An Off-The-Wall Idea For Y'all To Chew On

[ed packard]

To resonate or not to resonate…that is the question!

Do we want a resonant member(s) attached to the vibrating string or not in order to get the “tone” and “sustain” desired? The choice of material, shape, and method of attachment will determine the results.

Let’s start at the beginning. Takes a body top plate of your favorite wood, suspend it by a string and thump it. Listen to the pitch and how long it rings. Now add the neck block and repeat.

Now do the same with aluminum…notice any difference? Which material would you choose for “tone” and “sustain”?

Continue building and thumping as long as you have parts and patience.

Realize that these days the results can be recorded using contact mic’s and analyzed using US$100.00 software = O’scope and Frequency Spectrum Analyzer.

Re structural rigidity (minimize body/cabinet/parts connection drop) try this on your finished instrument: Tune one string to pitch and leave all others loose. Then tune each string in sequence noticing the change in cents of the reference string. The number of cents change indicates bending/flexing of the structure or change in the string holding components (nuts, key heads, changer mount etc.).

With the strings tuned, adjust the torque on the changer mounting screws etc.. Notice the cents change on the string pitch.

I like Aluminum = Aluminium for body. It changes less with time and humidity. Its’ thermal change compensates somewhat for the thermal change of the Stainless steel strings…and there is no grain and density variations as found in wood.

Fire away folks;
Edp

[Georg]

Ed, that's interesting.

Apart from that I unfortunately based all my research on an existing construction, I went through all steps you mentioned over a 5 year period, ending 17 years ago. "Unfortunately" because it was difficult to optimize everything to suit my taste within an existing construction, but I came close enough to know in which direction I will go next.

[Bent]

Like Georg remarked "to suit my taste". That's exactly it! There are as many tastes as there are steel guitars. One cannot say "this or that makes the best sound and tone" - because every taste is different. Same as one cannot say "buy one of every steel guitar you like and copy it". That is really a fallacy and flies in the face of all of us who try our utmost. We all copy. Even Georg's system of making the neck the main structural piece. In fact that one is as old as the pedal steel itself. Paul Bigsby built his steels like that - Neck, changer and keyhead in one. I wonder why that idea was abandoned decades ago?
We all do our research and make our own unique mousetraps and kudos to us!

As far as the necks on the modern pedal steel adding structure, I don't think so.
Ed's post makes a lot of sense.

Dave W. mentioned that the neck is there to ad strength and carry the fretboard. I agree on the last thing? For those who mill the neck down to 1/8" or less thickness, don't have strength in mind IMHO. I believe they put the neck there to add to the tone chain. I do agree with what you said ( and these are Paul Franklin's words as well) That the steel guitar is as good as the SUM of all it's parts.

I wonder how MY mousetrap will sound when I finally get it playable??

[richard37066]

Bent -

My original post centered around the idea of adding a tad more longitudinal strength to the instrument - hopefully to reduce so-called cabinet drop and, perhaps, improve the length of decay. Most necks will thoroughly stiffen the body in an area roughly half the length but in the center of the body. This still leaves areas in which the top may flex. I also posed the question, elsewhere, as to how much "sustain" is "too little", "desirable", or "exhorbitant".

I have ascribed to Paul Franklin's belief that it is the sum of the parts which determine tonal and "sustain" characteristics for several years. It is also my belief that, when you alter a major component in the system in search of the betterment of one attribute then it has the effect of inevitably altering something else.

IF - we had an instrument that sustained (decayed) for an entire minute, what would the tone be?

IF - we had an instrument whose tone was to die for with all steel players clamoring to get their hands on one, then what would the sustain (decay) be?

I don't believe these things to be mutually exclusive. I do believe that there are means to enhance the decay characteristics of the instrument considerably. But at what cost in tone? It is unfortunate but there are - at best - only semi-educated guesses at what generates that mythical and magical tone in an instrument. But at what cost to decay? No one has done the concentrated, bare-bones experimentation in order to nail the intangibles down. The instrument is, obviously, going to be a compromise between the two and, I suspect, that personal preference will dictate the desired balance between tone and sustain.

