| Author |
Topic: Big "E" String Spacing ? |
Franklin
|
Posted 18 May 2004 11:06 am |
|
Buddy, would you tell me how or why the pedal steel evolved into a closer spacing than the lap steel or dobro?
I have completely changed my opinion from years ago. Our guitar, like most, has the same spacing as the Emmons. I am no longer convinced closer spacing has an advantage because the more I play these older non-pedal instruments, I find the wider spacing increases my speed and accuracy. How about you? I've heard guitarists comment about the same thing. Just curious 
Paul |
|
|
|
John Daugherty
From:
Rolla, Missouri, USA
|
Posted 18 May 2004 11:32 am
|
|
Paul, I suppose one reason is: you would have to hire a roadie to carry your bar around.
The bar I use on my U12 doesn't cover all 12 strings but I guess it is not necessary (I haven't hit any 12-string chords lately).
Maybe you have heard the old riddle:"Why does a gorilla have big nostrils? .... Because they have big fingers".
That is one reason that crossed my mind. You can uncross it if you like.. Keep on keepin on Paul...We all appeciate you. |
|
|
|
Mark Herrick
From:
Bakersfield, CA
|
Posted 18 May 2004 12:40 pm
|
|
Great question. I've wondered about that myself. My theory would be less flex in a shorter changer axle.
------------------
|
|
|
|
Randy Beavers
From:
Lebanon,TN 37090
|
Posted 18 May 2004 12:47 pm
|
|
Good point Paul.
I used to play a BMI guitar, and it had an even closer string spacing that what we are used to today. When I started playing a Zum, which is the same as an Emmons or Franklin, I felt like I was more accurate and faster. I never thought that even wider yet might be better.
Im curious to know the answer also.[This message was edited by Randy Beavers on 18 May 2004 at 01:49 PM.] |
|
|
|
Bob Snelgrove
From:
san jose, ca
|
Posted 18 May 2004 2:38 pm
|
|
How is the Carter spacing? I have a Franklin and a P/P Emmons and the Carter feels tighter to me. (Not a bad thing
bob |
|
|
|
Al Marcus
From:
Cedar Springs,MI USA (deceased)
|
Posted 18 May 2004 3:20 pm
|
|
Paul- Your post hit on an important topic to me.
I also think that the wider spacing as on my Sho-Bud Pro 1 is better for me.
I find that it is easier for my fingers to hit the right strings and chord grips, than it is with the narrower string spacing on the newer models.
I feel more comfortable playing with the wider spacing. I believe the spacing is only 1/32 wider but an important difference to me.....al
------------------
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus/
|
|
|
|
Ray Minich
From:
Bradford, Pa. Frozen Tundra
|
Posted 18 May 2004 4:20 pm
|
|
| I noticed the string spacing on Kevin Hatton's ZB is greater than on either of my Dekleys or the Emmons. It felt good... [This message was edited by Ray Minich on 18 May 2004 at 05:21 PM.] |
|
|
|
Mike Selecky
From:
BrookPark, Ohio
|
Posted 18 May 2004 4:29 pm
|
|
My first steel was a Maverick - when I bought a pro model Dekley shortly afterward,
I really liked it, but the first thing I noticed was, the string spacing was closer, but I attributed it to the fact that it was a 12 string guitar, so I adjusted. A couple of years later, I bought a gorgeous new lacquer 12 string Marlen, which had even closer string spacing than the Dekley. I liked the Marlen, but never could get used to the spacing - it was tough going back and forth between it and the Dekley. In 1994, I bought a 12 string Zumsteel, and finally felt totally comfortable with the spacing - from the above posts, it sounds like it is the same as the Emmons and Franklin - is this the standard string spacing? |
|
|
|
Buddy Emmons
From:
Hermitage, TN USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 18 May 2004 5:06 pm
|
|
Paul,
The decision to go from 3/8” to 11/32” centers was made when we stopped building the Sho~Bud double 8 string steel and went to the double 10. The purpose of the narrower spacing was to keep the width of the new D-10 cabinet as close as possible to the D-8. I think players were so focused on pedals at the time that few were bothered by the string spacing.
I totally agree with you about speed and accuracy. One of the first things I discovered with closer strings was how much more difficult it was to apply an accurate bar slant. I relied a lot on bar slants before knee levers, so most of my early Sho~Bud levers were set up to replace the slants I lost.
