Kevin H…..I of course don’t know anything about what Bruce Zumsteg considers as a benchmark, but I do know he has every right to be proud of his achievements, not only as a steel guitar builder, but as a steel guitar player as well.
If you would, please tell me what I said that does not make sence to you, and I’ll do my best to explain more clearly.
After looking over your posts in this thread, it appears my comments have opposed your opinion. There is nothing unusual about opposing opinions, but when that occurs there is usually conversation between the two. I would like to believe you would be agreeable to changing your trend by responding to my comments as I have done for you.
If I understand you correctly, it appears our differences about consistent and inherent tone are:…… you are basing your position on your opinion and that of others, that consistent inherent tone exists within a specific brand of guitar, and I am sharing my comments on comparison evaluations conducted over decades, which is not only true, but verifiable.
If you chose not to discuss our opposing views, one would think you would be anxious and acceptable to the idea of accepting the opportunity to take the comparison evaluation yourself. I respectfully ask if you would be willing to do so? The details as to where and when an evaluation could take place and the results would be of interest to many on this forum and elsewhere.
You may be the first to successfully prove an inherent tone exists, and if so I will be the first to congratulate you. I might also consider being present for the evaluation, if I am.......dinners on me.
Paul A……Its always great to see a lurker “uncloak” themselves. Thank you for your kind comment!
MSA vs Sho-Bud/Emmons
Moderator: Shoshanah Marohn
-
Rex Thomas
- Posts: 1202
- Joined: 17 Jan 2002 1:01 am
- Location: Thompson's Station, TN
Owned all 3
A slight career change took me out of having a steel for now, but I had to get in on this as I owned all three in the '70's, owning the Emmons the longest.
Started with the little Sho-Bud single neck with the vol/tone knobs, coil switch. Great little guitar.
Moved up to a "Professional". Cabinet was a work of art. Good Sho-Bud tone. But it was a clunker to play.
On to 2 MSA's; one Classic plywood, then to the maple bodied Classic. Bought the maple Classic straight from Reece/Jerry, mid '70's. Both had the super-sustain humbuckers. Interesting thing is IMO the plywood Classic had a little more presence in the tone than the maple Classic, & I have old Wright Bros. recordings to prove it. But the maple MSA was the mechanical DEAL. Didn't limit me in any way, slick as all get out. No, tone wasn't great, but it worked.
Then I followed the crowd & went with a p/p Emmons. Always had mixed feelings about it. Owned it the longest, mainly because I stopped upgrading in the steel dept. To start, it had the "Crawford" chunkier single coil, which didn't take it too far from the MSA's, but yeah, it did have the famous p/p thing goin' on. I did have issues with the longer scale, didn't like the feel after being spoiled with the MSA's precision. But, got used to it, gigged it a LOT.
So, in my little corner, who won? Well, at that time, playability mattered more to me than tone, so I'd have to give it to the maple MSA. Knowing what I know now, what would I have kept/changed? Put the Surratt/Marrs mechs. in the Sho-Bud, better pickup in the MSA. Sorry, don't miss the Emmons. Recently, I had a Derby for awhile, & it most definitely satisfied my p/p desires, but it also wasn't MSA smooth. Derb was a great gtr. though, & I miss it.
Presently both MSA's & Jackson's are too expensive for me. LOVE the Jackson though, the SJC blew me away in tone/playability. I've heard plenty of great sounding Millys & Legends. The Show-Pros are cool, but the SJC's raise/lower system spins my beanie.
Guess through all this rambling I'd say the Sho-Bud's beauty, the MSA's mechanics, the Derby's (the one I had) tone. There U go.
Anyway, that's the way it WAS.
Started with the little Sho-Bud single neck with the vol/tone knobs, coil switch. Great little guitar.
Moved up to a "Professional". Cabinet was a work of art. Good Sho-Bud tone. But it was a clunker to play.
On to 2 MSA's; one Classic plywood, then to the maple bodied Classic. Bought the maple Classic straight from Reece/Jerry, mid '70's. Both had the super-sustain humbuckers. Interesting thing is IMO the plywood Classic had a little more presence in the tone than the maple Classic, & I have old Wright Bros. recordings to prove it. But the maple MSA was the mechanical DEAL. Didn't limit me in any way, slick as all get out. No, tone wasn't great, but it worked.
Then I followed the crowd & went with a p/p Emmons. Always had mixed feelings about it. Owned it the longest, mainly because I stopped upgrading in the steel dept. To start, it had the "Crawford" chunkier single coil, which didn't take it too far from the MSA's, but yeah, it did have the famous p/p thing goin' on. I did have issues with the longer scale, didn't like the feel after being spoiled with the MSA's precision. But, got used to it, gigged it a LOT.
