Bct

[Henry Matthews]

What exactly is BCT on Carter steel guitars? Can it be added to one that doesnt have it? Is or was it offered on Magnum guitars? Does anyone have a picture of it?

[John Palumbo]

This old thread may help Henry:
https://steelguitarforum.com/Archives/A ... 07525.html

[David Higginbotham]

Henry, this is my opinion and mine only! I found the BCT really to be a marketing project for Carter in an attempt to capture market share by supposedly emulating the tone of an Emmons PP in an all pull Carter and I believe it failed to achieve any such semblance. In fact, to my ears at least, it detracted from the good tone they already had. I’ve had several carters and two D-10’s were pre BCT models. I found the tone and sustain in those two preferable to the BCT models. More reminiscent of the MCI tone, which had more of a PP tone to me than many all pull guitars I’ve owned.

I think an additional metal piece contacting the changer fingers will fail to encompass the tone created by the mechanics of a PP…but sure seemed to be a great marketing tool.
Again, I love Carter steels and enjoyed all of the ones I’ve had. Fine instruments! I just didn’t hear the advantage of BCT.

Dave

[J D Sauser]

It wasn't a marketing stunt. Zum did something similar and called it "Hybrid".

BCT... meant "Body Contact Technology" and that's what it was:
Basically that the largest lower as well was as the larges raise would bottom against the body instead of just "hanging" on the pull rod.

Did it do much? Lets me put it this way: It was certainly not detrimental. I sent mine out for the offered upgrade and it came back sounding just same as good as it was before. Other swore they got a much better guitar back after the upgrade. Maybe my guitar just was a good sounding one from the beginning. When they're good, they rarely get much better.

I have ALL my longest throw lowers on all my AllPull guitars bottom against the split tuning resting screw. I can hear THAT as being better sounding than the half-lowers which "hang" on the rod only. So, that would indicate that the theory and logic behind it CAN be heard.
I think it makes sense.

... J-D.

[Marty Broussard]

Henry,
In case you haven’t read this elsewhere, you can view the patent with the drawings by searching Google Patents.(I can’t remember if it’s listed by Bud’s name or World Class Steel Guitars??). It’s there; hope you get your answers.

[Johnie Helms]

Henry

I believe if your changer is 4/2 then it’s BCT, My Magnum had the 4/2 Changer
And a very reliable good sounding Guitar.


Hope this helps




JH

[David Higginbotham]

I believe John & Bud incorporated this design as standard in 1998 and the year model can be ascertained by the 2nd & 5th numbers of the S/N.

Dave

[John McClung]

My SD10 with BCT had great sustain. I tried a keyless Pedalmaster several years ago with dieboard body or neck, and I carefully tested and timed it, and it outlasted my Mullen and the Carter!

[Damir Besic]

I owned Carters with BCT and with standard non BCT changers , I didn’t notice any difference, they all sounded great … I don’t think Magnum has BCT changer , or at least I never heard of it , which really doesn’t mean anything , it probably sounds great the way it is …

[Henry Matthews]

Thanks everyone for your input. Does anyone have a picture of BCT or can it even be seen?

[Greg Cutshaw]

So if I half pedaled the A pedal (no body contact) I would get a different tone/sustain than if I fully engaged the pedal making body contact? So at the point of body contact the tone/sustain increases?

[Tony Prior]

It certainly was not a marketing scam as there was a change in the way the fingers struck the body. Did it make a huge difference ? Probably slight. I owned several Carter Steels, a few without and a couple with. I personally never noticed any real difference as I thought they all sounded great !

I recall I did a track once with the NON BCT Steel and someone commented that my Emmons P Pull sounded great. Go figure !

[Bob Sykes]

Lots of opinions on the merits and tone (or not) of BCT but to reiterate Henry's original question; How does one tell if their Carter has BCT? Is it (in)visible? Are the changer fingers different? Is the body different? Based on this (and previous) thread(s), it seems the only way to know is by the serial number?

Inquiring minds wanna know (and I've used up all my parentheses).

[Lee Baucum]

Inquiring minds wanna know (and I've used up all my parentheses).

Here, Bob. You can have some of mine. I'll never use them all.

(((((((((((((((
)))))))))))))))

~Lee

[John Palumbo]

here's just another old post on the same subject not sure if it answers anything.

But there are some comments from John Fabian

https://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtop ... 53b260f7c0

[Danny Letz]

Greg I think maybe the idea was to transfer vibrations to the body. If you had one or two pedals engaged, there would still be others on contact with the body.

[Henry Matthews]

Still waiting for a picture. I don’t guess my Magnum has BCT but sure sounds great. Mine has the 4&2 changer. Guess all Magnums had that.

[David Higginbotham]

Sorry, but comparing Carter BCT to a Zum Hybrid is like comparing a skateboard to a Ferrari. Totally different concept mechanically. Carter was standard with BCT starting in 1998 and only a limited supply of Zum Hybrids were built and they command 3 times price of a Carter. By all accounts from owners of the Zum Hybrid, they experienced a drastic difference from a standard Zum, which was already top of the line!

A friend and well known builder who I used to have lengthy phone conversations with and advice on refurbishing two of his steels had the same opinion regarding the BCT marketing vs the actual enhancements claimed. I certainly respect and cherish his opinion as does anyone else who he’s been kind enough to spend time with.

