If you could write a "fusion" PSG course...

Eric Jaeger · Post by **Eric Jaeger** » 19 Sep 2007 11:12 am

Jim Sliff has raised the issue on some other threads that there's little in the way of instructional material for the steel that is based on music other than "traditional" country. Without lighting up the issues behind that comment, as someone who thinks of himself as a perpetual "beginner" (always trying new things) I'd like to see some thought on what would make a good instructional program based on, say, "Country rock".

What would you put in it?

What makes it different?

Whose work would you base it on?

As a proposal I'd start with Sneeky Pete, Rusty Young, JayDee Maness, Al Perkins, Hank DeVito, Neil Flanz....

Perhaps if we bounce some ideas around the outline will start to form.

-eric

Ben Jones · Post by **Ben Jones** » 19 Sep 2007 12:01 pm

I'd love to be able to buy that course Eric

Lotta differnt copedants there tho I think?
For a "country rock" course (which I would LOVE to see) i think you got a great lineup there.

If the intent is to reach potential players outside of the trad country genre...I think you'd need to go even further out than country rock and get some "rock" in there.

Its hard for me to say what might be in a rock course because Ive never seen such instructional material, nor frankly do i see much pedal steel in rock in the real world, nor am i a good player msyelf and certainly in no position to teach anyone anything...but maybe something like:
Neil Young, Dire Straits, ZZtop, Stones, Pink Floyd ???
Maybe a lil RR?
and a discussion of the "blues scale" (wether or not it actually exists to the blues purists

)

personally I am more attracted to the beautiful harmonic movement of trad country steel and thankfully there is plenty of instructional matrial out there for that and I DO think this is why most people come to the steel in the first place...but I definetly would be interested in instructional material in other genres also and i beleive alot of others would too. would a rock course "save the future of the pedal steel guitar" ? would there be thousands of youngsters wailing away? a psg under every tree? I think not...you might get a few more players but I dont think they'd be beating down the doors of the manufacturers just yet.

I'D love it tho

Mike Perlowin · Post by **Mike Perlowin** » 19 Sep 2007 1:37 pm

I'd put in a lot of Beatles tunes.

HOWEVER, all the songs that theoretically should be included in such a course are copyrighted, and cannot be used unless royalties are paid, which would make the course cost prohibitive.

I ran into this problem when I wrote my music theory book. The folks at Mel Bay made me delete all the popular songs I used as examples and replace them with old folk and children's tunes that were public domain.

Ben Jones · Post by **Ben Jones** » 19 Sep 2007 1:52 pm

I ran into this problem when I wrote my music theory book. The folks at Mel Bay made me delete all the popular songs I used as examples and replace them with old folk and children's tunes that were public domain.

bummer. explains alot about instructional material in general tho. Ive always wondered why more contemporary examples werent used instead of "Camptown Races" and such. no wonder no one is eager to take on this task.

Eric Jaeger · Post by **Eric Jaeger** » 19 Sep 2007 2:05 pm

Mike Perlowin wrote: I ran into this problem when I wrote my music theory book. The folks at Mel Bay made me delete all the popular songs I used as examples and replace them with old folk and children's tunes that were public domain.

Can't one put in examples of "licks in the style of..." for example? There is a "fair use" clause in copyright law that permits the use of segments of a copyrighted work. And there are plenty of rock and blues books that use entire verses of copyrighted songs as examples.

And I don't think anyone could stop you discussing the styles and musical underpinnings and playing techniques. An analysis of Sneeky Pete's style as contrasted with Rusty Young's as contrasted to more "traditional" styles would be fascinating.

Certainly the "requirement" to use non-copyright material goes a long way to explaining why much published material seems irrelevant. But it seems clear that there are economical ways of dealing with those issues.

If you could handle the copyright issues, what topics would you cover?

-eric

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 19 Sep 2007 2:36 pm

Eric, all the other players you mentioned are good, and they're classified as "country-rock" steelers, but Sneaky was in a class by himself, really. Not in his ability, but in his head, his mind, how he approached the instrument, and searched for new sounds. Red Rhodes was similar, probably the closest, IMHO. However, to play country-rock like the other players you mentioned, it just requires a good knowledge of the instrument, and a feel for rock and roll (with maybe a little added imagination).

It would be a really big effort to make a really modern rock course - maybe there's a few players who could do it, but it would have to be a "labor of love". Financial returns, if any, would be years away, maybe even decades.