So, in my little corner, who won? Well, at that time, playability mattered more to me than tone, so I'd have to give it to the maple MSA. Knowing what I know now, what would I have kept/changed? Put the Surratt/Marrs mechs. in the Sho-Bud, better pickup in the MSA. Sorry, don't miss the Emmons. Recently, I had a Derby for awhile, & it most definitely satisfied my p/p desires, but it also wasn't MSA smooth. Derb was a great gtr. though, & I miss it.
Presently both MSA's & Jackson's are too expensive for me. LOVE the Jackson though, the SJC blew me away in tone/playability. I've heard plenty of great sounding Millys & Legends. The Show-Pros are cool, but the SJC's raise/lower system spins my beanie.
Guess through all this rambling I'd say the Sho-Bud's beauty, the MSA's mechanics, the Derby's (the one I had) tone. There U go.
Anyway, that's the way it WAS.
-
Bill Duncan
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: 10 Jul 2008 1:53 pm
- Location: Lenoir, North Carolina, USA
If I understand Kevin's position, that the MSA's did not, and do not have the "tone", then shouldn't Kevin be able to consistently identify an MSA from the pack because of it's lack of inherent tone?
I would like for someone who "knows" what the builders of the tone monsters did to impart the "tone" in their brand of guitars, to explain it to me. I want to know what to look for because I am going to buy a new guitar, and the information sure would help me make my decision. If this inherent tone is so apparent in the vintage Sho-Buds and Emmons guitars, then surely someone knows the secret of the super tone. What is the benchmark, and how was it achieved?
As many guitars as MSA has built over the years you would think they could have found out, and put it in the MSA.
I would like for someone who "knows" what the builders of the tone monsters did to impart the "tone" in their brand of guitars, to explain it to me. I want to know what to look for because I am going to buy a new guitar, and the information sure would help me make my decision. If this inherent tone is so apparent in the vintage Sho-Buds and Emmons guitars, then surely someone knows the secret of the super tone. What is the benchmark, and how was it achieved?
As many guitars as MSA has built over the years you would think they could have found out, and put it in the MSA.
You can observe a lot just by looking
>>>As many guitars as MSA has built over the years you would think they could have found out, and put it in the MSA.<<<
Good point Bill!
Break down all the features that MSA has added to their guitars over the years. Which ones have stayed, which ones have gone? Which ones were done from the standpoint of improving the cold hard tone you hear in a blind test, and which ones were done for pure psychological appeal? Here's some I thought of off the the top of my head:
Keyed heads only: tone or psyc?
Alum necks: tone or psyc?
CF Millennium bodies: tone or psyc?
Maple Legend bodies: tone or psyc?
Studio pro scale length: tone or psyc?
Quick change p/ups: tone or psyc?
I'm sure we're all going to give different answers. What that says to me is that there's a lot of gray area between what you deem "tone" and "psyc". Just consider how much your depth of perspective changes when you move from the pure listening standpoint to sitting behind the instrument and playing. What I process as "tone" when I'm playing has content beyond what my ears alone are telling me. It's evidenced in vinyl vs. tape, analogue vs. digital listening experiments. Especially w/ vinyl, there can be things going on in that 40-50khz range which the listener can perceive, but not actually "hear". So I suspect a lot of that higher order content is processed by us as tone~ especially when we're making physical contact with the instrument. If we don't hear it with our ears, we hear it with the hairs on the back of our necks!
Good point Bill!
Break down all the features that MSA has added to their guitars over the years. Which ones have stayed, which ones have gone? Which ones were done from the standpoint of improving the cold hard tone you hear in a blind test, and which ones were done for pure psychological appeal? Here's some I thought of off the the top of my head:
Keyed heads only: tone or psyc?
Alum necks: tone or psyc?
CF Millennium bodies: tone or psyc?
Maple Legend bodies: tone or psyc?
Studio pro scale length: tone or psyc?
Quick change p/ups: tone or psyc?
I'm sure we're all going to give different answers. What that says to me is that there's a lot of gray area between what you deem "tone" and "psyc". Just consider how much your depth of perspective changes when you move from the pure listening standpoint to sitting behind the instrument and playing. What I process as "tone" when I'm playing has content beyond what my ears alone are telling me. It's evidenced in vinyl vs. tape, analogue vs. digital listening experiments. Especially w/ vinyl, there can be things going on in that 40-50khz range which the listener can perceive, but not actually "hear". So I suspect a lot of that higher order content is processed by us as tone~ especially when we're making physical contact with the instrument. If we don't hear it with our ears, we hear it with the hairs on the back of our necks!
-
Dave Mudgett
- Moderator
- Posts: 9648
- Joined: 16 Jul 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
I think this fine gentleman - perhaps my favorite jazz guitar player of all - isolates the real issue with all of this in this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4wjpnG91LQ
I don't think this is primarily about pedal steel guitars, particular brands or designs, or anything like that. Of course, each of us has our preferences, which evolve as we develop on the instrument. The theme is so common among musicians of all types that I started a separate discussion thread about this is over in the Music section. I really think the relationship between the instrument and player is paramount, and frequently given short shrift.
