Fender pedal steel
Daniel Cooper
pedals in 10-string Fender pedal steel guitars? Anyone know of a source for
parts?
Dan
RD
Fender...yes they are very good steal guitar...But One thing is that I don't
know exactely wish model that you own...Because somes of them were double neck
and came with 4 knee level...and also was a Fender 10 string one neck similar to
the Sho~Bud maverick 3 pedal and one knee level...at at this point the
undercariage of Maverick are not as good as were the other...Keep in mind that
the Maverick was designed as a Student guitar...If is a 10 string one
neck...with professional undercariage (I may said) yes is worthwhile to
upgrade...
I hope I'll be any help...but it will me better if I knew exactely wish model we
are talking about it....
RD
Bob
>Just how difficult is it to find parts for installing extra knee levers or
>pedals in 10-string Fender pedal steel guitars?
In my opinion it's not only difficult, it's ill-advised.
Fender pedal steel guitars may be the last great collectors' bargain today.
The 10 string models are much rarer than the 8 string models. As soon as
you start modifying these guitars, they start to lose their collectors
value. The past 5 years have seen an increase in the price of Fender
Stringmaster steel guitars. I believe that 10 years from now we will be
seeing a very high demand for all Fender steel guitars.
Daniel, if you need more pedals and knee levers, you should get a more
modern instrument. Chack the Buy & Sell area at the Steel Guitar Forum
http://www.b0b.com/forum ), or the Steel Guitar Swapshop
http://www.steelguitar.com/swapshop/swapshop.htm ). In the Steel Guitar
Forum, people are often willing to trade.
-b0b-
Daniel Cooper
Thank you for your reply, but...how "ill-advised"? If you mean only that
it will lose value as a "collectable", that doesn't really concern me. I
have never owned a guitar for the purpose of keeping it in the closet while
its value appreciates. I believe guitars are meant to be played. If you
think that it would amount to "butchering" a vintage piece of equipment,
again I must disagree. I don't think that adding a few more changes to a
steel corrupts the intent of the designers, do you?
Regards,
Dan
Reverend Bump
wrote:
> I don't think that adding a few more changes to a
> steel corrupts the intent of the designers, do you?
In the case of a vintage Fender steel, yes. But you are free to do
what you want with what you have.
The Right Reverend Bump
http://www.geldner.com
Remove "NOSPAM" from address to reply
Daniel Cooper
Reverend Bump wrote in message ...
>In article <7dlomt$8gt$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, Daniel Cooper
>wrote:
>
>> I don't think that adding a few more changes to a
>> steel corrupts the intent of the designers, do you?
>
>In the case of a vintage Fender steel, yes. But you are free to do
>what you want with what you have.
>
I just don't agree with you, Rev. Assuming you're not one of the designers
yourself, how do you know they did not provide just one knee for financial
reasons? Maybe they felt they could sell some add-on knees and make a
little profit. I don't see how adding on a knee lever can be seen as a
modification that is not in the spirit of the guitar maker.
Dan
Andy Marshall
bottom-of-the-line from Sho-Bud. The cable mechanism is almost useless and
they did not even sound very good by the standards of the day. As for
collectability, who knows? They were not made by Fender, they only had the
Fender name tag on them. That is not to say that they will not increase in
value. Stranger things have happened.
If you want to play a steel, get yourself a Zumsteel. Even their student
models are wonderful to play and sound fantastic. I had one as my second
pedal steel, and it never needed adjustment and stayed in perfect tune.
There was no mechanism noise to speak of and the pedals and knee levers
moved so smoothly and effortlessly that they could me used very expressively.
Reverend Bump
> I just don't agree with you, Rev. Assuming you're not one of the designers
> yourself, how do you know they did not provide just one knee for financial
> reasons? Maybe they felt they could sell some add-on knees and make a
> little profit. I don't see how adding on a knee lever can be seen as a
> modification that is not in the spirit of the guitar maker.
