|
Author
|
Topic: REECE Told me the Millennium
|
Gary Steele
Member From: Orient, Ohio, USA
|
posted 28 July 2006 07:47 AM
profile
I talked Reece last night and he told me the Millennium has had changes and modifycations since they started making them and told me they are much sweeter now in several ways. Like he said you constantltry to improve. I hope this is worded right. If not Reece can email me and i will make my adjustments also.I thought the first ones like the one i had was pretty terrific, SO! I only sold mine to pay some bills. |
Darvin Willhoite
Member From: Leander, Tx. USA
|
posted 28 July 2006 11:50 AM
profile
I think the latest version is the M3, which has a quad raise, triple lower changer and there may be a few other changes. My M3 and Legend have the same mechanics and these are the best sounding and easiest playing steels I have ever owned, the Rolls Royce of steel guitars. I own some other brands too that I would class as the Cadillac's and Mercedes' if you want to compare them to automobiles.------------------
Darvin Willhoite
Riva Ridge Recording
|
C. Christofferson
Member From: Utah, USA
|
posted 28 July 2006 12:15 PM
profile
G or D, hello, could you inform as to what is meant by a quad raise triple lower mechanism? Added later: Can i assume that any one of those options for one string can be either set to a halftone or a fulltone raise or lower or any combination thereof? Thx Gary and y'all for great info and pics.[This message was edited by C. Christofferson on 28 July 2006 at 06:20 PM.] |
Doug Seymour
Member From: Jamestown NY USA
|
posted 28 July 2006 12:32 PM
profile
four different raises & three different lowers
on each string. (if needed) |
Greg Cutshaw
Member From: Corry, PA, USA
|
posted 28 July 2006 03:24 PM
profile
For a detailed view of the changer end
click here! Go to my web site below for additional detailed MSA pics.Greg 
Greg's Web Page
MSA/Steel King Sounds
Complete Songs Added 6/26/2006!
|
Mike Perlowin
Member From: Los Angeles CA
|
posted 28 July 2006 04:40 PM
profile
The bell cranks on the M3 have 14 holes, for extremely accurate tuning and adjusting.. ------------------
Warning: I have a telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site [This message was edited by Mike Perlowin on 28 July 2006 at 04:40 PM.]
|
Greg Cutshaw
Member From: Corry, PA, USA
|
posted 28 July 2006 05:10 PM
profile
Bells cranks? click here and click here Greg |
Donny Hinson
Member From: Balto., Md. U.S.A.
|
posted 29 July 2006 11:52 AM
profile
The 14-hole (or rather, "slot") pullers are considered a plus by many, but I find them unnecessary. I was disappointed when I heard MSA dropped the titanium pull-rods in favor of regular stainless steel rods.I wonder if they're still an option? |
Mike Wheeler
Member From: Columbus, Ohio, USA
|
posted 29 July 2006 03:35 PM
profile
Donny and Mike P., I counted only 12 slots in the bell cranks...did I miss something?Just curious. |
Mark Fasbender
Member From: Salt Lake City,Utah
|
posted 29 July 2006 05:11 PM
profile
Mine has the older system with 4 positions and everything pulls fine. I took it to a rehearsal with a swing band and the solidity of the tone is something else. Everyone noticed right away. Impressive. ------------------
Got Twang ? Mark |
Mike Perlowin
Member From: Los Angeles CA
|
posted 29 July 2006 05:41 PM
profile
I was told the bell cranks had 14 holes. I never counted them.I was also told that the reason they stopped using titanium pull rods was that they don't work as well as the stainless steel ones. ------------------
Warning: I have a telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site |
Al Marcus
Member From: Cedar Springs,MI USA
|
posted 29 July 2006 08:16 PM
profile
Greg-re those Bellcranks slots staggered ? Looks like it in the 2nf picture. If so that would make the tuning pull even more precise than ever.It is a big improvement. the older ones were more standard with the brass setscrew bushings. They worked good,but, Now these are hooks. I would think that it would be easier to change a tuning pull if a player wished to....al  ------------------
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus/
|
Stephen Gambrell
Member From: Ware Shoals, South Carolina, USA
|
posted 30 July 2006 04:29 AM
profile
Titanium would also be cheaper than stainless, and easier to work with. |
Hook Moore
Member From: South Charleston,West Virginia
|
posted 30 July 2006 04:34 AM
profile
Your right Al, its extremely easy to add or change a pull. I just got a 05 M3 and changed the knee lever setup in just minutes. Donny, I don`t know if the titanium rods are better or worse than the stainless steel rods but I can`t imagine a guitar that plays or performs any better than the millennium.
