Mica Covered Steels-why do you play/prefer one???

[Roual Ranes]

Todd,
You maynot have liked my response but it definitely was no thoughtless. Some people have expensive firearms that they are afraid to use because they might get scratched. My shotgun was also used to hold barbed wire down while I crossed the fense. In short I bought my instruments to use and I don't mean mis-use.

[Lane Gray]

It may start ugly, but YA CAN'T HURT IT.
If I were to buy a Living Room guitar that would never gig, I'd be all over purty lacquer. But I like picking with others and I'm clumsy. I nicked my first steel all up. I learned my lesson and think Buddy and Ron were wise to set the precedent

[Donny Hinson]

Near as I can tell, playing a fake wood mica guitar didn't hurt Buddy Emmons' career. Maybe there are more important things than mica vs. lacquer.

Hats off to you Paul!

Wish I had said that. Mostly 'cause I'm the guy who doesn't care if you're playing a Multi-Kord, Anapeg, Carter Starter, or a Bigsby. What matters to me is how good the players is.

In fact, Bobbe Seymour had a video a while back, on youtube, with Terry Crisp playing a "Starter". Kinda made me think about some of these guys with their fancy lacquer/maple steels, and wonder why they couldn't sound as good?

Musta been the thumb pick he used.

[Todd Brown]

Maybe it's a generational thing. I mean, you guy's that were growing up when Buddy was King. And I mean that with all respect to Buddy. His guitar had mica, so why not. I understand that. You get set in your ways of thinking. But I think it's gone a little too far. Just my personal opinion.

Valid arguments both way, I guess. I'm just puzzled why so many of you are eager to defend spending thousands of dollars on an instrument that's covered in pretty plastic.

I agree a black mica D-10 with aluminum necks is a thing of beauty, no matter what brand. But how 'bout a little more professional finish. Paint it black and clearcoat it, for Pete's sake!

Had a fella email me to tell me that "the right kind of mica don't burn". Specious argument, at best. Who says all the builders are using "good quality laminate", which sounds a little weird anyway. And who the hell lays a cigarette down on there steel? And mica does chip and crack. Which looks a whole lot worse than a couple dings, or a chip in a lacquer finish.

Somehow we gotta change the mindset that it's cool to cover a steel with laminate.

[Kevin Hatton]

Ha, ha. Leave it to Donny to inject some reality into the argument, and he's mostly right. It's a subjective opinion and that's okay. I think that we're talking more about looks here anyhow. Cluck, cluck, buck, buck, buck...

[Todd Brown]

Prime example. That's just crazy talk, Georg!

[Brint Hannay]

It may start ugly, but YA CAN'T HURT IT.

And that's why most Telecasters, Les Pauls, and Steinway pianos all have Formica finishes now. It just makes sense.

As I said before, to each his own!

Donny, you're a past master of the "Let me horn in on this topic to say that a different topic of my choosing is more important" line of argument.

[Dave Mudgett]

Pedal steels are not the first instruments to feature this type of covering. Many high-quality drums featuring a wood shell used some type of celluloid or plastic sheet covering decades before ever being used on pedal steel, or even 6-string guitar. Some of these drums are the coolest looking and most desirable ever made, including my fave, the Slingerland Radio Kings going back to the 1930s. Gretsch borrowed the idea from its drum sets and used Nitron plastic covering on the Duo Jet in ca. 1953 or 1954. They expanded that with the various Sparkle Jets (silver, champagne, and so on) made in ensuing years.

I said my piece on the earlier thread, but I think this issue is a complete yaaaawwwwn. I love the look of a well-executed nitrocellulose lacquer finish on some nice wood, and have some guitars (6-string and steel) finished like this. But so far, my very best playing, feeling, and sounding pedal steels, to my tastes, are all mica-covered. I don't know if the mica has anything to do with that sound and feel, but I will say that my Franklin and Zums are considerably lighter than any of my comparable lacquered guitars, and have a noticeably different type of sound, at least with just a simple strum of the strings. We're all gonna just get what we want, what's the big deal? So why would anybody feel the need to lead the charge on "Somehow we gotta change the mindset that it's cool to cover a steel with laminate."?

My suggestion is to follow Frank Zappa's excellent advice - and I'll leave it for someone else to fill in that quote.

Donny, you're a past master of the "Let me horn into this topic to say that a different topic of my choosing is more important" line of argument.

Donny is dead-on correct. With respect to importance, playing ability is billions and billions of light years ahead of how your guitar is finished.

[Bob Hoffnar]

Most all lacquer body steels are a laminate the same as mica. Its just a prettier and more delicate laminate that is made out of wood. I get the impression that a sturdier laminate like mica might contribute in a positive way the the tone of the instrument. I have found this to be the case the times I have experimented with both lacquer and mica steels from the same builders.
Both sound great but there are subtle differences and some may prefer one or the other.

