| Author |
Topic: Can it be done on one neck?,,,,,,,,,,, |
Charles Curtis
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 6:13 am |
|
| Is it possible to have one neck, say E9th, and with added pedals (and/or strings) get the same licks you can on a C6th? |
|
|
|
John Drury
From:
Gallatin, Tn USA
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 7:09 am
|
|
Yes.
John Drury
NTSGA #3 |
|
|
|
C Dixon
From:
Duluth, GA USA
|
|
|
|
Wayne Baker
From:
Altus Oklahoma
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 7:31 am
|
|
I three-peet that. Yes. U12.
Wayne Baker |
|
|
|
Franklin
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 8:29 am
|
|
"Can it be done on one neck?"
"It depends on what your definition of "it" is?" 
Paul |
|
|
|
John Steele (deceased)
From:
Renfrew, Ontario, Canada
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 8:40 am
|
|
You can drive nails with the back end of a monkey wrench...But most people own a hammer. 
-John
------------------
www.ottawajazz.com |
|
|
|
Franklin
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 8:49 am
|
|
The basic licks of the C6th and E9th are easily accomplished within one universal tuning. Jeff's leans more towards the E9th for country and Reece's Bb leans more towards the 6th side for swing and Jazz. If you are serious about switching to a universal, I suggest one of those tunings.
The debate is in the word "it". There are lots of threads you can sift through to weigh out both sides of the D10 vs. Universal debate.
Paul |
|
|
|
Charles Curtis
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 9:36 am
|
|
| Thanks everyone. Paul, have you ever built such a guitar? There must be stronger arguments to maintain separate tunings; I am strictly an ear player posing this question because with the limited viable time I have left in this life, would it be easier for me to focus on such an instrument. It seems to me that every C6th course I've acquired is like stepping in the middle of a Calc 4 course from Math 101. |
|
|
|
Chris Forbes
From:
Beltsville, MD, USA
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 11:38 am
|
|
| Charles, may I suggest the beginner Jeff Newman course to you then? His C6 course makes it easy to get started and make noise right away on that neck. Oh, and by the way, howdy neighbor!! I didn't even know you existed!! |
|
|
|
Franklin
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 12:26 pm
|
|
Charles,
My father has built alot of universals. I have never built a guitar.
To answer your question, whether you chose D10 or U12 you will still experience the same problem. the intervals are pretty much the same.
Ditto's to Jeff's course and also pick up Buddy's course as well. If you already own a D10 I wouldn't switch. You can do that later on. Learn from those two courses and then you can make up your own mind.
Good luck...Paul
|
|
|
|
Charles Curtis
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 12:48 pm
|
|
| My humble thanks to everyone. |
|
|
|
Ernie Pollock
From:
Mt Savage, Md USA
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 2:39 pm
|
|
Charles: All of my best C6th licks were learned on B6, a lot of help from Herby Wallace Seminars. Matter of fact, just about everything I ever did on steel was learned on the E9th/B6th tuning, although I did go back & play double 10's for a few years, I still feel right at home on the old U12, especially now that I have my 2nd string going to C# with my 4&8 E's to Eb lever, not to mention a nice locking lever on there for serious C6th licks, done on B6th of course. Hope this is not too confusing fer ya!!
Ernie, up in Western Md :}
------------------
|
|
|
|
John Drury
From:
Gallatin, Tn USA
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 5:25 pm
|
|
I bummed a setup from Duane Marrs that I had on my Sho~Bud Pro-I that was a normal S-10 with an E-9 tuning.
He had me add two pedals raising 3,5,& 6 on the 4th pedal and lowering 9, & 10 on the 5th pedal.
With pedals 4, & 5 down you can do all the C6th type licks you want.
John Drury
NTSGA #3 |
|
|
|
Wayne Cox
From:
Chatham, Louisiana, USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 1 Feb 2004 6:36 pm
|
|
I pretty much agree with all the above comments. I own a S-12U and a D-10. Both are fine instruments and, musically, both are adequate for sessions and gigs. But I would like to add that when all other things are equal, Brand,etc.,the S-12U is a few pounds lighter. Now that I'm older, my old back says,"Thank You" for every pound it is not burdened with.
~~W.C.~~ |
|
|
|
Scott Henderson
From:
Camdenton, Missouri, USA
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 5:34 am
|
|
Charles my second book for the B6th tuning is almost complete. I also have some examples of licks on my web site. I have played U-12 for over twenty years and love it check out the examples to see what you can do 6th wise on the U-12 scottyhenderson.com
------------------
Steelin' away in the ozarks and life,
Scott
www.scottyhenderson.com
|
|
|
|
Bill Stafford
From:
Gulfport,Ms. USA
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 5:53 am
|
|
| Yep. |
|
|
|
Larry Bell
From:
Englewood, Florida
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 7:08 am
|
|
In the words of Bill Stafford, "Yep".
