6139

Jerry Tillman · Post by **Jerry Tillman** » 25 Oct 2009 10:08 am

I just got a mint 6139 67 or 68.The wood neck goes around the changer.Its 3 and one and sounds great.I,m trying to decide if I want to add more knees or just leave it as is.The wood and metal parts are in such good condition I hate to mess with it.Its seems more like art to me than an instrument.Any pros or cons.Not looking to get flamed in anyway.Thanks Jerry.

Dennis Brown · Post by **Dennis Brown** » 25 Oct 2009 10:28 am

Can ya share some pictures? I for one would like to see the pretty thang. You need to share these rare horns with the rest of us. I do however suggest you make it what ever it is you want it to be. (playable for you).

Dennis

Bent Romnes · Post by **Bent Romnes** » 25 Oct 2009 10:39 am

Jerry, in 1972 I bought a new 6139, 3 and 1.
I traded it on a new MSA Classic D10 in 1976
If I'd'a known then what I know now, I would have bought the MSA outright. They had a lovely tone and the birdseye maple body and neck was beautiful.

Skip Edwards · Post by **Skip Edwards** » 25 Oct 2009 10:47 am

I've also got a 6139 that I bought new in "72. It came 3 & 1, and I added 3 more KL's in '76, with parts from Sho-Bud.
I'm a fan of rack and barrel, and I'd say add the 3 more levers, but try to keep it original. Not sure who makes r&b parts these days. John Coop, maybe?

James Morehead · Post by **James Morehead** » 25 Oct 2009 12:44 pm

Ben Elder · Post by **Ben Elder** » 26 Oct 2009 1:57 am

I've got the same situation somewhere in my future. Even though I have a D-10 8+2 Professional made virtually new by the estimable James Morehead (above), I think I'll keep the 6139 3+1 because a) it's great; and b) it came from a friend who's very close, not to mention fabulously talented and famous...for somewhat different musical accomplishments. It'll need the KL's and I may put a correct period pickup back in it to take advantage of the coil-tap capability. (It came with a George L PF-1 which sounds just fine but doesn't accommodate that coil-tap knob.)

(Stand by, James. If some upcoming winter's slow again, you may be seeing both of thees for knese...)

Jerry Tillman · Post by **Jerry Tillman** » 26 Oct 2009 4:01 am

I think I going to leave it 3 and one for now as there are no extra holes underneath and I don,t want to make any.I going to drop 8>1/2 and 2>1/2 and a whole step.I can do most stuff with those changes and I like some licks I do without the 4th string drop.I have other steels if I want to.I may also use the tuning keys to get some more stuff going.I detune my tele all the time but have never really done it to any pedal steels for some reason.

Eddie Harper · Post by **Eddie Harper** » 26 Oct 2009 7:29 pm

Hi Jerry
I Bought a New Professional,6139, in 1975. It came with 8+2 and I had a couple extra knees added acouple of years later. Still have the guitar and wouldn't part with it. No issues for 39 years, except something minor...Still play it everyday. Hang on to it and make it playable for you.

If you want, go to Charles tilley's site and click on Eddie Harper and listen to Farewell Party, recorded with that 6139 and a Session 400 amp....

Eddie

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 26 Oct 2009 7:38 pm

What is a 6139?

Casey Lowmiller · Post by **Casey Lowmiller** » 26 Oct 2009 7:52 pm

I think that a 6139 is an early Pro-1 with the gumby headstock...I think

James Morehead could probably hot-rod that 6139 for you. He really knows his old Sho-Buds!!!

Casey

Stan Schober · Post by **Stan Schober** » 26 Oct 2009 8:10 pm

Mike Perlowin wrote:What is a 6139?

THIS is a 6139, and about of the same vintage

Skip Edwards · Post by **Skip Edwards** » 26 Oct 2009 10:06 pm

The 6139 was the designation for Sho-Bud's sgl neck gtr, pre-ProI.
They were originally rack and barrel, and for all intents and purposes was a sgl neck Professional.

