Author
|
Topic: How good/bad are Mavericks?
|
John Schjolberg Member From: Golden Valley, Minnesota, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 07:58 AM
profile
Okay, aside from the obvious limitations of the Sho-Bud Maverick, such as 1 knee lever and its less than beautiful looks, can it be a usable guitar? Let's assume that you don't need any other changes other than the ones on this guitar, does it sound good, stay in tune? I've never played one but from the pictures I've seen the undercarraige looks pretty primitive. Do these guitars work or do they have major tuning/cabinet-drop issues? |
CrowBear Schmitt Member From: Ariege, - PairO'knees, - France
|
posted 24 January 2005 08:10 AM
profile
the one i had worked fine John it stayed in tune but sounded cheap at least it got me goin'....  |
John Schjolberg Member From: Golden Valley, Minnesota, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 08:12 AM
profile
Thanks CrowBear. But can you describe "cheap"? |
Tony Prior Member From: Charlotte NC
|
posted 24 January 2005 08:28 AM
profile
I had a very early 70's Maverick..full maple body with neck..It was fine for what it was..which was minimal.Can you learn on them? yes Will you outgrow it fairly soon ? Yes ..if you are actually learning.. The phrase of "Not needing anymore than it has" is pretty self limiting... don't paint yourself into a corner.. t |
Herb Steiner Member From: Cedar Valley, Travis County TX
|
posted 24 January 2005 08:35 AM
profile
I'd say about 90%+ of what I consider an acceptable level of traditional country playing can be accomplished on a Maverick if the player is aware of where the notes are on the fretboard and has proficiency with a couple of slant bar positions. Up until 1964, the majority of professional level steel guitars had mechanisms no more advanced than a Maverick. Which takes into account a great percentage of the solos that caused everyone to fall in love with the steel guitar in the first place. ------------------ Herb's Steel Guitar Pages Texas Steel Guitar Association
|
David Doggett Member From: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 09:00 AM
profile
I also started on an early Maverick with maple body and neck. I eventually striped off the powder blue enamel and gave it a beautiful natural lacquer finish. It didn't have rollers on the nut, and the strings squeaked, so I replaced the keyhead with a regular ShoBud pro head. The cabinet drop was not much more than many modern pedal steels. The single-coil pickup was noisy and not very hot - but that can be replaced. The playing action was very easy and reliable. So the sound and playability were okay.The biggest drawback was that you could not put both a raise and a lower on the same string. So you had to choose whether your 4 and 8 string lever was to be an E raise or E lower. Both of these are very standard for pedal steel since the '60s. Not having one or the other of these from the git-go is a major learning deficit. If you just can't afford anything else, a Maverick will do to get started. But if you stick with it, you will want to trade up within a year. If you don't stick with it, you will want to get rid of it within a year. It will be much better to pay the extra couple of hundred bucks to get a used professional S10 E9 with 3 and 2. If you stick with it, you wont need to trade up for a long time. And if you don't stick with it and want to sell it, you will get all your money back. |
Ollin Landers Member From: Columbia, SC
|
posted 24 January 2005 09:00 AM
profile
I have owned 2 Mavericks and I can say that the quality varies widely on their playability and useability. I have always thought in terms of just getting by with a Maverick when I couldn't have a full setup. If all one were to use would be ABC and a D Lever I would rather go with another guitar. And then you get into an issue where the semi-pro student model is almost as expensive as a good used S-10 with 3x4. I would recomend a Maverick for a beginner wanting to learn but that would be about it, unless you could find one in exceptional condition. Just my opinion (and subject to change when proved wrong). |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 24 January 2005 09:18 AM
profile
This has been discussed a million times on the forum. They are limited but, a lot can be played on them. It's really no more limited than the D-9 fingertipper a fellow is on the road to my shop for me to rebuild and add Knee levers.The big problem was the 'Coat Hangers" that pulled the fingers. If a person could play everthing the Maverick could do, they would be a great player. Ed Naylor Steel Guitar Works. |
Kevin Hatton Member From: Amherst, N.Y.
