Talking about cable guitars

[Duane Reese]

Chris,

I'm sorry for overlooking the "Don't quote me" request.

That's okay, Jerry. Think nothing of it.

[Bill Hankey]

Duane,

That's two in a row. No excuses! I'm lucky that you are a civilized man. You would know about the days that may not go smoothly for one reason or another.
I regret the second error.

[Duane Reese]

[Bill Hankey]

Duane,

As gentlemanly as the majorities appear, speaking of those who are somewhat familiar with cables, please take note how very few wish to come forward to show and tell. Not by a long shot! The same head count will leap wildly over such questions as: brand names, colors, and all sort sorts of silly things that will not earn the reader a penny in American money. The information that rushes forward from the masses has much to do with the same old routine of keeping up with the Joneses. The same group of proud owners of everything with a price tag, it has been observed over and over, wherein will as a rule, give a wide berth to such matters as cable use, or the vast department of money saving techniques that would ultimately benefit the "little" man, by making products more affordable. The system is a bit topsy-turvy in more ways than can be counted. Gullibility is rampant! Tons of monies slip through the fingers of unsuspecting glitter shoppers.

[Dave Zirbel]

Bill, any chance you can post pics of your home made cable steel? Sounds interesting. I'm a fan of cable driven steels.

Dave

[Duane Reese]

Duane,

As gentlemanly as the majorities appear, speaking of those who are somewhat familiar with cables, please take note how very few wish to come forward to show and tell. Not by a long shot! The same head count will leap wildly over such questions as: brand names, colors, and all sort sorts of silly things that will not earn the reader a penny in American money. The information that rushes forward from the masses has much to do with the same old routine of keeping up with the Joneses.

Nah, I don't think so, Bill. It's not about keeping up with the Joneses. It's about the fact that the use of cables in pedal steels mostly fell out of favor with builders years ago, and they're comparatively obscure.

The same group of proud owners of everything with a price tag, it has been observed over and over, wherein will as a rule, give a wide berth to such matters as cable use, or the vast department of money saving techniques that would ultimately benefit the "little" man, by making products more affordable.

Are you sure that using cables would be cheaper? I mean, you wouldn't have cross shafts and bell cranks, but the differences in the changer (as I pointed out earlier) might amount to more than you'd save by not having the aforementioned rodded guitar hardware. There might be ways to make it cheaper to build student guitars with cables. Actually...going back to what I was mentioning earlier about slip joints, I bet an easier way would be to make some kind of bar, or bars arranged in a grille, whereby the rod assemblies could fork and go around and stop against, but rejoin on the other side where the cable hooks on. But anyway...

The builders are the experts. If they could make a guitar cheaper with cables, and still get the same quality, they'd do it. There's more than just one steel builder in this world...and they are competing, just like in any industry. If they can make a guitar for less money, then they can sell it for a lower price, and they'll probably sell more guitars and make more money.

The system is a bit topsy-turvy in more ways than can be counted.

I assume you are talking about rodded systems as opposed to cabled systems... Bill, I'm starting to thing you've experienced a whole mess of problems with rods than no one else has.

Gullibility is rampant! Tons of monies slip through the fingers of unsuspecting glitter shoppers.

Refer to my second comment in this response.

I agree with Dave Zirbel. You should put a picture or two of yours, and show us how good things can be.

[J D Sauser]

I think that the questions of cables or rods, as far as most builders are concerned nowadays, it's no so much a question of cost but RESULTS in comfort of playing (easy, controllable, repeatable and positively stopping changes).

The biggest ticket item on today's PSG's is the CABINET, especially if it's lacquered. Especially when modern production methods are being considered at time of planing a new PSG (the Carter was a prime example of a design which was designed with quality in mind AND being able to have it's parts made precisely and at the most reasonable cost).

Builders are experts? Some are or have indeed been, some only in their field and yet a few others, only on their own product. A very few too have proven to be only experts at projecting an nebulous image of "expertise"... but that's a different subject (no, I won't elaborate, thanks!).

Really, PSG building, besides a few creative hiccups has been a pretty homogeneous evolution of trying to better what everybody else was doing.
Some guitars "designed" today look almost identical to especially one brand designed in the mid 60's. The QUALITY of the mechanics has mostly become better, maybe the tone too, still some will eternally argue that the later never did get much better.