Henry, I would assume the magnum series incorporated the BCT as that became a standard for Carter after 1998. The primary difference was the less expensive aesthetics involved on the magnum which made them less expensive to build compared to the Carter and more affordable for the consumer.

Dave

[J D Sauser]

Sorry, but comparing Carter BCT to a Zum Hybrid is like comparing a skateboard to a Ferrari. Totally different concept mechanically. Carter was standard with BCT starting in 1998 and only a limited supply of Zum Hybrids were built and they command 3 times price of a Carter. By all accounts from owners of the Zum Hybrid, they experienced a drastic difference from a standard Zum, which was already top of the line!

A friend and well known builder who I used to have lengthy phone conversations with and advice on refurbishing two of his steels had the same opinion regarding the BCT marketing vs the actual enhancements claimed. I certainly respect and cherish his opinion as does anyone else who he’s been kind enough to spend time with.

Henry, I would assume the magnum series incorporated the BCT as that became a standard for Carter after 1998. The primary difference was the less expensive aesthetics involved on the magnum which made them less expensive to build compared to the Carter and more affordable for the consumer.

Dave

Some people seem to forget that while Carter SG was John Fabian's idea, the design was done by none other than Bud Carter. BC had been instrumental in the development of PSGs from the very early years, perfected the old MSA's, and MCI/EMCI and was the chief designer of Carter and singlehandedly assembled most Carters.
Yes, they cost about half as a ZumSteel, even less compared to a Franklin. They cost even less than most other pro-level PSG brands. THAT was the concept.
They were designed in a later time, allowing the use of extrusion dies for very repetitive small parts like their bell cranks and if I am not mistaken even the changer block, and cost-engineering many aspects of the parts manufacturing process and assembly. An example was their neck... which was "just" a bent aluminum cap with a hidden wood "neck" underneath it. It cost a fraction in materials and production cost, compared to cast or machined billet necks prevalent. We've just recently had a long discussion about wood vs. aluminum necks here on the Forum... again... and the consensus seems to be that most don't perceive a difference in tone. That was also BC's view on it.
The end-plates were CNC machined from the very beginning on and designed for that process to be as minimal as possible in time and tool change.
Did that diminish the quality of the guitar? I doubt it. The only complaint we've seen was that some bell cranks tired out and broke 20 years later. Undesirable and upsetting indeed but nothing new to the industry


When I mentioned Zum's "Hybrid" (which could also seen as fancy name for what it did), it was because both approaches were meant to mimic the body-contact advantages of a push-pull's changer parts stopping and/or resting against the body and/or body. On a PP too, only the resting fingers and the maximum raise/lower stops against the body or end-plate. Smaller throws also "hang in the air" on the pull or push rods. Zum's "name" was in reference of doing in part what a PP does while retaining the flexibility of an AP while Carter's name was alluding only to the fact that major pulls would rest against the body or endplate. The idea and actually the application on either guitars were very similar.

So, to discard one, means discarding BOTH.

Neither were a "Marketing" stunt and in both cases the thinking was logical.

Musical instruments are not cars... cars are junk.


... J-D.

[David Higginbotham]

Ah yes! Bud Carter. A master builder credited with major aspects of modern all pull steel guitars. I was fortunate enough to visit with him at the Carter shop and fascinated listening to him explain concepts dating back to early MSA. His masterful skills are easily recognizable on the brands of which he built and all had similar designs. He was such a nice, generous, humble, and ingenious person. He took time to show a young novice player all the parts in stock and his method of assembling, along with an assistant he had that seemed to change regularly. He then looked at his watch and said John kept him on a production schedule of working 6 days a week and he had to get back to work. But he had a D-10 setup with a Fender Steel King in the front room and told me to play as long liked and let him know if I had any questions. John wasn’t there that day so I’ve never met him other than a phone conversation and some emails. Spoke with Ann once and a couple of emails…and that’s all I have to say about that!

Interesting enough was that Bud was too humble to talk about his monumental contributions to designs and how well respected he was by so many. Not only for his knowledge and craftsmanship, but for his generosity and humbleness. He instead chose to talk about Gene Fields and Gene’s contribution to pedal steel design, including the MCI welded frames. He elaborated about the GFI design, which he found superior to many other approaches of the past. He said the only thing that kept GFI from even higher sales of that era was the “futuristic” looking design compared to traditional looks of the past. He said many diehard traditionalist resisted the look and overlooked the actual design. He was a huge fan and longtime friend of Gene.

I left there in awe that Bud took his time to visit and explain so much and I then fully understood what so many others had shared about Bud. A humble genius! I also took away the opinion that John was very much a business person (I think he even earned an MBA?) and that he was quite demanding in marketing and production by working his people 6 days a week (including his father in law) and keeping them on a strict timeline. At no point in our conversation did Bud mention the BCT theory. But of course I didn’t ask specifically and this was December 2005 so it was standard by then.

J.D. thanks for helping me stroll down memory lane. I’ve long been a fan of Bud, just as so many others, and owned many guitars he built. They were among my favorite. Particularly 2 MSA’s, 2 MCI’s, and 2 Carters pre-BCT. My longtime treasured steel that I’ll never part with and has outlasted some “cream of the crop” steels is one of the first 10 GFI’s Gene built. Bud’s high regard of Gene and his design is what lead to my interest in GFI.

Henry, I’m sorry your thread seems to have been hijacked and I don’t believe any of this addresses your question or gives you the pictures of the actual mechanisms installed for BCT.

Dave