Very Old Sho-Bud for Sale

Alan Brookes · Post by **Alan Brookes** » 14 Nov 2009 10:51 am

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... K:MEWAX:IT
Saw this on eBay. Does anyone have any information about this particular model ?

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 14 Nov 2009 10:56 am

That is the ubiquitous Sho Bud Maverick student-model pedal steel - I guess late 70s, not 'very old', not remotely 'valuable', IMO.

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 14 Nov 2009 10:59 am

Yes. Its a piece o' crap Maverick good for keeping the screen door propped open in the summer time to promote airflow in the house. They make good planters if you turn em' upside doen and fill them with dirt. If you put wheels on them you can make a wagon.

Chuck McGill · Post by **Chuck McGill** » 14 Nov 2009 11:35 am

Gentlemen I beg to differ. If not for the Maverick, one Chuck would not have been able to afford to take
up this indulgent instrument. I would not have been able to try and copy Rusty Young,John Call,names that escape me cause I'm old. I agree it's not much of a steel but did allow me to progress so for that
I am grateful.

Bob Carlucci · Post by **Bob Carlucci** » 14 Nov 2009 11:45 am

Agreed Chuck.. Mine was a real piece of crap, but it was MY piece of crap.. It was also better than the Red Baron I was about to buy.. I learned on it, and realized it did indeed suck eggs, and then bought a new in the box MSA Classic S-10 -5 and 4 from the factory!... $750 including case and rack mount MSA volume pedal. Ah those were the days.
I think I traded the Maverick for an Ovation Breadwinner.. My wife got real pissed at me after a heated argument, and threw the Breadwinner down the stairs snapping the neck off.Anyway, after initial rage and murderous intent, I was laughing with her about it as it was a bigger piece of crap than the Maverick I traded for it. So yes, I have to love Mavericks.. I just don't like playing them. bob

Bob Hamilton · Post by **Bob Hamilton** » 14 Nov 2009 11:48 am

Good story Bob..

Ryan Barwin · Post by **Ryan Barwin** » 14 Nov 2009 12:07 pm

If you put a modern changer in it, and added three more levers, it could probably be a decent guitar.

Geoff Marshall · Post by **Geoff Marshall** » 14 Nov 2009 12:58 pm

Well at least my vinyl covered Maverick had a tear drop Knee lever. Played the rear off it from 75 to 80 with a home made lever raising 4th string e to f on a home made lever made from a table knife, a guitar string, some bits of 'mechano' and an axle and bracket made from a butchered shoulder metal plane I got for 3000 cigarette coupons. I just wished the other guys wouldn't stubb their cigarettes out in the tuning pan. There is some nice maple under the vinyl and the black painted aluminium end plates can be polished. The previous version Maverick was far better with exposed maple body, proper neck and gumby headstock but it had the same coat hanger technology. I would gladly have another if I could get one at the right price and put a simple ballanced pull release systen on it.

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 14 Nov 2009 1:18 pm

Alan,
Your Crossover is a far, far better guitar!

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 14 Nov 2009 1:26 pm

Sure, you can fix anything if you're willing to spend enough money on it. But why not start out with something playable in the first place? The problem is that the mechanics are, to say the least, not great, so properly upgrading it will be expensive.

My memories of the Maverick aren't so great. Short story - when I went looking for a pedal steel in the 70s somewhere in southwest Ohio, pro-grade pedal steels were very high indeed, but even a new POS Maverick was something like $450. In 2009 inflation adjusted dollars, that's over $2000. After watching the salesman/player struggle to get the stops right and play it in a way that sounded good, I said to myself, "Geez, even a crappy student-model pedal steel is crazy expensive, guess I better stick to guitar." Remember that you could get a nice old goldtop Les Paul, or 2-3 nice old Teles or Strats, for that kind of money in those days.

Fast-forward to the mid-late 90s - I picked up a Maverick for $300-400 at a guitar show on a lark. It was still a POS, I had it for a week. A good friend, a very fine guitar player, came into the shop and said, "I have to have it." I told him, "No you don't, it's a POS. Wait till I find some decent steels, I'm looking for myself." He insisted he wanted it, and I sold it to him. A few years later, after I had found a few decent pedal steels and had taken up playing myself, I asked him how the steel was coming. His reply, quote, "Dave, pedal steel is a very frustrating instrument." I told him he should get a decent steel, he replied that he decided to go the lap steel route instead. I think he still has that Maverick, and I suspect he still thinks pedal steels are just a PITA.

I have always thought that it was ironic that beginning students of many instruments - who most need something that just plays correctly without a huge struggle - very often wind up with crappy beginner instruments that fight them from day one.

I think the situation is far better for beginner steels now - any of the starters or an inexpensive old pro-grade S-10 (like BMI, MSA, or Dekley) are a huge upgrade. You can generally buy one of these for less than a grand - which is less than $200 in 1973 inflation-adjusted dollars.

This situation is totally different for an old Emmons student steel - properly set up, they're great because the changer is right. They skimped on the right features, not the changer, and they sound great. I struggled on mine because I didn't understand how to set it up correctly - not the guitar's fault.

My opinions, of course. I guess I just don't understand the fascination with old wallpaper Mavericks.

