Richard
Your views (as ever) are very succinct and incisive. Re the Promat guitars, I think it is that logo on the front of the guitar that is the biggest stumbling block to its commercial success. Resale of the Promat in the second hand market is not that easy as proved on the USA forum, and they certainly don't get snapped up anywhere near as quick as the Emmons p/p guitars. However, I suspect that Mr Papic has enough orders to keep him ticking over.
If Emmons were to suddenly resurrect the push pull, would everyone clamour to buy one? I would suggest not, as all pull guitars have closed the gap on the push pull in the tone department. I have a D10 push pull and I adore it. It plays very smoothly and sounds wonderful. I also have great sounding guitars in the shape of Zum, MCI, Sho~Bud, Emmons LeGrande and Mullen. Not a bad sounding guitar among them, and easier (for me) to change or add additional pulls.
Why is there this inconsistency among guitars from the same manufacturer? That is the beauty of wood I guess. No two guitars will ever be constructed identically as it is impossible to get identical body cabinets on a pedal steel. Only the MSA carbon composite guitars will sound identical to each other.
There are enough push pulls around to keep the second hand market place going, and I think that they will appreciate in value over the years. Whether that is justified is debatable, but then again just look at the way that Franklin guitars are sought after. I know a number of top pros who do not rate the Franklin guitar at all, yet it has achieved near legendary status. So too has the push pull.
Your's is a MOST welcome appearance on this Forum. It's been a long time.
Seems like our verbal interplay is akin to "preaching to the choir" - our views pretty much enmeshed. Any minor disparities in our collective thoughts only serve to broaden the swath of information and edification painted by a very wide brush. Much to the dismay of many, I'm certain. It is, however, a little disheartening to note that a free-wheeling open-minded approach to the vagaries of the pedal steel oft times are discarded in favor of touting a person's instrument of choice - of proclaiming something as "best" without a foundation of evidence other than personal preference.
With this thought in mind, I'm mindful of the exposure - albeit minimal - of the Promat on the Steel Guitar Forum. The photos that have been posted appear to show a paramount degree of craftsmanship. No doubt Mr. Papic has sold a goodly number over the last few years. Yet - where is the hue and cry by the owners of said instruments - testimonials to the resurrection of the P/P "sound" even though hidden behind an obscure logo? They are virtually nonexistent. The reasons for a lack of endorsements could be several - yet all conjecture. Or is it something else - or a combination of mitigating factors?
In espousing a couple of attendant views I will, no doubt, exhibit a degree of redundancy - old folks tend to repeat themselves, don't you know. As in politics a "passing of the baton" is an inescapable truism. When young Johnny goes to vote for the first time, he's likely to ask his dad for guidance. Dad unloads upon young Johnny - a passioned defense of his political preference. This then becomes gospel in the mind of the young lad. Should young Johnny decide to study the pedal steel it is likely that the fervor of an addict to the supposed "P/P sound" infuses a like gospel within the impressionable mind of young Johnny. Johnny then "passes the baton" in like fashion at every available opportunity. It matters not that a political view or an assessment of the "P/P" sound is unfounded or flawed. Aberrant human nature embraces a "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" attitude which touts a given entity as "best" - the inadequacies of either notwithstanding. Emmons afficionados are extremely vocal - bordering upon the fanatic and, for the most part, at least somewhat ignorant of the nature of that which they promote.
I must agree with Reece Anderson in his assessment of the inability of players to repeatedly identify a given instrument. Although I find fault with Reece's methodology I am forced to believe that the preponderant, average steeler cannot reliably identify an Emmons sandwiched
'twixt several other instruments in a controlled listening test. To be sure, there will be a small number of P/P owners - of exceptional instruments - who will recognize small nuances attributable to the exceptional Emmons and make an "educated guess" - correct, at least, a part of the time. The remainder - those with "untuned ears" - will hopelessly flounder in their own bewilderment and resort to mimicking their mentors, their gurus, and cite ANY Emmons as being the best thing since "mother's milk". It is likely that this plethora of voices - the din of overt yet unfounded passion - tacitly dismisses the Promat as just another steel guitar.
Since you and I are of a technical bent, it would be informative and illuminating to make laboratory comparisons between a gaggle of Promats and a small flock of Emmons' in an effort to ascertain any identifiable differences. Alas, the results of said undertaking would most likely be summarily dismissed by the hoards of those with myopic vision as so much academic nonsense. It would be a futile excercise in "shovelling you-know-what against the tide". The "tide", in this case, will not abate regardless of the preponderance of evidence - pro or con. My contention that "name recognition" will prevail should not be taken lightly - such is the mentality (or lack, thereof) of the steel guitar player. Further, published papers and meaningful experiments pertaining to specific aspects of the guitar seem to offend the professed intelligence of readers. Possible improvements of the genre are thus relegated to the shadows - not even to be addressed by the venturesome builder.
