string space
Re: string space
otoh... 3 13/16 works out to 11/32" string spacing
http://benrom.com/
21 BenRom pedal steel guitars, a Nash 112 and a 1967 TOS Milling machine with many cutters making one hell of a mess on the floor.
21 BenRom pedal steel guitars, a Nash 112 and a 1967 TOS Milling machine with many cutters making one hell of a mess on the floor.
-
Georg
- Posts: 457
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:38 am
- Location: Mandal, VA, Norway & Weeki Wachee, FL, USA
- Contact:
Re: string space
(decimal point sneaked in ... I probably should not post that late after midnight)
Make my measurements 97 mm and 75 mm, and recalculate
Re: string space
That's more like it. That works out to about 11/32"
http://benrom.com/
21 BenRom pedal steel guitars, a Nash 112 and a 1967 TOS Milling machine with many cutters making one hell of a mess on the floor.
21 BenRom pedal steel guitars, a Nash 112 and a 1967 TOS Milling machine with many cutters making one hell of a mess on the floor.
Re: string space
Most steel makers use the Emmons push-pull as the benchmark, as there's not much point in re-inventing the ergonomic wheel.
I've just measured mine, it's 11/32" at the changer, and 9/32" at the nut, 24 1/4" scale length
I've just measured mine, it's 11/32" at the changer, and 9/32" at the nut, 24 1/4" scale length
-
richard37066
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 11:44 am
- Location: Gallatin, Tennessee, USA
Re: string space
This has been discussed at length both here and on the SGF before yet no one has deemed to answer the most pertinent questions:
1) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a splayed array from the nut to the changer?
2) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a parallel array from the nut to the changer?
And Burt, I must take slight umbrage with you as to the "benchmark" attributed to the Emmons. Just because "that's the way it's always been done" is not justification for engraving the concept in stone.
On a 6-string guitar, one can make the argument for the splayed array simply because fingertips must be crammed into a much tighter space when playing well up the neck. Such is not the case with the PSG.
Can anyone come up with convincing arguments to either of the questions that I've posed above?
Richard
1) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a splayed array from the nut to the changer?
2) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a parallel array from the nut to the changer?
And Burt, I must take slight umbrage with you as to the "benchmark" attributed to the Emmons. Just because "that's the way it's always been done" is not justification for engraving the concept in stone.
On a 6-string guitar, one can make the argument for the splayed array simply because fingertips must be crammed into a much tighter space when playing well up the neck. Such is not the case with the PSG.
Can anyone come up with convincing arguments to either of the questions that I've posed above?
Richard
Re: string space
This has been discussed at length both here and on the SGF before yet no one has deemed to answer the most pertinent questions:
Good stuff, Richard. It's been batted back and forth only to have been left hanging, with peoples different opinions hanging as well.
1) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a splayed array from the nut to the changer?
The way I see it is that there is a mechanical advantage in that the total distance between strgs 1 & 10 have to be what they are, to make room for the 10 fingers' thickness+related hardware, in a set 'industry standard' measurement. If string distance at the nut were the same as a =t the bridge, one might feel the need for quite a longer bar.. Ditto wider keyhead. Would it "look right"?
2) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a parallel array from the nut to the changer?
The advantage has been touted by some that the string now in a perfectly straight line will make for the best sustain and easiest vibration of the string.
Sure, I'll go along with that theory, but only on open strings. Once you put the var down on a fret, everything behind the bar gets cancelled by the left hand's dampening. What is left from bar to bridge? A straight run.
And Burt, I must take slight umbrage with you as to the "benchmark" attributed to the Emmons. Just because "that's the way it's always been done" is not justification for engraving the concept in stone.
I don't believe Burt meant to engrave anything in stone. It is a good thing to carry on with what the old masters did...their maybe old thinking has proven itself through decades of testing...unscientific as this may be, it has proven itself to a majority that it is the Emmons sound many great builders of today work towards.
On a 6-string guitar, one can make the argument for the splayed array simply because fingertips must be crammed into a much tighter space when playing well up the neck. Such is not the case with the PSG.
Not sure if there is any kind of standardization on a six-string as I have seen many different measurements. I hardly think the two should be compared.
