Reece Anderson wrote:
Kevin H…..You stated…”plywood guitars just don’t sound good, and that is related to the used market”. This comment should first be addressed with two questions for you…..1) are you really saying the Finnish plyboard has sound characteristics you can consistently identify when compared with a hardwood guitar? And 2) Do you know of a way that anyone who is buying an older MSA can visually identify any guitar cabinet as being Finnish plyboard or hardwood? Were there to be no visual way of identifying what the cabinet is made of, how can that impact the price of the guitar?
Reece, I think you just gave the reason: in order to recognize if an older MSA is made of plywood one would have to cut it in half. After that the value of the plywood guitar will be much less.
Marco Schouten wrote:
in order to recognize if an older MSA is made of plywood one would have to cut it in half. After that the value of the plywood guitar will be much less.
Actually you can tell by looking at the undersides of the aprons. You can see the laminations.
Tom Q.....Thank you for your post. Please accept my sincerity when I say I took absolutely no offense whatsoever to your post, and I appreciate your comments and kind words about the MSA SS guitar. If I may have appeared to take exception to your post, you have my word it was unintentional.
I've always done my best to preserve and maintain verifiable information about the history of MSA. When I made my comments relative to yours, I had trusted that with my providing verifiable information contained in MSA records while addressing your comments, it would qualify my comments as being something other than an opinion.
I have always respected the right of everyones opinion, and when opinions are directed to MSA to which I have record of the contrary, I feel an obligation to share the verifiable truth as recorded through the years.
Anytime you are anyone wants to reach me, all they need do is click on my name on the MSA website.
Kevin H.....I also trust you did not accept my comments or questions as being anything other than a respectful exchange. However for the sake of continued friendly discussion, (which is what the forum is all about) I would appreciate your response to my questions so our discussion may continue. [/i]
#1. BILL SIMMONS - It would be an honor to have you steal my steel.
#2. Now, on to a more serious tone...
I own the a fore mentioned mid-70's D10 Lacquer Classic that Bill Simmons spoke about. The comment that I am about to make has nothing to do with "brand loyalty" or an overzealous like or dislike of any brand. I hope to own MANY different brands of steels before I leave this life.
As an MSA owner, I feel that my guitar possesses incredible mechanics that could hold its own against any modern steel for smoothness of operation and quality of build. I am very pleased with the sound that I get from my steel with a variety of amps and effects.
With that said, I find it peculiar how even after we have seen topic after topic on the inconsistencies in the workmanship of Sho-Buds and the fact that Emmons PP guitars lack what I guess would be called "mechanical finesse", that some still give MSA's a bad rap.
Please understand, I LOVE Sho-Buds (I've owned one and I'm wearing my Sho-Bud shirt as I post this) and I think that the PP Emmons guitars are absolutely wonderful instruments. But, my perception is that the negative comments made about the other manufacturers does not affect their values like it has older MSA's.
Is it marketing? Is it history? Is it geographical location (Nashville vs. elsewhere)? I don't have the answer.
This is an absolutely wonderful topic, and I want to thank everyone for their intelligent comments and thanks also to Reese for jumping into the discussion.
Your thoughts?
Prevent Juvenile delinquecy...teach children to STEEL
Back to what I was originally talking about at the start of this thread.
How can a great, well built, instrument like the MSA be so under valued?
Almost never do you hear anything bad about the old MSA's as to reliability. They really were, "bullet proof". They had extremely well designed mechanics, and solid quality control that assured a superb instrument, and they sounded GREAT as well!
If a tornado comes my way, I'm diving under my MSA!
Thank you Reece, for supplying us with, and standing behind the MSA.
Also, no small thing; thank you for being accessible.
I'm thinking along the lines that Fred Shannon suggests, that the supply of MSA steels was much greater than were Emmons & Sho-Bud. Is there any way to confirm this? Supply & demand perhaps both play a price in today's second hand market . Decades ago, was there a MAJOR difference in the price of MSAs compared to Emmons & Sho-Bud? If not, isn't it ironic that players back then were buying more of the supposed "less than desired" MSA guitar? Why would MSA produce those large numbers of guitars if it were not selling them?