As we have previously discussed, it is the resistance to change and criticism which encumbers the further development of the instrument. I believe that there is much to be done, yet the impediments to progress combine to form a steep mountain to climb.
Maybe, someday - even though I may not be around to witness it.
The topic is interesting enough for me to chime in with my observations. PPs are "heavy metal rattlers", and the Zum Hybrid is exploiting the same "rattle-points" mechanics to some degree.
Whether the Emmons PPs got the sonics of a "rattler" intentionally, or by accident as a result of practical construction decisions, I don't know, but I do know that if the "rattle-points" are dampened a PP loses its distinct tone. So, balance it well...
I can see the point in trying to build a replica of a well-known brand/type of PSG just to see if it can be done. I personally can't see any other reason for building an Emmons PP replica, but it's OK if others see it differently.
The words "heavy metal rattlers" are degrading and miss the point IMHO.
Questioning whether the Emmons PPs got the sonics of a "rattler" intentionally, or by accident further drives this home.
When the truth is that Buddy Emmons went to Ron Lashley Sr. and asked him to make him a guitar with such and such sonic attributes and even specific looks, then Ron went ahead and did just that. To suggest that he arrived at construction details by accident is, IMO, ludicrous to suggest seeing how Ron Sr was an engineer and machinist and left no detail to accident. His design decisions have prevailed through the ages and have certainly proven themselves as quality throughout, both in construction and tone.
That they are "heavy metal...." misses the point somewhat as well.They are not the heaviest of the old style steels. I lifted one in the case the other day and was surprised to observe that, although heavier than some of today's newer guitars, it was lighter than what I remembered my old MSA Classic D10 to be.
The tone is there for sure. Soon as I sat down and played it, I heard the distinctness of its tone, to my ears beautiful, and certainly more distinct than what I have heard from other heavy metal guitars.
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.
I wasn't commenting on the weight of the PP instruments - they are average for constructions of their time. Even if weight does play a role in the Emmons PPs' overall sound character, total weight in itself is not essential for "that" tone.
It's the sonic characteristics of PPs bridges I was commenting on, and there are some heavy moving parts in there when comparing to other PSG constructions. PPs exploit the centuries-old "buzzing bridge" principles using "rattling" connections to add sonic character to the string tones, and my "insert" of the Zum Hybrid pointed to another construction that exploits the same principle in a different way. They have changer-parts directly coupled to the strings that are made to "buzz, vibrate, hammer, rattle (you pick the description-combo that suits you)" against body-parts, not too unlike how many traditional, acoustic, instruments get their tone/character but very unlike how most AllPull steels get theirs.
Whether you (anyone) like the tone character of a well-balanced PP, or not, is a different matter. I have no problem with that either way. I am not particularly fond of it because it's a "constant" (built-in) that is difficult to keep from affecting the tone when I want a different character. I prefer steels with a wider sonic range to play on, even if that means losing some or most of one, (IMO) narrow, sonic character.
Fred's initial question was about emulating the build of a push pull. It can be done, but a challenge that many builders task themselves with is trying to build an all pull guitar that has the top end sparkle and bottom end growl of a push pull. Rittenbury is the closest that I have heard from current manufacturers, and the MCI is the closest of any pedal steel makes that I have played.
I have to say that one of the worst tones from any player at the recent Dallas show in my opinion came from the great Jim Loessburg. His early Emmons push pull obviously had very low output pickups, and his sound was very thin and tinny in comparison to Junior Knight's push pull which had a much fuller tone. Another player with thin tone was Ronnie Miller on his GFI.
So, there is variance in Emmons guitars as there is in most manufacturer's of pedal steels. Of all of the modern pedal steel's on show at Dallas, the most striking guitar tone-wise was the Show Pro. Rich overtones with great string separation. Beautiful looking and beautiful sounding. They also fly in the face of the views of many top players with their wooden necks and lacquer bodies. People like Paul Franklin will tell you that a mica covered guitar with metal necks has a more defined tone.
As a push pull owner, I will say this readily. Is the push pull tone a myth? No - it does have a very distinctive tone and I would argue that point with Reece Anderson any time. Reece's insistence on changing the amp settings in a blindfold test actually defeats the whole premise of directly comparing a P/P with other makes.
I must first laud your effort at objectivity. I was first rate.
