|
Author
|
Topic: Why SD10 instead of S10?
|
Peter Timaratz
Member From: Fairfield, Iowa, USA
|
posted 26 December 2003 08:23 AM
profile
My understanding is that an SD10 is a single neck on a double body. What is the advantage of that compared to an S10? |
Bob Hoffnar
Member From: Brooklyn, NY
|
posted 26 December 2003 08:43 AM
profile
For some people the ergonomics make a difference. I have been told that there is a tonal difference although I have never experienced it. I go with a regular S10 myself. They are a bit lighter and I find them comfortable. The only reason I own an S10 is to have a steel I can get on an airplane without paying overweight.Bob |
Joey Ace
Sysop From: Southern Ontario, Canada
|
posted 26 December 2003 09:38 AM
profile
More room underneath for Knee Lever placement is the biggest factor I can think of.If you also have a D10, it feels more natural when you switch between the two. I have a switch for my MatchBro hidden under the pad of my SD10. Can't do that on the S10 or D10. More wood should equal better tone, but I haven't heard any difference. |
Bob Mainwaring
Member From: Qualicum Beach Vancouver Island B.C. Canada
|
posted 26 December 2003 11:10 AM
profile
Peter - All the above plus I guess that an SD10 is really more rigid in the fact that the leg placements are a little more deeper than an S10.Just my pounds worth.Bob Mainwaring. Z.B.er. |
Bob Carlson
Member From: Surprise AZ.
|
posted 26 December 2003 02:31 PM
profile
I have a SD-10 and I like that pad to rest my arms on.But I now wish I had bought a D-10 because i'm ready to try to learn the C6th neck. Bob |
David Friedlander
Member From: New York, New York, USA
|
posted 26 December 2003 03:06 PM
profile
An S10 will tend to move around if you're heavy on the knee levers. The weight and width of the SD10 will alleviate this.I love my keyless S10 for size reasons. If you're playing on small bandstands, an S10 may make the difference between sitting on the stage or somewhere in Cleveland. I've got a D10 on order. I guess once I start to love the C6, I'll be relegated over to Cleveland........ |
Bob Carlucci
Member From: Candor, New York, USA
|
posted 26 December 2003 04:02 PM
profile
I just sold a Pro III[got peanuts for it!!] that I converted into a 7+4 single 10 E9... I kept that guitar for YEARS and hardly played it. After playing single 10 MSA steels for years I COULD NOT!! get used to the double cabinet. It felt big,cumbersome and uncomfortable and I always ran back to the MSA s-10 5+4 guitars I grew up with. I tried an MSA d-10 too and that felt the same.. uncomfortable! I think I would have liked the double bodies if I put the E9 on the BACK neck!. It's an uncommon set up but I have heard of single neck players doing it. Some of us need the neck straight down I guess. |
David Doggett
Member From: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
|
posted 26 December 2003 10:55 PM
profile
I started on an S10 (Sho-Bud Maverick) and have never liked the SD10 shelf and pad between me and the strings. The pad gets in my way, and resting either arm on the pad just doesn't seem like good form for playing to me. For a universal or C6, you need to be able to easily see your feet, and that is very difficult on a SD10, but I guess that doesn't matter if the SD10 is an E9.Some claim that the extra wood and weight in an SD10 helps tone, but I have never been able to hear that subtle difference, and some people on the Forum have said they thought the single neck bodies sounded better, so go figure. At any rate, some makers actually make their S10s and S12s as 1 1/2 sized bodies. That leaves plenty of room for knee levers, doesn't impede vision of the pedals, and probably has tone very similar to a D10 or SD10. The only really good reason I can see for an SD10 is if you are use to playing E9 on a D10 and want the same distance to the strings. I'm sure you'd get use to the change within a couple of weeks of playing, but some folks just don't like to have to adjust. Also, lots of D10 players rest their arms on the C6 neck and might as well have a pad if they don't want the C6 neck. In the end, it's a matter of personal preference. Lloyd Green has certainly made good use of his SD10 E9 all these years. |
Michael Johnstone
Member From: Sylmar,Ca. USA
|
posted 27 December 2003 01:45 AM
profile
I think that SD-10s,12s - whatever - with the dummy neck/armrest etc are a preposterous waste of wood and naugahyde. The argument that you can get more levers on such a beast seems to be a red herring to me because I have 8+9 on a 28" long single wide Excel keyless U-12 and it's very playable and very stable. Tonewise, some guys say they hear a difference - but I hear no difference whatsoever.
Why those big tanks are some guys' cup of tea is beyond me. -MJ- |
Erv Niehaus
Member From: Litchfield, MN, USA
|
posted 27 December 2003 07:45 AM
profile
FWIW, a lot of the SD-10s out there have been converted from D-10s. The guts have been removed from the back neck. An original SD-10 would not have the changer end cut out on the back neck. At least that is true for the LDG Sho~Bud.
Erv |
Richard Sinkler
Member From: Fremont, California
|
posted 27 December 2003 09:41 AM
profile
I have been playing a D-10 for over 25 years, but if I was to go back to a single it would be a single body S-12. I like not having the C neck under my arms. quote:
For a universal or C6, you need to be able to easily see your feet, and that is very difficult on a SD10, but I guess that doesn't matter if the SD10 is an E9.