The earliest ones had the wood wraparound at the changer, and the later models had the aluminum block.
Earlier ones also had the pedals further inboard, like in the picture above. The pedals were moved to the left around '72.

When barrels & two-hole pullers replaced rack and barrels, it became the ProI, although I think some of the earliest versions lacked the ProI decal. These early ProI's also had the round front body.

Older 6139's came with volume and tone pots on the back shelf, as well as a coil tap switch. Around '74 the pots went away, and the tap switch was moved to the endplate.

The model with the two hole pullers and barrels lasted a very short time, and was soon updated with nylon hex end tuners, and now had the square front body.
This became the ProI that you see most often. All of these had gumby headstocks, teardrop KL's, and waffle pedals. The final version of the ProI had a shorter body, no gumby, and narrow pedals, as well as straight KL's. These are the ones with the SuperPro undercarriage.

To muddy the waters a bit, around '74-75, Sho-Bud continued to make a model 6139 and a ProI for awhile.
The only difference between the later 6139 and the ProI was the ProI had a decal that said "ProI", while the 6139 didn't...and the ProI came from the factory with 2 KL's, while the 6139 came with one. Otherwise they were identical. It didn't take Sho-Bud very long to figure out that they didn't need two sgl neck 10 string steels in their line-up, so the 6139 was discontinued.

As with all Sho-Buds, there are numerous variations, since they continued to use up the older parts on newer models, so you see a mishmosh of features along the production run.

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 27 Oct 2009 12:14 am

Thanks for the info guys.

Man, those guitars are pretty.

Jerry Tillman · Post by **Jerry Tillman** » 27 Oct 2009 9:08 am

Stan,that looks just like my steel.I don,t see as many birdseyes on yours as I see on mine but that could just be the way it comes out in the picture.Mike these guitars have a wonderful full woodsy sound.I think I remember from another post that you play with your fingers without picks(you get a great tone by the way)you would sound really nice on one of these.I think I see to many s,s in the birdseye.

Stan Schober · Post by **Stan Schober** » 27 Oct 2009 1:05 pm

Jerry Tillman wrote:Stan,that looks just like my steel.I don,t see as many birdseyes on yours...

Dude, I -WISH- that was mine.It's a pic of one that Pittsburgh Phil sold here a while ago. I just dug it up so Mike could see what we were all gaga about.

SO when are you gonna let us see yours ?!!??!?!

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 27 Oct 2009 1:50 pm

I keep forgetting what model mine is! 6141? 6 pedals and two right knees. No pots on the back ledge, but the coil-tap is there. Wood wraparound changer. 1967, as per Coop. Crudest looking racks you'll ever see! Great-sounding guitar!

And Skip, you are correct, there is no decal on my round-front, wide-pedal, two-hole pullers S-10.

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 27 Oct 2009 2:01 pm

Jerry Tillman wrote:Stan,that looks just like my steel.I don,t see as many birdseyes on yours as I see on mine but that could just be the way it comes out in the picture.

Funny, I don't see any "birdseyes" on Stan's pictures? (That looks more like what they call "quilted" or "flamed" wood.)

Jerry Tillman · Post by **Jerry Tillman** » 28 Oct 2009 6:27 am

Steel not for sale. Any interest in foot please send private message

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 28 Oct 2009 7:35 am

This is a good example of "birds eye" maple...

And these are good examples of "quilted" or "flamed" maple...

Note that the birds eye variety normally contains some (or even a lot) of the "quilted" effect, but that the varieties termed "quilted" or "flamed" normally contain very few (or sometimes no) "birds eyes" (the tiny dark spots or circles in the wood).

This is for info only (not for the sake of argument), and to prevent buyers from using improper terminologies and possiblly getting something different than what they wanted from a builder.

Bent Romnes · Post by **Bent Romnes** » 28 Oct 2009 10:28 am

Donny, what you see as "quilted" maple is actually still birdseye maple that has been quarter sawn. Look close and you will still see the odd birdseye.
The birdseye pics that you posted are from plain sawing.