If one acknowledges that significant changes to one part of the instrument will affect another attribute then I have an experiment (one, of many) that I'd love to do. Take a full-fledged PSG with seperate neck and changer structures and measure the sonic bejabbers out of it. Now - replace the two-piece changer/neck with one in which the parts - as I have described them elsewhere - are integral with each other and make the same measurements again. Any notable difference? And in what area(s)? I would suspect so. However, one would most likely need a Digital Storage Oscilloscope (maybe with a built-in Fast Fourier Transform function), spectrum analyzer, frequency counters, a couple of home-brew special electronic circuits and what-not in order to do a first rate job of it. There aren't many with the necessary equipment and the wherewithall to do the research. In the absence of a truly methodical approach, to simply say that "I think that so-and-so showed.........." just doesn't hack it.

This most likely leaves the average builder in a position where he might make minor changes such that tonal and decay characteristics are not perceived to be in peril. If it turns out to be "no harm, no foul" then all is well and good. If the result is more than, or less than, expected then there'll be a lesson learned.

All of these discussions are NOT to say that current designs are lacking or, worse, rotten. It is only the belief that there's some tweaking that can be done in an effort to improve the breed.

We have an entire forum of "tweakers". Blessed be them all.

Richard

[Georg]

To resonate or not to resonate…that is the question!

Do we want a resonant member(s) attached to the vibrating string or not in order to get the “tone” and “sustain” desired?

Question to whoever feels inclined to respond: what "tone" and "sustain" do you desire?

I do believe that there are means to enhance the decay characteristics of the instrument considerably. But at what cost in tone? It is unfortunate but there are - at best - only semi-educated guesses at what generates that mythical and magical tone in an instrument. But at what cost to decay? No one has done the concentrated, bare-bones experimentation in order to nail the intangibles down. The instrument is, obviously, going to be a compromise between the two and, I suspect, that personal preference will dictate the desired balance between tone and sustain.

Questions: what "tone" and "sustain" characteristics do you want? What "tone" and "sustain" characteristics do you not want?

There aren't many with the necessary equipment and the wherewithall to do the research. In the absence of a truly methodical approach, to simply say that "I think that so-and-so showed.........." just doesn't hack it.

Question: is it worthwhile to do metodical research and produce loads of irrefutable documentation, without having an equally well documented definition of what you want to achieve?

I have mentioned before somewhere (at least to some of you) that I dumped the more than 30 kg of documentation - pictures, notes and data - produced to keep track of all stages of my modifications on my own PSG, when I moved house around -96, thinking I would never need it. I was right - I have never needed any of it and I can't imagine that I ever will.

I can't come up with a single good reason why I should produce, or reproduce, an equally detailed set of documentation just to satisfy some not well defined "goals" or whatever others may have, especially since there are clear signs that these "goals" or "whatever" deviate quite a bit from my own. Someone else will have to document whatever they want to document.


1: I want a PSG that can produce a wide range of tone and tone-changes depending on how it is played. Many PSGs I have tested have too much of a dominant inherent tone no matter how they are played, so they fall outside my scope no matter how well they sound.
- My S10 Dekley fell into my "good sounding but inflexible tone-wise" category two decades ago. Not anymore, as its inherent tone doesn't dominate - it sound (boringly) neutral initially and reacts well to how I choose to play for the sound I want.

2: I am interested in how a PSG responds to various "sustain" regenerating playing techniques - bar-vibration, string-whipping etc. Since "sustain" can't last forever and I dislike certain sounds created by vigorous "bar-sliding", the PSG must respond well to more inaudible techniques.