It is my opinion based on my education as a precision tool and machine designer (formal education which is certainly dated and could benefit from some freshening up) that OPEN (unguided) cable systems will remain inferior as to feel, precise repeatability, positive stopping and drag to a well designed and appropriately build lever and rod system.

Two main culprits come to mind:

• The pulleys:... as "space agey" as they may seem to a select few, are in my opinion the main culprit. You can look at ANY PSG with pulleys on it, and you WILL see that in the "neutral" position the wire or cable does not bend in a close fit around the pulley. That slack WILL be felt when a change is activated.
• Sagging: Even rods sag and need to be stretched in place, but unguided cables or wires have no hold of their own at all... ALL they seek to, is SAG. You can tighten that sag up only so much. The force necessary to straighten a "sag" is EXPONENTIAL and ends up infinite to reach a, in theory never reachable perfect straightening. So, you can only adjust so much out of the sagging so the tension does not start to endanger the solid sitting against their resting post or bar of the finger nor hinder a solid comeback of these to that "neutral" resting place.
  With the added weight of small splitting pulleys furthering the sagging of the pull cables, a considerable amount of sagging will have to remain.
  THAT too, will remain felt in the over "action"/playability or call it play comfort and responsiveness of the instrument.

SOME Bigsbys, Wright Customs and many of the Fender 400 thru 2000 series were certainly great sounding instruments and workhorses which withstood the test of time and served many artists, which developed the foundations to today's tyles on these instruments, well. And they certainly have left their unalienable cultural imprint on American music too. It can also seem worth while to re-produce some of these instruments (Eg: Clinesmith).
But still, as far as ACTION/Pedal-and-knee lever feel and comfort and even versatility they do not match up today's levered/rodded designs.

I also don't think that it is a "cables" which gave some of these instrument their tone or timbre. That would seem as silly as arguing that it was the pushing and pulling of the rods on an Emmons PP which gave it it's alleged distinctive timbre, when in fact it may much rather have been the fact that the changer finger come to rest again the body/cabinet/end plates, the absence of a scissor mechanism etc. If you'd PULL the lower finger of an Emmons PP from behind against it's stop, the sound remains the same! PUSHING per-se, is not what makes the sound. Anyways, yet another subject.


Now, that is not say that "cables" are out of question. I think that while yes, Richard Burton's contraption had the fine mechanical charms of an older Mack truck, it included a key progress from previous commercial cable operated PSG, which is the use of guided cables (bowden cables: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowden_cable)
Richard referred to them as bicycle "brake"-cables... but today, you can find precision bowden cables which are used in avionics and other precision applications. In my opinion, they MAY be an option worth while at least considering (I certainly WOULD C O N S I D E R them as an OPTION).
Still, bowden cables need to be GUIDED too, to limit sagging (and jump-straightening under tension), and around bends (which are limited too).
The smoothest and most precisely operating bowden cables are also NOT really CHEAP!
Sharp bends create friction and can prematurely age bowden cables. So for drastic action re-routing (typical for PSG's), lever system (unless someone persists on toying with "space age pulleys" (now, where in heavens did you pick up that notion, Bill? Space age began in the late 40's!! Yo DO realize that that's a bit DATED term? )), lever systems will remain a "pivotal" part of PSG design until mechanics will be replaced by electronic systems altering each string's pitch by altering the output frequency accordingly.

... J-D.

[Bill Hankey]

Duane,

Duane, I don't think it's fair to deem the use of cables obscure, in light of the fact that I consider rods to be inferior to my setup. There is simply to much motion in the the changers that are considered standard. Simplistic asseblies with positive stops allow for a more stable instrument, a real plus when fine tuning is desired. Most invariably you will catch sight of pro-level players retuning at intervals during performances. That conspicuous habit matches the picks adjustments. Check out the you tube entertainers. Emmons has adjusted his picks unconsciously by habitual motivation at least a million times. All of the great artistic players do the same thing. They go with the flow. Why bother trying to work with cables, thought the thousands, when rods are far superior, at least according to the experts.

Duane, please acknowledge the fact my homemade steel does everything say that an Emmons or Franklin steel does. I can triple lower or raise any string. At one time I equipped the steel with 4+8, but I'm now satisfied with 3+5.