------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps
|
|
|
|
Jim Smith
From:
Midlothian, TX, USA
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 7:22 am
|
|
I found in my experiments with Universal tunings that it's possible to get most, but not all of everything that's possible on a double neck.
If you currently play a double neck, by the time you get all the changes you had, assuming there are enough changer holes to accomodate them and enough places to put all the knee levers and still be able to access them, the weight is almost the same.
You're only saving maybe five pounds for the weight of a changer, neck, machine head housing, and possibly a narrower body. Then there are the tuning issues due to more notes being used as different parts of chords.
I'll stick with schlepping my D-12 around on my Rock-N-Roller cart.
------------------
Jim Smith jimsmith94@comcast.net
-=Dekley D-12 10&12=-
-=Fessenden D-12 9&9=-
-=Emmons D-12 push pull 9&4 (soon to be 9&9)=-
Stereo Steel rig w/Boss GX-700
IVL SteelRider w/JV-880
|
|
|
|
Franklin
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 8:17 am
|
|
Charles,
Jim's post is right on the mark and states the reason most steel players have chosen to stick with a D10. Players love to load up their D10 with possibilities. The universal deals with the basic D10 setup.
Paul |
|
|
|
Harry Williams
From:
Duncan, Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 10:07 am
|
|
| One thing I love about the U-12 is seamlessly using both tunings in the same song, or even a hybrid of C6 and E9. An example is playing blues in open E9, then pressing Pedal 4 (Newman setup which lowers the low B to a G#), and moving up one fret for a nice, deep A7 chord in C6 tuning. |
|
|
|
Michael Johnstone
From:
Sylmar,Ca. USA
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 11:23 am
|
|
| My Excel U-12 keyless weighs 32 lbs with 8+9 & a TT 17.5. It has the tone I want and every change I'd ever want - plus sone nice "grey areas" which don't exist on either neck of a D-10.In the case it's around 42 lbs and the case is no bigger than a tenor sax case.I could still get a couple more pedals and maybe one more lever on there if I really tried and they'd work good too because the changer has 6 raise - 5 lower. As it is though,I've never been happier with a steel guitar.If I had to play a single neck on a big old clunky double frame w/keys though,I could see the argument for staying w/a D-10. But less really is more. -MJ- |
|
|
|
Reece Anderson
From:
Keller Texas USA, R.I.P.
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 11:42 am
|
|
Great points Jim and Paul. A double neck can be loaded down to provide more options than that of a single 12.
In my opinion however, much of that which some may perceive to be an advantage by having more options on a double neck is negated because both tunings cannot be instantly accessed.....whereas a Universal provides the advantage of instant access to both musical applications, and has the capability to weave in and out of both tunings, not only seamlessly, but effortlessly and instantly.
|
|
|
|
Franklin
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 12:15 pm
|
|
Hi Reece,
Good point, although I don't see switching musical genres in a song as an advantage. By seamless, you must mean in the middle of a lick, not a song? Switching necks can be achieved in a second or two at the most which is not a problem.
Certainly musicians face different musical desires and your point is well taken.
When I play Jazz I play the C6th and have no desire to weave in and out of a country 9th lick, although there are plenty to be found within most C6th setups, when I play country on the E9th, the same holds true.
Because of the way I prefer to approach music, if I switched to a U12 I would lose alot of mathematical possibilities.
When we last talked was before you started building guitars. I should tell you that I heard Junior play his in Nashville and his tone was as good as any I heard that day. And it was a tone to the bone day
All the best to you.....Paul[This message was edited by Franklin on 02 February 2004 at 12:22 PM.] [This message was edited by Franklin on 02 February 2004 at 12:33 PM.] |
|
|
|
John McGann
From:
Boston, Massachusetts, USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 1:17 pm
|
|
| Paul, I am always interested in how fluent players think on the instrument- you mention "mathematical possibilities", could you elaborate a little on that point of view? |
|
|
|
Scott Henderson
From:
Camdenton, Missouri, USA
|
Posted 2 Feb 2004 1:28 pm
|
|
IMHO I don't feel the need to cross over from tuning to tuning as Paul said. BUT I feel their is every bit as many possibilities using all the pedals of a uni-12. you do, after all, have most usually eight pedals on the floor and how you approach that in what ever tuning is acceptable in my book. I have changes on my D-10(C6th neck) that I never thought I had until i started playing the D-10. after going back to the 12 i have found some of those changes and more. I look at it like this... I have 5 pedals and 5 knees on my C6th(8 & 8 on the whole guitar) On my uni I have 8 pedals and 4 knees. I think it's all in how you approach the song and the tuning.
I have been big fans of Paul and Reece for years and am not intending to stir anything up. I just like looking at all aspects of steel guitar and afterall Paul was the one who many years ago taught me to go outside the box. Just my opinion.
------------------
Steelin' away in the ozarks and life,
Scott
www.scottyhenderson.com
|
|
|
|