3: I eliminate all "what amp", "what speaker" and "what settings" variables when in-depth evaluating my PSG, and run it through a sound-chain with as flat/neutral frequency response and even dynamics as I can when testing. Constant, resistive, load and no equalizers anywhere. Only the speakers' negative influence can't be eliminated, but fullrange studio monitors aren't too bad after being calibrated for even phase and frequency response.
- Clearly not everyone's "cup of tea", but to me results achieved through a somewhat neutral sound chain translates well to more regular PSG sound chains and most of the guesswork about what produce which sound-characteristic where is eliminated.

4: I rely on "beats" to check for "body-drop" detuning, and tune following JI principles by checking the same "beats". If in doubt about exact frequency - I am not born with perfect pitch, I check using a frequency counter - which I also use to check stability in my tuning-fork.
- I see no point in accepting any degree of "body-drop" detuning in a PSG as "inevitable". Plenty enough ways to introduce intentional detuning on a PSG, so no "need" for any built-in tendencies.

That's my short-list ... I am tired of writing.

Wondering what your baseline/preferences may be.

[louckswayne]

Guys
When i play, i sustain the note with my volume pedal! If a note takes 2 minutes
to decay doesnt really matter because i have allready gone on and played
another note! To me it is all about tone. The components used in construction
do in MHOP affect the tone properties, such as aluminum neck verses wood!
Just my 2 cents!
Wayne

[richard37066]

Georg -

Points well made - and taken.

You'll note that I have twice posed the question as to how much sustain does one really want or need. Without comparisons, conjecture rules. And no, I am not in favor of accumulating reams of meaningless data just for the sake of documentation. It is clear that some work need be done (in my mind) in order to provide the opportunity to make comparisons according to taste. Or are virtually all players willing to accept that which comes without thought to alternatives? If so, then any research along those lines is without merit since the need is apparently absent. Is there a need? I, personally, would like to be able to examine options. Many others could, most likely, care less. If that be the norm then any work that I or others might do would be for personal satisfaction to the exclusion of a lack of interest on the part of others. So be it. I'm not offended. My personal preferences take precedent over all other considerations. In sum, we'll all be happy little clams.

Tone is another elusive entity entirely. We've all listened to instruments who's tone is pure but sterile. Clear, bell-like tones void of "character". This may well be the dish of tea for many players. On the other hand, many of us have heard that exceptional instrument where it appears that there are "artifacts" (for lack of a better word) generated within the construction and which immediately command our attention. I've spoken here and elsewhere about a certain Emmons LeGrande II which had an abundance of "character" and which - to my tastes - outshone all other instruments that I've ever heard - including a handful of PP's. "Personal preference"? Perhaps so. Just what is it that produces such a distinctive tone? I'd love to know. The only way to find out is to either tear apart that particular instrument and attempt to unearth its' secrets or to unilaterally experiment on one's own and hope to achieve a "eureka!" moment. This is where the lab work enters the picture.

Current and extensive use of ultrasonic testing - be it in concrete or steel structures or, even, trees suggests that the absolute best piece of wood in the lumber yard will be bastardized - to one degree or other - by the attachment of a myriad of fixtures such as are found in the PSG. Whatever natural sonic resonances to be found within the piece must, inevitably, be attenuated, accentuated or, even, shifted in position - translation of the nodes and antinodes. But how? And why? Ain't no one got a clue.

I wholeheartedly agree that the ideal would be an instrument which can stand firmly on its' own when played through precision audio equipment. To be sure, there will be a degree of "coloration" associated with the speakers used. Perhaps it is simply a case of finding that one speaker which produces the best result - one without a rack full of ancillary equipment - and to accept it as the best that can be done - even reluctantly.