|
posted 24 January 2005 09:19 AM
profile
Sho-Bud Mavericks. Good for propping the kitchen window up in the summer time to keep the breeze moving through the house. Makes a nice flower planter also when you turn them upside down. Resale value to unsuspecting new steel players on ebay is excellent.[This message was edited by Kevin Hatton on 24 January 2005 at 09:20 AM.] [This message was edited by Kevin Hatton on 24 January 2005 at 09:21 AM.] |
John Schjolberg Member From: Golden Valley, Minnesota, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 09:22 AM
profile
Hey Ed - what kind of problem did the "Coat Hangers" create? |
Bob Carlucci Member From: Candor, New York, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 09:55 AM
profile
Early Mavericks with the maple body and neck are pretty nice and sound like a pedal steel guitar. Later Mavericks with no neck and the "Mother of Contact Paper" body finish should be avoided like the plague. For the same price get a Carter Starter,which is a very nice 1st steel guitar,that you won't have to upgrade until you are READY to upgrade.Years ago when I played a Maverick,I was wanting a new steel in a few weeks, and I went and bought a S 10 MSA 5+4.. If you are in the market for a "beginners guitar",steer clear of a Maverick and get a used pro model[any of the well known brands are good steel guitars] or a C.Starter... bob |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 24 January 2005 10:02 AM
profile
The "Coat Hangers" were SLOPPY and you pulled 2 strings at a time and there fore you had the "Slop"Many other guitars had a similar problem.I get real upset when people go and "TRASH" the Maverick or any other Steel.I guarantee the Steel would not be as advanced as it is had the MAVERICK and other "LIMITED" guitars were never on the market.I would say half the Steelers today started on a LIMITED guitar.ED |
John Schjolberg Member From: Golden Valley, Minnesota, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 10:12 AM
profile
Thanks Ed - so when you say "Slop" are you saying that the string pulls are uneven? For instance, if I'm pressing the B pedal to raise strings 3 and 6, does one string raise quicker than the other? Or does something else happen? |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 24 January 2005 10:36 AM
profile
John- There is no adjustment so you can get an even pull. I have modified hundreds of these and with better "Bell Cranks" you have no problem. If you want to take the time call me at 1-800-749-3363. ED |
Farris Currie Member From: Ona, Florida, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 10:56 AM
profile
i probaly bought 15 of these mavaricks brand new for beginners at 225 each. they were fine for beginners, but didn't take long to outgrow them. some thing better. these days, forget them, so much better on the market!!!!! sure you can spend your money and play around, or get a real guitar and get it going,,,mavarick,had there days, but the carter starter will beat them cold.. lots of things to consider,but don't waste youre money on them, farris |
Bobby Lee Sysop From: Cloverdale, North California, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:04 AM
profile
It doesn't have to have slop, if you make the rods the right length for the pull. And yes, coathangers work fine for the job. I think that the lack of a roller nut is the biggest problem on the Maverick. It tends to knock the strings out of tune. The pickup isn't my favorite, either. Bobbe Seymour has been known to get a good tone out of it, though. It's acceptable. My main objection is that people should not learn to play without an F lever. It's fine to play without one after you learned, when you know to slant the bar to get that note. But you'll always fall back on the habits that you learned in the early years, and if you didn't learn the F lever early on you might never fully integrate it into your playing. Imagine a guitar teacher who says "Tuck your little finger into your palm. You don't need it for most chords. You can learn how to use it later. It's an advanced technique." Would you go back to that teacher for a sceond lesson? I wouldn't. Well, the F lever is one of your "fingers" on the E9th pedal steel. You can get around without it, but you have to understand it first. Otherwise, you'll never really "get" the E9th. That's my opinion.BTW, my Maverick has two pedals and one lever. Guess which! ------------------
Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts Sierra SD-12 (Ext E9), Williams D-12 Crossover, Sierra S-12 (F Diatonic) Sierra Laptop 8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster (E13, C6, A6) |
Tony Prior Member From: Charlotte NC
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:14 AM
profile
well spoken b0b..but I would add the Eb lever as an absolute integral part of the equation..another required finger if you will... t |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:20 AM
profile
b0b- You mentioned the "F" lever and I agree it does help. However on the 8th string you can "Slant" and cover it. The thought just occured to me- When and who used the "F" lever first and about what period of time.?Was anybody using it before they started building Mavericks?I am surprised we get very little comment on this subject from the "PRO" players.ED |
Bobby Lee Sysop From: Cloverdale, North California, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:26 AM
profile
Lloyd Green doesn't lower his 4th string!  I think that you can get by with two levers if one lowers the 2nd and 8th strings, and the other raises the 4th. I had a Marlin that I set up within Maverick-like mechanical limitations, and I was amazed at how much it could do. You just have to get used to using the 2nd string more - not a bad thing to learn!