I do miss the old spacing. Today, when I want a quick fix, I’ll drag an old lap model out and play it for while. It never ceases to be fun and always brings me back to the basics.
|
|
|
|
Michael Johnstone
From:
Sylmar,Ca. USA
|
Posted 18 May 2004 5:30 pm
|
|
| Yeah Paul I know what you mean. I have a Fender 800 S-10 w/6+6 and its' strings span about the same distance as the strings on my Sierra and Excel 12 stringers. I use a 12 string bar on the Fender and it's about right. I wish someone offered a modern guitar with that kind of spacing - it might not be for everybody but I'll bet a lot of guys would go for it. It's definately easier to play clean once you get used to it. -MJ- |
|
|
|
Randy Beavers
From:
Lebanon,TN 37090
|
Posted 18 May 2004 6:10 pm
|
|
Buddy, I've got to ask.
What brand and models of lap steels do you drag out to play on? |
|
|
|
Bill Erb
|
Posted 18 May 2004 6:20 pm
|
|
What brand of pro model pedal steel built today has the most wide spacing between the strings? I agree with you guys that when I play my dobro I donot have any problems with my slants. I thinking this is what gives me the most problem on the c-6th neck. I cannot get a clean slant.
------------------
BILL ERB
|
|
|
|
Dan Tyack
From:
Olympia, WA USA
|
Posted 18 May 2004 11:10 pm
|
|
What a great thread....
Since pedal steel was my first real instrument I never really thought about it until I started playing lap steel in the last couple of years, but I have found a huge advantage to the spacing on the lap steels in terms of precision, especially when doing a lot of work which involves bar movement. I don't really slant at all, but it just feels better somehow....
Hey Paul, if your Dad decides to build a pedal steel with wider string spacing, sign me up. Ooh, can I have a D-11 with wider string spacing??
------------------
www.tyack.com
|
|
|
|
Buddy Emmons
From:
Hermitage, TN USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 19 May 2004 2:15 am
|
|
Randy,
I have a six string National, seven string Rickenbacher frypan design, and a ten string Rickenbacher copy.
The story behind the ten string Rickenbacher is that a man brought one to Sho~Bud for repair. Shot either hadn’t seen a ten string model before or knew they were scarce, so he stripped it down to the frame and went to a foundry in Nashville and had six, maybe seven bodies cast out of aluminum. Then he fixed them up to look like an authentic Rickenbacher, horseshoe pickup and all and either gave them away or sold them. And yes, it sounds just like a Rickenbacher.
|
|
|
|
Franklin
|
Posted 19 May 2004 3:27 am
|
|
Thanks, Buddy.
The evolution makes perfect sense.
I believe if any builder began offering a wider spacing, they would face this hurdle.
Wider strings = wider bodies = Heavier cabinets = a bulky look. To change to an even wider spacing within most guitars could also significantly alter the tone characteristics, for better or worse.
I don't know if the present crop of players is any more concerned with this than they were back when the transition to shorter spacing was made.
Besides the lap steels, I personally own a telecaster and a strat that have been converted to play with a bar. Their string spacing feels so right.
Paul |
|
|
|
Buddy Emmons
From:
Hermitage, TN USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 19 May 2004 4:13 am
|
|
I would like to add that we’re talking about an era in history (1957) when words like high tech and cutting edge were not yet a part of our vocabulary. Few people had ever seen a pedal steel guitar and the pedal steels I saw used cable to pull the strings to pitch. Shot’s idea for rods to replace the cables has become the standard. But other than that, in the first stages of building Sho~Buds there was no profiting from other builder’s mistakes. We were the ones that had to make them.
The first Sho~Bud pickups were made by the company that either manufactured the Stratosphere guitar Jimmy Bryant played, or the pickups that were used in the guitar. The wound coils were sent to us and we would make covers for them out of a dry fiberglass substance we mixed with a liquid and poured into a mold.
There was no reason for anybody to think the steel guitar needed a pickup different from that of a standard guitar so ours were wound at 9,000 ohms. Somewhere down the line Shot suggested a 12,000 ohm pickup and it progressed from there.
Shot wanted to make his own pickup so he built a pickup winder using a variable speed sewing machine motor and bobbin mounted on a wood frame that was C clamped to a bench.
