|
|
Post by mitchfit on Nov 24, 2013 0:48:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by slide496 on Nov 24, 2013 1:06:13 GMT
Aren't those both understrung?
|
|
|
|
Post by zak71 on Nov 24, 2013 4:39:56 GMT
Understrung and overpriced. The tailpiece-to-bridge distance on these guitars is VERY short, so the margin of "correct" break angle is even smaller than it is on a normal National. Once someone oblivious to the easily adjustable neck angle has monkeyed with the bridge saddle height, understringing them is the only way to make it work (short of starting over with a fresh saddle), and unfortunately at least half of the 1133s I see are in that state. And the fellow with the red one isn't doing himself any favors with that video, I don't know if it's the cone or the video quality, but that's an atrocious sound. Mine sounds nothing like that! If the cone is damaged, does anyone even make a correct 8" replacement? I really like mine, but they are not guitars anyone should ever pay four figures for. If you're patient, you can still find them in the $700-$800 range.  |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Messer on Nov 24, 2013 9:58:47 GMT
Owners and sellers (dealers!) of these guitars often have them under-strung because they don't understand about the neck angle screw. The white pearloid one looks beautiful and for a UK buyer, at £680:00 GBP it is a bargain.
The red one for sale at $1800:00 USD is way overpriced, but it's a nice guitar.
Shine On
Michael
|
|
|
|
Post by mitchfit on Nov 24, 2013 14:21:23 GMT
if you find an 1133 for 800 american inflationary notes in todays
market, it will likely be pretty rough. from memory the blue book
on them coupl'a years back was 1200 for a round neck, and 100 less
for square. same would have to be nicer than the white one in top
advert. rare to see one with the OEM case still all intact as they
are poor quality. as such, that would be an item that likely only
a collector might find of interest.
to me the sweet thing about these is their sound, NOT the short
supply of unmolested models. i wish i had bought one that was
listed at elderly.com last year. it had been stripped of the
plastic film, and a magnetic PUP had been installed. would have
been a good one to put a highlander or a small permanent mic in.
IIRC, it was listed at 600 [+,-] and uglier than a mud fence. it
sold pretty quickly.
in previous postings, MM said he had auditioned the current mfg
cones that will fit these, and they pull 30"+ of mercury.
mitchfit
|
|
|
|
Post by zak71 on Nov 24, 2013 14:48:08 GMT
if you find an 1133 for 800 american inflationary notes in todays market, it will likely be pretty rough. I traded a pretty rough lookin' '59 Harmony Meteor (which I bought for $475 2 years ago) for mine this summer. The only thing wrong with it cosmetically is that the little brad nails that held the pickguard in have been replaced with tiny screws. And the fact that it is pink...I guess that might deter some potential buyers who aren't in touch with their feminine side haha.  |
|
|
|
Post by mitchfit on Nov 24, 2013 15:01:26 GMT
same mother of pearl drums color as mine. wouldn't call
mine pink though. and i don't even watch rambo movies.
i'll give you 800 for it...
mitchfit
|
|
|
|
Post by zak71 on Nov 24, 2013 15:50:56 GMT
Haha thanks but I really have no desire to get rid of it.
In terms of tone and the immaculate condition of the frets and fretboard, it is by far the best one I have come across.
It's so tiny that I can't even use the "I have no room left for it" excuse.
|
|
|
|
Post by mitchfit on Nov 24, 2013 17:38:58 GMT
the defense rests.
not unusual for these to have new-ish frets as
many aren't aware of neck adjustment option, or
only purchased them for slide use.
can't say with any authority if mine is a good
representation for all of the set-ups they had
prior to the post '64 clearance of remaining
parts mfg guitars, but it has a pretty high nut.
not bow-and-arrow grade, but higher than i'd
want on one for standard play. i do prefer an
action lower than many like on an acoustic.
yours appears post '64 also, does it have a nut
that seems somewhat high for standard playing?
may be another reason for the lack of fret wear.
mitchfit
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Messer on Nov 24, 2013 17:58:57 GMT
Hi Zak,
The only replacement cone, as far as I know, is the Beard 8¼ inch biscuit bridge cone. I am afraid that I have seen one of these and it is just not any good, it is too thick.
I do know that you can rout out the soundwell to take a 9½ inch National cone. Another way, is to cut down a 9½ inch cone with a pair of scissors and sit the sharp edge on a gasket of felt. I have seen both done successfully.
Shine On
Michael
|
|
|
|
Post by zak71 on Nov 24, 2013 18:08:41 GMT
It has a G prefix serial number in the 1964 range, but the nut is cut low enough for it to feel like an electric guitar. I play it with .13s in standard tuning and it feels slinky. I can tell the original nut hasn't been tampered with, there's a little bit of paint overlap on the edge of the nut where it meets the neck.  |
|
|
|
Post by zak71 on Nov 24, 2013 18:10:36 GMT
The only replacement cone, as far as I know, is the Beard 8¼ inch biscuit bridge cone. I am afraid that I have seen one of these and it is just not any good, it is too thick. Thanks, Michael. I am not at all surprised to hear that about the Beard cone. They may have an excellent reputation for Dobro cones, but they just don't seem to "get" the National style. |
|
|
|
Post by mitchfit on Nov 24, 2013 18:59:42 GMT
Zak,
was going to say that from the pics, yours
seems to have the strings down into the nut
pretty deep. then i got mine out and the
strings on it are deeper into the nut than
most acoustic setups i recall.
thought 1/2 diameter the not-to-exceed spec
for nut slot depth? on mine only the bass
string [low E if standard tuned] is not
completely submerged. it barely clears the
top of the nut. what would be a high E is
about 1/2 diameter down below the nut,
and the string is needing a periscope...
is it soft nut material on these allowing the
string to "saw" into them from many times
tuned?
is this nut slot depth common with the
national reso nuts, or just a reflection
of the rushed assembly methods with the
post '64 offerings? anyone else have input
on their national guitar nut slot depth?
seems like the set up on mine would kill
tone badly...
mitchfit
|
|
|
|
Post by oscar on Nov 24, 2013 19:05:35 GMT
I could compare the original cone to the Beard cone which I think is not that bad.
I had a 1033 with a very good orignal cone and a 1133 with a ruined cone (nailed with 3 nails, flattened, "repaired" sections etc.) I bought a Beard cone for replacement.
They 1033 did not sound good with the orignal cone, and the Beard cone did not change that. I fear this gitar looks great but sound and volume are very far away from the 1133's.
The 1133 sounded best with the old National cone, which produced more bass response, but the Beard produced nearly the same volume and gave sharp trebles (which I like and make this guitar great for soloing in an acoustic band).
I also could compare the Beard 9.5 cone to (new) National cone in two different guitars(National Style O and Continental Style O). Same effect: less bass with the Beard, but nice trebles (maybe a little bit too Dobro-ish for someone looking for the classic National sound).
|
|
|
|
Post by zak71 on Nov 24, 2013 19:29:08 GMT
was going to say that from the pics, yours seems to have the strings down into the nut pretty deep. then i got mine out and the strings on it are deeper into the nut than most acoustic setups i recall. --- is it soft nut material on these allowing the string to "saw" into them from many times tuned? I don't think your strings have sawed through the nut. Every 60s Valco guitar I've had (I am too ashamed to give you an actual figure) had deeper (and sloppier) nut slots than what is considered to be optimal. I think is due to the fact that by the early 60s, aside from short-scale student models, Valco electrics used a zero fret, and the nut served only as a string guide. |
|