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 19 Sep 2007 2:45 pm

For a purely 70's west coast style country-rock instructional book, I don't see why one needs to use a copedent different than E9, Ext E9, or the standard universal E9/B6. In fact, I don't really see that much difference in technique between "traditional" country playing and that style. Although there are variations, when I play that kind of thing, I'm still leaning heavily on ABC pedals and DEF and maybe X and G levers, much as I would do in traditional country playing.

I think it would be great to have a book on Sneaky's tuning and how to work with it - hey Jim, if you put something like that together, I want to buy one.

To do a blues or rock instructional book, I again think that minimal modifications to these copedents are needed. Perhaps it would make sense to alter strings 9 and 10 on the 10-string E9 from D, B to B, E to get at least down to the low E on a guitar. In addition, it might make sense to lower the 7th string with a lever from F# to E just to get it out of the way for rhythm playing. My sense is that whatever the more mainstream sacred steel players are using could be adapted pretty closely from the standard copedents with a little modification.

I think there are some public domain tunes out there that one could adapt to a more Americana, alt-country, or country-rock context. Americana is based somewhat on traditional folk music, and I'm not talking about Camptown Races or Kumbaya. Lots of old bluegrass and folk music - to me the basis of of a lot of Americana and alt-country - is public domain. Delmore Bros, Jimmy Rogers, Carter Family, and so on. Some of that must have moved to the public domain by now. I guess one would need to check and see what's really available.

Similarly with rock and roll, which is based on blues and to a certain extent, country music. I don't see why one can't put generic or public domain slow blues, blues shuffles, rock-and-roll, jump blues, gospel blues, and other melodies and progressions in there as examples and not sound outdated. No, you can't put "Pride and Joy" on there, but so what? SRV learned by playing old blues and rock and roll - why is his repertoire necessary to get the basic techniques down?

On the "fair use" provision - I think it's a slippery slope when you're talking about using copyrighted material without permission in a commercially sold book. One can do "in the style of", but not the exact lick or melody - I think.

I think such a book would be a good idea, but in the end, except for the fact that the music would perhaps feel less "traditional country sounding", the basic ideas would be pretty similar to what's out there now. Maybe an exception would be the blues/sacred steel components. But Chuck Campbell has a great video out now that explains that stuff well, IMHO. To me - if you are interested in more bluesy or sacred steel stylings, you should at least check that video out. No, it's not gonna make you sound like SRV, but it might help ease you onto the right road if that's where you're heading.

All my opinions, of course.

Ben Jones · Post by **Ben Jones** » 19 Sep 2007 3:25 pm

Dave, I got the Chuck Cambell dvd and as a beginner with my E9 3+4, there was not much i could get into from it since he is tuned differently and has a million pedals and levers I dont have. Its hard enough when the pedals and strings are the same as your teachers let alone when he's got a whole differnt instrument there basically. There's still some useable stuff (in fact i need to go back and watch that again) but as a beginner with a standard setup (and certainly most beginners DO end up starting on a standard E9 setup) it was a bit off putting.

I agree very much with most of what you said tho.

As a beginner wanting to explore rock on the psg the biggest thing i found lacking in instructional material was that there was virtually no mention whatsoever of "the blues scale". I know many people put their noses up at even the concept of such a thing as a "blues scale", but its in countless beginner six string books for a reason ... it provides a platform and easy entree into blues and therefor rock. The nuances and microtones, the heartful soulful expression and all the other wonderful elements of blues not found strictly and solely within the blues scale can come later (or not).

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 19 Sep 2007 5:10 pm

For a purely 70's west coast style country-rock instructional book, I don't see why one needs to use a copedent different than E9, Ext E9, or the standard universal E9/B6. In fact, I don't really see that much difference in technique between "traditional" country playing and that style.

I agree wholeheartedly, it's more the way you approach the music and instrument, technique-wise, than it is a tuning difference. Find a teacher who's done some rock music (that should be real easy if you live in a city like LA or NY), and sit down with him, rather than some book.

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 19 Sep 2007 6:06 pm

Ben, I don't know, but it seemed to me that there was an awful lot on that video that could be transferred to E9. Yes, he's playing a 12-string guitar and has some other levers and the tuning is a bit different. But it's still an E9 tuning with A, B pedals and an F-lever. The top 4 strings are identical to E9, there's a D inserted on string 5 between E and B, the F# and lower D are missing, but otherwise, it's pretty close to the modified E9 I was talking about with the lower D missing from string 9 and the 7th string F# lowered to get it out of the way. I think one can work around the differences.

