Gauged rollers

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 9 May 2003 6:39 am

Thanks, b0b, William and Bruce. I'm really hoping someone with a Zum, MSA Millenium, or Mullen will post their measurements.

William's Cougar roller width of 0.205" is about 3/16". Most of the dimensions seem to be in round 8ths, 16ths or 32nds of an inch, or at least those are probably close enough to work with.

William, are your Cougar roller grooves U-shaped and do the strings fit so snugly in them that you can't change guages? That is the disadvantage of U-shaped grooves. The V-shaped grooves allow different guages to be used, and these small changes would probably have minimal effect on the string height.

The advantage of guaged rollers and a flat profile across the tops of the strings is not just to prevent string rattle (although that is a major problem). The extra pressure on the raised wound strings causes louder "bar whistle" on the wound strings. I just think this problem is inexcusable in instruments that cost several thousand dollars. When I finally decide on a final copedent and start shopping around for a new pedal steel made to order, I will certainly pay attention to whether the manufacturer has been thoughtful enough to address this nut roller problem. To me it is an indication that good design can be expected throughout the guitar.

William Peters · Post by **William Peters** » 9 May 2003 6:58 am

David,

My Cougar rollers are Vee shaped, so I can change string gauges; the tops of the strings just won't be flat anymore. I know my roller width (.205) is not 3/16 (.1875) though. If I had to guess at a fraction, I would say 13/64 inch which equates to .203

Bill

</quote>William's Cougar roller width of 0.205" is about 3/16". Most of the dimensions seem to be in round 8ths, 16ths or 32nds of an inch, or at least those are probably close enough to work with.
</quote>

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 9 May 2003 8:02 am

There is another advantage of "V" shaped grooves over a "U" shaped groove. And that is; everything else being equal, a string will have more sustain with a V groove than with one where the bottom of the string fits into a U shaped groove.

Actually the best obtainable nut is one where the string ONLY touches at one point such as a knife edge. But this is not possible on a roller nut. So the next best thing is a V groove where the string only touches at two points on the nut roller.

Finally, for those players (myself included) who slide the bar clean off and back over the nut (when open strings are needed), the tops of the strings should be higher than ANY thing else. lest you get rattles and cut outs as your bar hits these obstructions.

I find this to be a "CON" on many PSG's.

carl[This message was edited by C Dixon on 09 May 2003 at 09:06 AM.]

Bruce Derr · Post by **Bruce Derr** » 9 May 2003 8:41 am

David, I probably ought to mention that I measured the Kline rollers with a dial caliper so I am sure the measurements are "dead to nuts" (pun intended

sorry). I rounded the width measurement up slightly when I converted to the fraction; the actual measurement was about 0.186". The channels that the rollers fit into appear to be exactly 3/16" so there's a little clearance room to prevent binding.[This message was edited by Bruce Derr on 09 May 2003 at 09:42 AM.]

Lee Baucum · Post by **Lee Baucum** » 9 May 2003 10:54 am

Carl - Why couldn't the roller nut be flat? As long as the tuning key was perfectly aligned with the roller nut, which was perfectly aligned with the finger on the bridge, it should be possible. Of course, how many pedal steels have strings that are exactly parallel with each other?

------------------
Lee, from South Texas
Down On The Rio Grande

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 10 May 2003 6:08 am

Bump. Thanks for the careful measurements Bruce. If we don't get any more measurements posted here, maybe I'll start a new topic on it.

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 10 May 2003 6:31 am

Lee,

It could be flat. I have seen at least one that is. The problem is, as you say, is one where the strings not leaving the roller in a straight line would make them non parallel and I am not sure this would be good.

carl

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 10 May 2003 7:42 am

Carter has pointed out that I misquoted them above, so I have edited it. I said they have had no requests for guaged rollers, but actually they said the have had "few" such requests.

I think the problem is that those fortunate enough to have instruments with guaged rollers have no reason to think about this problem, and a lot of players without them don't know what they are missing.

The problem is most noticeable with C6 and 12-string necks, so most E9 players don't have much cause for concern. Also, maybe with C6 there is not a lot of playing with the full bar at the first fret. With an E9/B6 universal you are down at the first fret with the full bar a lot for C6, Am and F chords; and that big fat low B string really raises the bar up above the other strings. I play my 12U with a 10-string bar with double-bullet ends, but it's still a big problem.

Pete Burak · Post by **Pete Burak** » 10 May 2003 8:22 am

I would definatly pursue guaged rollers for any brand I were to play.
I have them on my Sierra and they make the feel of playing at the first fret real nice.
I play on strings 6-12 on the first fret all the time for both E9th and B6th.
I play right on top of fret zero using the bar with vibrato also ('Love that open A+B twang with vibrato!).

[This message was edited by Pete Burak on 11 May 2003 at 01:11 PM.]

Hans Holzherr · Post by **Hans Holzherr** » 12 May 2003 12:19 am

Here are the roller measurements from my 1987 Zum:

width 1/8
diameter 5/16
axle 3/32

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 12 May 2003 5:05 am

Thank you Hans (I am surprised a European gave the dimensions in the old inch fractions we still use here in the US for many things). The Zum rollers seem to have the same roller and axle dimensions as my Fessenden, which has rollers that are not guaged. I will see if Zum will sell me a set of their rollers. [This message was edited by David Doggett on 12 May 2003 at 06:09 AM.]

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 12 May 2003 6:31 am

Thank you David for posting the retraction about Carter Guitars.

I could not believe Carter has not received any requests for "gauged rollers". This makes me feel better.

I will add this bit of trivia to the scenario. When I was with quality control at RCA, we discovered that for every complaint or request received, that there were many more who felt the same, but didn't complain or request.

In fact, discovering this, changed our thinking completely and resulted in better customer relations as a result.

carl

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 12 May 2003 8:47 am

Guys, I started a new post with the title specifically asking for roller measurements for MSA, Zum and Mullen, since these are currently manufactured brands that have guaged rollers. Maybe that will bring in some more measurements. Also, I compiled all the measurements we already have there.

Carl, I think you are right. If the manufacturers asked if customers want guaged rollers, I'll bet they would find out that close to 100% do, and most would gladly pay extra for them - although why should you have to if you are paying three to six thousand dollars for an instrument. Even the cheapest 6-string guitars have guaged nuts.

I think the problem has gone unnoticed by some manufacturers because this is not such a big problem with 10-string E9, which is most customers. It could be a problem for C6, but there are not a lot of common chords at the first fret on C6. Universal players have the biggest problem, because we have the same big fat low strings as C6, but have a lot of common chords at the first fret (C6, F, Am, Dm, etc.). But there are not that many universal players, so some manufacturers have simply ignored the problem, or dealt with it inadequately. Maybe some of them will see our posts on the Forum and think harder about this.