Your last paragraph is that which I alluded to in my post and to which I took umbrage. One cannot adjust an amplifier to suit the instrument and claim that there is a level playing field. IMHO, there is only one way in which to differentiate the differences in tone between several instruments - they all would have to be played through a high-end audio amplifier with any tone controls set to "flat". The end result might not be "pretty" as any distinguishing characteristics would not be emphasized as is the case when a player presumably adjusts things to bring out the best in a given instrument. Such singular characteristics would be readily identifiable in such a test - "pretty" or not.
It still disturbs me that the Emmons P/P is widely considered to the the "standard" by which all other guitars are measured. That perception places into exile all other instruments and, worse, diminishes the innate worth of "personal preference". This is a somewhat elitest attitude which, in essence, says that if your guitar doesn't approach that of an Emmons then it is wholly inferior. This is balderdash! I, among thousands of others, have thoroughly enjoyed the playing of Curley chalker and still do - to this day. I have never heard anyone say that Curley's playing was great BUT - it would sound better if he had played an Emmons as opposed to his old MSA.
Attempts at adequately describing "tone" are nebulous, at best. Adjectives abound yet few fully understand the meaning of said adjectives since they are wide open to interpretation. I defy the majority of players to specifically delineate the characteristics of "growl" or of "string seperation". Efforts to literally expose the nuances of such terms would, most likely, be an excercise in painful futility. And therein lies the inadequacy of many claims. Who, I ask, has been ordained the patron saint of pedal steel guitars and who, in their lofty position of deity, is authorized by the PSG gods to dictate precisely the accepted "tone"? Over time, there appears to be a degree of closed-mindedness which obviates the viability of one's "personal preference" thus relegating players like myself to second-class status since I DO NOT like the sound of the best of Emmons P/P's. I won't bore anyone with my previously posted account of a Legrande II at Bobbe's other than to say that it significantly surpassed ANY guitar that I have ever heard as regards tone. Buck Reid might well second my opinion - even with a reservation or two.
'Tis sad but worth repeating - my opinion is that all-too-many who tout the "Emmons sound" do so only as a result of "following the crowd" and not with a personal, in-depth examination of the myriad sounds which eminate from an array of wonderful instruments. As in politics, if you bludgeon one over the head long and loudly enough, they will believe anything.
And thus, my tirade concludes.
Personal preference reigns - at least in my world.
Well thanks to you, I am a great Buck Reid fan. Buck's tone that he gets from his JCH is superb. But, he is a great and brilliant technician and that is one area that I will agree with Maurice on. Great tone is generated by the player.
The JCH is mica covered, and it beggars the question as to whether mica guitars sound better than lacquer guitars. I have a blue mica Emmons LG2, and it has very nice tone. The push pull that I own has just a fraction more 'zing' on the top frequencies, but probably it would not be noticeable to a third party. It may even be just psychological !!
Bobbe and I have talked about tone on many occasions when I have spent time with him. He is very biased when it comes to the virtues of the Emmons push pull, and also about certain makes having poor tone (I won't go there )
Building a push pull? I wouldn't think there is a huge market for new ones as modern all pulls are very easy to tune and change copedants on. Most of the builders on this site are building lacquer guitars from beautifully grained wood and that's probably where their potential market lies.
Last edited by Ken Byng on Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Got a call from Buck a little less than a year ago. He was in a panic. His Profex II was dead in the water and he wanted to know if I had anything that he could use to get a little "delay" since he was about to go on the road with Lyle Lovett. I loaned him my cheapy DD-7 and he got extremely close to what he wanted. To the best of my knowledge, he used the DD-7 for the entire tour! Could he also have used it when the aforementioned album was recorded? Don't know. A JCH, DD-7, a Nashville 112 and he kicks butt! Whouda thunk it!
I never get out of Bobbe's shop in less than an hour and a half. I know from whence you come as regards the Emmons and Bobbe's opinions. To be sure, he has a world of experience with various and sundried instruments but, unfortunately, he doesn't have the technical background in physics and engineering - as do most - so as to ask crucial questions concerning the why's and wherefore's of the mechanics of the instrument. Formica versus wood? Conjecture reigns. I am certain that I could conduct a few meaningful experiments which might shed a little light on the subject but, unfortunately, it would cost more money than I have to spare. Much more. I keep designing experiments in my head and on paper just in case I'm able to, once again, stick my nose into a home-grown laboratory. Oh, well - dream on, old man.
Those of us who can remain objective realize that there's a multitude of variables in the construction of an instrument. I'm not surprized, therefore, to note that good instruments are made of both wood and the combination of plywood covered in formica. I'm convinced that "chance" plays a major role in whether a particular instrument is very good or just a klunker. Until someone really delves into the contributions of both types of builds, we'll not know for sure if, indeed, there is one that can be labeled "better".
Oh - Jimmy Crawford and Buck built Buck's guitar. Don't know if they were able to infuse any mystical "magic" into it or not.
)