>
Dan, I didn't reply to pick a fight with you. Just to make a suggestion that
you not do it for the value of the guitar. I already said you were welcome to
do whatever you wanted with your guitar. It's a free country.
However, you would be buying more potential trouble than it's worth due to
the cheezy cable changer system on those steels -- not to mention cost. As to
violating the "spirit" of the maker, that is in the eye of the user. If you
never plan on selling the steel, then you won't care right? Otherwise, the
drilling and other mods required may have a negative affect on this unit's
collectability. And the name Fender on a USA product is pretty golden even if
the product isn't very good to begin with (Fender Coronado's for instance).
The Right Reverend Bump
http://www.geldner.com
NO SPAM - Remove ".junk" from address to reply
Daniel Cooper
Reverend Bump wrote in message ...
>
>> I just don't agree with you, Rev. Assuming you're not one of the
designers
>> yourself, how do you know they did not provide just one knee for
financial
>> reasons? Maybe they felt they could sell some add-on knees and make a
>> little profit. I don't see how adding on a knee lever can be seen as a
>> modification that is not in the spirit of the guitar maker.
>>
>Dan, I didn't reply to pick a fight with you.
I'm sorry if I sounded like I was "fighting", I didn't mean to come off like
that and certainly don't feel hostile!
Just to make a suggestion that
>you not do it for the value of the guitar. I already said you were welcome
to
>do whatever you wanted with your guitar. It's a free country.
Clearly. And, of course, I understand that modifying a "collectible"
decreases its value.
>
>However, you would be buying more potential trouble than it's worth due to
>the cheezy cable changer system on those steels -- not to mention cost.
Now you're talking! I didn't realize they were so cheap.
As to
>violating the "spirit" of the maker, that is in the eye of the user. If you
>never plan on selling the steel, then you won't care right? Otherwise, the
>drilling and other mods required may have a negative affect on this unit's
>collectability. And the name Fender on a USA product is pretty golden even
if
>the product isn't very good to begin with (Fender Coronado's for instance).
>
Right.
Thanks for the input.
Regards,
Dan
Bob
<7dn7kc$jpl$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>Actually, the Fender Pedal Steel guitars were Sho-Bud Maverick models, the
>bottom-of-the-line from Sho-Bud. The cable mechanism is almost useless and
>they did not even sound very good by the standards of the day. As for
>collectability, who knows? They were not made by Fender, they only had the
>Fender name tag on them. That is not to say that they will not increase in
>value. Stranger things have happened.
Some of them were Mavericks, but not all. There were, I believe, a few
guitars made based on Gene Fields' design. I would hate to see one of those
mutilated by someone who just needed more knee levers.
Some of us here in California just love the tone of Fender pedal steels, by
the way. It's the essence of the West Coast Sound.
Some of the Sho-Bud Fenders were double necks, with rods not cables. Check
out the one at http://www.steelguitar.net/sg26.jpg . I think it would be a
real shame if someone hacked at this beautiful instrument.
>If you want to play a steel, get yourself a Zumsteel. Even their student
>models are wonderful to play and sound fantastic.
I agree. The Zum student model is a fine instrument for a beginner, and it
can be ordered with as many as 4 knee levers.
-b0b-
Daniel Cooper
Bob wrote in message <7dpp7s$2ka$1...@ultra.sonic.net>...
>Andy Marshall wrote in message
><7dn7kc$jpl$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>>Actually, the Fender Pedal Steel guitars were Sho-Bud Maverick models, the
>>bottom-of-the-line from Sho-Bud. The cable mechanism is almost useless
and
>>they did not even sound very good by the standards of the day. As for
>>collectability, who knows? They were not made by Fender, they only had
the
>>Fender name tag on them. That is not to say that they will not increase
in
>>value. Stranger things have happened.
>
>Some of them were Mavericks, but not all. There were, I believe, a few
>guitars made based on Gene Fields' design. I would hate to see one of
those
>mutilated by someone who just needed more knee levers.
Mutilated?
