Page 1 of 1

Fender Volume Pedal Reissue - Scratchy Pots?

Posted: 7 Apr 2009 4:28 am
by Doug Tewksbury
I bought one of these last November and it already seems to be crapping out on me - total scratchiness already. That doesn't seem right after less than six months.

Anyone else have this problem? Or solutions?

Posted: 7 Apr 2009 6:25 am
by Ben Jones
well, if it makes you feel any better my goodrich didnt even last 6 weeks let alone 6 months before the pot got all scratchy. i bought a pot from Tom Bradshaw that has wroked flawlessly since. It really sucks that we all just accept that these things are made from crappy foreign parts and reward these companies by continuing to buy their products. if there were any reasonably priced alternative I would jump on it. A VP is just a housing some string and the pot. They charge what I think is an obscene amount of money for such a simple device and they cant even get those minimal components right!!!
sorry, this just peeves me.

my next VP will be a hilton.

Posted: 7 Apr 2009 7:24 am
by Len Amaral
I ordered a replacement pot for a VP that was scratchy. Before I replaced it, I drilled a hole in the side of the scartchy pot still in the VP, a bit larger than the snoot that snaps into the can of contact cleaner then sprayed the inside of the pot.

I cleaned the outside of the pot with alcohol and put a piece of duct tape over the hole I drilled. It is quiet and has been working for several years and I still have the replacement pot if I need it.

Posted: 7 Apr 2009 11:12 am
by Paul Arntson
Hi Doug,
I have the Fender reissue vol/tone pedal. A little caig blue contact spray should take care of any scratchy pot issues. As long as Caig takes care of it I never hold a grudge against a slightly noisy potentiometer.
http://www.siber-sonic.com/electronics/caig.html
Sometimes that stuff happens and just needs to be sprayed.
However....
Mine had a crackle I couldn't get rid of by spraying. What I finally found out was there was some crackling due to the flexing of some of the wiring when I actuated the pedal. Re-arranging the wires so they bent differently (wider radius) cured the problem. I posted on that last fall or something..
Of course, if the pot is truly already bad, there's not much to be done except replace it or the whole pedal...And complain lots. Warranty?
Best of luck.

Posted: 7 Apr 2009 1:23 pm
by Lee Jeffriess
I would recommend just replacing the carbon track pots with, Tom Bradshaw's Dunlop parts.
Bottom line is, no one makes quality carbon pot anymore.
The Dunlop is the only thing out there that is usable.
I have had one in my pedal now for about 5 years, no problems.
Here is a diagram for both the Vol and Tone, keep in mind this is not the Fender VT specs, its adapted from the Bigsby spec, and will give you a Speedy West, Doo Wah.
Tom, mentioned to me that he may be able to get these pots in 250K.
If that happens, you could then have the original Fender specs.
The diagram would also work the same.
Please excuse my drawing.
Image
Lee

Posted: 7 Apr 2009 7:03 pm
by Paul Arntson
Wow. Thank you for the advice, Lee. I think I will get some Bradshaw pots and change mine over. This is excellent!
Then I could concentrate on trying to learn how to play instead fighting gear.
-Paul

Pots

Posted: 8 Apr 2009 5:16 am
by Ray Mangrum
The advice is right on target, Tom can fix you up. I ordered one, put it in my Emmons, and what a difference. Needed a little modification, but nothing that you can't overcome. Tom shipped it the very next day to.

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 5:57 am
by Jon Light
When you guys work on your Fender pedals are you doing it all through the bottom hatch?

Image

This is an original pedal--I don't know if the reissues are built the same. Please tell me there's an easier way to work on this than through that opening. I'm beggin' ya.

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 6:03 am
by Doug Tewksbury
Nope - the reissues still have that same submarine hatch. It doesn't make any sense for working on it, but I'm sure it makes it harder to build, too.

You know, there's something to be said for keeping a reissue authentic, but then again, I don't really understand why it's necessary to keep a terrible design going.

I felt that way about the bridge on my MIJ Fender Jaguar reissue, which kept the poor design of the original in to the reissue.

It's like we're taught to value "authenticity" over usability. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 6:20 am
by Jon Light
It doesn't make any sense for working on it, but I'm sure it makes it harder to build, too.
Well at least there's that. :o

I couldn't agree with you more. It is totally different from if you were restoring a vintage piece and paying attention to authenticity. And even then I get bored with people who treat the old item as an inviolate religious object. But when in Fender, do as the Fenders.
Or maybe I'll throw this out and buy a new one.

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 6:33 am
by David Mason
You know, there's something to be said for keeping a reissue authentic, but then again, I don't really understand why it's necessary to keep a terrible design going.

