Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:11 am
Of course, Ken - all fair comment. You mention the bar: we both use Basil's high-density plastic bar, and we've both noticed the effect it has on tone. But let's not lose sight of the fact that you can *expect* it to affect the tone, because it's directly a part of the interaction with the string and its vibration, in a way that a 3D printed puller is not.
You comment on the best tone coming from guitars with round shafts. You attribute that to "maximum contact between cross-shaft and puller". Actually, that can't be so, from a simple geometric (engineering) standpoint. If you consider the nature of the contact between a round shaft and a puller with a round hole in it, there can only be contact between them at one point on the periphery. Well, let's not forget the screw as well.
With a square cross-shaft, I would argue that there is a much greater area of engagement between puller and cross-shaft. For a start there is a tighter fit, and then there is the double rectangular area of contact to consider. I'd say I'm sure your ears are giving you the right message, but that we need to look elsewhere for why the tone is as good as it is.
As I say, a bit off topic, but if time allows I have a promise from my 3D man to print me some trial pullers.... It would be fun to try them. The acid test would be "can you hear a difference without looking underneath?" I think.
You comment on the best tone coming from guitars with round shafts. You attribute that to "maximum contact between cross-shaft and puller". Actually, that can't be so, from a simple geometric (engineering) standpoint. If you consider the nature of the contact between a round shaft and a puller with a round hole in it, there can only be contact between them at one point on the periphery. Well, let's not forget the screw as well.
With a square cross-shaft, I would argue that there is a much greater area of engagement between puller and cross-shaft. For a start there is a tighter fit, and then there is the double rectangular area of contact to consider. I'd say I'm sure your ears are giving you the right message, but that we need to look elsewhere for why the tone is as good as it is.
As I say, a bit off topic, but if time allows I have a promise from my 3D man to print me some trial pullers.... It would be fun to try them. The acid test would be "can you hear a difference without looking underneath?" I think.
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:08 am
Will
I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree on the round v square cross shaft puller thing. Two of my guitars have completely round cross shafts, and the grip of the clamps on the pullers have to be virtually 100% or they will slip. With a square puller you only have some kind of grip on 3 sides as the screw will be on the 4th side. Both systems work well, but my round shafts have more sustain than my square shafts. I will leave it at that.
I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree on the round v square cross shaft puller thing. Two of my guitars have completely round cross shafts, and the grip of the clamps on the pullers have to be virtually 100% or they will slip. With a square puller you only have some kind of grip on 3 sides as the screw will be on the 4th side. Both systems work well, but my round shafts have more sustain than my square shafts. I will leave it at that.
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Thu Apr 27, 2017 4:11 pm
Ken, I think I have twigged where the misunderstanding lies. Do your pullers have a split circle, that is tightened by the clamp screw so that it grips all around the shaft? The circular holes on my old Marlen were a fixed size, and my logic works from that point forward.
Certainly, with a square shaft, I think there is proper contact on two sides only - but I said that in my previous post. Proof of the pudding, I guess. You've been at this a lot longer than I, and I must cede the floor to you.
Certainly, with a square shaft, I think there is proper contact on two sides only - but I said that in my previous post. Proof of the pudding, I guess. You've been at this a lot longer than I, and I must cede the floor to you.
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Thu Apr 27, 2017 4:24 pm
Will C wrote:......Ken, I think I have twigged where the misunderstanding lies. Do your pullers have a split circle, that is tightened by the clamp screw so that it grips all around the shaft?.....
They do indeed Will.
BTW, I have been eyeing up the possible purchase of a 3D printer. I would definitely have to smuggle one of them past her indoors.
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:14 am
I suppose the best way to conduct an experiment to see how 3-D printed plastic parts effect tone is to start with a conventional, good sounding steel. You could then swap conventional parts for plastic parts and listen for any tone changes. Building a new steel with a lot of plastic parts would involve too many variables and would make it impossible to determine where the tone change is happening.
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:04 pm
George Piburn in the States has made a start using 3D printing. 
http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopi ... 3f70f529d5
http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopi ... 3f70f529d5
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Mon May 01, 2017 2:36 pm
You've done well Ken to re-rod your steel for £70.
I'd been looking for some 1/8" rods years ago and the prices here were outrageous. One metal supplier wanted £18 for a 3 foot length. (McMaster-Carr were about the cheapest but wouldn't ship to UK)
Having been scouting Ebay for years and virtually given up, about 6 or 7 years ago I found a bloke selling a job lot for $3 a yard length.
At that time the exchange rate was OK so I was extremely lucky.
They do weigh less and the co-efficient of expansion is less. From roughly a ratio of 16 for stainless to 9 for Titanium.
As regards Ali. rods, a mate of mine had a Sho-Bud Professional with the rack and barrel system that was sawing through them. At the time I changed them to stainless for him and no trouble since.
Perhaps it might be of interest to others, to know where you got your rods from at that price.- Just a thought.
I'd been looking for some 1/8" rods years ago and the prices here were outrageous. One metal supplier wanted £18 for a 3 foot length. (McMaster-Carr were about the cheapest but wouldn't ship to UK)
Having been scouting Ebay for years and virtually given up, about 6 or 7 years ago I found a bloke selling a job lot for $3 a yard length.
At that time the exchange rate was OK so I was extremely lucky.
They do weigh less and the co-efficient of expansion is less. From roughly a ratio of 16 for stainless to 9 for Titanium.
As regards Ali. rods, a mate of mine had a Sho-Bud Professional with the rack and barrel system that was sawing through them. At the time I changed them to stainless for him and no trouble since.
Perhaps it might be of interest to others, to know where you got your rods from at that price.- Just a thought.
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Mon May 01, 2017 4:32 pm
Tony Smart wrote:...............Perhaps it might be of interest to others, to know where you got your rods from at that price.- Just a thought.
I was supplied the rod by a contact supplier in India Tony. I won't go too deeply into the deal, but the lady who sold me some NOS titanium rod through the company she works for did so on the proviso that my purchase was a one off. Titanium is getting more expensive to produce now apparently, and I bought my little stash at the right time. I have enough rod left to re-rod my Zum, but I will leave that project for another day. Cutting threads onto titanium rod is not as easy as it is on stainless or aluminium.
I have a friend who has outsourced pedal steel pullers to China, and had to buy in bulk but got an outstanding deal.
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Sat May 27, 2017 7:20 pm
Umm..I am led to believe that the MSA M3 (mine) has Titanium undercarriage as standard. 
Re: Titanium rods for weight reduction.
Sat May 27, 2017 8:53 pm
Davie Holland wrote:Umm..I am led to believe that the MSA M3 (mine) has Titanium undercarriage as standard.
Yes, MSA were supplying titanium pull rods as standard on their M3 models, but haven't done so since they announced that the price of titanium made it prohibitive. They stopped using it a while back, as the late Maurice Anderson told me at one of the Dallas shows that the price of titanium rod had trebled from when the early M3 guitars were built.
So it would seem that you have a good'un Davie, unlike McMiser's guitar which has welding rod as pull pods.