|
Bobby Lee Sysop From: Cloverdale, North California, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:29 AM
profile
Lloyd Green is credited with discovering the F lever change and being the first to use it on record. |
John Schjolberg Member From: Golden Valley, Minnesota, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:38 AM
profile
What is the standard knee lever change on a Maverick? Can it be changed to raise the E strings to an F? |
Bobby Lee Sysop From: Cloverdale, North California, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:49 AM
profile
The standard at the time was to lower the 2nd and 8th string. It's a combination of the two standard levers that works pretty well, actually. I think that the direction of the single lever was designed for lowering only. There is no lever reversing mechanism, so you can't use that lever for a raise. The Zum Student Model had the same limitation at one time. I'm not sure if it still does. My Maverick has a homemade LKL. I don't have the original parts. |
Farris Currie Member From: Ona, Florida, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 11:56 AM
profile
mavaricks, were straight fingers,raises only best i remember,raise all you want,but no lowering,cables ect.although some have changed them some, still not much!!!! farris |
Dave O'Brien Member From: Okeechobee, FL USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 12:11 PM
profile
The only problem with Mavericks is the newer vinyl covered ones leave a residue in the chimney. |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 24 January 2005 12:35 PM
profile
Believe it or not there is a simply way to make a R/L change with a Maverick type "Finger".I don't use it because I usually make a conversion and change the whole undercarriage when I rebuild a Maverick.I still feel the Maverick is getting "Bashed" unnessarily.I would say 90% of old Mavericks are still around.How many TV's,Computers etc. the same age are still around?ED |
Lem Smith Member From: Fulton, MS. U.S.A.
|
posted 24 January 2005 12:37 PM
profile
quote: When and who used the "F" lever first and about what period of time.?
Ed, as b0b mentioned, it was Lloyd Green who first used that change, and the first recording that it was used on was D.I.V.O.R.C.E. by Tammy Wynette. Farris, the Maverick's did indeed lower. That was what the knee lever did, it lowered the 2nd and 8th strings. Folks can say all the bad things they want about a Maverick, but the first Maverick that I played, which was one of the vinyl covered ones, was such a major improvement over the guitar that I started with, that for a while I thought the Maverick WAS a pro level guitar!!!  Lem |
Farris Currie Member From: Ona, Florida, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 01:06 PM
profile
Dave i love it,they did stink up the chimney,LEM, your right they did put a spring in there to lower couple strings i think. pullers were all pull tho,junk junk, and that viynal cover,must have got a real deal on that!!!they were hard to burn though. farris |
Kevin Hatton Member From: Amherst, N.Y.
|
posted 24 January 2005 03:34 PM
profile
Dave O., you crack me up. Funny, but your right the last time I took the chimney ashes out. |
Dave O'Brien Member From: Okeechobee, FL USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 03:36 PM
profile
Like you Farris I sold tons of them back in the 70's but now for what they are bringing (on eBad)you can get an MSA or BMI or something much better for very little more money. Let's try to guide the beginners towards those older quality built guitars. |
David Doggett Member From: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
|
posted 24 January 2005 10:17 PM
profile
My Maverick came with 3 and 1. I bought it used from Bobbe Seymour around 1975. Charlie Gore, the guy I learned from took me down to ShoBud and had them add a second knee lever. The stock lever was RKR. It could lower a couple of strings. The way the changer worked was that the string tension held the fingers against the allen screw tunable stop on the right side of the changer hole (like on a push-pull). For a raise (pedal or knee), the coat hanger pull rod pulled the finger against the body on the left side of the changer hole. You tuned the strings at the key head with the pedals down (holding the fingers against the body), and tuned the open string with the allen screw (like a push-pull). For a lower, the RKR used a loop spring at the lever cross-rod to keep tension on the coat-hanger pull-rod to hold the finger against the body at the left of the changer hole (the opposite of the raise strings). Pressing the lever toward the changer slacked the string until it hit the allen head tunable screw on the right of the changer hole. So you tuned the lower string open at the keyhead, then pressed the lever to tune the lower against the allen screw.So you had to choose whether you wanted a string to raise or lower, it couldn't do both. I never knew that the stock lower was on strings 2 and 8. On the advice of Charlie, Shobud put on a new LKL that raised strings 4 and 8 by the same mechanism as the pedals (the coat-hanger pull-rod pulling the finger against the body at the left of the changer hole. So the stock RKR lower lever could not lower string 8. They set it up to lower 2 and 9. Which was the standard for RKR on the pro models. But you see, I lost the lower on 8. You could conceivably have a LKR to lower something, but you had to pick something that didn't already have a raise or lower. I guess you could have lowered 1 and/or 7. You could get multiple raises by attaching more than one pedal to the yokes that attached the ball-end bell-cranks to the coat-hanger pull-rods. The yokes could swivel to pull strings evenly, as long as the coat hangers were the proper length for each string. So I guess the Maverick could properly be called a coat-hanger raise-or-lower pedal steel. One of my pull rods was an actual piece of coat-hanger that I used to get one of the pulls even. I don't know that the Maverick was much worse than the first Bigsby pedal steels, or the original ShoBud permanents. But today, with all the great old used pro models available from the Forum, or dealers like Bobbe Seymour and Scotty, a beginner can do better than a Maverick, for only slightly more money. [This message was edited by David Doggett on 24 January 2005 at 10:26 PM.] |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 25 January 2005 06:04 AM
