Slants vs Pedals

Roger Edgington · Post by **Roger Edgington** » 9 Oct 2007 3:29 pm

The reason you need a bullet shaped bar for three string slants is because for some chords the bar needs to cover two strings at one fret and pick up a third note on a slant. The bullet shape allows that to happen with the correct positioning. It's not possible with a straight bar. As already mentioned. the scale and spacing play a big part in slants also keep in mind the angle changes as you go up the neck and frets become closer together. The short scale wide string spacing is by far easier. I'm in the middle of re learning this and playing some non pedal.

James Mayer · Post by **James Mayer** » 9 Oct 2007 3:37 pm

Really, I think there are some misunderstandings here. I mentioned above that I have no problems with controlling the bar and getting it in any position, forward or reverse. I think the SP2 is far easier to control than the standard bar style that I started with. Reverse slants, in particular, are so much easier that I'll probably never go with the conventional bar.

I think my problem is that my musical ear isn't so great, probably because I started playing music late...while in my mid-twenties. I have to pull out a tuner to figure out which way to adjust my slant. I can definitely get three notes in tune in a row with my bar, but i have to have a good tuner handy to hit the spots. Hearing how far to rotate and adjust is not getting easier for me.

James Mayer · Post by **James Mayer** » 9 Oct 2007 3:40 pm

Roger Edgington wrote:The reason you need a bullet shaped bar for three string slants is because for some chords the bar needs to cover two strings at one fret and pick up a third note on a slant. The bullet shape allows that to happen with the correct positioning. It's not possible with a straight bar. As already mentioned. the scale and spacing play a big part in slants also keep in mind the angle changes as you go up the neck and frets become closer together. The short scale wide string spacing is by far easier. I'm in the middle of re learning this and playing some non pedal.

My SP2 has a bullet end. It's not a straight bar.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 9 Oct 2007 3:59 pm

James, you've heard it from Scotty and Rick and myself, the accepted norm is the bullet bar.
If you think you can get it accurately using the SP2, go for it, I haven't heard anyone yet that has..IMHO..
we're just trying to save you time and effort

To read the posts here you'd think he was doomed to never be in tune again

No one said that even if you intimated it.

admin · Post by **b0b** » 9 Oct 2007 4:12 pm

I use a Shubb SP1 on pedal steel sometimes. It has a rounded nose, but it's not right for bar slants at all. I've only seen pictures of the SP2. It doesn't look like a bullet nose in the pictures, but if you say it is, maybe I'm wrong.

The advantage of the bullet nose is that the top note of a triad can be made flat by varying degrees, according to how far into the bullet taper it touches the string. A straight forward slant over 3 strings is rarely in tune. You often need to be able to flat the top note to accommodate the narrower fret spacing. This is why a bullet nose bar is necessary for triads.

James Mayer · Post by **James Mayer** » 9 Oct 2007 4:13 pm

I really didn't mean for this to turn into an argument about technique and bars, neither of which is my issue. My issue is the same as a violinist approaching double stops for the first time.

Craig Stenseth · Post by **Craig Stenseth** » 9 Oct 2007 4:15 pm

The bullet bar doesn't have to be kept 'standing up', if that makes any sense.

James Mayer · Post by **James Mayer** » 9 Oct 2007 4:15 pm

I posted before seeing this:

"The advantage of the bullet nose is that the top note of a triad can be made flat by varying degrees, according to how far into the bullet taper it touches the string. A straight forward slant over 3 strings is rarely in tune. You often need to be able to flat the top note to accommodate the narrower fret spacing. The inverse is true on reverse slants. This is why a bullet nose bar is necessary for triads."

BINGO!!! we have an explanation.

Ok, I see the point. I'm not actually attempting to use the SP2 nose in this way. I'll give it a shot.

Scott Thomas · Post by **Scott Thomas** » 9 Oct 2007 4:32 pm

Three note forward slants like you describe (that triad on the top three in C6 as you described, different fret each string) are among the most challenging to get in tune. (Just in case you thought you were alone here.

) In fact, I didn't think it physically possible to get all three strings, because if string one and three are right on, then string two is usually slightly out of tune by necessity? (Could just be me.) Again, that's where "optimal" scale length and string spacing come into play. I think Jerry Byrd had it at 22.5 scale and 3/8 inch string spacing.

Speaking of Jerry Byrd, who Scotty mentioned, he was the "gold standard" by which many of us measure our own progress in slanting. He came as close to perfection in this regard as humanly possible, but himself realized that there will often be some fudging involved, to be disguised by judicious use of vibrato.

But if as you say, you have no problem controlling the bar, and that your ear is the problem, then I suppose that really is a whole other thing.