This emphatically does not mean that the particulars about an instrument don't matter - they obviously do. But the idea that because a different player doesn't see it "my way" means they have cloth ears or can't hear well - an argument I have seen on this thread and many others - is pretty vacuous, IMHO. Different players have different sounds in their heads. It is possible to accept and even embrace that reality without giving anything up.
My opinions, naturally.
I don't think this is primarily about pedal steel guitars, particular brands or designs, or anything like that. Of course, each of us has our preferences, which evolve as we develop on the instrument. The theme is so common among musicians of all types that I started a separate discussion thread about this is over in the Music section. I really think the relationship between the instrument and player is paramount, and frequently given short shrift.
This emphatically does not mean that the particulars about an instrument don't matter - they obviously do. But the idea that because a different player doesn't see it "my way" means they have cloth ears or can't hear well - an argument I have seen on this thread and many others - is pretty vacuous, IMHO. Different players have different sounds in their heads. It is possible to accept and even embrace that reality without giving anything up.
My opinions, naturally.
-
J D Sauser
- Moderator
- Posts: 2808
- Joined: 4 Aug 1998 11:00 pm
- Location: Wellington, Florida
- Contact:
While for the most part, as others also pointed out this has been quite a surprisingly civilized discussion, I wish not to add much more to it.
Only that, I had hoped I could post a youtube clip which someone else had uploaded and apparently disappeared. Anyway, I just found, that I had saved it, so I re-uploaded it onto youtube.
It shows one marvelous steel guitarist playing in a Nashville setting in a series of solo clips, on two different brand guitars... brands which have been mentioned on this thread.
I think the listener/viewer ought to play the video first with the eyes closed... and only at the repeat, watch.. well, one or the other may come away with a different opinion.
Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b75msHFynvU
... J-D.
Only that, I had hoped I could post a youtube clip which someone else had uploaded and apparently disappeared. Anyway, I just found, that I had saved it, so I re-uploaded it onto youtube.
It shows one marvelous steel guitarist playing in a Nashville setting in a series of solo clips, on two different brand guitars... brands which have been mentioned on this thread.
I think the listener/viewer ought to play the video first with the eyes closed... and only at the repeat, watch.. well, one or the other may come away with a different opinion.
Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b75msHFynvU
... J-D.
Last edited by J D Sauser on 11 Mar 2009 2:58 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
Fred Shannon
- Posts: 3363
- Joined: 27 Sep 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Rocking "S" Ranch, Comancheria, Texas, R.I.P.
- Contact:
"As many guitars as MSA has built over the years you would think they could have found out, and put it in the MSA."
After listening to the above clip, there's not one single doubt in my mind, they've found it, and the newer MSA's don't take a back seat.
phred
After listening to the above clip, there's not one single doubt in my mind, they've found it, and the newer MSA's don't take a back seat.
phred
There are only two defining forces that have offered to die for you; Jesus Christ and the American GI!!
Think about it!!
Think about it!!
-
Bill Duncan
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: 10 Jul 2008 1:53 pm
- Location: Lenoir, North Carolina, USA
Dave,
What you say is very true. Some folks seem to get it in their mind that since they think a certain way, then anyone who disagrees with them is wrong. They then rationalize that if the person cannot be persuaded to change their opinion, then there has to be something faulty with that persons senses! That's when the "cloth ears" and "tone deaf" terms get brought out.
To set the record straight, there is no such thing as "cloth ears", and "tone deafness" is extremely rare!
What you say is very true. Some folks seem to get it in their mind that since they think a certain way, then anyone who disagrees with them is wrong. They then rationalize that if the person cannot be persuaded to change their opinion, then there has to be something faulty with that persons senses! That's when the "cloth ears" and "tone deaf" terms get brought out.
To set the record straight, there is no such thing as "cloth ears", and "tone deafness" is extremely rare!
You can observe a lot just by looking
-
Chris LeDrew
- Posts: 6404
- Joined: 27 May 2005 12:01 am
- Location: Canada
J D, the last solo sounds best. (I first watched with eyes closed.) I have the same model guitar, probably same year, and it too has that same sound: sweet, with very haunting overtones. No fighting it for sustain and tone up top. It's not all in the hands IMO, even though Curly had two of the best.
-
Reece Anderson
- Posts: 2218
- Joined: 21 Jun 1999 12:01 am
- Location: Keller Texas USA, R.I.P.
Bill D…..I have never seen or heard the words “cloth ears”, which is somewhat amusing. I’m of course familiar with the term “tone deaf”. I have always believed tone deaf was a medical term which had little if anything to do with tone in the musical context to which we’re discussing.
