The Steel Guitar Forum

Kinda a lame qustion but what feature or features is it that most makes a shobud sound like a shobud.
Is like the top deck or wood thickness or what ever.
No matter who played them you can tell its a ShoBud.

I can't hear it. To begin with, there are lots of Sho-Bud models - permanent, fingertip, crossover, Baldwin, Fender, the early Pro series, LDG, pot-medal era Pro series, SuperPro, several Maverick models. They don't all sound the same. I've owned, played and listened to many of them. Other than a generic all-pull tone, I don't hear a "Sho-Bud sound" that they all have in common.

There are other brands and models that do have some tone distinction that most people seem to agree on. Emmons push/pulls are the most distinctive. Early MSAs are considered dark. ZBs are considered bright. Most of the Sho-Buds have good tone, they look great, and they have history and traditional mojo. But anything special and unique? I don't hear it. To me it's a myth.

Unbiased response...

and that myth is single handedly responsible for the classic country sound we all know and love !

Well I don't know but I hear something in the pretty mellow sound they have.

When I bought my LDG new in 1981 I was horrified with the rattling and clattering sound of rods and pedals and undercarriage noise. When I played Orange Blossom Special, I got all the train effects free of charge. I couldn't stand it and ended up selling it to Bobbe Seymour. I replaced it with a Carter. Only then, did I get that sound and it is no MYTH!!!

Norris...Just a guess, but the vast majority of Sho-Buds have lacquer bodies with wood necks while most modern steels have mica bodies and aluminum necks (unless special ordered). The lacquer wood bodies and necks have a tendency to give the guitar a more sweet and mellow or as I refer to it, "woodier tone". I have two Mullen D-10's with identical pickups(TT's), one has a lacquer finish with wood necks and the other has a mica finish with aluminum necks. There is a very distinct difference in tone between the two, the lacquer guitar having a VERY Sho-Bud like tone.

David that right there makes sence to me. I know Bud Carters webb site says the wood necks have a more mellow tone. I think to much wood gives the old 70's Msas the dark tone. you know the 95lb lacquer models.

Keep in mind too that Shot was using OLD maple. Old wood is much more resonant than new wood.

I think it's the pickup, mostly.

I think it's a combination of the wood and changer.
All I know is I get a good feeling when I play my SuperPro that I don't get with my newer Emmons LeGrande II.
Don

Well everytime I say this I get flamed.....but....

I bought the Jim Vest burnt orange Sho-Bud and it came with lawrence pickups. Took it to the job, and everyone said it was awesome looking but it sounded a lot like my other guitar, an Emmons 1972 PP.

Being depressed over this I bought a pickup from a very early Sho-Bud LDG. Took that sucker to the gig and I had wall to wall warm Sho-Bud tone! Those pickups, one being a modern design (all the modern pickups sound a lot alike to me) and one being a vintage design were night and day. Even the casual listeners were commenting on how warm and full the tone was.

I was there........

Greg

This would be an interesting showcase at a PSG convention. Have ONE player... lets say Mooney... and several PSG set up in a row and let him play the same short song on each PSD using the same amp on all steels. This would at least compare apples to apples for tone comparison.

No matter how you look at it, just to hear mooney do it would make my day complete

It's really all in the hands. HA! No seriously I had three or four guitars after my first Bud and never got back to that sound I liked until I got my Sho-Bud Professional. It is a Duane Marrs upgrade and has TruTone pickups but still has that signature Bud sound. I think it's the wood.

i played a sho-bud professional for 10 years..it was pretty cool. then i bought an '82 zum and finally had a beautiful sounding steel that played better, tuned better and was lighter, with split tuning and more changes, better action, great look,better sound, etc.

Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

Old wood is much more resonant than new wood.

So those guitars were not resonant when new and all those classic recordings were made?

Hardly.

Some types of older woods can be good if aged properly...but if not aged correctly they can be ruined. So age alone is no factor at all. I've been hearing this one for decades...yet no one has come up with a definitive test to prove how much "more resonant"...or exactly what that even means...when it comes to an instrument - is it an increased, even frequency response? That might be BAD in the case of some guitars, like Les Pauls or Teles. Does it mean they're louder? How? And how does the pickup (thanks b0b) react with "much more resonant" wood?