>
>Some of us here in California just love the tone of Fender pedal steels, by
>the way. It's the essence of the West Coast Sound.
>
>Some of the Sho-Bud Fenders were double necks, with rods not cables. Check
>out the one at http://www.steelguitar.net/sg26.jpg . I think it would be a
>real shame if someone hacked at this beautiful instrument.
>
Hacked?
We're not talking about drawing a moustache on the Mona Lisa, boys. We're
not even talking about adding fuel injection to a 1925 Packard. I think
your attitude is a might precious. But each to their own.
Dan
Reverend Bump
> We're not talking about drawing a moustache on the Mona Lisa, boys. We're
> not even talking about adding fuel injection to a 1925 Packard.
>
From a collector standpoint, you would be. If you do it, you do it knowing
that you will knock the value down by 30% or more when you go to resell --
assuming the steel is in real good condition. If it's not, then who
cares? If, as Bob said, its one of the few made in Fullerton pedal steels,
then you stand a good chance of nuking a potentially valuable instrument.
That's all people are trying to tell you. If you want a player, consider
selling the Fender to someone who appreciates it as-is and get a good basic
modern model with a dedent push/pull or all-pull solid mechanism. You'll be
much happier with the intonation, sound, durability, etc., etc. The Zumsteel
is a good recommendation as are Sierras, some MSA's, Franklins, etc.
Daniel Cooper
Reverend Bump wrote in message ...
wrote:
>
>> We're not talking about drawing a moustache on the Mona Lisa, boys.
We're
>> not even talking about adding fuel injection to a 1925 Packard.
>>
>From a collector standpoint, you would be. If you do it, you do it knowing
>that you will knock the value down by 30% or more when you go to resell --
>assuming the steel is in real good condition. If it's not, then who
>cares? If, as Bob said, its one of the few made in Fullerton pedal steels,
>then you stand a good chance of nuking a potentially valuable instrument.
I wasn't arguing about this. Obviously, when you modify a "collectible" in
any way you are reducing its monetary value as a collectible.
This is very sound INVESTMENT advice.
>
>That's all people are trying to tell you.
No. Using the words "hack" and "mutilate" definitely imply at least a lack
of reverence, maybe even a kind of barbaric disrespect for a thing of
beauty. Or what, b0b?
If you want a player, consider
>selling the Fender to someone who appreciates it as-is and get a good basic
>modern model with a dedent push/pull or all-pull solid mechanism. You'll be
>much happier with the intonation, sound, durability, etc., etc. The
Zumsteel
>is a good recommendation as are Sierras, some MSA's, Franklins, etc.
Thanks, I've been playing a Mullen D-10 for about 7 years. It's getting a
bit heavy to lug around and I'm thinking about getting an S-10 since I don't
play much C6.
I also love the sound of Fenders as played by Al Perkins and Sneaky Pete.
Some of you seem to think that I'm looking for a fight. Not so. I thought
that newsgroups were for discussion. Am I wrong?
I don't believe in buying instruments as "collectibles" and leaving them in
the closet to appreciate.
The pedal steel is not a very old instrument and has been in almost constant
development as far as number of strings, number of changes, different
copedants. It's rather stuffy IMO to use words like "mutilate" when you're
talking about adding a knee lever to a pedal steel, an instrument that lends
itself so readily to modification. But I've seen a great increase in this
"collector's mentality" over the last couple of decades. In some ways it's
beneficial as it has raised the level of respect for craftsmanship. In
other cases, it is mere faddishness or camp. It's also done wonders for
driving up the price of guitars.
If you disagree with me, I'd love to hear your arguments. I hope that I
haven't reached that fearful point of senility when I'm unable to be swayed
or to change my mind. Then again, if you're not interested there's no need
to respond. Eventually, I'll get bored and go away.
Best wishes,
Dan
Reverend Bump
> I also love the sound of Fenders as played by Al Perkins and Sneaky Pete.