Chris L…..I agree with you in that I could hear a tone difference in the two clips, but that does not change my belief that were the amp to be adjusted to a like tone, it is extremely unlikely that an inherent tone could be consistently identified.
Tone may not “all” be in the hands, but anyone who believes the hands don’t play a very significant role in the overall sound, would be mistaken. Anyone can quickly and easily verify this to be true by asking someone who is getting a terrific tone to let you sit down and play their guitar, when you do, you will find it sounds nothing like the sound they were getting. The hands of the player can indeed dramatically change the tone.
As time passes most players alter their sound somewhat. I could be mistaken, but it was my understanding that at the time when Curly was using the Sho-Bud he was also using a Sho-Bud/Evans amp, and when playing MSA he had changed to Peavey.
I continue to be convinced that the hands, eyes, overall guitar design, cosmetics and color, are critical ingredients to achieving be best tone for each individual.
Chris L…..I agree with you in that I could hear a tone difference in the two clips, but that does not change my belief that were the amp to be adjusted to a like tone, it is extremely unlikely that an inherent tone could be consistently identified.
Tone may not “all” be in the hands, but anyone who believes the hands don’t play a very significant role in the overall sound, would be mistaken. Anyone can quickly and easily verify this to be true by asking someone who is getting a terrific tone to let you sit down and play their guitar, when you do, you will find it sounds nothing like the sound they were getting. The hands of the player can indeed dramatically change the tone.
As time passes most players alter their sound somewhat. I could be mistaken, but it was my understanding that at the time when Curly was using the Sho-Bud he was also using a Sho-Bud/Evans amp, and when playing MSA he had changed to Peavey.
I continue to be convinced that the hands, eyes, overall guitar design, cosmetics and color, are critical ingredients to achieving be best tone for each individual.
-
Kevin Hatton
- Posts: 8173
- Joined: 3 Jan 2002 1:01 am
- Location: Buffalo, N.Y.
- Contact:
-
Donny Hinson
- Posts: 21192
- Joined: 16 Feb 1999 1:01 am
- Location: Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
-
Reece Anderson
- Posts: 2218
- Joined: 21 Jun 1999 12:01 am
- Location: Keller Texas USA, R.I.P.
-
Rex Thomas
- Posts: 1202
- Joined: 17 Jan 2002 1:01 am
- Location: Thompson's Station, TN
R.o.t.f.l.m. Tukus O.
And the pot yet get be-stirreth.
HAW!!!
-
Bill Duncan
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: 10 Jul 2008 1:53 pm
- Location: Lenoir, North Carolina, USA
Kevin H.
From what I understand from your remarks about pedal steel design, there was some sort of vast "tone" research and development program going on at Sho-Bud, Emmons, and any other guitar builder who has the supposed super tone.
I think the bulk of the design research that went on was to; improve the action of the changer, tuning stability, looks of the guitar, and improvements to aid in the cost effective manufacturing of the product.
I do not propose that there is no difference in tone between guitars. There without a doubt is a difference in tone between guitars. That is due to many things such as, loose fasteners, or variances in the amount of down pressure of the strings on the nut and bridge. Those types of things can be fixed, and can happen to any guitar regardless of brand.
I just believe that there is no "super tone" inherent in any particular "brand" of guitar, or that a particular builder has found a "super tone" secret. That what difference there is, can easily be outweighed by the amplifier, and the talent in the hands of the picker.
I also hold that what tone difference there is in the different guitars, is mainly noticed by the picker, and not the listeners.
Before I get drunk and forget to ask! What is the design factor, item, or what ever, that instills the inherent tone in the Sho-Bud/Emmons guitars, and was supposedly left out of the MSA?
From what I understand from your remarks about pedal steel design, there was some sort of vast "tone" research and development program going on at Sho-Bud, Emmons, and any other guitar builder who has the supposed super tone.
I think the bulk of the design research that went on was to; improve the action of the changer, tuning stability, looks of the guitar, and improvements to aid in the cost effective manufacturing of the product.
I do not propose that there is no difference in tone between guitars. There without a doubt is a difference in tone between guitars. That is due to many things such as, loose fasteners, or variances in the amount of down pressure of the strings on the nut and bridge. Those types of things can be fixed, and can happen to any guitar regardless of brand.
I just believe that there is no "super tone" inherent in any particular "brand" of guitar, or that a particular builder has found a "super tone" secret. That what difference there is, can easily be outweighed by the amplifier, and the talent in the hands of the picker.
I also hold that what tone difference there is in the different guitars, is mainly noticed by the picker, and not the listeners.
Before I get drunk and forget to ask! What is the design factor, item, or what ever, that instills the inherent tone in the Sho-Bud/Emmons guitars, and was supposedly left out of the MSA?