Scott Thomas · Post by **Scott Thomas** » 9 Oct 2007 4:37 pm

Ooops, didn't see B0b's post in time. Guess I'll just have to say, "I second that!"

Ron Randall · Post by **Ron Randall** » 9 Oct 2007 6:56 pm

I hate to digress too much. Consistent string spacing from bridge to nut is part of the geometry lesson we are discussing. The string spacing dictates the nose radius. The back end of the bar needs a good indention for the thumb.

We are discussing instruments that generally have a 3/8 string spacing and a bullet nose bar that is 3/4. Get out the drawing paper, compass, ruler etc. and see why Mr Byrd recommended what he did. 3/4 inch spherical nose can touch 2 strings of 3/8 spacing, and the the bar can lay at most any angle to get the third note.

Hope this helps the discussion.

Ron

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 9 Oct 2007 7:16 pm

Thanks for putting it so plainly Ron, I said the same thing four and a half hours ago in this thread but couldn't explain it a well as you've done.
I said (On the previous page)

There is no way you can accurately do split slants with the bar you use.

Of course I was presuming that "Split Slants" would suffice as a description of the modus operandi !
Maybe some fell on stony ground ?

Alan Brookes · Post by **Alan Brookes** » 9 Oct 2007 7:22 pm

Every time you put the bar on the strings you're creating a fret. The frets are where they are because of arithmetic. Two note slants are possible, but difficult in terms of the complicated arithmetic. Three note slants are impossible. Just show me a position on the fingerboard where the bar could be, and work out the distances from the nut, and I'll prove to you mathematically that you DO NOT HAVE A TRIAD.

That having been said, why do proficient, long-time players manage to play triads by slanting? The answer is that they don't. They create the illusion of a triad, and that is all the human brain can take in. I want you to imagine a band where many instruments are playing, and the brass section is sliding from one note to another, and the guitarist is bending his notes, and the vocalist is sliding from one note to another. If you were to take a cross-section at any one time you would find that the combination is totally dischordant. The human brain ignores this. I don't know how; it just does.

When you play a slant the human brain seems to consider the starting point and the ending point, and allow some sort of leeway in between.

Playing the steel guitar we're taking advantage of that leeway all the time. When you add vibrato to a note by moving or rocking the bar you're taking the note out-of-tune flat then sharp. If you do that with the bar on several strings you're taking several strings out-of-tune at the same time. Only the central position constitutes a chord: away from that position even a fraction of a millimetre constitutes a dischord.

The human brain has to take in an enormous amount of information in three dimensions. It is capable of isolating a single conversation in a room full of chatter. It does that by intelligent selection, by concentrating on one thing at a time. If you want to see an example of this, record a crowd with one microphone. The brain no longer has three-dimensional information, so cannot separate different conversations the way it would in a live room.

When listening to live music the brain has the ability to separate out the tune from the dischordant background. This is why it is more important to be in tune on a recording than live.

But to sum it up, it is impossible to play an in-tune triad with a bar except for one position, and that is parallel to the frets. The rest is illusion. But it is that illusion that the masters can manipulate into an art form. That's what separates the Jerry Byrds from you and me...

Les Anderson · Post by **Les Anderson** » 9 Oct 2007 7:37 pm

Allen, that was the best one so far. I don't think anyone can argue with your explanation.

Stephan Miller · Post by **Stephan Miller** » 9 Oct 2007 8:09 pm

Alan, I don't disagree. But there some additional ways to get a 3-string slant to sound in tune. On certain slants, you can line up the two lower notes perfectly, then use bar pressure to sharp the highest string into tune. With other slants, you can perfectly line up the two outside strings, and bring the middle one up to pitch with a mild behind-the-bar string pull.

These are compensating techniques that can be practiced along with slants. And when you nail them, you've got a fairly illusion-free in-tune slant.

Keith Wells · Post by **Keith Wells** » 9 Oct 2007 9:09 pm

What a great thread. Playing slants, besides being a lot of fun, really seems to grap the attention of people when I play, they say things like, "I didn't know you could angle the slide thing like that, are you supposed to do that?"

Alan, your post really made me think. (not always easy to do)

If I could nit-pick just a little ...

Three note slants are impossible. Just show me a position on the fingerboard where the bar could be, and work out the distances from the nut, and I'll prove to you mathematically that you DO NOT HAVE A TRIAD.

First: It depends on the tuning of the guitar of course, but most three-string slants are not triads, even if the bar stopped all three strings in the perfect position. A triad of course is a 1-3-5 chord, either with a major third or minor third. (major or minor triad -- also diminished and augmented triads, but the point is a triad has a specific construction)

Second: With the right combination of scale length and string spacing, in-tune three-string slants could be available in at least one position on the neck. This is a minor point but hey -- you played the math card, and math is usually quite precise.

