including the high third on the E9th tuning with no broken strings. I love the sound of this Fender and the ease of changing copendents.
Dave |
nick allen
Member From: France
|
posted 19 February 2004 12:19 AM
profile
Speaking for myself (but I do know others who feel the same way) - having come the 6-string > bottleneck > lap steel route, I'm not sure I want to (or feel the need to) make the quantum leap to a "full-scale" E9 pedal steel set-up. Right at the moment, I would like 8 strings and a very flexible system of changes. (I'm fooling around with a 2+1 Maverick...)
The number of discussions on Robert R and the Sacred Steel players, plus a recent thread on Daniel Lanois, the enthusiasm for Bigsbys (even though I recognise they are a special and very historic case) suggest to me that some of us just don't want or need as much complexity as exists on the "standard" PSG - same as Lloyd Green doesn't want or need all the possibilities of a Universal 12... whereas players like Maurice Anderson, Mike Perlowin, Michael Johnstone and others DO want and need all those options.
Maybe the time will come when I do, too - but for now, 8 strings and a couple of pedals would do me fine. (And the Fender sound would be a big bonus )
It's a question partly of the player and what he wants to hear, and partly of the music - a full E9 may be necessary for many current country bands, and jazz requires (ideally) extended chord capability, but Sneaky Pete and Jerry Douglas, to name but two, have made a LOT of music with "limited" set-ups...
Nick
[This message was edited by nick allen on 19 February 2004 at 12:43 AM.] [This message was edited by nick allen on 19 February 2004 at 12:44 AM.] [This message was edited by nick allen on 19 February 2004 at 12:46 AM.] |
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 19 February 2004 05:40 AM
profile
I'll post some photos this Fri or Sat. |
Tim Whitlock
Member From: Arvada, CO, USA
|
posted 19 February 2004 05:53 AM
profile
Amen, Nick! Don't forget the incomparable Ralph Mooney. If you want to hear the Fender sound in all it's glory, listen to those old Buck Owens reissue CD's or some Wynn Stewart, with Moon on his 1000. Beautiful stuff! |
Bobby Lee
Sysop From: Cloverdale, North California, USA
|
posted 19 February 2004 09:26 AM
profile
Nick,
I think it's often a case of having what you need on the bandstand. Song styles vary, and those variations often require different pedals. For example, I have little use for the F# to G# change in rock or blues, but I use it all the time in country. I can play complete country songs with using the E lower lever once, but I'd be lost without it in western swing.
Furthermore, some changes are just necessary for musical completeness. In any kind of music, having all 3 inversions of the major and minor triads will free your mind.
I play 5+5. My reflexes can't find more than that reliably. I do have a 2+1 Maverick at my sister's house in Pennsylvania that I play when I visit her. I don't have any problem playing within limitations, but I wouldn't want to do it all the time. How many times have you found yourself searching for a transition that just isn't there on your Maverick? Or found that the only way you could play a certain passage was in a position far away from the notes that lead into it?
We don't develop these complex-looking copedents to make things more complicated. We do it to make the instrument easier to play. A six string lap steel is the hardest steel guitar to play well. A fully loaded D-10 is the easiest. I may be overstating a bit, but I just want to make the point that pedals really do make the instrument much easier to play.------------------
 Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9),
Sierra Laptop 8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax |
Joey Ace
Sysop From: Southern Ontario, Canada
|
posted 19 February 2004 10:37 AM
profile
Another tempting thing about these pre-CBS instruments is their low price, compared to their six string siblings.Even the high priced steels are a fraction of what a Tele or Strat of the same vintage now costs. And the Steels are rarer! Maybe they'll never be worth more, or maybe we'll look back on these days when they were affordable. |
nick allen
Member From: France
|
posted 20 February 2004 06:12 AM
profile
I know you are absolutely right, b0b -
quote:
We don't develop these complex-looking copedents to make things more complicated. We do it to make the instrument easier to play.
I think the point I was getting at is that we are starting from different points... you have already made the "quantum leap" I referred to above, to become familiar with the basics of the "standard" pedal steel. Dan Tyack mentioned some time ago that he was enjoying the freedom of playing a lap steel in a straight Open E tuning. The thing I am uncomfortable with on the E9 (and there is probably *no* logical reason for this) is having to make sure not to pick strings 9, 7, 2 and 1 if I'm playing a major chord... The 6th note in a lap steel A6 tuning seems more friendly somehow(?).
I guess ultimately I'm just saying I would feel more comfortable adding changes to a non-pedal tuning as I find the need for them, rather than having them there and having to avoid them *until* I find the need for them...
Having said that, every time I try to work out a "simpler" tuning/set-up, I realize *why* those notes and changes are there...
Practice and hard work required, I guess
Thanks for the food for thought.
Nick[This message was edited by nick allen on 20 February 2004 at 06:16 AM.] |
Marco Schouten
Member From: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
|
posted 20 February 2004 08:31 AM
profile
Carl wrote: From my standpoint and excluding Ralph Mooney on Wynn Stewart's and Buck Owen's early recordings, I have never heard anything on them I could compare favorably with the sound of a Sho-Bud or Emmons's etc.--------------------------------------------
I just want to say: Together Again.