Last edited by Bill Duncan on 13 Mar 2009 12:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You can observe a lot just by looking
-
Ken Pippus
- Posts: 2618
- Joined: 8 Feb 2007 7:55 am
- Location: Langford, BC, Canada
-
Bill Duncan
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: 10 Jul 2008 1:53 pm
- Location: Lenoir, North Carolina, USA
I've been looking at new guitars, several brands so far, and it has made me appreciate just how advanced my 30 plus year old MSA guitar is.
Granted, my 1977 D10 Classic is heavy, but the action is great. The pedal stops are solid, with the pedals working very smooth and effortless. It seldom breaks a string, holds tune without a problem, and is solid as a rock!
The only problem I have experienced with it has been with the pickups. They had become microphonic, and picked up a large amount of body noise. I put on a set of George L E66's, and they made a huge improvement. Now the pedal noises are gone, and when played the only sound heard comes from the strings.
The workmanship is flawless. The guitar still looks very good. I installed a set of new fretboards from Tom Bradshaw, and the guitar looks almost new.
Even when comparing my 30 year old MSA to the new ones, about the only advantage I can see is a weight savings. They, (the new ones), are smaller and lighter, but that's about it!
But, when comparing my guitar to the 30 year old Sho-Buds and Emmons, the old MSA is far advanced, and much better built. As a matter of fact, the new guitars are just now catching up to the old MSA.
I am beginning to have second thoughts about needing a new guitar. I already have a "new", meaning advanced, old one! My old, Brown Monster, my 1977 D10, MSA Classic.
It is a Classic in every sense of the word! Did I mention that it has "the sound" too?
Granted, my 1977 D10 Classic is heavy, but the action is great. The pedal stops are solid, with the pedals working very smooth and effortless. It seldom breaks a string, holds tune without a problem, and is solid as a rock!
The only problem I have experienced with it has been with the pickups. They had become microphonic, and picked up a large amount of body noise. I put on a set of George L E66's, and they made a huge improvement. Now the pedal noises are gone, and when played the only sound heard comes from the strings.
The workmanship is flawless. The guitar still looks very good. I installed a set of new fretboards from Tom Bradshaw, and the guitar looks almost new.
Even when comparing my 30 year old MSA to the new ones, about the only advantage I can see is a weight savings. They, (the new ones), are smaller and lighter, but that's about it!
But, when comparing my guitar to the 30 year old Sho-Buds and Emmons, the old MSA is far advanced, and much better built. As a matter of fact, the new guitars are just now catching up to the old MSA.
I am beginning to have second thoughts about needing a new guitar. I already have a "new", meaning advanced, old one! My old, Brown Monster, my 1977 D10, MSA Classic.
It is a Classic in every sense of the word! Did I mention that it has "the sound" too?
You can observe a lot just by looking
-
Fred Shannon
- Posts: 3363
- Joined: 27 Sep 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Rocking "S" Ranch, Comancheria, Texas, R.I.P.
- Contact:
Aw now Bill, it's plainly evident that you don't know what you're saying and you better start ducking. To think that you have one of those old MSA's and you're the least bit satisfied with the tone and how it works is just absolutely incredible. You just don't realize what you've said. Better check with the doctor and get you some meds. You really need help. 
I must say after playing one of these idiot machines since 1962, and non-pedal since 1948, I can tell you that you're in deep poo poo. Adding the E66's, a choice I made when some of my pups went democratic, was the ultimate sin you could have made. They'll change the inherent tone, whatever that is, so much you won't be able to identify your own guitar.
My goodness what's this world coming to, a guy who actually likes what he has in his stable and maybe won't even get a new axe. Oh well, guess he just joined a bunch of us who like our environment, and don't really pay too much attention to some of the naysayers--one in particular.
Welcome aboard Bill.
phred
I must say after playing one of these idiot machines since 1962, and non-pedal since 1948, I can tell you that you're in deep poo poo. Adding the E66's, a choice I made when some of my pups went democratic, was the ultimate sin you could have made. They'll change the inherent tone, whatever that is, so much you won't be able to identify your own guitar.
My goodness what's this world coming to, a guy who actually likes what he has in his stable and maybe won't even get a new axe. Oh well, guess he just joined a bunch of us who like our environment, and don't really pay too much attention to some of the naysayers--one in particular.
Welcome aboard Bill.
phred
There are only two defining forces that have offered to die for you; Jesus Christ and the American GI!!
Think about it!!
Think about it!!
-
Al Marcus
- Posts: 9440
- Joined: 12 May 1999 12:01 am
- Location: Cedar Springs,MI USA (deceased)
- Contact:
Bill and Fred-Now you've done it! the BIG Secret is out. Now watch the prices go up on those Used MSA's that are out there in the steel guitar world...al. 
Michigan (MSGC)Christmas Dinner and Jam on my 80th Birthday.