Only the central position constitutes a chord: away from that position even a fraction of a millimetre constitutes a dischord.

Moving away from the central position might sound discordant, but it's still a chord. A chord is three or more notes played together. It doesn't matter what the notes are, or if they are in tune.

Great explanation of how our brains sort out and adjust what we hear.

Michael Johnstone · Post by **Michael Johnstone** » 10 Oct 2007 4:38 am

I think plain old slanting across 3 strings which has angular limitations based on where on the neck it is done,is being confused with split slanting where the round nose of a bullet bar acts as a spherical shape touching 2 adjacent strings in a way that the back end can be moved to the left on a lower string without disturbing the "in-tune-ness" of the top 2 strings.This technique is player controlable and not dependant on fret angles of a particular part of the neck.The nose of a Shubb dobro bar - even with it's little rounded lip doesn't have enough of that spherical shape to do that trick - plus it take a lot more effort to not have the bar fall over on its side when attempting to slant it - especially on reverse slants. My advice is get a bullet bar and practice.Your life will be easier in the long run. BTW here's a little slantin' I did on YouTube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqYJKYWtbVw

Bob Stone · Post by **Bob Stone** » 10 Oct 2007 5:08 am

Hi James,

If the "stretching sound" is what you are looking for in my opinion you will never acheive it on a lap steel to the extent possible on a pedal-steel. Jerry Byrd pretty much did it on a few tunes (Surprise Waltz is a good example), but mostly that was not his mission.

Many of us non-pedalers are not looking for the stretched sound. I don't listen to pedal steel that much and when I do the twangy, stretched sound of country pedal steel sounds strange to me and takes a little getting used to. I can appreciate it, but it's quite different from what I'm used to hearing in the non-pedal world.

Bob Lee: I can't make your essay appear on the screen. Is there something I can do about that?

Best,

Bob

admin · Post by **b0b** » 10 Oct 2007 6:41 am

Bob Stone wrote:Bob Lee: I can't make your essay appear on the screen. Is there something I can do about that?

Try a different browser? $:\$

James Mayer · Post by **James Mayer** » 10 Oct 2007 7:48 am

Ok, I did some experimenting last night and came to the conclusion that three-string slants just aren't worth the trouble (for now). I've been working on the hardest first when I should have concentrated on easier slants to begin. So I started trying two string slants, forward and reverse, and had the simple stuff (an A minor scale) down in no time.

I may eventually go to the bullet bar, but I see the advantages of my SP2 being greater than it's disadvantage......which seems to only be the angle of the bullet nose.

Harry Dietrich · Post by **Harry Dietrich** » 10 Oct 2007 8:38 am

In fact, I didn't think it physically possible to get all three strings, because if string one and three are right on, then string two is usually slightly out of tune by necessity? (Could just be me.

If I remember correctly, Jerry Byrd said you have to apply a little downward pressure on the nose of the bar where it rests on the second string to get the proper intonation.

Happy Practicing!

Harry

Les Anderson · Post by **Les Anderson** » 10 Oct 2007 10:01 am

Bullet bars are great tools until you have to do an outdoors gig in cooler, if not colder, weather.

If I am using my bullet bar at an outdoor gig in the fall here in the north, I am always praying that when I need to do a slant, my bar is not going to take off on me and go skidding across the stage. It has happened too many times.

For this reason, I always carry my Stevens bar and use it a lot. And yes, I have learned to do most slants with it; forward and reverse.

Scott Thomas · Post by **Scott Thomas** » 10 Oct 2007 10:12 am

James Mayer had said earlier:

I've mostly been attempting the forward slant minor triad across the three treble strings of the C6 where the root is on the little E string.

It was to that one to which I was referring, I think Michael above is right. There is a little confusion about two different slants we're talking about here.

The other kind of slant that others brought up, where the tip of the bar must cover the top two strings on the same fret, and the bottom of the bar get the third or fourth string one fret down, is a good example of why a bullet nose bar is especially useful, and answers James's earlier questions of why it is superior to the SP2 in this regard.

Whew! This is a perfect example of why a picture (or diagram) would be worth a thousand words!

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 10 Oct 2007 10:32 am

Whew! This is a perfect example of why a picture (or diagram) would be worth a thousand words!

What's wrong with the term I used throughout "Split Slant" ? doesn't that say it all.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 10 Oct 2007 10:40 am

the tip of the bar must cover the top two strings

Not necessarily, it could well be strings 5 and 6 with string 6,7, or 8 at the lower position.
Or any adjacent pair.

That is of course presuming you mean strings 1 + 2 when you say the TOP two, the higher two of the three involved is a different matter though.
Myself and most 'Old-Timers' would take the top string to be the 'Highest' or 1st string.
semantics