John De Maille · Post by **John De Maille** » 14 Nov 2009 1:44 pm

I started on a birdeye maple Maverick with 3&1.
It stayed in tune, played well and never gave me any problems. I moved on to another "pro" model because of the limitations it had. I'll always revere that Maverick! It gave me the opportunity to sound like a steel player. They weren't all, that bad.

Clyde Mattocks · Post by **Clyde Mattocks** » 14 Nov 2009 2:30 pm

Seems that recently any mention of a Maverick brings an onslaught of flame to a humble intstrument that never pretended to be anything but an entry level guitar AT THE TIME. My opinion is that they filled a need and can still do so for someone who doesn't particularly aspire to be Buddy Emmons. In other words, maybe a second instrument for a guitarist who wishes to do some "steely" things on some songs. A fellow brought one in for adjustment a few months ago. After some tweaking, the thing played and sounded great and stayed in tune very well. I occasionally have to fly and the gig doesn't require full time steel, so I entertained the idea of trading him out of it for a more advanced guitar. He wasn't interested in a trade and I don't blame him. He had the perfect guitar for his situation.

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 14 Nov 2009 2:36 pm

Good Maple underneath. The same pickup as all the other ShoBuds. And kinda Permanent style mechanicals. They sound great, but are limited.

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 14 Nov 2009 3:11 pm

Zum Stage One.

Lee Baucum · Post by **Lee Baucum** » 14 Nov 2009 3:20 pm

Why do I get the feeling that ol' Alan wasn't exactly serious when he posted this?

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 14 Nov 2009 3:23 pm

He knows better. Alan just sometimes likes to "stir the pot."

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 14 Nov 2009 3:28 pm

Ryan Barwin wrote:If you put a modern changer in it, and added three more levers, it could probably be a decent guitar.

Reminds me of the old Stan Laurel comment to his friend Oliver Hardy (when they were both starving)..."You know Ollie, if we had some ham, we could make some ham and eggs...if we had some eggs."

Larry Bressington · Post by **Larry Bressington** » 14 Nov 2009 4:33 pm

Alan Brookes · Post by **Alan Brookes** » 14 Nov 2009 5:18 pm

John Billings wrote:He knows better. Alan just sometimes likes to "stir the pot."

Let's just say I'm not thinking of buying it.

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 14 Nov 2009 5:53 pm

Well, they were a good student model. If you could last through a month or two on a vinyl maverick, you definatly had the right disposition to make a steel player one fine day.

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 14 Nov 2009 6:07 pm

Well, they were a good student model. If you could last through a month or two on a vinyl maverick, you definatly had the right disposition to make a steel player one fine day.

Yeah, I think I coulda' dealt with that - it was just forkin' over that $450 in 1973 dollars for the privilege that got to me.

Seriously though - how many of you would pay $2200 for that guitar today? That's the equivalent of what it cost back then.

Let's say it sells for $450 now - that's equivalent to about $90 in 1973 dollars - I'd have bought it for sure at that price.

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 14 Nov 2009 6:30 pm

Hey Dave, I hear ya. I just sold a mav on ebay a couple weeks ago. it went to a person who wanted to "dabble" a bit with pedal steel to see if he wanted to go further. He's haveing a blast with it. I was surprised at how well that guitar tuned up and stayed in tune. pretty low mleage.

Some fellows will get a little heavier leg to stabilise the guitar a little more, ditch the undercarrage to the changer, and just play non pedal with them. Cool way to experiment different copedants AND on a budget, too.

I sold a couple project mavs, too. Some folks just like to have something to tinker with. If their interest climbs, there are always better guitars to upgrade to. Mavericks have a place in the food chain. they were not designed to be the "WOW" guitar, just a low budget entry level guitar.

Larry Bressington · Post by **Larry Bressington** » 14 Nov 2009 6:51 pm

I agree james, i had the 'Emmons' student model for a few years and eventhough the tone sucked, it served a great purpose for me to decide to move onto a pro model when funds were there. If i remember correctly, i used to super glue the legs to the stage, because it was light, love light guitars on 'Load out' hate them during a performance and i am a very 'basic' player.
I still think alan is just trying to 'cook stew' with this question!
Ummm, are the accelerator cable's off a ford Cortina???
Al

Danny James · Post by **Danny James** » 15 Nov 2009 5:58 am

I have been watching Alan on here for a good while. He and I have had some good conversations from time to time. From what I can see he thoroughly loves to mess with old guitars of just about any kind as well as building some fine and sometimes very different instruments. I know he also likes tinkering around with old Multi-Kords too.

Messing with this kind of stuff seems to me to be what Alan enjoys the most. When a man is having a great time doing what he loves, it just doesn't get any better than that.

Ya gotta remember "Music is much too important to leave entirely in the hands of proffessionals" (Quote posted in Joe's Pizza & Pickin Parler in North Vernon Indiana)

So let em laugh while we who tinker with the old guitars and even inventing some things along the way, are having the time of our lives eh Alan?

I said when I retired from Cummins Diesel Engine Co. way back in 87 "if it ain't fun I ain't doin it". I have been having a blast ever since.

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 15 Nov 2009 7:15 am

Oh, Danny my friend, well said.