Why in the world would anybody care what somebody elses steel looks like ? Are we a bunch of old ladies from the garden club or what ?

[Brint Hannay]

Donny, you're a past master of the "Let me horn into this topic to say that a different topic of my choosing is more important" line of argument.

Donny is dead-on correct. With respect to importance, playing ability is billions and billions of light years ahead of how your guitar is finished. :)

Of course he is. But that's not what this topic is about.

[Dave Mudgett]

Brint, if you're gonna argue that these kinds of senseless arguments have nothing to do with learning to play, I disagree. A very reasonable rationale to not give a damn about guitar finish is:

1. It's not worth worrying about because playing ability is far more important.
2. Fretting over this kind of stuff is actually moving in the wrong direction.
3. Many of us actually tend to prefer the feel and sound of the mica guitars we encounter. So why fight it - why not just go with what feels right (whatever that is)?

The entire premise of this thread is that is, somehow, a primary concern of a player is/should-be what a guitar looks like, with an apparent complete mystification about why other people wouldn't agree, and even think this kind of preoccupation is senseless, at best.

[Kevin Hatton]

I like red.

[Paul Sutherland]

The problem with this thread is Todd apparently wants us all to join his crusade to stamp out the mica steel; as if that would somehow be a benefit to the greater steel guitar world. We should each be free to choose what we like.

There is no good reason to insult the choices made by others on matters that are almost entirely subjective. Nor is there reason to throw out implied insults based upon age.

[Brint Hannay]

I like kittens.

(Tip o' the pen to Archie Nicol)

Dave--Here's the original post of this thread:

Well, hopefully I haven't been totally blackballed just yet. This is spawning from another current thread about new psg's. If you play a mica covered steel, or prefer one, why? Just a little friendly discussion. I'd like some input from any pro's, too. Obviously, cost is an issue for some, but not all. There are alot of pro's who choose to almost exclusively play mica covered guitars, Paul Franklin, quickly comes to mind. Almost all builders today put mica on some of their guitars, with lacquer finishes being more expensive. Some only offer lacquer, but very few. If money is no object, would you choose a guitar covered in mica over a lacquer finish, and why???

My opinion, I don't like them, aesthetically speaking. It cheapens the appearance of what is otherwise, usually a beautiful example of American craftsmanship at it's best. Maybe if enough people answer, and say the only reason they just bought a brand x, mica covered guitar, was because they couldn't afford to go another $1000 deep for that beautiful lacquer finish, some builders will pay attention to this and stop covering these beautiful music making machines in a cheap looking, unattractive laminate, and figure out a way to put a real finish on their guitars, and not charge an extra grand for it. Your thoughts 8) ....

Do me a favor and point out the language in there that says "a primary concern of a player is/should-be what a guitar looks like"? He expresses a strong opinion about what a guitar should look like; that's on the topic of "what a guitar should look like." Nothing about the relative importance of that topic in the concerns of a player.

To be clear: I do not consider this topic very important. I am not in accord with any idea that this or that finish should be stamped out. I think it's silly to say so. I happen to like lacquer finishes better, in general, but that's just me.

But any rebuttal of anybody's argument on any subject whatsoever that's based on "such-and-such else is more important" is off-topic and invalid. I'll bet dollars to donuts that Donny, and you, sometimes expend utterance on things that you don't consider fundamentally and overarchingly significant. There's room in life for minor matters.

[Todd Brown]

Thank you, Brint. You guys are insinuating alot of things that I' haven't said. I don't think appearance is more important than how you play. That's ridiculous! But appearance's are important if your playing in front of an audience, is it not?

Paul ,I don't see how my previous comments could be taken as an insulting. Either with respect to one choice in guitar, or anyone's age, here? I'm just voicing my opinion.

Dave, if this was all I had to worry about in life, I think I'd shoot myself. Since looks mean nothing to you in an instrument, I guess you'd jump on a pink Franklin, huh? You seem to throw that name around quite a bit. (insert really cool internet forum acronym that everyone has to google)

[Jeff Metz Jr.]

Man oh man., I see a lot of good replies to this post...I happen to be a mica man myself. The reason? I just happen to like the solidity(is that a word?) that it seems to portray. It seems more streamlined to me. I know some of you won't understand my portrayal, but hopefully some will. And you can still get some micas with a wood grain pattern but with more interested colors. For instance, my Thomas is a grey Birdseye mica. I actually really dont like the look of sunburst pedal steels with the exception of The Lloyd Green that was recently up on the forum.
Great debate though guys, a lot more worthy of bandwidth than some other topics I've seen. Keep the opinions coming please.