IMHO, more to do with amp, foot pedal and pickup than "Fender". <G>
I really don't disagree much with anything you say except that the steel
(non-pedal) has been around longer than the electric guitar. Some of the
early pedal models are pretty valuable simply because there aren't many of
them and they are unique. Not everything is a player. My friend has a
Gibson acoustic from the 20's that belonged to his grandmother. Sounds like
hell but it's probably worth $2K or so. On the other hand, lots of things
that aren't collectable play real well. Like my Aria Pro II thinline.
Bob
>In article <7dqt6f$m0n$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, Daniel Cooper
wrote:
>
>> We're not talking about drawing a moustache on the Mona Lisa, boys.
We're
>> not even talking about adding fuel injection to a 1925 Packard.
>>
>From a collector standpoint, you would be. If you do it, you do it knowing
>that you will knock the value down by 30% or more when you go to resell --
>assuming the steel is in real good condition. If it's not, then who
>cares? If, as Bob said, its one of the few made in Fullerton pedal steels,
>then you stand a good chance of nuking a potentially valuable instrument.
That's my point exactly, Rev. Bump. Dan didn't give any details about his
10 string Fender. If it's truly a student model, you can throw together a
knee lever with a quick trip to the hardware store and nobody will care.
But lately we've seen dramatic increases in the prices of certain
"collectible" steel guitars, and I expect that trend to continue.
Even among players, I see that many of us love "original" antique steels.
They are a challenge to play because of their limitations, but the vintage
sounds are worth the effort. Adding a knee lever to a Bigsby today would be
considered a crime in some states (Texas and California, to be sure!).
Fenders are poised to be the next big wave of collectibiles, in my opinion.
-b0b-
Daniel Cooper
Reverend Bump wrote in message ...
>
>> I also love the sound of Fenders as played by Al Perkins and Sneaky Pete.
>
>IMHO, more to do with amp, foot pedal and pickup than "Fender". <G>
>
twins. By "foot pedal" do you mean the kind of pedal or their technique?
Dan
Daniel Cooper
Bob wrote in message <7dsl1j$co3$1...@ultra.sonic.net>...
>That's my point exactly, Rev. Bump. Dan didn't give any details about his
>10 string Fender.
I don't *have* the guitar. As a matter of fact, it was up for auction on
good ol' eBay. And by the looks of it, it had rods, not cables. Went for
$425.
It seems I must have offended you somehow, since you never answered my
response to you and do so now only indirectly - talking past me AIW. I was
only disagreeing with you. No offense meant!
Adding a knee lever to a Bigsby today would be
>considered a crime in some states (Texas and California, to be sure!).
Surely the cops have better things to do then chase "ax murderers." <wink>
Dan
Reverend Bump
wrote:
> By "foot pedal" do you mean the kind of pedal or their technique?
>
Both. The type of pedal makes a surprising difference in sound.
Reverend Bump
> So Daniel, add the knee levers to your instrument and I only hope that you
> get from your Fender all the enjoyment I have received from my (Red's) Fender
> 1000 over the years.
I have said all along that if the guitar is going to be a player for you then
do what you want. All you have to do is RECOGNIZE (as you admitted) that the
mods you do will affect the value of the guitar.
However, in YOUR case, you bought a guitar used by someone famous. In the pedal
steel world, buying Red Rhodes guitar is sort of like buying something used by
Dicky Betts or Mark Knopfler. Hell, if Red had scratched his initials into the
finish with a pen knife, it might even be worth more.
Now, if Dan turns out to be the next Buddy Emmons, any knee levers he adds will
be worth an extra 25%. Let's compare apples to apples Al, not apples to caviar
or apples to bullshit.
al...@webtv.net
Between 3/28/99 and 3/31/99 there were approximately 15 postings under this
subject thread started by Daniel Cooper. The subject deals with whether a
pedal steel player should change an old instrument (in this case, the early
Fender pedal steels such as the Fender 400 or 800) by adding knee levers,
which were not a factory option available with the original instrument.
