Replacement cone for Vintage brand AMG1

[lukfur]

Hi Folks,

Just new to Resonators and this forum.


Bit the bullet recently and bought my 1st Res last month, 2nd hand Uk brand Vintage AMG1.  Unfortunately distorted buzzing belied a collapsed cone.


Looking for a possible upgrade. The AMG1 biscuit bridge is listed as being Maple, which is a good start I've been told?


Viking cones are available as cheapest in uk but I can't seem to source a new National or Beard one in the uk - does anyone have any suggestions for suppliers? Thoman in Germany have none instock.


Does anyone have any experience with Delta Resophonic Cones form the uk and how they compare to the others.  


Many thanks in advance for any pointers, suggestions or comparisons.


S

[Michael Messer]

Hi lukfur

Welcome to our friendly forum.

The Vintage AMG series were all manufactured around 20+ years ago by a factory/company in Shanghai called AXL. In other countries they were marketed as Johnson guitars.

The easiest replacement cone to get is the Viking. It should be fine.

Delta Resonators have not existed for many years, maybe 20 years or so. I am not sure how or why their name still turns up.

Do not buy a Beard cone for any National-style guitar. Beard make the best Dobro-style cones in the world, but their National-style cones with no spirals and the wrong gauge aluminium are at the opposite end of the pole.

National Reso-Phonic (NRP) cones are excellent, but I don't think you need to spend that amount of money on your guitar.

Continental cones are also good, but importing from Germany is more costly than getting a Viking cone.

The biscuit and bridge saddle in your guitar might be all maple, but more likely the biscuit is rosewood and the saddle is maple, which is fine.

I hope that is helpful information. I am sure other members will also have comments to make.

Shine On
Michael

[lukfur]

Bril thanks for the advice Michael.

I was wondering about Beards coated biscuit cone which they have in stock, but a bit pricey, so thanks for the heads up.

Delta resonators website seems to have been last updated 2016, so no longer available tho? www.deltaresonatorcones.co.uk/bigboss.html

Is there another type of biscuit bridge other than rosewood that might improve tone further?

BTW, am I right in thinking open E and A never mind High G is a no no for these cones and guitar?

Thanks again,

S

[Michael Messer]

My pleasure.

Maple biscuit and boxwood saddle is the correct combination and is what the original National company used in the 1920s and 30s.

Coated cones are not something that are of any interest to me or any other National-style guitar owners that I know. They would be better off making them with the correct specs and not worrying about the coating. Their main market is for Dobro players with spider-bridge instruments. I am not sure that I understand coating the cones on any type of resophonic guitar. I am assuming it keeps them bright and new-sounding, which is everything I don't want, whether on a National; or Dobro style instrument.

I just read on the Resophonic Outfitters website that the black coating is this >> Vesper: A micro-thin Ceramic Polymer that is applied to the top surface of the aluminium to protect the cone from the oxidation process. This is not paint or powder coat, the special application process ensures superior adheasion with the thinnest coating possible. As a result of creating a longer lasting cone, we also discovered new increased sonic attributes. The sustain of the legend cone, with a more pronounced high end.

Making a cone laster longer seems pointless to me, as many are still sounding amazing after almost 100 years. For me and everyone I know that p[lays these instruments, it is about the cone mellowing and ageing over time, not trying to keep it sounding new. They are also talking about it creating more pronounced highs, which again is a million miles from where I am. This is all aimed at modern bluegrass players that want as much volume and brightness as possible from their Dobros. My taste in Dobros is the opposite, I like them warm and sweet, but still with a kick if required. As I said in my previous post, Beard know about Dobros and modern bluegrass players, and that is their thing.

Delta disappeared long before 2016. Strange.

Shine On
Michael

[Ian McWee]

Hi all,

Just a quick clarification regarding Delta Resonator Guitars and Delta Resonator cones ~ John Alderson (Delta Resonator Guitars) retired several years ago from building resonator instruments and only accepts repairs on any Delta Resonators requiring a little fettling to keep them in playing condition.

Any links existing between Delta Resonator Guitars and Delta Resonator cones ceased over two decades ago ~ neither company are now trading commercially 😉

Slide On!

The Flaschenmeister.

[lukfur]

Thanks for all the info and clarification!

I've gone for a Viking cone just now and ordered a maple biscuit from Amazon (?China) and a Rosewood biscuit from Hobgoblin too, just incase...

Can you suggest the heaviest strings the cone will take if I'm in Open D or Open Low G?

Also is there any scope for tuning up to open E without the cone collapsing? High G is out of the question I take it?

Thanks again

[Michael Messer]

I would recommend 15-56 for open G and D, and probably fine for open E. I would go lighter on the bottom two strings for high bass G.

If they are what I think they are, those are quite strong cones and should be fairly collapse-proof.

Just enjoy your guitar and don't worry about all that stuff you read written by tyre-kickers on socials.

Shine On
Michael

[bignatz]

I was about to ask a similar question, but for replacement cones for a National tricone. 

I'm sure that this has been covered elsewhere on this forum, but what does Michael think about the "hot rod" cones from NRP, if they're still made? 

Are they superior or inferior to the Continentals? 

There's a retired builder in France, can't remember his name, who was claiming that it was the certain type of aluminum, as much as the skill of  the person spinning the cones, that made a big difference in tone. He was, I think, using some reclaimed, pre-War aluminum from printing press type blocks at the time, and claimed the this produced a vastly superior tone. I tried to get some replacements from him, but he refused to sell any, and was using them in his own builds. I'm sure somebody here knows who I'm talking about - having yet another Senior moment and just can't remember his name. Doesn't really matter anyway, but I would be interested in what people think here makes for a superior cone for either trigones or single cone guitars. 