Also thinking that many on this Forum are predisposed to either liking or not liking certain brands; that they are hardly objective going into any comparison. steve t
steve takacs wrote:Decades ago, was there a MAJOR difference in the price of MSAs compared to Emmons & Sho-Bud? If not, isn't it ironic that players back then were buying more of the supposed "less than desired" MSA guitar? Why would MSA produce those large numbers of guitars if it were not selling them?
The MSA, on paper, was only slightly cheaper than an Emmons or a 'Bud. When it came time to buy, though, You could get quite a big discount. The other two were much harder to get that big discount (unless you knew someone, or bought it in Nashville). A D10 mid-70s Emmons push pull listed for around $1800, a 'Bud for $1600, and the MSA for $1500. When it came time for me to buy in 1973, everyone was quoting $1400 and up for a 'Bud, and $1600 for an Emmons, but I got the MSA for $1050. When it came to mechanics, the MSA was clearly much higher quality. Everything in it was precision machined, and made from aluminum or stainless. The Emmons had regular steel parts, which would (and did) rust, and the 'Bud had cheap castings which were prone to breaking. Coming from a machinist background, it was really no contest as to which one to buy if I wanted reliability. The MSA's were readily available, and they produced them fast enough to supply every music store in the country with a few (something Sho~Bud or Emmons could never do). The 'Bud and Emmons, as usual for brands with their "cachet", had a waiting list of a few months or more, but MSA delivered what you ordered in 30 days...or less.
I’ll echo some of Donny’s impressions from the mid ‘70s. I was living in Nashville and just learning on a Maverick, but I tried other people instruments and listened to them talk about the brands. People were so impressed with the superior mechanics of MSAs that they thought MSA was going to take over the market. And I never heard anything bad about MSA tone. But Sho-Bud stayed in the market based on name recognition and looks. And Bud mechanics soon got better. They used inferior metal, but that was often not known by the buyer at the time of purchase. Emmons stayed in the market, but eventually switched to all-pulls, because the push/pulls stopped selling, and all-pulls were simpler and cheaper to make. The arguable tone differences don’t seem to have been enough to give Sho-Bud or Emmons serious advantage over MSA in the market. While players may perceive the tone differences, there is little or no evidence that most listeners can, especially after compensating EQ adjustments are made. While there are some players who will place small tone differences above everything else, apparently more players have the practical approach that first they have to get the notes with smooth, precise, reliable mechanics, then they will worry about small differences in tone.
On the current used market, the Buds and Emmons are considered more vintage and with more mojo in rep and looks, and their comparative rarity adds to that. The actual quality of the instruments is not as important as those things in the vintage market.
I think David and Donny nailed it! My sentiments exactly.
I've seen old time Bluegrass pickers with D28's and D18's with the action so high that they were not playable beyond the third fret, but they were so biased toward a high action sounding "better", that they took it too the extreme. Many times the high angle pulled the necks up and I have reset them, only to have the owner to want the action right back up there!
Some folks will go to strange lengths for perceived tone. Tone is subjective, and like personal taste there is no accounting for it. An instrument should be playable and reliable first; I think.
Thank each of you for your very interesting and insightful comments. Hopefully an insight of behind closed doors of MSA relative to the past will add to the conversation and be of interest to some. The comments on this thread suggests primarily two things, the sound of MSA of that era, and today’s pricing of older MSA’s.
In the middle 1970’s we began hearing there was a comment being widely circulated that MSA did not have “the sound” most were looking for. We took such comments serious enough as to build a sound proof and acoustically baffled room in the MSA factory and began making sound comparison tests with all different brands of steel guitars with every steel player who wished to participate.