I'm not exactly a complete newbie, but I haven't been playing PSG for decades at all - I started in '99, hit it hard for a year or two, took a couple off to intensively study computer science, and then in '04 hit it hard again. Yeah, there's a lot going on, but I think if you persist, he explains what he's up to very well. Don't expect to figure it all out right away, though, but that's OK. For me, the most important thing I got was his general approach and feel for things.

I think one needs to really dig deep and very actively watch any of these instructional videos over and over again to get much from them. To me, that means watching a few times to get the lay of the land, and then focusing on small segments at a time while seated at the steel and working on stuff as it loops a bunch of times. Once I have some practice time in on some things, then it may be useful to sit and watch it a bunch of times more, then more practice, and so on. But to me - this is not some sort of "watch it once or twice and it sinks in by osmosis" kind of process.

Another issue with the blues styles and blues scales is that it's not necessarily all pedal and lever movement. When playing that stuff, I prefer one of the Shubb-Pearse steels with the indentation like a dobro bar - I think it's the SP-1 that I prefer - and often treat it much more like a lap steel or slide guitar. Then, all the so-called "pentatonic box patterns" to get blues scales, like on a slide guitar, are all over the place. Pedals-up, A+B, A+F give you those patterns to slide around in at different positions, and you can use pedal movement and typical E9 scale patterns to connect the positions. A+F can toggle the A to get from major to dom7, and you can get dom7 with other levers, like the G-lever (F#-to-G). Or B+E for another dom 7, which you can toggle back and forth into a 6th chord with the B pedal, or toggle the A-pedal in and out to get a dom 9. There are so many things one can do with just a simple E9 setup.

Like I said earlier, on E9 I might well ditch the string 9-10 D and B and go B and E (putting the D on a lever), and it's pretty much an open-tuned slide guitar on steroids if you just have a lever to lower the F# to E for strummable open-chords. Of course, I play a lot of universal, so that's not an issue. But I think that puts you closer to the low end of Chuck's tuning. Not completely - but enough to play a lot of blues or rock and roll.

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 19 Sep 2007 10:50 pm

Can't one put in examples of "licks in the style of..." for example? There is a "fair use" clause in copyright law that permits the use of segments of a copyrighted work. And there are plenty of rock and blues books that use entire verses of copyrighted songs as examples.

Yep, as stated, it's done all the time. If Mike's publisher didn't want to, I'm sure it was a financial, not musical, decision.

Honestly, while a country-rock steel course would be nice (but not for me and othe rB6 or weird copedent users) I still think a "non specific" style...meaning a generic "steel guitar" course covering a LOT of styles lightly is the way to go. Several very good guitar books like "The Complete Guitarist" do ths quite well, covering basics of theory, tunings, fingerpicking, flatpicking, bluegrass,country, rock, blues, a little jazz...usually classical is left out as it's pretty much its own thing and there are not as many crossover players.

DM- as far as the B6 Sneaky stuff, I do not feel qualified technically (writing yes - knowing the musical end of that instrument/tuning, no). But as I compile notes I'm planning on putting something together...and it will be free. In the meantime, I'm happy to discuss ideas about playing it via email, phone...you name it!

Jim

Mike Perlowin · Post by **Mike Perlowin** » 20 Sep 2007 2:57 am

Jim Sliff wrote:
If Mike's publisher didn't want to, I'm sure it was a financial, not musical, decision.

This is correct. They would have to pay to use "Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds." I had to ditch the song and substitute "Mary Had A Little Lamb."

Of course, songs are copyrighted, and licks are not. But still, the copyright/royalty issue might cause problems if one were to use a signature lick from a specific song.

But there's something else to consider. My book is published by Mel Bay and a big firm like that has to be very careful about following the laws. Somebody writing and self publishing a small book with limited circulation might be able to skirt around the issue just be asking permission from the copyright holders.

I've done this three times. Once for some business cards, in which I wanted to use a image owned by Simon and Schuster, and the other two times for the use of copyrighted artwork for CD covers. In all three cases, I simple wrote or called up the people who owned the copyrights, told them what I wanted to do, and asked their permission to use their material, and they all simply said "OK".

Mike Perlowin · Post by **Mike Perlowin** » 20 Sep 2007 3:12 am

On a different subject, I don't come from a country rock background. (In fact I missed the whole thing).