As been said throughout the subject thread, from a collectability standpoint,
the instrument will "always" be worth more in it stock form. This applies to
pedal steel guitars, guitars, Corvettes and x-wives (I'm just checking to see
if you're still with me).
I posted under this thread because I wanted to tell you about the Fender 1000
I bought fron Red Rhodes around 1963-64. Red was a member of the Palimino
Club house band (later on, he fronted his own band there) along with being a
top sideman in the Hollywood country music scene.
He acquired his Fender 1000 new around 1956 and almost immediately he began
his program to install a variety of modifications to this instrument. By the
time the Fender 800 came out, he was ready to acquire that instrument
(because it was a 10 string model and had double sharpeners and flatteners on
each string) and dispose of his Fender 1000.
To Red, the Fender 1000 was akin to a piece of equipment used by a company to
produce a product. His product was "music" and all of his modifications were
designed to improve his instrument.
Some of these modifications were:
1. He took a Fender metal nameplate from one of the Fender Amps and installed
it on the front of the wooden pedal assembly.
2. He actaully produced his own individual string pedal changer units that
would double sharpen. No, he never got one to double flatten but I'm sure he
thought about it. This way, he was able to modify the instrument so that he
could get the pedal changes he wanted. Also, he increased the height of
these pedal changer units so that they pulled the string in a straighter
fashon. This was done to increase the life of the smaller guage strings that
were pulled quite often.
3. He rewound both of the stock pickups to improve the sound. I don't know
if he actually changed any of the pickup magnets.
4. He installed a second cable pulley and in doing so, he relocated the
original one (I'm not sure if I am using the correct name for this part) so
that the cables for each neck had their own individual cable pulley. This
resulted in a reduction of the internal pedal cable friction.
5. He added either three or four knee levers (I may have put one of them on
myself; at my age, I don't remember!) using simple parts from a hardware
store.
6. He added a roller bridge on each end of each tuning, probably from
improvements Fender later made on their pedal steel guitars.
7. He added a washing machine relay unit to the steel with the appropriate
tuning cabling so that by flipping an off/on switch, the base tuning on one
of the necks was changed. I removed this shortly after I acquired the guitar
because the 60 cycle hum resulting from the relay was picked up by the
pickups and it was too difficult to shield this hum. The relay was plugged
into regular 110 AC and when you turned it on, it instantly pulled the pedal
cables and the string changes occured. Sometimes the tuning change was so
fast that a string would break from the intense pressures exerted by the
relay unit.
I don't have the guitar in front of me right now so I'm sure I left something
that Red did to this instrument off my list.
The point that I trying to make is that as a professional musician, Red made
those improvements to his Fender 1000 that he felt were necessary to assist
him in his quest to improve as a performing artist.
When Red offered his Fender 1000 to me for sale, I wasn't concerned about any
of the modifications he did to his guitar. For several years before I bought
this guitar, I heard him play it at the Palimino and I listened to it on many
of his record recordings. I knew what this instrument was capable of doing;
so all I said to Red was, "How much?" (For the record I believe it was
around $500.)
If Daniel Copper is interested in modifying an old Fender pedal steel guitar
for his use as a musician, I really don't see anything wrong with this as
long as he does it tastefully. I don't believe there is any shortage of
stock Fender 400, 1000, 800 or 2000 pedal steel guitars to appease the
appitite of steel guitar collectors.
So Daniel, add the knee levers to your instrument and I only hope that you
get from your Fender all the enjoyment I have received from my (Red's) Fender
1000 over the years.
It's still my only pedal steel guitar and I enjoy playing it as much today as
I did when I first bought it from Red Rhodes.
Regards,
Al Gershen,
Grants Pass, OR, USA
al...@aonepro.net;
and thru ICQ # 12342782
(Message posted thru Deja News on Friday, 4/2/99 at apx. 7:32 PM PST [GMT
-8:00])
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Daniel Cooper
He's saying that someone of his stature as a steel player thinks nothing
about modifying a guitar to suit his needs. He's interested in the sound he
can get out of it, not in how much he'll be able to sell it for later. I
think the same goes without saying about Buddy Emmons. One person looks at
an apple as something to eat, the other person looks at it and wonders how
much it will be worth in thirty years.