As I have mentioned before, after MANY comparison tests over the years, we never found one person who when comparing any brand of guitar to any other guitar without a visual reference that could consistently identify any specific brand of guitar being played. After “many” comparison tests, we concuded there was no need to make drastic and costly changes to our guitar. Our comparisons had proved to our satisfaction the circulating comments we had heard were nothing more than rumors. We also concluded that even IF someone had the ability to consistently identify a sound characteristic specific to any brand of guitar, they would be in such a minority that it would be of little significance.
I then began considering the negative influence of rumors and how the eyes can effect what we hear, as was discovered in the comparison tests. We knew rumors could be damaging, and we also knew that although we had proven to our satisfaction the rumors were not valid, we needed to address the false rumors to minimize the erroneous perception.
We then made the decision to continue with the same physiological premise and further explore the persuasive influence of the eyes. To echo the premise, we started placing “SuperSustain” on the neck and pickups, and it wasn’t long before the rumors subsided dramatically. Our theory had then been proven correct, that although we had made no design or pickup change, simply placing “SuperSustain” on the necks and pickups proved that the eyes of the players have a positive impact on ones perception of sound. Once more our findings further validated the sound comparison test results.
While still considering the influence the eyes have on the mind, I became curious to know if a persons mind could be convinced so as to “hear” something differently through the power of suggestion.
I later unexpectedly recognized the perfect opportunity to make an experiment concerning the mind hearing sound differently by the power of suggestion. There was a very well known steel player (who’s name I will never reveal) who had a new MSA, and he said his guitar did not have “the sound”. We made him several custom wound pickups, and each time he would call me and say………….the guitar just don’t have “the sound”.
After he had tried numerous special wound pickups, I decided it would be the perfect opportunity to make an experiment. I got the original pickup that was in his guitar, waited a few days, called him and said, I’ve got something which I believe can solve your sound issue. When he asked what we had done, I simply said, “it’s an experimental pickup, that I believe it will be exactly what you’re looking for”.
After installing his first pickup again he called a few days later, and raved about the “new” pickup that had “the sound” which he had been looking for. I’m convinced that even today he would say, it was the finest sounding pickup and guitar he ever played or heard.
My comments to him concerning the “experimental pickup" were true, and the end result did not represent anything misleading, after all, since it sounded great to “him” that was all that mattered and the most important thing. The end result was, he got exactly what he wanted and he was totally happy………while the good thing for me was…….. proving a theory.
I have to believe there are those who sincerely believe black guitars sound better, and if they truly believe it, then they DO sound better…. “to them”.....which again is very important, but just as importantly, it makes them happy.
The power of suggestion applies to brand specific guitars as well. When some see the name on the front of a guitar, their mind conjures a visual “sound assumption”, which can be only “thought” as being brand exclusive, when in what we found to be a reality, they could not tell the difference if they could not see it being played.
We have all experienced the perception of our favorite automobile running smoother and quieter after it has just been cleaned and highly polished, when in reality we know a high gloss polish job has nothing to do with the engine or the sound proofing.
Concerning the comments about the price of the older MSA’s. It’s my opinion the somewhat lower price is attributed to availability. MSA produced many thousands of guitars which after decades, most are still functioning as they were designed to do.
I believe many will agree the older MSA has stood the test of time relative to reliability over the last four decades. I’m therefore of the belief that because there are more playable MSA’s still in existence, that’s the answer as to why older MSA’s may sell for less than expected in comparison.
Reece, you totally nailed it, And that is what I meant in my own imperfect way. There's another thing going on here to: Sometimes things -- guitars, cars, food -- you name it -- can be "too good." Packards were great automobiles. Broccoli is tasty done right. Epiphones were terrific jazz boxes.
Personally I think the old MSA wood Classics and SS guitars are highly undervalued. And I also know that the first time a major player shows up on the teevee playing one consistently, the price will double overnight. It'll be "the next big thing."
Right now Barrel Buds are making a big comeback, including their clones and "offspring." A few years ago, it was Mullin and Zum Steel, then push/pulls got a huge boost.
Stick around, have a cup of coffee and you'll see the same for the old MSA guitars... :- )
I just want to add that even though I have a millennium, I still use the 2 older MSAs all the time.