What about the environment? Is there a difference in wood aging in a dry climate vs a humid one? And how to the finishes...polyurethane. lacquer, formica...each affect old vs new wood?

Just a few thoughts to ponder.

Not what I said.
Shot was using OLD wood to build the guitars with. That means the wood was ALREADY old to start with.........

And no, the same pickup installed in an old guitar doesn't sound the same as in a new guitar. The difference albeit subtle, and granted not as noticable at 18k ohms as it is at 10k ohms, is there.

Okay, I'll grant that aged, highly figured maple, big lacquer body, wood necks, and lighter wound pickups would have a certain sound. But would that be unique to Sho-Bud? Granted there wasn't much competition back in the day. But I'm thinking a modern guitar, say a Fulawka or a Williams, built the same way, with a similar pickup, would sound about the same, maybe even better.

In a private email, someone pointed out that Emmons chose not to use curly maple, and instead used straight grained maple, because of the better tone (and I think the consensus is that the tone of Emmons steels WAS better). And that reminded me of an old thread where a modern builder (Carter?) also said highly figured woods have lesser tone, because of the inconsistencies.

There's a whole cottage industry now of refurbishing old Buds with a modern undercarriage. Can you imagine such a thing with old Emmons or ZBs or MSAs or Sierras? Do you think that will ever be needed for Zums, Fulawkas, Williams, Fessies, Excells, etc.? The only thing that's left in these hot rodded Buds is the looks. Yeah, there's nothing more beautiful than a Bud, with that figured wood, lacquer, card suit fret board. But it's pure nostalgia and mojo. Special tone? Not so much. I know that's sacrilege - but I'm just sayin'...

Lots of things help account for what a guitar will sound like. In my opinion only, the main factor is the player sitting behind the guitar. Each builder has there own things they build into each guitar. Jimmy Crawford and Bobbe Seymour have discussions on this topic in detail somewhere. I've read both players' opinions and comments here on the forum. I know I look for a certain tone/sound, regardless of the brand I play. Lacquer or mica body doesn't matter to me. I prefer mica because it's least likely to be scratched or nicked like lacquer bodies are subject to. I've found over the years, lacquer guitars with great tone/sustain and found some without it. Same with the mica covered guitars. Each guitar is different. The transfer of sustain throughout the guitar is something I check closely. I believe the mounting of a changer, pullrods, bellcranks and cross shafts onto to a body determines how a guitar will sound also. Whenever I can feel the sustain on knee levers/legs, to me, that's a good sign. I also prefer humbuckers. I can't see someone spending 3000 to 5000 on a guitar and have hum to worry about when a solution is as simple as a noisefree p/u.

Sho Bud stands for Shot Jackson and Buddy Emmons. If it is really in the wood how come Buddy Emmons gets that sound on Emmons guitars and now on his Zumsteel. Perhaps Buddy's hands might just be the reason???

Well guys you can get this into the player such as B.E but what does that have to do with it when the guitars are setting in your own house as David Nugent pointed out.

I've had 3 different Sho-Buds, and the one with the clearest grain and least 'flame' (a very early Pro II which I still have) seems to sustain the best, although the others were good too. Three guitars is not really a relevant sample size, just my experience.

Somebody once told me that Sho-Bud tone has a characteristic 'lisp'.. I think that's pretty accurate for what I hear, and I think the single coil ShoBud PU is a good part of that.

It's not like this whole 'tone' thing hasn't been beaten to death about a 100 times.. Lot's of opinions, that's mine.

Well I belive I got what I needed out of this. I do belive that the players have a sound they like and when they think ShoBud will tend to set there amps up in some what the same maner.


I wasn't trying to beat the tone thing to death,just wanted opinions on the construction of the of the guitars. I know theres no one thing in the build that affects the tone, but a number of things from the wood to the pickups, but the pickups can only send out the sound they hear so to speak.

I still think it's mostly the pickup. I put a BL 705 in a Sho-Bud and it sounds like a different guitar. It doesn't sound like a Sho-Bud anymore.

You guys can argue about subtle differences in wood and mechanical design, but the pickup is where the rubber hits the road. If the pickup is happening, the guitar is happening. If it's not, it's not.