When you quarter saw a log, you first split it into four equal sized quarters and then cut boards out of each quarter. With normal sawing, you start at one side of the log and work your way towards the other side.

The advantages of quarter sawing are two: First, you get more stability of the board against cupping and twisting when dried. The other advantage is that you normally get more dramatic grain pattern on an otherwise 'boring' piece of log.

Quarter-sawing birdseye maple is really a wasteful practice. You certainly have the dramatic grain from normal sawing birds eye maple anyway. So why quarter saw birds eye, since it is not as economical as plain sawing? That would be my thinking anyway.
Years ago when fine lumber was more plentiful, I guess they could afford to quarter saw.

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 28 Oct 2009 3:27 pm

Bent Romnes wrote:Donny, what you see as "quilted" maple is actually still birdseye maple that has been quarter sawn. Look close and you will still see the odd birdseye.
The birdseye pics that you posted are from plain sawing.

I'm sorry Bent, but I will have to disagree (in a friendly manner, or course). Both flamed (quilted) and birds eye figures in the wood are actually anomalies, and they cannot be "created" by any sawing technique. While it's true that birds eye figured lumber often exhibits some quilting, which can, itself, be enhanced by different sawing techniques, the radial pattern which creates the birds eye figure must first exist in the log. You can take a log that just exhibits beautiful quilting and saw it seven ways to Sunday, and if the radial "spoke pattern" isn't in the log, you will never see a birds eye figure once you get past the sapwood. I know all about quarter-sawing, plain-sawing and through-cut sawing as my grandfather ran a sawmill. Regardless of which method of sawing is used, some of the boards and grain patterns will be identical in each cut. (There are actually 3 different methods of quarter-sawing!)

The vast majority of logs (maple or otherwise) have no appreciable "figure", and there is usually no way to tell what, if any, figuring the log exhibits until the first cuts are made. Elaborate figuring can increase the value of wood by a hundred times, so you can bet that if someone could "create" those types of figures by merely applying different sawing techniques, they certainly would.

Years ago when fine lumber was more plentiful, I guess they could afford to quarter saw.

Quarter sawing is still done when the goal is a more dimensionally stable product (fine furniture, for example). The type of end-product desired determines which method is best suited. The cheapest and fastest method is through-cut sawing (done nowadays on computer-controlled bandsaws). It also yeilds boards with the biggest width. The most expensive and time consuming sawing is radial quarter-sawing, which yeilds lumber that is exceptionally strong and resistant to warping, cupping, or twisting.

Again, all this is not for argument, but for information for those who may be interested.

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 28 Oct 2009 3:37 pm

There seems to be a difference, at least to my eye, between "Tiger Stripe" maple, and "Quilted" Maple. Is that not the case?

Bent Romnes · Post by **Bent Romnes** » 28 Oct 2009 5:45 pm

For sure, Donny, it's nothing to argue about. Opinions will vary. Because that is what they are - opinions

Jerry Tillman · Post by **Jerry Tillman** » 31 Oct 2009 5:08 am

I played my first gig with the Sho Bud last nite and I really enjoyed it.I played through my 65 twin which has two jensens in it.The sound was very rich and full and I did not miss having the other knee levers.The band played old country ,swing ,blues and origanals so I didn,t have to copy any parts exactly.These steels have a sound and sustain all their own.If you want to hear what I,m talking about go to you tube and search JJ Cale Heh baby.Lloyd Green does a lead and fill that has this tone.Its one of my favorite solos.

Jay Ganz · Post by **Jay Ganz** » 31 Oct 2009 5:33 am

Hey Jerry,
You sure lucked out on that one! Great find! It's got the standard coil tap switch for the pickup, right?

The Steel Guitar Forum

6139

6139

6139

Knee Lever

6139

6139

Re: 6139

Re: 6139

Blind hog finds acorn

first gig