[Dave Mudgett]

Whatever, but I disagree. It's one thing to say, "I prefer lacquer." (which I doubt would get much of any reaction - you're not alone, and that topic has been discussed many times), and quite another to say, "You really only see it (mica) anymore on old, or cheap counter tops. It has no place on an expensive instrument. Simply put, it's cutting corners! I really feel this has degraded the perception, and image of steel guitar ever since this psg atrocity was committed with the Push/Pull. ... Your options should be color of finish, and wood or aluminum necks. No more mica!!!" and on and on and on.

I'll also say that I have never heard a band or audience member articulate to me that a mica-covered pedal steel looked 'weird'. Hell, that's what most of 'em look like. A pedal steel is as much a machine as anything, and especially the black mica is the shiznitz.

On the 'pink Franklin' - trust me, if there was a pink Franklin (I doubt there is, so that's probably just a red herring), lotsa' guys would jump on it. People are looking under rocks for Franklins, and for damned good reason. At worst, one could recover it in black mica.

You're entitled to your opinions, but so is everybody else here. And some of us are gonna tell you what we think. No charge.

[Franklin]

Todd,

Do you really believe the formica crowd is blindly following Buddy? Yes, formica was introduced by Buddy Emmons as a ding preventative.....As great and influential as Buddy "still" is as a musician, his playing influence is not why formica is used today.....

You asked why? Well, generally speaking, guitars are test driven by strong minded individuals before they are introduced as an option within most brands of instruments. Because those testing consistently heard a difference in the sustaining tone of a formica covered guitar when compared to the natural finished guitar within the same brand, formica covered cabinets exist as an option within most brands.

If you're truly curious about formica and tone, play an all wood PP and then a formica covered PP to learn what formica does to the tone of an instrument.....There is a distinct sustain and tonal difference between the two otherwise alike designs........Sure, there are always some who can not hear the differences between a wood finished and formica finished cabinet. To say which sounds or looks best is a subjective call, that's all.....

For most musicians, music is all about the ears, not the eyes. Thanks to all of our manufacturers, players have a multitude of choices available to them.....

PF

[Ken Byng]

Mullen have introduced the best of both worlds with their lacquer finished mica guitars. They certainly look beautiful to me.

Paul raises an interesting point with the tonal differences of wood versus mica. Some players prefer the sound of wood finished instruments, hence why Show Pro (who don't offer mica as an option) are doing really well on the sales front.

I certainly don't buy into a common perception that it is cheaper and easier to mask inferior wood by the use of mica. Nearly all manufacturers of mica covered steels use hard rock maple, as it is deemed by many to have better tonal quality than birdseye maple. To this end, many players have expressed the view that mica finished guitars sound a little 'brighter' than their wood finished counterparts.

Really it is tone and durability versus different tone and 'dingability' (sorry for the jargon). I think we should be grateful that there are still pedal steel manufacturers around today, let alone giving us a choice of finish.

Whatever makes us happy will ultimately impact on our ability to play better.

[Adam Sorber]

I enjoy reading everyone's opinions on this topic. I think for the most part the difference between guitars is each individual's personal preference. when it comes to tone, for me, nothing beats the sound of an ole Sho-bud. (If you don;t mind the weight of the guitar). I really like the look of my ProII in this pic of one of my gig's in Connecticut.

[CrowBear Schmitt]

well i aint gettin' in no anti mica crusade
whatever floats your boat
the nitty gritty is, as Donny H, how you play on it
Bob H, i'd love to have you over for tea w: the ladies
i'll call you for a rendez vous

[Jim Hollingsworth]

In 6 string guitar terms....

I have a really nice flame maple Les Paul ($$$$) that has a broad thick sound - very cool - but I worry about it and tend to leave it at home. I have old starts & teles that aren't nearly so pretty (or $$$$$) and they have a clear ringy sound with a nice full bass. I take those guitars everywhere.

I LOVE the looks of all wood guitars with their gorgeous flame maple. But I play mica guitars because they have a clear ringy sound with a nice bass and I don't have to worry about them.

And.... I can plug my Rittenberry straight into the board when recording & get a perfect tone that requires no EQ - just a touch of reverb.

Jim

[Fred Glave]

It's hard for me to believe that anyone would sacrifice tone, or durability over appearances. However, if you like a particular guitar and it comes in laquer AND formica, what's your reason for choosing one over the other? For that matter, if you're going with formica, why black or red, or why with chrome or paint? If you're going with laquer, why blonde or dark, or whatever? I've owned laquer and mica and to tell the truth I thought they both were beautiful in their own way. My new steel is mica and I can't stop looking at it when I'm not playing it. If you like laquer and the tone you're looking for only comes im mica, are you going to stop playing???