Dan
Reverend Bump wrote in message ...
>In article <7e426a$m37$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Al wrote:
>
>> So Daniel, add the knee levers to your instrument and I only hope that
you
>> get from your Fender all the enjoyment I have received from my (Red's)
Fender
>> 1000 over the years.
>
al...@webtv.net
geldne...@earthlink.net wrote on 4/2/99, in part:
> However, in YOUR case, you bought a guitar used by someone famous. In the pedal
> steel world, buying Red Rhodes guitar is sort of like buying something used by
> Dicky Betts or Mark Knopfler. Hell, if Red had scratched his initials into the
> finish with a pen knife, it might even be worth more.
>
> Now, if Dan turns out to be the next Buddy Emmons, any knee levers he adds will
> be worth an extra 25%. Let's compare apples to apples Al, not apples to caviar
> or apples to bullshit.
Hi the Right Reverand Bump:
Thank you for your comment about my posting.
>"...buying Red Rhodes guitar is sort of like buying something used by Dicky Betts or Mark Knopfler."
I haven't really given much thought to the value of Red Rhode's Fender 1000
that I have owned for over 34 years. Your appraisal of it potential value is
surely a tribute to the fine pedal steel guitarist, Orville "Red" Rhodes.
>"Hell, if Red had scratched his initials into thefinish with a pen knife, it might even be worth more."
If you were to look at the guitar, you would think that it was a real
fixer-upper and of only minimal value. I've seen many stock Fender 1000's
for sale over the years and their value appears to be somwhere between $500
and $750.
Remember, this guitar had a suggested retail price of $1000 when it came out
around 1956. How many Fender Telecaster could one have bought back in 1956
for the price of one Fender 1000?
Another thing is: How do I prove to any prospective buyer that my guitar was
owned by Red Rhodes? I never received a bill of sale when I bought it from
Red because things were done informally at that time and he didn't initial
the instrument anywhere that I am aware of.
> "or apples to bullshit."
Finally your above comment suggests that something in my posting was intended
to be ......ahh "bullshit?" Nothing can be further from the truth. I only
wanted to tell the readers about my experence with a highly modified Fender
1000; nothing more, nothing less!
I don't hold myself out as any expert on what anyone should do to their pedal
steel guitars or the future effect of same on its value. I'm only a "weekend
warrior" who loves to play music as a sideman and who loves his Fender 1000.
Hey, nobody ordained me!
Regards,
Al Gershen,
Grants Pass, OR, USA
al...@aonepro.net;
and thru ICQ # 12342782
Message posted thru Deja News on Saturday, 4/3/99 at apx. 12:30 PM PST [GMT
Reverend Bump
> I think Al was using this example precisely BECAUSE it's Red Rhodes' guitar.
> He's saying that someone of his stature as a steel player thinks nothing
> about modifying a guitar to suit his needs.>>
Sure, but remember, when Red had it, it was a NEW guitar to him. No thought
then of it being something collectible. Let's put this another way. If Eric
Clapton came across an original condition, minty Gibson Super 400 from the
early 50's, do you think he would permanently modify it or leave it alone? I'd
lay 10-to-1 odds he'd leave it alone as would most top guitar players. They
wouldn't change something that desirable just to "improve" the sound. Besides,
sound is totally relative. What you think is an improvement I might think made
it worse.
<<He's interested in the sound he
can get out of it, not in how much he'll be able to sell it for later. I
think the same goes without saying about Buddy Emmons.
Absolutely. Although it Buddy's case, since he is/was building steels under
his own name, it's a slightly different case. Besides, modern steels are
designed to be modified. They are pre-drilled for extra levers, pedals, etc.
and have changer mechanisms designed to handle the add-ons.