The Fender 1000 concept is totally unrelated to my steel. Mine is equipped with cross shafts to begin with. That feature alone is a key advantage over Fender's pulleys. The rigidity of rods, and their properties, resulted in my pulling away from their practicality; as such.

[Gene Jones]

No one has mentioned "Tiesco" steel guitars that were equipped with bicycle cables in the 1960's- 70's.

Here is an example from my days in Korea: http://genejones.com/Scan10124.BMP

[Duane Reese]

Duane, I don't think it's fair to deem the use of cables obscure, in light of the fact that I consider rods to be inferior to my setup.

Sure it's fair, no matter which you consider to be better. Even if rods were inferior, that wouldn't change the fact that cables are obscure. They aren't widely used — they're not mainstream. Obscure, as I'm using the word, means out of the mainstream.

There is simply to much motion in the the changers that are considered standard.

No there isn't. It all works just fine.

Simplistic asseblies with positive stops allow for a more stable instrument, a real plus when fine tuning is desired.

That's pretty much what you get with rods too, although there is some distance between the positive stop and the changer on a rodded gutiar. Nonetheless, they seem to tune very well. This distance might affect tuning more if it were across a cable, but on all the cable steels I've seen, the positive stop was at the changer (probably for that very reason) so tuning was fine with those as well. It's just a different way of making it work, but I haven't really noticed the tuning accuracy being any worse with rodded guitars.

Most invariably you will catch sight of pro-level players retuning at intervals during performances. That conspicuous habit matches the picks adjustments. Check out the you tube entertainers. Emmons has adjusted his picks unconsciously by habitual motivation at least a million times. All of the great artistic players do the same thing. They go with the flow. Why bother trying to work with cables, thought the thousands, when rods are far superior, at least according to the experts.

That's called professionalism, Bill. They aren't just going with the flow. You know, regardless of what the mechanism underneath is doing, the strings tend to stretch and things, so steels do need some tweaking anyway. Furthermore, I dont' know why you are bringing up pick adjustment since that has nothing to do with the undercarriage, but I doubt any of that is merely unconscious or habitual. I don't know about you, but I don't feel qualified to question the way Buddy Emmons does things.

Duane, please acknowledge the fact my homemade steel does everything say that an Emmons or Franklin steel does.

Hmm, let me think about it....uh NO. How can you expect me to "acknowledge" anything about your steel when you have posted no diagrams or photos? Nevermind the fact that I've never played it... I don't know anything about this steel of yours or how it works. Post some photos and/or diagrams, and then we'll talk. Please... I'm interested, and so is Dave Zirbel.

The Fender 1000 concept is totally unrelated to my steel. Mine is equipped with cross shafts to begin with. That feature alone is a key advantage over Fender's pulleys. The rigidity of rods, and their properties, resulted in my pulling away from their practicality.

Well, show us then.

[Bill Hankey]

Duane,

Too many negative comments that tend to negate my sincere efforts to seek support in a valid cause, have grounded all hopes of winning favor in a proven method of independent construction of a musical instrument. It wasn't a total loss, writing, explaining, and trying to open the doors of disbelievers. While the experts chuckle, and you disagree, I'll bite the bullet, and move on down the road.

[Duane Reese]

Come on, Bill. That's the biggest cop-out I've ever seen.
Just put up a picture of your guitar. From what you have told us about it, it may very well win us all over! We've been through many angles of this topic, and you may very well be only one step away from vindication, and possibly even glorification.

Hey Gene, that's quite the ol' axe! Did that have pedals on it in that pic?

[Stu Schulman]

I just played a Fender 400 yesterday at my friend's guitar shop,I've been playing a long time and this was my first time with a cable guitar.Now I am curious about what makes them tick,Bill I hope that you would post a photo of the guitar that you designed I for one wouldn't laugh at that,Because I don't have the skills to design anything.

[Ben Jones]

Does anyone know how to tell the diff between a long scale and short scale 400 from a photo?

I HAD thought that short scales were:
Usually, but not always sunburst
Had balck cast pedals
Had the smaller telecaster style pickup

and long scales:
Usually, but not always, cream colored
Jaguar style big pickup
Chrome stamped pedals

Im just noticing now that in Stu's photo, what appears to be a short scale guitar from the pickup and paint job has the long scale stamped chrome pedals ?
anyone?