All the above..my opinions only and not meant to demonstrate any kind of super knowledge on the subject.
Can anyone come up with convincing arguments to either of the questions that I've posed above?
Not likely, sorry.... Basically, the way I see it is you do what you do and if it sounds good, you continue doing it.
With that, you'll have to excuse me.. going in the shop to work on my steel which has 1/4" - 11/32" string distance
Bent
Richard
Good stuff, Richard. It's been batted back and forth only to have been left hanging, with peoples different opinions hanging as well.
1) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a splayed array from the nut to the changer?
The way I see it is that there is a mechanical advantage in that the total distance between strgs 1 & 10 have to be what they are, to make room for the 10 fingers' thickness+related hardware, in a set 'industry standard' measurement. If string distance at the nut were the same as a =t the bridge, one might feel the need for quite a longer bar.. Ditto wider keyhead. Would it "look right"?
2) Is there an advantage/disadvantage to having the strings in a parallel array from the nut to the changer?
The advantage has been touted by some that the string now in a perfectly straight line will make for the best sustain and easiest vibration of the string.
Sure, I'll go along with that theory, but only on open strings. Once you put the var down on a fret, everything behind the bar gets cancelled by the left hand's dampening. What is left from bar to bridge? A straight run.
And Burt, I must take slight umbrage with you as to the "benchmark" attributed to the Emmons. Just because "that's the way it's always been done" is not justification for engraving the concept in stone.
I don't believe Burt meant to engrave anything in stone. It is a good thing to carry on with what the old masters did...their maybe old thinking has proven itself through decades of testing...unscientific as this may be, it has proven itself to a majority that it is the Emmons sound many great builders of today work towards.
On a 6-string guitar, one can make the argument for the splayed array simply because fingertips must be crammed into a much tighter space when playing well up the neck. Such is not the case with the PSG.
Not sure if there is any kind of standardization on a six-string as I have seen many different measurements. I hardly think the two should be compared.
All the above..my opinions only and not meant to demonstrate any kind of super knowledge on the subject.
Can anyone come up with convincing arguments to either of the questions that I've posed above?
Not likely, sorry.... Basically, the way I see it is you do what you do and if it sounds good, you continue doing it.
With that, you'll have to excuse me.. going in the shop to work on my steel which has 1/4" - 11/32" string distance
Bent
Richard
http://benrom.com/
21 BenRom pedal steel guitars, a Nash 112 and a 1967 TOS Milling machine with many cutters making one hell of a mess on the floor.
21 BenRom pedal steel guitars, a Nash 112 and a 1967 TOS Milling machine with many cutters making one hell of a mess on the floor.
-
richard37066
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 11:44 am
- Location: Gallatin, Tennessee, USA
Re: string space
Bent -
Many have not clamored for an extended bar when venturing up into "Hugheyland". Given the fact that most steelers play only chord fragments as opposed to wide-open voicings and that they still move the bar to and fro across the fretboard lends support to the idea that this is a moot point. There is roughly a 1/4" difference in total width of strings between the changer and the nut on my GFI. Unless one is standing right on top of the instrument and sighting down the fretboard, this difference is not noticed. Given this, I suspect that - if two instruments were placed side by side with one having the splayed array and the other having parallel strings - the viewer would not notice the difference unless they hunkered down and sighted down the fretboards.
I seriously doubt that parallel strings provide any measurable increase in the decay time (sustain) of the strings. To my knowledge - and I may be wrong - no one has done the experimentation by which to prove the theory. My own gut feeling is that is shouldn't matter whether the string runs straight down the fretboard or is at an angle - there are too many other facets of the instrument which should determine the tonal characteristics of the guitar. One has a "straight run" whether the string is vertical to the changer or is at a slight angle.
This idea of a "benchmark" should be taken with a giant grain of salt since not all of the Emmons P/P's are exceptional. Some are very good, some not so. Once again, I believe that it's the "other facets" which predominate. Remember that LeGrande II that I've spoken of on occasion? I wouldn't trade that guitar for any P/P that I've ever heard. And it's a modern ALL-PULL instrument! Since personal preference plays a role in that judgement, then take it, also, with a grain of salt.
ALL 6-string guitars have strings in the "splayed array" and for the reason that I've mentioned.