My Email.. almarcus@cmedic.net
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus
My Email.. almarcus@cmedic.net
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus
-
Bill Duncan
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: 10 Jul 2008 1:53 pm
- Location: Lenoir, North Carolina, USA
Fred, Al,
It is a real eye,(and ear), opener to go around and check out the different new guitars. It made me take a second look at, and appreciate what I have.
These old MSA's really are good guitars!
Al, I realize that you were probably half joking about the prices going up on the vintage MSA's, but, you may just be right!
The only problem I have experienced, is that the pickups, or at least mine, were not potted as well as they should have been.
But, they really are great guitars! Just take a look underneath one, they are, expertly engineered, well thought out, superbly built, guitars.
Come to think of it, I ,(nearly), feel sorry for folks who don't have one! My Dad always said to say nearly, and you won't tell quite as big of a lie.
It is a real eye,(and ear), opener to go around and check out the different new guitars. It made me take a second look at, and appreciate what I have.
These old MSA's really are good guitars!
Al, I realize that you were probably half joking about the prices going up on the vintage MSA's, but, you may just be right!
The only problem I have experienced, is that the pickups, or at least mine, were not potted as well as they should have been.
But, they really are great guitars! Just take a look underneath one, they are, expertly engineered, well thought out, superbly built, guitars.
Come to think of it, I ,(nearly), feel sorry for folks who don't have one! My Dad always said to say nearly, and you won't tell quite as big of a lie.
You can observe a lot just by looking
-
Fred Shannon
- Posts: 3363
- Joined: 27 Sep 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Rocking "S" Ranch, Comancheria, Texas, R.I.P.
- Contact:
Bill for those of us who were around the factory in the old days, Al was one of them, the articulate methods used in the QC of those old classics were step by step checklisted. I've seen several "parts" that were rejected that an untrained eye would never detect.
MSA kinda' scared the heck out of other builders and some players, even though they wouldn't admit it, with their ability to kick out over 2600 units annually during their best year. A bunch of guitars you'll have to admit.
I still have the first Classic I ever bought from the factory plus 3 more different style MSA's. I look for all of them to appreciate in value, sentimentally if not monetarily.
I try to buy every SS off ebay, unless they take it too high, and then resell it to forumites for the same price I paid. They resell quickly and they have the better tone than some of the others. Never make a dime on them but at least they're back in circulation. I recently sold 8 guitars, not all MSA's, we were using in the little school here to another who's going to start a school I hope.
phred
MSA kinda' scared the heck out of other builders and some players, even though they wouldn't admit it, with their ability to kick out over 2600 units annually during their best year. A bunch of guitars you'll have to admit.
I still have the first Classic I ever bought from the factory plus 3 more different style MSA's. I look for all of them to appreciate in value, sentimentally if not monetarily.
I try to buy every SS off ebay, unless they take it too high, and then resell it to forumites for the same price I paid. They resell quickly and they have the better tone than some of the others. Never make a dime on them but at least they're back in circulation. I recently sold 8 guitars, not all MSA's, we were using in the little school here to another who's going to start a school I hope.
phred
There are only two defining forces that have offered to die for you; Jesus Christ and the American GI!!
Think about it!!
Think about it!!
-
Bill Duncan
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: 10 Jul 2008 1:53 pm
- Location: Lenoir, North Carolina, USA
Fred,
The quality shows through! Even after all those years.
I am constantly trying to bring mine to new specifications. With only one guitar, I can't do much at a time. But, the more I learn about my guitar, the more I respect her, and the folks who built her!
I do plan to purchase another guitar so I can dissasemble my Classic, do her justice, and make her brand new! Maybe get a new,old, vintage, MSA. Then I'll have two. After all they don't have the resale price of the "tone titans"; do they?
Did I say how much tone this guitar has? How good she sounds?..... Yeah, I guess I did.
The quality shows through! Even after all those years.
I am constantly trying to bring mine to new specifications. With only one guitar, I can't do much at a time. But, the more I learn about my guitar, the more I respect her, and the folks who built her!
I do plan to purchase another guitar so I can dissasemble my Classic, do her justice, and make her brand new! Maybe get a new,old, vintage, MSA. Then I'll have two. After all they don't have the resale price of the "tone titans"; do they?
Did I say how much tone this guitar has? How good she sounds?..... Yeah, I guess I did.
You can observe a lot just by looking
-
J D Sauser
- Moderator
- Posts: 2808
- Joined: 4 Aug 1998 11:00 pm
- Location: Wellington, Florida
- Contact:
I think the effects of "perception" go further than just color, mechanical aspects, looks and other ingredients directly related to the instrument.
One we often forget is the perception and influence of a particular famed player playing such and such brand.
We mostly assume, and hopefully mostly correctly so, that if "so-and-so" plays a particular brand or model guitar, while we may not really be able to match their tone, they will be playing a particularly good sounding and quality guitar. And we hope for that to be true, even when we are to believe rumors of players which never had to pay for one single guitar they ever played, for their fame and endorsing power.