I come from a blues rock background. The people I listened to when I was a kid were Son House, Lightning Hopkins, Reverend Gary Davis, etc and when I discovered the joys of playing with electricity, I played in blues bands.

I play a pretty much standard E9/B6 universal (I tune my 2nd string to C# and raise it.) The blues scale is there. All the rock and blues licks are there.

5 years ago I played steel (often with distortion) in a blues rock band. The band leader probably couldn't tell you who Poco or the Burrito Brothers are, let alone anything about real country music. But he knows everything there is to know about Jimi Hendrix and led Zeppelin. the band's "gimmick" if you can call it that, was that one of the 2 lead instruments was a steel.

You don't need a separate tuning to play rock and blues on a steel. You just need to learn the one you've got.

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 20 Sep 2007 5:41 am

On a different subject, I don't come from a country rock background. (In fact I missed the whole thing).

I come from a blues rock background.

I came fromblues/rock and progressive rock, mainly, but got into the country-rock thing when I got hooked on The Byrds "Notorious Byrds Brothers" album - a country/prog/rock album if there ever was one. I still keep my harps in the car and play blues harp when stuck in freeway traffic!

Regarding signature licks - that's very ture, and why you rarely see the intro to "Sunshine of Your Love", Smoke on Water", etc. But the "hooks" are usually easy-- that's why they're memorable. It's the other stylistic things that can be presented without copyright problems.

Bob Hoffnar · Post by **Bob Hoffnar** » 20 Sep 2007 6:33 am

In terms of what is actually played on the steel there is no difference between the "country rock" presented in the begining of the thread and the regular country music steel playing at the time. There was different hair styles and lyrics but the music was basicly the same. Same chord progressions, song stucture, melodic vocabulary. The steel has the same role; Mixolydian mode over major chords, harmonized scales in thirds and sixths, play in the holes around the melody and so on.
Standard county music actually had its share of innovative players at the time when you think about all the wild things Emmons was up to along with Hal Rugg and Pete Drake.

If anybody is actually interested in being able to apply steel guitar to a truly different form of music they will need to do the work to learn the notes on the neck and then get on with the learning the music part. Joe Wright has a great system with his scale spread sheet to learn the neck along with a bunch of other stuff. The Jeff Newman stuff is a great way to get up and running. If you can get through the Newman beginner courses you will be able to handle 90% of the country rock tunes. Also once you get going after a bit the DVD's that JayDee Mannes has put out are amazing !

Ben Jones · Post by **Ben Jones** » 20 Sep 2007 7:33 am

Ben, I don't know, but it seemed to me that there was an awful lot on that video that could be transferred to E9. Yes, he's playing a 12-string guitar and has some other levers and the tuning is a bit different. But it's still an E9 tuning with A, B pedals and an F-lever. The top 4 strings are identical to E9, there's a D inserted on string 5 between E and B, the F# and lower D are missing, but otherwise, it's pretty close to the modified E9 I was talking about with the lower D missing from string 9 and the 7th string F# lowered to get it out of the way. I think one can work around the differences.

Once you have some knowledge of the psg perhaps you can work around the differences. As a stone cold beginner however (at least in my case), you barely know the string names, let alone be able to think about the substitutions and modifications that would bring it close to the tuning your guitar came with. I dont imagine many beginners are willing to start the first lesson by changing their string guages and retuning...especially someone who is not committed fully to that style. I wanted to play the country stuff I heard AND I wanted to be able to play bluesy licks. Maybe its just me tho, I had the same problem with Cindy Cashdollars lap steel vids, she plays an eight string, I only had six..I wasnt thinking "I can get those notes on the missing two strings over here on the strings I have"...i was thinikng.."dang, I dont got that string Cindy!". i didnt know any theory or note names or anything (still barely do)

Everyone says blues licks are possible with a standard E9 ten string..Dan Tyack proves it for us....and yet there is seemingly little or no written instruction for it. I find this to be the major gap in beginners instructional material for psg...speaking AS a beginner myself. (yes its been almost two years now and I still consider myself a beginner...sad)

Bo Legg · Post by **Bo Legg** » 20 Sep 2007 8:06 am

I know I brag too much on my son and I don't want to sound like I'm braging on my picking. Blues and Rock are not really that hard to play on the Steel.
My son Stuart who is disabled and can't physically play the Pedal Steel but he writes some of the best tab I've ever used.
He has tabed out for me 100rds of rock and blues licks Steve Ray, B.B.King, Ted, Frank, and Eric etc. just to name a few using pedals and knees in position all over the E9. Stuart has tabed out for me most all the modes and scales that the rock musicians use to create their styles. Most rock and blues licks are single line and double stop phrases and the E9 neck does this very well and believe me if it is tabed out right it is easy to learn. I play a lot of blues on the E9 neck in all the country songs and I don't have to put my Bar down and leave it to the guitar player when when they want to play rock or rock something out. Just shut up and play me your power chords baby.