Never heard it better than the original by Tom Brumley on a Fender.
------------------
Steelin' Greetings
Marco Schouten
Sho-Bud LLG; Guyatone 6 string lap steel; John Pearse bar; Emmons bar; Evans SE200 amp
|
Rick Collins
Member From: Claremont , CA USA
|
posted 20 February 2004 11:40 AM
profile
quote:
When is the last time anybody saw Buddy,Lloyd or Paul Franklin (or anybody else) playing one of these things?
All of these players play their own signature models. If we are to assume by the apparent inference, that the best players play only the best guitars; then it becomes a mathematical certainty that at least two of these players do not play the very best.Rick |
Herb Steiner
Member From: Cedar Valley, Travis County TX
|
posted 20 February 2004 12:01 PM
profile
What is the attraction of the Fender steel?Speaking as a guy who occasionally plays a Bigsby on gigs, and who just acquired a short-scale Fender 1000, it has to do with the notes you want to play, the sound you want to project, and the vibe coming off the bandstand. If you want to play totally retro, like a 1950's-early 60's steel player would, an instrument that created that sound is the best duplicator of it. Also, the limited changes available on a guitar like that forces you to actually (gasp!) learn the instrument in the style of the original player, with his tuning and pedal setup (or close to it). Thirdly, the vibe projected to the audience. If your band is playing Stonewall Jackson, Wynn Stewart, early Buck Owens, etc. music, wearing cowboy outfits, and the guitarist is holding an old Gibson archtop, do you really want to be sitting behind a Single-14 gearless Sierra with 9&7...? I didn't think so. Driving a new Mercedes sports car with impeccable handling and custom wood/leather interior is a wonderful experience, for sure. But sometimes tooling around in a dead-clean 56 Chevrolet pickup is a way-cool ride, as well. I'm speaking from the point of view of a professional working onstage with a particular type of country artist. If you're in a modern cover-type band that has to do Paul Franklin licks, the older guitar is not for you. If you're a home player, what fits in your living room or music room is up to you, but you probably won't be playing Doug Jernigan solos on an old Fender. Better have a modern guitar on hand, and an old one for the occasional indulgence. ------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association [This message was edited by Herb Steiner on 20 February 2004 at 12:05 PM.]
|
Larry Robbins
Member From: Fort Edward, New York, USA
|
posted 20 February 2004 02:06 PM
profile
I guess Ive got to go along with Jody Carver on this one.ID' like to find a early,
blonde model myself!!
 |
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 02:02 PM
profile
Here we go.....
[This message was edited by HowardR on 21 February 2004 at 04:54 PM.]
|
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 02:04 PM
profile
|
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 02:06 PM
profile
 [This message was edited by HowardR on 21 February 2004 at 05:00 PM.]
|
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 02:07 PM
profile
 [This message was edited by HowardR on 21 February 2004 at 03:19 PM.] |
Michael Johnstone
Member From: Sylmar,Ca. USA
|
posted 21 February 2004 04:25 PM
profile
Thanks for posting those Howard. I'm getting a little red x in a box in addition to a picture in each post and the forth post has no picture. Am I missing something? Are we clogging up b0b's fine forum w/our excessive jpegabites? How about a topside shot of the pickups? Thanx again. -MJ- |
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 04:54 PM
profile
 [This message was edited by HowardR on 21 February 2004 at 05:16 PM.] |
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 04:59 PM
profile
|
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 05:01 PM
profile
 |
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 05:06 PM
profile
Something has gone awry here. There should be 7 photos which would include the pickups photo.I've tried posting them separatly. I'm also having a problem posting a photo in another thread in this same forum, although it loads into Feedback & Testing. b0b, how's about loading two more hamsters on the forum treadmill? We're running out of juice here! |
Michael Johnstone
Member From: Sylmar,Ca. USA
|
posted 21 February 2004 07:22 PM
profile
Perhaps you've exceeded your daily bandwidth allotment. |
Donny Hinson
Member From: Balto., Md. U.S.A.
|
posted 21 February 2004 07:56 PM
profile
Howard, that's a wonderful piece of engineering and machining, but actually much more elaborate than needed on a cable guitar. My own were simply levers that had a pivot at the body, and a hole in them for the pulling cable. They worked fine. |
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 21 February 2004 08:25 PM
profile
That's Michael's work and yes, a wonderful piece of engineering it is. It looks like a love of labor. Anyhow, I'm just the postman... who didn't complete the delivery...yet. |
basilh
Member From: United Kingdom
|
posted 22 February 2004 03:51 AM
profile
b0b,
this one just sold on e-bay for $1,325.54And it's NOT original (Re-finished BADLY)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3702297001&ssPageName=ADME:X:ON:UK:2 Baz
www.waikiki-islanders.com ------------------
quote:
Steel players do it without fretting
http://www.waikiki-islanders.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
|
The Steel Guitar Forum