The Mica one is in my living room, where I use it to woodshed. I do most of my recording with the green lacquer guitar, which is located in my studio in the basement. The Milly is in a garage at the bottom of the hill, and I use it when I play out or rehearse with my trio. (Even with the light weight of the Milly, I still don't like carrying it up the stairs to my house.)
The older guitars still play and sound great. I plan on keeping them and using them as long as I live.
Scientists have given subjects plain milk colored black. They didn't like the taste of it, but only if the lights were on and they could see it.
Reese's story reminds me of an astrology test some scientists did. They picked readings at random and sent them to subjects. They all thought they were very accurate. Then they picked another reading at random and sent it saying the first one was a mistake, but this one is the real one for them. Some of the subjects thanked them for the correction and said the new one was a much better fit.
Daniel, if we took the decals, logos, and fret boards off the guitars, could you tell the difference up close? How 'bout on a well lit band stand and you in the audience?
phred
There are only two defining forces that have offered to die for you; Jesus Christ and the American GI!!
I would like to give my 2 cents. First giving honor to Mr.Reese,thankyou for a good product. I am 41years old and I saw my first Sho-bud at church when a guitar genius in my church "House of GOD" went against the norm of lap steel to get a 10 string pedal steel.The sound from that Bud still rings in my ear from when he played it. A few years later an upcoming hopeful in the church bought an MSA Red Baron. Didnt sound the same with the rookie playing it but with the genius it sang. That use to be rookie plays that same MSA Red Baron today with the same single coil pickup thru a NV1000 and it sounds like a beast,with "that sound".That's one scenario. Another is that I am a drummer naturally. I have been playing steel for less then 2 years. I still have "that sound" in my head. In my drumming, there would be times when I could do no wrong and the drums would sound like musical extentions of my heart, they would have "that sound". Then there would be days when they would not sound good at all. I said that to say this, there are so many variables when it comes to sound and you ALL have hit many of them. The older we get the more picky we get and our hearing gets worst, especially for you gig guys and gals. So steel-on everybody, and make the heaven rings with this ever-so-special instrument of music. David said to praise HIM with the 10 stringed instrument. You all take care and "may the chords be with you".
Dwight
I think all of the pedal steel guitars are beautiful, no matter what the the brand! I can't think of a better looking instrument made. There is something about the look, feel,and yes, even the smell of a pedal steel guitar that lights me up.
North Carolina moonshine has lit me up on a few occasions, and I won't even mention the peach brandy they used to sell in fruit jarsat the Galax Fiddle Convention.
The old MSA "Can You Tell" room was a fun place to experience. It was at the new factory in east Dallas. I can remember having many good laughs there when some pretty good players tried to identify their own guitar from several others. To hear them swear and bet cokes or maybe a little something else on their imagined capability was a sight to see.
I've seen them get it correct and then the guitars were moved around until sometime the same guitar came back around for ID. Inevitably the "guesser" would miss it. I've seen several folks try to ID the axes and I don't remember anyone who could consistently get it right.
I can recall I, along with Joe McHam-Houston, was taken lessons from Julian Tharpe--so it would have been sometime in early '70's and Julian missed it too so I guess the little test applied to all, pros and amateurs. BTW if you get to see Julian before I do, tell him to keep the 20 bucks I didn't need it anyway.
I think the key word here is "CONSISTENTLY", because some of the cats could hit it sometime but I don't remember anyone who could ID any make time after time. There might have been some but I surely can't think of any.
I can also recall the machines running full bore and guitars seemed to be spurting off the floor. Quite a sight. Those were some good days in the music world.
Ah, such sweet memories.
phred
There are only two defining forces that have offered to die for you; Jesus Christ and the American GI!!
Fred Shannon wrote:I think the key word here is "CONSISTENTLY", because some of the cats could hit it sometime but I don't remember anyone who could ID any make time after time. There might have been some but I surely can't think of any.
Right, one would expect some positive hits by random chance. It would have to be reproducible to mean anything.