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 20 Sep 2007 8:28 am

Bo, Stuart should definitely put out an instruction book including all his tab. I think it would sell well.

Bo Legg · Post by **Bo Legg** » 20 Sep 2007 9:23 am

Jim Cohen quote "Bo, Stuart should definitely put out an instruction book including all his tab. I think it would sell well".

Thank you for the compliment but I hope no one thought I was trying to sell some tab. He makes this tab just for my use and have never really thought about selling it and I don't know if we legally could. I'm not sure if we can even share some parts of the tab without getting into trouble. I'm trying to check on this.

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 20 Sep 2007 10:09 am

Bo, I don't think anyone would have thought you were trying to sell anything. I just think that you (and/or your son) SHOULD! I think there would be great interest in what he has created.

Bo Legg · Post by **Bo Legg** » 20 Sep 2007 3:14 pm

I just picked through some of tab Stuart just gave and picked out something that looks easy.
I won't show all of it its to long to post but here ere the first four bars of guitar solo for E9 pedal Steel for Lay Down Sally that stuart has tabed for me. I haven't worked on it much yet but I'm sure its pretty accurate. I don't have our web site up yet or I would post a sound clip. It is in the key of A. I didn't list the notation for fear of breaking the law.

Bo Legg · Post by **Bo Legg** » 20 Sep 2007 3:26 pm

Stuart just informed me that I posted an uncorrected page and the 5's on the 5th string of the last bar should be on the 4th string and god knows what else. The notes should be A G G# A. Boy did I get chewed out for posting this. Sorry I missed that but the rest looks OK.

Aaron Harms · Post by **Aaron Harms** » 20 Sep 2007 3:51 pm

heheh...sons are tough.

On a couple of points, although I won't go back and attribute them to their authors, either transcribing or creating new parts for the traditional songs, which might emulate licks that new folks need to know.

I also have trouble, being an 8 stringer, with the fact that most tab/lessons are in 10 string. While yes, I can move the bar around and get those notes, it's far easier to read it and play it the way it's written, at least the first time around.

I also agree that a "complete pedal steel" course would be nice, and would allow you to include a history of the instrument's uses within those other genres. FWIW, once I heard the Misunderstood with Glen Ross Campbell, it opened things up for me within other contexts. While I'm traditionally playing what I think you'd call country rock, having a backstock of licks from an actual course would help immeasurably...

So, perhaps you'd include different sections, for multiple copedents and tunings? It would be nice to show folks, here's what you can do with 12, 10, and 8, within given genres.

Just my 2 pence....

A

admin · Post by **b0b** » 20 Sep 2007 4:42 pm

I agree with Bob Hoffnar. Most of the country-rock "style" of steel playing is basic country steel played over a rock rhythm section. That's how I hear it, anyway.

The other part is when we hit the distortion pedal and steel the slide guitar licks. That sound is actually unique to pedal steel, but it takes an educated ear to realize that it isn't being done on a standard electric guitar.

I think that you basically need to know two things to play well in any genre:

your instrument
the music

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 21 Sep 2007 5:15 am

If you keep a narrow focus on "country-rock" Bob and b0b are correct. But when you step outside that to "rock" (sans the country connection), blues-rock (ala Clapton, Hendrix, Bloomfield, and a lot fo the others who started it back in the 60's...and what unfortunately many people think of as "blues" today) and blues playing it's NOT the same stuff - and honestly, when I hear Joe Wright play "Takin' Care of Business" or the "hook" to "Smoke on Water" I hear country steel being played as a novelty. It doesn't aound like rock, it sounds like "country rock" because he and others just can't seem to escape some of the "country" influence.

OTOH when I hear a Chuck Cambell, I hear blues/rock without the country influence..and when HE plays anything "country-like" the reverse is also true - it sounds like a novelty.