From a constructor's point of view, it would seem that machining a straight slab of aluminum for the neck would be simpler than setting things up on the TOS for a slight angle. Would an angled neck versus a straight neck have any significant influence on the tone of the guitar? I don't have the foggiest and wouldn't even begin to guess.
All of this is just another instance where, for lack of experimentation, the builder is almost forced to "follow the crowd" and use the "cookie-cutter" approach to designing the instrument. It's very frustrating for me since, presently, I'm unable to shed much light on things in question. Maybe, some day.
Any other comments, pro or con, by the members?
Richard
Many have not clamored for an extended bar when venturing up into "Hugheyland". Given the fact that most steelers play only chord fragments as opposed to wide-open voicings and that they still move the bar to and fro across the fretboard lends support to the idea that this is a moot point. There is roughly a 1/4" difference in total width of strings between the changer and the nut on my GFI. Unless one is standing right on top of the instrument and sighting down the fretboard, this difference is not noticed. Given this, I suspect that - if two instruments were placed side by side with one having the splayed array and the other having parallel strings - the viewer would not notice the difference unless they hunkered down and sighted down the fretboards.
I seriously doubt that parallel strings provide any measurable increase in the decay time (sustain) of the strings. To my knowledge - and I may be wrong - no one has done the experimentation by which to prove the theory. My own gut feeling is that is shouldn't matter whether the string runs straight down the fretboard or is at an angle - there are too many other facets of the instrument which should determine the tonal characteristics of the guitar. One has a "straight run" whether the string is vertical to the changer or is at a slight angle.
This idea of a "benchmark" should be taken with a giant grain of salt since not all of the Emmons P/P's are exceptional. Some are very good, some not so. Once again, I believe that it's the "other facets" which predominate. Remember that LeGrande II that I've spoken of on occasion? I wouldn't trade that guitar for any P/P that I've ever heard. And it's a modern ALL-PULL instrument! Since personal preference plays a role in that judgement, then take it, also, with a grain of salt.
ALL 6-string guitars have strings in the "splayed array" and for the reason that I've mentioned.
From a constructor's point of view, it would seem that machining a straight slab of aluminum for the neck would be simpler than setting things up on the TOS for a slight angle. Would an angled neck versus a straight neck have any significant influence on the tone of the guitar? I don't have the foggiest and wouldn't even begin to guess.
All of this is just another instance where, for lack of experimentation, the builder is almost forced to "follow the crowd" and use the "cookie-cutter" approach to designing the instrument. It's very frustrating for me since, presently, I'm unable to shed much light on things in question. Maybe, some day.
Any other comments, pro or con, by the members?
Richard
-
louckswayne
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:54 pm
Re: string space
Richard
The Emmons has been brought up here and they are known for there good tone
and nice bite on the highs! I just recently did a bit of setup work on a student
model emmons for the friend of a friend. The guitar was built in 1972 and is in
nice shape but the setup was way off! S10 with one knee lowering 2 and 8 string.
The point i wanted to make here is that even this guitar has the (emmons sound!)
The string spacing was 11/32" at changer. I looked the guitar over very closely
while at my place. The body is hardwood covered completely with mica, it has
no neck pc. the top deck is the neck! So what is giving it that nice tone? It has
the original emmons pup and the nut rollers seem to be made of aluminum instead
of brass! Other than that i see no difference to many other steel brands! As for
string spacing the 11/32" is what has proven over time to work well!
Wayne
The Emmons has been brought up here and they are known for there good tone
and nice bite on the highs! I just recently did a bit of setup work on a student
model emmons for the friend of a friend. The guitar was built in 1972 and is in
nice shape but the setup was way off! S10 with one knee lowering 2 and 8 string.
The point i wanted to make here is that even this guitar has the (emmons sound!)
The string spacing was 11/32" at changer. I looked the guitar over very closely
while at my place. The body is hardwood covered completely with mica, it has
no neck pc. the top deck is the neck! So what is giving it that nice tone? It has
the original emmons pup and the nut rollers seem to be made of aluminum instead
of brass! Other than that i see no difference to many other steel brands! As for
string spacing the 11/32" is what has proven over time to work well!