Hook------------------
www.HookMoore.com
|
Donny Hinson
Member From: Balto., Md. U.S.A.
|
posted 30 July 2006 11:34 AM
profile
quote:
Donny, I don`t know if the titanium rods are better or worse than the stainless steel rods...
They're better; in fact, they're almost twice as good! Uhh...next question?  |
Reece Anderson
Member From: Keller Texas USA
|
posted 30 July 2006 01:09 PM
profile
Should someone want titanium rods on their new MSA, all they need to do is specify. |
Mark Eaton
Member From: Windsor, Sonoma County, CA
|
posted 30 July 2006 01:39 PM
profile
Stephen wrote:"Titanium would also be cheaper than stainless, and easier to work with." I'm no metallurgist, but one subject I have really been into for decades is bicycles, both road racing and mountain bikes. I know that in that application, titanium is historically way more expensive than stainless steel, so I can't figure out how it would be cheaper when it comes to steel guitar parts. Also, when working with titanium in bicycle frames and components, it has to be an absolutely sterile environment, so setting up shop to utilize this material is cost prohibitive. The hardness of titanium (as a material) in bicycle building also burns through a lot more cutting tools and devices, so apparently requires a more skilled hand than working with stainless. Once again-not a metallurgist-but what benefit would titanium have over stainless steel in this application for a steel guitar? Save a little bit of weight? ------------------
Mark
[This message was edited by Mark Eaton on 30 July 2006 at 01:40 PM.] |
Stephen Gambrell
Member From: Ware Shoals, South Carolina, USA
|
posted 30 July 2006 04:00 PM
profile
Thanks, Mark! Of course, I got it backwards, and you caught it. I've worked around machine shops a lot, and I of course meant that titanium would be more expensive.
Again, thank you! |
Donny Hinson
Member From: Balto., Md. U.S.A.
|
posted 30 July 2006 04:40 PM
profile
Thank you, Reece, for your answer here, as well as for the e-mail. It's good to know that MSA will still acommodate any customers who desire the titanium rods. Mark, you're right on both counts. Titanium is harder to work with, and it's also more costly than stainless. However, it's not only the low weight that makes me embrace the material, but the thermal stability advantages. You see, in most every all-pull guitar (except for the old Fender cable models), the pedal tuning is adjusted by turning a nut on the pull rod. This nut is, in effect, a "length adjuster" for the rod, and when we adjust the nut what we're actually doing is changing the length of the entire rod to set the pedal tuning. Any thermal deviations in the length of the rod will therefore affect the pedal tuning. One (I feel) very important advantage of titanium over stainless in this application is that it is more thermally stable, it changes much less (dimensionally) with changes in temperature. I fully understand that practically everyone else in the world is quite satisfied with the performance of stainless steel pull rods. But I, personally, just happen to think that titanium is superior. I'm funny that way.  |
Mark Fasbender
Member From: Salt Lake City,Utah
|
posted 30 July 2006 04:48 PM
profile
Never mind
[This message was edited by Mark Fasbender on 30 July 2006 at 04:49 PM.] |
Mark Fasbender
Member From: Salt Lake City,Utah
|
posted 30 July 2006 04:50 PM
profile
Donny...... A P/P guitar stops at the changer as well. ------------------
Got Twang ? Mark |
Mike Perlowin
Member From: Los Angeles CA
|
posted 31 July 2006 04:13 AM
profile
Has anybody compared the pedal action of 2 otherwise identical guitars, one equipped with steel rods and one with titanium? Is there a noticable difference?Frankly, I can't imagine how the pedal action could be any smoother than it is on my M3 (with the stainless steel rods.) ------------------
Warning: I have a telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site |
Donny Hinson
Member From: Balto., Md. U.S.A.
|
posted 31 July 2006 08:40 AM
profile
Mike, Reece informed me that if there was a case where two rods were touching, that the titanium rods would create some friction, kinda like when you rub two ceramic parts together. I feel that the rods can be routed so as to prevent two adajacent rods from touching. Once that is done, the pedal "feel" would be identical between the two. On short rods, I think that the stainless would probably work fine. However, on the longer (E9th) rods, I'd personally like to see titanium employed.By the way, it was Buddy Emmons that turned me on to this "problem" (thermal contraction and expansion of the rods affecting the pedal tuning) on the all-pull guitars. |
Darvin Willhoite
Member From: Leander, Tx. USA
|
posted 31 July 2006 06:25 PM
profile
My old MSA Classic SS has Aluminum pull rods, which is effected by temperature even more than stainless. I have never noticed a problem with this, although I do almost always play in churches or my studio where the temperature is pretty constant. If I play outside I use my mica Fessenden which has stainless pull rods. ------------------
Darvin Willhoite
Riva Ridge Recording
|
The Steel Guitar Forum