Bil,. Id love to see your homemade cable guitar also, I love and admire stuff like that.

[J D Sauser]

Duane,

Too many negative comments that tend to negate my sincere efforts to seek support in a valid cause, have grounded all hopes of winning favor in a proven method of independent construction of a musical instrument. It wasn't a total loss, writing, explaining, and trying to open the doors of disbelievers. While the experts chuckle, and you disagree, I'll bite the bullet, and move on down the road.

Proven method, Bill? You haven't proven anything. You have articulated repeated "statements" only. You even seemed to contradict yourself too, labeling pulleys "space age" and suggesting that they came to find their place in Fender guitars on the premises of higher engineering, but then, only most recently, acknowledging that your own creation uses levers to send pulls back.

I am not saying that YOUR guitar is inferior, but I have really no prove it wouldn't be. I haven't seen any prove and that can't be my or Duane's fault. YOU haven't made your point, Bill.

And negative posting? Read YOUR posts and comments.

I am always interested in new approaches, if you read the threads I participate on, I think that you WILL find PROVE of that at least. I have pushed forward new concepts and never been too proud not to also re-visit previous concepts which have been "lost" along the progress.

While I often marvel at your grammatical creativity and prowess, may I suggest that on a technical subject like this one, maybe a little more emphasis on the descriptive CONTENT could be well received.

... J-D.

[Allan Munro]

...to seek support in a valid cause...

If you want support I think it is reasonable to SHOW us what we would be supporting.

...a proven method of independent construction of a musical instrument...

What is this proven method of construction? Can you SHOW us?

...trying to open the doors of disbelievers...

You could 'open the doors' easily, very easily - just SHOW us...

Bill, as you well know I have taken the occasional fairly gentle pot shot at your posts. But now, I find myself getting more and more frustrated at your amazing penchant for backing out of corners that you have placed yourself firmly into. You made a lot of statements on your own most recent thread in the 'players' section of the forum and continued in this thread. It seems that now you are asking that we all take your claims on trust and drop all that we believe to be true in favor of your system, yet, you won't show us a picture or a diagram of how it looks. Neither will you post a sound bite to show us how it sounds!
You are expecting a lot are you not? It's getting close to put up or shut up time Mister Bill.
Expecting people to accept all that you claim, on faith alone, is likely to get threads closed down under the 'religion' rule.
Come on Bill, post a pic, how hard is that?

[Michael Lee Allen]

Removed.

[Michael Lee Allen]

Removed.

[Michael Lee Allen]

Removed.

[Duane Reese]

Wow! Thanks for those pictures, Michael. Carvin?! They made pedal steels? And I thought they only made discount amplifiers (Ha! — I don't mean that in any serious way about all Carvin stuff, but I did witness a Carvin bass rig in a backline fail... Good thing I had my Ampeg there!)

Wait — anyone have a pic of the Harmos pedal steel? I can't get a pic from the site anymore.

[J D Sauser]

The Teisco certainly reminds the MSA pedal rig for Phil Baugh's "standard" guitar:



Discussed in this thread: http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopi ... 61aac780fe

The Carvin looks quite a bit like a Fender clone... don't tell me it was first !

... J-D.

[Michael Lee Allen]

Removed.

[Michael Lee Allen]

Removed.

[Bill Hankey]

Allan M.,

"I thought I heard someone call my name." I pulled to the side of the road and listened intently. There is was again, a familiar diatribe about my reluctance to prove that I have something worthwhile here in Pittsfield,MA. to call attention to. Aside from the needlelike strands of steel wire that make up the cables used in hundreds of applications, people like myself learn quickly to avoid getting poked by loose strands jutting out, if the cable is a bit unwound. Highly intelligent people trust those cables for every practical use imaginable. Cyclist speed down steep grades, while trusting only in cables to slow them down. Cables actuate the functioning of the rubbery blocks that pinch against the rims of the wheels. My U-turn on highway 101 was mandatory after hearing challenges to put up or shut up. I am considering answering the requests at this time.

[Duane Reese]

Speaking of getting poked by loose strands jutting out, Bill, I'd say that you especially owe some photos to Richard Burton, after those jabs you made about his own home-built guitar.

We are all eagerly waiting...