I don't buy into this reasoning. You shouldn't have to look at your pedals. You should have the "muscle memory" to remember where the pedals are. Also, differing the heights of pedals can help you feel where the pedals are.David F. - I could handle the Cleveland thing if they placed me in Jacobs Field during an Indians game. |
Roger Rettig
Member From: NAPLES, FL
|
posted 27 December 2003 12:10 PM
profile
Maybe they proliferate simply because it's more economical for some builders to deal with one body-size, with the same pattern of endplate on all their guitars. A lot of SD-10 Emmons I've seen (including my old one) have had two apertures in the end-plates at the changer-end - suitable for one OR two-necked guitars.Having said that, I like resting my forearms on the C neck to play E9, and I miss it when I'm actually playing on C6th ('good form' or not). I do think the success of the LDG led to this format becoming somewhat fashionable in the '70s. RR[This message was edited by Roger Rettig on 27 December 2003 at 12:14 PM.] |
Bob Carlucci
Member From: Candor, New York, USA
|
posted 27 December 2003 01:28 PM
profile
I agree with Roger... I think its more a matter of economics .The guys who DO build single cabinet S 10's sell plenty of them however. bob |
David L. Donald
Member From: Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
posted 28 December 2003 03:19 AM
profile
I think Lloyd Green would have the best answer on this, since he had the 1st SD-10.I believe, if memory serves, he said partly to reduce a bit of weight and partly to maintain the same sound he liked on his D-10. At the time there was no reason for him to play C6. |
David L. Donald
Member From: Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
posted 28 December 2003 08:16 AM
profile
Lloyd was nice enough to e-mail me, gentileman that he is.The original SD-10 was a D-10 with all the C6 parts removed. Losing 18 lbs of weight.
But maintaining the same sound as the E9 on a D-10. This was not an LDG.
He also says he does hear a difference between an S-10 and an SD-10 and that's why he still uses the original LDG SD-10 #1 in all recordings since then, right up to Remember When.
And as we all know he got "that" sound! Merci Lloyd and happy new year to you and Dot. |
Nicholas Dedring
Member From: Brooklyn, New York, USA
|
posted 28 December 2003 12:19 PM
profile
I get shinsplints if I have to push too far forward under the guitar. I like being able to have the Knee Levers closer to me, which cuts down on the discomfort of having to flex my feet up off the pedals... if my knees are further forward, it is less comfortable to flex the front of the foot up. It would either be more stress flexing my ankles/feet, or having the knee levers significantly further forward on my knee... which I don't really care for.I guess maybe it's also that you have some room to stash a spare bar and picks... and it gives you a better workout carrying it to and from the car. FWIW, I play a D10 right now anyway, but C6 is basically an armrest, so who knows?  |
Larry Chung
Member From: San Francisco, CA, USA
|
posted 28 December 2003 12:29 PM
profile
When did Tom Brumley start playing his SD-11? When did Lloyd Green start playing the SD-10?I probably wasn't around then, or maybe just barely! Please enlighten me!!!
ZeeBest,
larry chung ------------------
Larry Chung
ZB D-10 8+4
ZB Custom S-11 4+4 Dekley S-10 3+4
|
Nicholas Dedring
Member From: Brooklyn, New York, USA
|
posted 28 December 2003 02:04 PM
profile
I don't know, but I think the Anapeg Brumley plays now might not be a full double body. I think it's narrower than that, but I'm not sure. |
Jon Light
Member From: Brooklyn, NY
|
posted 28 December 2003 02:16 PM
profile
For whatver reason, probably very different reasons than Nick seeing as how we differ by around a foot and a half in height, I also want/need the double body. Mainly for flexibility of lever placement. Having 8 levers, doubling LKL, LKR, and RKR, placement becomes a crucial issue. And for whatever reason my playing posture has evolved so that I sit well back, only barely under the guitar. This wouldn't be possible with a single-wide. On the other hand I'll bet my ergonomic approach would simply have evolved differently with a different configuration. I strongly believe that the the most correct feeling guitar is the first one you learned to play on. Everything else is judged relative to this. Of course if you change to a guitar that suits you much better (as I did by ordering a new Carter custom tailored to my dimensions) the learning curve to adjust to the new axe is short and sweet. |
Roger Rettig
Member From: NAPLES, FL
|
posted 28 December 2003 09:12 PM
profile
To give credit where it's due, the success of the ShoBud 'LDG' in the '70s was undoubtedly due to Lloyd being arguably the most influential player of that time - that coincided with steel guitar reaching a huge new audience with the 'country rock' explosion of the day.It was inevitable that lots of new players would want the ultra-cool look of Lloyd Green's guitar, and only a matter of time before other makers followed suite. RR |
Roger Rettig
Member From: NAPLES, FL
|
posted 28 December 2003 09:16 PM
profile
A 'PS'....Having thought about it, I agree with Jon - I've become accustomed to my knee-levers being under the rear neck, and a few inches nearer than the pedals; I think I'd find an S10 very cramped now. RR |
Nathan Delacretaz
Member From: Austin, Texas, USA
|
posted 29 December 2003 06:49 AM
profile
Roger made a good point about the economics of it......I don't think any manufacturer in any industry can resist the urge to standardize whenever/whereever possible.I do like the spaciousness of my SD10's undercarriage, and the pad is a good place to put miniature set lists, pics of the family, etc! |
The Steel Guitar Forum