Lastly, it's great that Michael warned us all about Beard cones. I don't know why they bother, the non-Dobro type cones absolutely suck. I made this mistake and it was a total waste of money. 

I would also like to pose the question as to why nobody is making "boutique" cones. I'd gladly spend another couple hundred bucks on cones that sounded like the old ones, if the "code" could be broken by some metalworker. 

I understand that the machinery for spinning these cones is expensive...I think I remember that NRP acquired the old machinery used to spin the cones from the last iteration of the National plant, but they still don't sound good to me...so this goes back to the question about the differences between the stock used to make them. I though aluminum was just aluminum, and didn't think there were alloys of this material. 

End of stream of consciousness rant....sorry. 

[Michael Messer]

bignatz....Answers to your questions....

I'm sure that this has been covered elsewhere on this forum, but what does Michael think about the "hot rod" cones from NRP, if they're still made?
>>Hod Rod National cones are very good. They are consistent and they work really well. NRP Hot Rod 9.5" cones are not better or worse than Continental-Shanghai cones, they are different. However, NRP 6" tricone cones are better than Continental-Shanghai cones because the Continental-Shanghai 6" tricone cones are made from the same gauge aluminium as their 9.5" single cones and this is wrong. NRP are using the correct gauge for tricones, so they are better.

Are they superior or inferior to the Continentals?

>>The subject of Continental cones is not as simple as it might sound. The name "Continental" has become a generic term for all Shanghai-built cones which is why I sometimes call the Continental-Shanghai cones. In Shanghai there is no such company, it is a brand that the West has invented. There are a couple of workshops making cones in Shanghai, one of the workshops spins them by hand and the guys there are masters of this black art, the other is a workshop that creates almost the same looking cones, but using CNC machinery. They are not as good as the hand spun cones, but for most people there is no way of knowing what you are going to get, hand spun or CNC, so it has become a bit of a pot-luck situation. My MM cones are made for me by the guys that hand spin them and they are not the same as standard so called "Continental" cones. I gave those guys a few original 20s and 30s cones and asked them to get as close as they could, and they do a pretty good job. My guys can spin a hundred or so in one batch and they are as consistent as NRP or original Nationals. They do a great job. There is so much more to this subject, but I could go on writing for an hour and still not cover it all.


There's a retired builder in France, can't remember his name, who was claiming that it was the certain type of aluminum, as much as the skill of the person spinning the cones, that made a big difference in tone. He was, I think, using some reclaimed, pre-War aluminum from printing press type blocks at the time, and claimed the this produced a vastly superior tone. I tried to get some replacements from him, but he refused to sell any, and was using them in his own builds. I'm sure somebody here knows who I'm talking about - having yet another Senior moment and just can't remember his name. Doesn't really matter anyway, but I would be interested in what people think here makes for a superior cone for either tricones or single cone guitars.

>>You are talking about my friend, Mike Lewis "Fine Resophonic Guitars" in Paris. Mike spins his own cones and knowing Mike as well as I do I can assure you that he would never claim that his are better than any others, or that they are closer to the originals. However, Mike is a master of his craft of building resonator guitars and IMHO his cones are without question the closest to original 1920s and 30s National cones. Mike spins them by hand and he does not sell them, they only go in his own Fine Resophonic Guitars.

Lastly, it's great that Michael warned us all about Beard cones. I don't know why they bother, the non-Dobro type cones absolutely suck. I made this mistake and it was a total waste of money.

>>My pleasure!

I would also like to pose the question as to why nobody is making "boutique" cones. I'd gladly spend another couple hundred bucks on cones that sounded like the old ones, if the "code" could be broken by some metalworker.

>>Mike Lewis is already doing this, but doesn't sell them. There is no code to crack, it just takes years of experience and dedication, and an affinity and understanding of what you are trying to make.


I understand that the machinery for spinning these cones is expensive...I think I remember that NRP acquired the old machinery used to spin the cones from the last iteration of the National plant, but they still don't sound good to me...so this goes back to the question about the differences between the stock used to make them. I though aluminum was just aluminum, and didn't think there were alloys of this material.

>>There is no expensive or special machinery required to spin cones, just a good lathe, a mould and some hand tools. Oh.....and a very skilled and experienced pair of hands. Aluminium / aluminium does vary and you have to use the correct grade to get the right result. It is aircraft grade, but there's more to it than that.


End of stream of consciousness rant....sorry.

>>No need to apologise, that was a good set of questions.

Shine On
Michael

[Bill Stig]

Excuse me for butting in after such a long silence.

I once had a long conversation over a few pints with someone who used to build metal bodied resos and spin his own cones. I don't want to say who as he's a very private person. His take on it was that the best sound for cones would be achieved with pure aluminium. The problem with that is there's not enough strength to prevent them from collapsing, therefore an alloy had to be used. He said that the more aluminium content in the alloy, the better the sound.

Bill

[Michael Messer]

Hello Bill, long time!

Original National cones were 99% pure aluminium and the rest was whatever they threw in the pot.

Shine On
Michael

[Bill Stig]

Interesting. That'll be why they sound so good then.

[Michael Messer]

Mar 12, 2024 20:04:16 GMT Bill Stig said:

Interesting. That'll be why they sound so good then.

Indeed. It is also what Mike Lewis uses to make his cones. I have no idea about NRP or my guys in Shanghai, but it wouldn't surprise me if they are all using 99%.

As well as the material, there is a lot of skill in the hands of the spinner. There is a lot to it that is all done by feel and experience. Each person has their own touch.

Shine On
Michael

[hawgwash]

Man that is one heck of an informative exchange .. seriously .

[Bill Stig]

Mar 13, 2024 3:00:00 GMT hawgwash said:

Man that is one heck of an informative exchange .. seriously .

It is. Maybe it could encourage other people to have a go and develop some skills.