I felt that way about the bridge on my MIJ Fender Jaguar reissue, which kept the poor design of the original in to the reissue.


Fender is nuts. One of my favorite guitars of recent years is a 24" scale "Mustang" I built out of Warmoth wood with:

non-crap tuners
non-crap pickups
non-crap bridge
non-crap frets
non-crap wiring

I would've bought a Fender, if they'd make a good one - instead, they reissue the old one with everything wrong with it, except in Chinese... You know, there's a "fix" for that Jaguar bridge, replacing some of the saddles with Mustang parts - it's explained on the Warmoth site. What really kills me is the Gibson "authentic historic" reissues with KLUSON TUNERS - remember when the first thing you did was dump that garbage and put on Grovers or Schallers? $6000 for a guitar with Kluson tuners... :P

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 8:20 am
by Doug Tewksbury
This is an interesting conversation - I started a new discussion of this topic specifically: http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopi ... 42#1374642

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 8:50 am
by Tim Whitlock
When you guys work on your Fender pedals are you doing it all through the bottom hatch?

Replacing the pots requires that you disassemble the pedal. This is done by simply removing the two bolts on either side. After you reassemble the pedal, the access plate on the bottom allows you to re-attach the string. Like many products from the golden age of Fender you can service or repair them forever with a trip to your local hardware or electronics store.

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 9:38 am
by Jon Light
Great, Tim. Thanks for that. I was starting to mess around, trying to undo the knot where the string is anchored to the base when FORTUNATELY I saw Lee's post in my thread here:
http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=156887
and now I realize that it all makes more sense than I was giving them credit for. I did not undo the string (whew!) and now I've got the step-by-steps I need to do this right.

So Doug--did you actually replace the pot just through the hatch? Man, that's like building a ship in a bottle. Congratulations.

Posted: 19 Apr 2009 10:20 am
by Dave Mudgett
I don't think anybody makes a pot volume pedal with a decent pot right now. As Lee says, the problem is that nobody makes a decent carbon-track pot anymore. But lots of players (steel and guitar) prefer pot-pedals. It's just a matter of time before my Goodrich and Sho-Bud pedals all need new pots, and I'll just get some Dunlops. What's the big deal?
Fender is nuts. One of my favorite guitars of recent years is a 24" scale "Mustang" I built out of Warmoth wood with: ... I would've bought a Fender, if they'd make a good one - instead, they reissue the old one with everything wrong with it, except in Chinese...
Ah, slight correction - Japanese. And I would argue strongly that the quality of the MIJ or CIJ reissues is every bit the quality of American-made guitars, like that idea or not.

I don't understand the beef with the market for reproductions of original designs, but I put my comments about that on the other thread.

Posted: 21 Apr 2009 12:33 pm
by Nils Fliegner
I'm confused!!!

I always thought that Speedy got his boo-wahs out of a tone control pot mounted at the side of his Bigsby and not via a Bigsby VT pedal.
Am I wrong? Has history to be rewritten?

Please, Lee, help! You are the expert :)

Posted: 21 Apr 2009 3:03 pm
by Tim Whitlock
Speedy did his doo-wah's with the tone control on the guitar, at least in the film clips I have seen. I don't know that he ever used a vol/tone pedal - I'm sure Lee would know as he's spoken to the man himself. The vol/tone pedal is a nice alternative that does the same thing but keeps your hands free.

Hey Jon - I have found that it's easier to untie the string from the spring, or cut it, rather than try to re-thread the taught string through the pully system at the back of the pedal. I think it's easier to get the loose string through the pullies and then re-tie it to the spring. FWIW

Posted: 21 Apr 2009 4:40 pm
by Jon Light
Tim---thanks for that. I'll take it under advisement. I haven't gotten around to this yet. Knots are not my strength so I can't say I lean towards this, frankly. When I'm ready to get at this I'll ask my gut what it feels like doing. Whatever it says....it's the boss.

Posted: 21 Apr 2009 4:44 pm
by Lee Jeffriess
Nils, Im no expert, I don't know if Speedy used the Tone control on his guitar 100% of the time?.
He indeed had a Bigsby VT pedal, and I would imagine he used both.
As Tim points out, it Free's up both hands, Im sure I have heard him back rake across the strings and use the Doo Wah.
Lee

Posted: 27 Apr 2009 6:53 am
by Frank Bradley
Don't wear yourself out on the problem. You can't go wrong if you just go ahead the replace the pot with one from Tom Bradshaw. He's great to deal with and was my VP savior just a couple of months ago. THANKS TOM!