I could go on, but the moral of the story and what I hope addresses the heart of this thread is that we applied a little common sense in certain areas but there were few if any technical reasons behind our building the Sho~Bud. There was nothing but a blank page, a garage, a few mechanical skills, and imagination. So, many of the decisions we made for the sake of one thing often turned out to be beneficial in other areas. We just didn’t know it at the time.
[This message was edited by Buddy Emmons on 19 May 2004 at 05:50 AM.] |
|
|
|
Michael Johnstone
From:
Sylmar,Ca. USA
|
Posted 19 May 2004 7:30 am
|
|
Wow! What a forum. Someone asked if any modern manufacturers offered non-standard string spacing and I know Mitsuo Fuji has built an Excel guitar like that for Bill Stafford. Perhaps I heard that Gene Fields might be persuaded to do something like that as well. Since both these guitars are available as keyless and both offer universal models,the extra bulk,width etc mentioned by Paul would be less of an issue on such a guitar.BTW,I just went thru my quiver of instruments and came up w/these numbers: Fender 800 & Stringmaster nut: 5/16", bridge: 3/8". Supro Comet 8-string nut: 5/16", bridge: 3/8". Rickenbacker G Deluxe 8-string nut: 5/16", bridge: 7/16".
Regal RD-45 Sq neck 6-string nut: 11/32", bridge: 7/16". My 2 modern pedal guitars (Excel and Sierra) are nut: 1/4",bridge: 11/32" So there ya go.... The Fender spacing strikes a nice medium for me. -MJ- [This message was edited by Michael Johnstone on 19 May 2004 at 08:31 AM.] |
|
|
|
Bobby Lee
From:
Cloverdale, California, USA
|
Posted 19 May 2004 11:29 am
|
|
If a builder today wanted to offer wider spacing, he could build a D-10 on a D-12 body. A pickup without individual pole pieces like the George L's 12-1 would work well. It's not something that would require major retooling if the builder already offers a D-12.
Frankly, I think it's a good idea. For my music I've always felt that wider string spacing gives better tone, and it makes the guitar easier to play.
------------------
 Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9),
Sierra Laptop 8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax |
|
|
|
ebb
From:
nj
|
Posted 19 May 2004 2:58 pm
|
|
| what is the feeling concerning the tapering from the bridge to the nut. is this something more than cosmetic? |
|
|
|
Mark Durante
From:
St. Pete Beach FL
|
Posted 19 May 2004 3:11 pm
|
|
The insight from you guys is appreciated for sure.
I would think there would be interest in a new wider spacing S-10. |
|
|
|
Al Marcus
From:
Cedar Springs,MI USA (deceased)
|
Posted 19 May 2004 3:14 pm
|
|
Michael-It would appear that Sho-bud's 12/32 is the winner and the best compromise.
To go from 11/32 to 12/32 is not much and I don't think you need a wider body. It would be close but would work fine.
Thank you Buddy and Paul for all your valuable input and history......al
------------------
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus/
|
|
|
|
Herb Steiner
From:
Briarcliff TX 78669, pop. 2,064
|
|
|
|
Bob Knight
From:
Bowling Green KY
|
Posted 19 May 2004 3:45 pm
|
|
Herb,
Seems the 12/32 would be wider because the numbers are larger?    |
|
|
|
Buddy Emmons
From:
Hermitage, TN USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 19 May 2004 3:57 pm
|
|
ebb,
The 11/32” string spacing on my guitar is approximately 10/32 at the picking area. Your question, which is a very good one, reminds me of an experience I had with the Sierra guitar company a couple of years or so ago:
I ordered a single 12 non pedal guitar with 3/8 centers. To make bar slants truer at the lower end of the fretboard I asked them to make the string centers at the nut slightly farther apart than their norm. Doing so pulled the strings farther apart at my hand position and made it extremely hard to play.
Knowing that, I‘d leave the cabinet dimensions and the 11/32” string spacing as is and go with a wider nut spacing. If it worked like it did on the Sierra, it would pull the 11/32” width farther apart at the right hand position and get you close to the spacing you’d have with the 3/8” centers tapered at that point. It’s just a theory but with a little modification of the keyhead and no changes elsewhere, it might be worth a shot.
[This message was edited by Buddy Emmons on 21 May 2004 at 03:21 AM.] |
|
|
|
Jim Smith
From:
Midlothian, TX, USA
|
Posted 19 May 2004 4:16 pm
|
|
| Buddy's idea sounds the most logical, and could be implemented without retooling most of the pickups on today's market. |
|
|
|