Jerry Byrd: Rickenbacher, Fender (custom), Sho-Bud.
Jimmy Day: Bigsby, Sho-Bud.
Buddy Emmons: Bigsby, Sho-Bud, Emmons (the Blade), MCI-EMCI, Sierra, Derby, Carter, Zum etc.
Speedy West: Bigsby, Fender, Marlen, BMI.
Curly Chalker: Fender? Sho-Bud, MSA.
Maurice Anderson: Bigsby, MSA, new MSA.
Junior Knight: Emmons, Carter, Zum, new MSA?
Lloyd Green: Bigsby? Sho-Bud, HGS?
John Hughey: Emmons, Zum.
Short most every brand has or has had it's name player and thus followers and none of the above players have really sound bad or not "cut it" using any of these guitars... and the list is far from complete.
I for one believe there are some brands which have a characteristic sound, timbre or "thing" which stands out or does something to me or my ears. I for one, can hear a Zum (at least those before the "Hybrid" technology from outside the concert or convention hall. While I have the greatest of respect for the workmanship on these guitars and I can fully accept that they have their share of followers, that particular brand guitar triggers something in MY ears I just don't like.
I have heard only two PP Emmons guitars which really, I mean really grabbed my attention. One was fellow forumite's Crawford's out of Orlando "Cassed" bolt-on. I plaid it and it sung throughout it's whole body, levers and knee levers. It really almost felt like it was going to eat me up. An amazing guitar and his owner felt equally about it. Interesting fact was, that I had plaid other PP Emmons guitars and was mostly less than impressed... so, I was not predispositioned to give that guitar a lot of credit. But I would have bought THAT one for a huge junk of money and, back then, have thought I'd get buried with it. Maybe, just maybe, Buddy Emmons' "Blade" is just like that one (actually I understand there are rumors there have been TWO "Blades"?), ONE of a kind... maybe also the reason he kept on to it and gave it that name?
An other one was the late and greatly missed Garry Hogue playing his PP-Emmons one night at a Dallas concert backing up, Marty Stuart, playing like an Buddy Emmons clone and then, with the same guitar, Boss delay and Nashville 400 amp, Hank Thompson sounding like Bob White wailing on his Bigsby on those late 50's early 60's Capitol recordings. I mean it HAD THAT Bigsby sound and ring! These are two examples which shatters all our theories, yours mine and all in between!
I had a Sho-Bud and it was muddy when compared to what I plaid later. But it was a good guitar. It also had all new after market mechanics.
I later got me a Sierra Session, after hearing and seeing the late Gene O'Neal playing a Crown and enlightening me with the fact that Buddy Emmons plaid one too. Evidently, I did not sound like either of the two on that one either. But it sounded good but the mechanics were spongy to put it mildly.
I had 4 Peavey Nashville 400! One actually, wasn't mine but a loaner for a couple of weeks from my Friend and fellow steel guitarist Ken Kotsay in Southern Florida.
ALL 4 sounded completely different. One was, had nothing going for it, an other one sounded good/generic. The third one was a real odd ball and sounded like an ol' tube amp... although surprised, I liked it for a good while. Finally, Ken's has a sound like a million bucks. The one amp, one can truly enjoy playing straight from the guitar... no effects, not even a delay or reverb.
Really, I think there is no way really tell. BUT, I still firmly believe, that once we are comparing quality, professional grade instruments, which have found it's stars and followers, it is not making sense to judge a particular brand of model as the ONE or one of the few which are the ONLY ones to have THE sound, tone or timbre and for the same reasons unfair (to put it diplomatically) to rate the other ones as BAD or not good.
You are proud of your guitar brand or model? Sweet, we are all glad you are. But to go on and jump onto conclusion that YOUR perception and limited experience entitles one to declare that brand as the ONLY one universally, and also all or so many others as not good... is a bit childish, IMHO. It reminds me of the neighborhood I grew up, where it was the thing to do, to argue about cars. And obviously, everyone would defend his dad's car brand or model as the ultimately cool and hot thing. If I remember right, we were 8, 9 or 10 years old back then.
... J-D.
One we often forget is the perception and influence of a particular famed player playing such and such brand.
We mostly assume, and hopefully mostly correctly so, that if "so-and-so" plays a particular brand or model guitar, while we may not really be able to match their tone, they will be playing a particularly good sounding and quality guitar. And we hope for that to be true, even when we are to believe rumors of players which never had to pay for one single guitar they ever played, for their fame and endorsing power.
Jerry Byrd: Rickenbacher, Fender (custom), Sho-Bud.
Jimmy Day: Bigsby, Sho-Bud.
Buddy Emmons: Bigsby, Sho-Bud, Emmons (the Blade), MCI-EMCI, Sierra, Derby, Carter, Zum etc.
Speedy West: Bigsby, Fender, Marlen, BMI.