We can go round in circles on this forever and I doubt either of us will
change the other's mind.
Mike
special significance to anything, ( yeah even if it was say Jimi's
Strat)...If you are looking to try something to YOUR OWN INSTRUMENT to make
it more suitable to YOU...go for it...it's yours....you have to play
it....I don't believe in putting instruments in glass cases and saying
"Don't Touch"...Thats not what they are designed for...just my
2cents...Mike
Reverend Bump
> Finally your above comment suggests that something in my posting was intended
> to be ......ahh "bullshit?"
>
Nope. It's just that when you made the comparison between Red's modifications
(way back when) to what someone is contemplating doing now on an old steel, it
didn't track.
Slidin' Bill
I don't strive for professional kudos
I play for the worst critic
Modifications are a blessing if you can do it
More beer wider rhodes
RESPECT
al...@webtv.net
geldne...@earthlink.net wrote on 4/4/99:
> In article <7e5tq8$4ra$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, wrote:
>
> > Finally your above comment suggests that something in my posting was intended
> > to be ......ahh "bullshit?"
> >
> Nope. It's just that when you made the comparison between Red's modifications
> (way back when) to what someone is contemplating doing now on an old steel, it
> didn't track.
>
> The Right Reverend Bump
> http://www.geldner.com
Hi the Right Reverand Bump:
A bell just rang in my head and a light lighted up my consciousness after
reading your above posting; and it wasn't an Easter church bell or a light
from above!
You are absolutely right! it's really different when a musician modifies a
new instrument vs the modification of a very old instrument. I didn't
consider that aspect of the discussion in this subject thread but now, "I've
seen the light and heard the bell."
If I went out and purchased an old 1939 Gibson Eelectraharp (please read my
earlier postings to this newsgroup about "What happened to the 1939 Gibson
electraharps?"), which is both probably not a very "good" pedal steel guitar
or a very "bad" pedal steel guitar, I would not make any modifications to
this guitar; even if I made the decision to play it as my regular axe.
What Red did to his Fender 1000 was done over a period of around 9 years was
all to the new instrument he purchased around 1956.
The original writer of this subject thread was considering the modification
of a newly acquired early Fender pedal steel guitar. My recommendation to
him to go ahead and make his knee pedal modifications in good taste still
stands. This is only because there are many early stock Fender pedal steel
guitars out there and they are very reasonably priced.
Unfortunately for the 1939 Gibson Electraharp, only a few were made and the
number of surviving instruments is not apparantly known.
So what is the moral of all this dialogue? Not all "old" pedal steels are
alike. As I believe you earlier said, it like comparing "apples and
oranges."
Regards,
Al Gershen,
Grants Pass, OR, USA
al...@aonepro.net;
and thru ICQ # 1234282
(Message posted on Easter Sunday, 4/4/99 at apx. 12:41 AM PST [GMT -8:00])
Reverend Bump
> Not all "old" pedal steels are
> alike. As I believe you earlier said, it like comparing "apples and
> oranges."
>
Say amen! You may now play the Hallelujah Chorus on Rhodes' steel.
<G> I think one factor that needs to be nailed down is if the Fender
in question was one of the (rare) Fullerton models and NOT a Sho-Bud
re-label.
The Right Reverend Bump
http://www.geldner.com
Daniel Cooper
many examples, your point is more valid. There is an example of the type of
Fender guitar I was talking about pictured on Bobbe Seymore's web site.
Look under used/new steels.
BTW, Bobbe notes that knees can be added at $100 per.
Dan
Here's the URL: http://www.steelguitar.net/page3.html
Reverend Bump wrote in message ...
Reverend Bump
wrote:
> There is an example of the type of
> Fender guitar I was talking about pictured on Bobbe Seymore's web site.
>
OK, that's a Sho-Bud in disguise. The steels I'm thinking about are the
1000, 2000, 400 & 800 Fenders made in Fullerton. AFAIK, none of them ever
came with knee levers but they all eventually used Gene Fields changer
mechanism on them.