profile
If the MAVERICK is such a bad guitar I cannot figure out why so many are still around, and they bring big money.FENDER sold a modified version of the Maverick when Sho-Bud built them.They can be modified very easily and will hold their own with about any single neck Steel.For years I have thought about having a "Maverick Conversion" workshop.In by 8 am out by 4pm.ED |
Sidney Ralph Penton Member From: Moberly, Missouri, USA
|
posted 25 January 2005 06:09 AM
profile
john i started on a carter starter and i wished i would have went right to a pro model it would have saved me money in the long run. i went from the carter starter to a carter U12, too many strings to complicated to play. so then i sold it and went to a SD10 zum wow what a psg. starters don't have adjustable legs and they don't sound quite as good as a pro model. you can get a carter starter for about 700 you can get on the forum and find a good used psg for 1500. that is what i paid for my zum used. and was lucky to get it. a zum don't last more than a couple hours on the forum. sho buds there is a reason that they give you extra parts when you buy one. thanks doc
------------------ zum SD10 peavy vegas 400 peavy special 212 if its not a zum steel it isn't real
|
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 25 January 2005 07:16 AM
profile
I have said this many times-Take a 'Converted" Maverick w/a George L PU-Go behind the curtain on stage and play to a croud, and watch and see how many leave or "BOO" the player.As the ultimate test have various other guitars and switch back and forth. Anybody willing to try this??? ED |
Bob Carlucci Member From: Candor, New York, USA
|
posted 25 January 2005 07:56 AM
profile
Ed I AGREE as long as we are talking about the original maple body/neck Maverick.. If its a contact paper job forget it. The original Maverick with a "real" changer and a few knees and a good pickup,would make a nice pedal steel. The problem is cost. For the same price of a Maverick purchase and conversion, you can get any number of used pro quality pedal steel guitars. If a guy has a maple body Maverick laying around,by all means, get it upgraded.. I sure would,but to BUY one and then having to upgrade it doesn't seem to make much sense. bob |
Bobby Lee Sysop From: Cloverdale, North California, USA
|
posted 25 January 2005 08:13 AM
profile
quote: I have said this many times-Take a 'Converted" Maverick w/a George L PU-Go behind the curtain on stage and play to a croud, and watch and see how many leave or "BOO" the player.
That's silly, Ed. I've never seen an audience dis a musician because of his guitar. The guitar doesn't make the music - the musician makes the music. Audiences know that! I've heard that Bobbe Seymour used a Maverick for a Johnny Paycheck tour. I'm sure it was Bobbe's talent that got him the job, not his choice of guitars.------------------
Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts Sierra SD-12 (Ext E9), Williams D-12 Crossover, Sierra S-12 (F Diatonic) Sierra Laptop 8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster (E13, C6, A6) |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 25 January 2005 09:40 AM
profile
b0b-To claify my point- Have the audience score the "SOUND" of the guitar they are hearing.Example- Guitar #1 -#2-etc. rate them 1-10. Like rating the Animal Talent show on ANIMAL PLANET TV. Keep it basic- 1 AMP,Volume pedal, and no "EFFECTS".I still think it would be interesting.OH- the audience has to be general people and no STEEL players voting. ED |
Lem Smith Member From: Fulton, MS. U.S.A.
|
posted 25 January 2005 01:10 PM
profile
quote: OH- the audience has to be general people and no STEEL players voting.
In that case, I don't believe a difference would be detected. I'm not so sure that John Q. Public would know the difference in sound between a lap steel and a modern day D10. Lem |
Kevin Hatton Member From: Amherst, N.Y.
|
posted 25 January 2005 02:41 PM
profile
There once was a guy named Ed Whose Maverick sounded unusually dead He hit it with a hammer Used slats and a jackhammer And now Ed's Maverick is a bed Copyright 2005. (Ed I only do this to people I like). |
John Steele Member From: Renfrew, Ontario, Canada
|
posted 25 January 2005 02:46 PM
profile
I started on a Maverick, but I sold it to get something with more changes on it. I didn't sell it because I disliked the sound. In fact, it sounded pretty good. The guy I sold it to is now working around Ottawa with it, playing in several bands and sounding fine. When I read the incredible angst directed toward mavericks by some of the forumites, I smile and think about him. I wonder if he knows he not supposed to be out there with a maverick, sounding so good and having such a good time ! -John |
Ed Naylor Member From: portsmouth.ohio usa
|
posted 25 January 2005 03:08 PM
profile
Lem- Thanks for helping prove my point.Remember the saying" Gone but not forgotten?"" The Steel is in a reverse now-"Forgotten but not gone."I don't know when or how, but Steel Guitar will come back. WE must keep the word out. Practically every time I call a company I ask the receptionest- Do you know what a Steel Guitar is??Occasionally one will know.It comes down to PUBLIC AWARENESS. Put the word out ED |