Curly Chalker: Fender? Sho-Bud, MSA.
Maurice Anderson: Bigsby, MSA, new MSA.
Junior Knight: Emmons, Carter, Zum, new MSA?
Lloyd Green: Bigsby? Sho-Bud, HGS?
John Hughey: Emmons, Zum.
Short most every brand has or has had it's name player and thus followers and none of the above players have really sound bad or not "cut it" using any of these guitars... and the list is far from complete.
I for one believe there are some brands which have a characteristic sound, timbre or "thing" which stands out or does something to me or my ears. I for one, can hear a Zum (at least those before the "Hybrid" technology from outside the concert or convention hall. While I have the greatest of respect for the workmanship on these guitars and I can fully accept that they have their share of followers, that particular brand guitar triggers something in MY ears I just don't like.
I have heard only two PP Emmons guitars which really, I mean really grabbed my attention. One was fellow forumite's Crawford's out of Orlando "Cassed" bolt-on. I plaid it and it sung throughout it's whole body, levers and knee levers. It really almost felt like it was going to eat me up. An amazing guitar and his owner felt equally about it. Interesting fact was, that I had plaid other PP Emmons guitars and was mostly less than impressed... so, I was not predispositioned to give that guitar a lot of credit. But I would have bought THAT one for a huge junk of money and, back then, have thought I'd get buried with it. Maybe, just maybe, Buddy Emmons' "Blade" is just like that one (actually I understand there are rumors there have been TWO "Blades"?), ONE of a kind... maybe also the reason he kept on to it and gave it that name?
An other one was the late and greatly missed Garry Hogue playing his PP-Emmons one night at a Dallas concert backing up, Marty Stuart, playing like an Buddy Emmons clone and then, with the same guitar, Boss delay and Nashville 400 amp, Hank Thompson sounding like Bob White wailing on his Bigsby on those late 50's early 60's Capitol recordings. I mean it HAD THAT Bigsby sound and ring! These are two examples which shatters all our theories, yours mine and all in between!
I had a Sho-Bud and it was muddy when compared to what I plaid later. But it was a good guitar. It also had all new after market mechanics.
I later got me a Sierra Session, after hearing and seeing the late Gene O'Neal playing a Crown and enlightening me with the fact that Buddy Emmons plaid one too. Evidently, I did not sound like either of the two on that one either. But it sounded good but the mechanics were spongy to put it mildly.
I had 4 Peavey Nashville 400! One actually, wasn't mine but a loaner for a couple of weeks from my Friend and fellow steel guitarist Ken Kotsay in Southern Florida.
ALL 4 sounded completely different. One was, had nothing going for it, an other one sounded good/generic. The third one was a real odd ball and sounded like an ol' tube amp... although surprised, I liked it for a good while. Finally, Ken's has a sound like a million bucks. The one amp, one can truly enjoy playing straight from the guitar... no effects, not even a delay or reverb.
Really, I think there is no way really tell. BUT, I still firmly believe, that once we are comparing quality, professional grade instruments, which have found it's stars and followers, it is not making sense to judge a particular brand of model as the ONE or one of the few which are the ONLY ones to have THE sound, tone or timbre and for the same reasons unfair (to put it diplomatically) to rate the other ones as BAD or not good.
You are proud of your guitar brand or model? Sweet, we are all glad you are. But to go on and jump onto conclusion that YOUR perception and limited experience entitles one to declare that brand as the ONLY one universally, and also all or so many others as not good... is a bit childish, IMHO. It reminds me of the neighborhood I grew up, where it was the thing to do, to argue about cars. And obviously, everyone would defend his dad's car brand or model as the ultimately cool and hot thing. If I remember right, we were 8, 9 or 10 years old back then.
... J-D.
-
Bill Duncan
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: 10 Jul 2008 1:53 pm
- Location: Lenoir, North Carolina, USA
JD,
The Sho-Bud, and Sierra, sounding different is what I've been saying. There is a guitar to guitar difference! But, that is not saying that there is a brand inherent tone. There is not!
Pickup height can make a big difference in how a guitar sounds. So can strings. So can the talent of the picker.
The Sho-Bud, and Sierra, sounding different is what I've been saying. There is a guitar to guitar difference! But, that is not saying that there is a brand inherent tone. There is not!
Pickup height can make a big difference in how a guitar sounds. So can strings. So can the talent of the picker.
You can observe a lot just by looking
-
Kevin Hatton
- Posts: 8173
- Joined: 3 Jan 2002 1:01 am
- Location: Buffalo, N.Y.
- Contact:
Bill Duncan, have you ever heard of the Carter BCT system? Or the Zum Hybrid Changer? Both were incorporated into the steel guitars by their designers to effect the inherent tone of the instrument. Thats a fact. Maybe you want to argue with Bud Carter or Bruce Zumsteg. What makes you an expert? These men are master builders.