Wayne
-
Georg
- Posts: 457
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:38 am
- Location: Mandal, VA, Norway & Weeki Wachee, FL, USA
- Contact:
Re: string space
Richard,
...a few thoughts.
I only notice string spacing when I play a PSG with a spacing I'm not used to, as I may not hit the strings perfectly on one that is "off". Same thing when slanting the bar. After a short while at any PSG the actual string spacing doesn't matter to me, as they're simply not different enough.
I see no connections between parallel / non-parallel strings and tone / sustain. Inherent tone / sustain is, IMO, all in how the strings vibrate at / through the bridge / changer / soundboard.
Apart from that the neck on a number of PSGs seem to be mainly decorative pieces that may or may not add a bit of rigidity and (maybe) some "body" vibrations, most PSGs that have a neck seem to have one that is not much wider than overall string width. On my preferred PSG the neck is much wider and it definitely isn't decorative, but being a "bug" that's hardly relevant for the kind of PSGs you guys are building and/or commenting on.
I will choose a string spacing of 8 - 8.5 mm at both ends for my own builds, but that's 1: because the changer is part of the keyhead and needs the space, 2: my preferred PSG has a slightly less than 11/32 string spacing at the bridge (which suits me just fine) and 3: I prefer to work in mm
Having no changer to bother about - at that end, I just may get the tone / sustain factors right for the bridge. I am sure the finished build won't sound like an Emmons.
Skål ... for a new year.
You Richard, have a coffee. See you in a few months.
...a few thoughts.
I only notice string spacing when I play a PSG with a spacing I'm not used to, as I may not hit the strings perfectly on one that is "off". Same thing when slanting the bar. After a short while at any PSG the actual string spacing doesn't matter to me, as they're simply not different enough.
I see no connections between parallel / non-parallel strings and tone / sustain. Inherent tone / sustain is, IMO, all in how the strings vibrate at / through the bridge / changer / soundboard.
Apart from that the neck on a number of PSGs seem to be mainly decorative pieces that may or may not add a bit of rigidity and (maybe) some "body" vibrations, most PSGs that have a neck seem to have one that is not much wider than overall string width. On my preferred PSG the neck is much wider and it definitely isn't decorative, but being a "bug" that's hardly relevant for the kind of PSGs you guys are building and/or commenting on.
I will choose a string spacing of 8 - 8.5 mm at both ends for my own builds, but that's 1: because the changer is part of the keyhead and needs the space, 2: my preferred PSG has a slightly less than 11/32 string spacing at the bridge (which suits me just fine) and 3: I prefer to work in mm
Having no changer to bother about - at that end, I just may get the tone / sustain factors right for the bridge. I am sure the finished build won't sound like an Emmons.
Skål ... for a new year.
You Richard, have a coffee. See you in a few months.
-
louckswayne
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:54 pm
Re: string space
Hi GeorgeGeorg wrote:Richard,
...a few thoughts.
I only notice string spacing when I play a PSG with a spacing I'm not used to, as I may not hit the strings perfectly on one that is "off". Same thing when slanting the bar. After a short while at any PSG the actual string spacing doesn't matter to me, as they're simply not different enough.
I see no connections between parallel / non-parallel strings and tone / sustain. Inherent tone / sustain is, IMO, all in how the strings vibrate at / through the bridge / changer / soundboard.
Apart from that the neck on a number of PSGs seem to be mainly decorative pieces that may or may not add a bit of rigidity and (maybe) some "body" vibrations, most PSGs that have a neck seem to have one that is not much wider than overall string width. On my preferred PSG the neck is much wider and it definitely isn't decorative, but being a "bug" that's hardly relevant for the kind of PSGs you guys are building and/or commenting on.
I will choose a string spacing of 8 - 8.5 mm at both ends for my own builds, but that's 1: because the changer is part of the keyhead and needs the space, 2: my preferred PSG has a slightly less than 11/32 string spacing at the bridge (which suits me just fine) and 3: I prefer to work in mm
Having no changer to bother about - at that end, I just may get the tone / sustain factors right for the bridge. I am sure the finished build won't sound like an Emmons.
Skål ... for a new year.
You Richard, have a coffee. See you in a few months.
I love the Emmons sound! Wouldnt change a thing.