Have I made an erroneous assumption in the posting of this thread? Are steel players and, even, builders, content with a carlot of nothing but Chevys or Fords? Are the innovations to be found in decades of Formula 1 or Indy cars not applicable - or even desired - in the family sedan? It is to this point that I offered my initial suggestion but which would require at least a venturesome builder in order to ascertain any validity to the idea. Better yet, someone should hunker down in the lab and beat it firmly about the head and shoulders. When finished, a somewhat cursory description of the findings should be let known. It is not necessary to get bogged down in minute detail - such as is found all too often in many technical papers - but to describe, in the simplest of terms, the what and how of the effort. Ya can't publish any results unless you've done the searchin'.

Someone has to do the "searchin'" and then say "Lookee here, folks, this is what I've found". We'll all be a little richer for the effort.

Richard

[Georg]

Richard,

IMO, there is no such thing as "too much sustain", but to me it isn't important that my PSG sustains a note well for long, but how easily I can control - extend or shorten - the "sustain" while playing without involving VP riding.
Example: I may play a series of short notes on some strings, while I want to keep some strings sustained like drone-tones. Apart from that I as a player must develop the necessary playing technique, the PSG must respond well to very subtle "touches" and the VP can only be used for leveling/expression - not for sustain. If the PSG itself responds well, it doesn't matter if its inherent (pick once and wait) "sustain" lasts for 5 seconds or 50 seconds.

Tone is another elusive entity entirely. We've all listened to instruments who's tone is pure but sterile. Clear, bell-like tones void of "character".

Plenty of personal and poorly defined "tone" preferences around. "Pure but sterile" sounds good to me, but I am of course not sure if we mean the same thing here.
To me a PSG may have as much "character" as it likes, but if its "character" dominates no matter how I play I am likely to throw it out or sell it to someone who like PSGs with "tone character".

Perhaps it is simply a case of finding that one speaker which produces the best result - one without a rack full of ancillary equipment - and to accept it as the best that can be done - even reluctantly.

I don't understand "best result" while looking for neutrality.

For testing PSGs (and whatever) I use the same sound-system/speakers that I use to listen to classical (and all other types of) music, and you could buy a decent mini-van for what it would cost to replace those speaker systems as they stand today. Coloring is minimal compared to whatever, but of course there is some.

For regular playing I am much less critical. As long as my NV112 doesn't distort too much I ignore the fact that it isn't anywhere near ideal or neutral and that it colors the sound delivered to it. My (tested to be) good-sounding PSGs sound OK through an NV112, and the (tested to be) not-so-good-sounding sound not-so-good ... and that's it for the regular sound chain as far as I'm concerned.

Have I made an erroneous assumption in the posting of this thread? Are steel players and, even, builders, content with a carlot of nothing but Chevys or Fords? Are the innovations to be found in decades of Formula 1 or Indy cars not applicable - or even desired - in the family sedan?

I have no idea, but in the small market for PSGs there is probably not much incentive for economical risk-taking and real development. Can't hurt to bring the issue to the surface now and then though.

[louckswayne]

Guys
You seem to be looking for something but im not sure just what! I dIdnt know
that the Emmons had these hidden ameneties but maybe so. Ive heard
Tommy White play 5 different makes of steel guitars and his tone and sound
is always the same! It must be the way he eqs. his amp or something!
Most Sincerely
Wayne

[Pat Comeau]

Guys
You seem to be looking for something but im not sure just what! I dIdnt know
that the Emmons had these hidden ameneties but maybe so. Ive heard
Tommy White play 5 different makes of steel guitars and his tone and sound
is always the same! It must be the way he eqs. his amp or something!
Most Sincerely
Wayne

Tone is mostly 75% in the hands and technics and the rest is the PSG, pickup, bar, strings, EQ's or amps, everyone has his own tone and sound and if i were to play on someone else PSG it would sound alittle different than the owner of the PSG, and thats a fact...it's the same with a 6 strings guitar, alot of folks ask me how i get my tele sound ...and i always say it's in the hands cause when they play it it doesn't sound as good, so the bottom to this is...either you have it or you don't and probably never will for some.

sorry to hijack your thread Richard
Pat.