Sustain

[P Gleespen]

I find myself wondering how long you guys are going to be able to sustain this argument. (bing!)

I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist.

Here's some input from an expert on sustain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhVWJgIzftE

Seriously though, this whole argument seems to me to be all semantics. In fact, it reminds me very much of the whole tone vs timbre arguments.

[mike nolan]

b0b,

check this out.......

http://www.fernandesguitars.com/whatis.html

[Dave Mudgett]

b0b, I don't see why one couldn't implant something similar to the Fernandes Sustainer - http://www.fernandesguitars.com/sustainer.html - on a steel guitar. Of course, the main issue with the Fernandez unit itself is that it's designed for 6-string guitars. But I think the overall approach could be generalized.

Bob H. - of course, I was not discounting the issue of picking technique. As a rule of thumb in typical freely vibrating mechanical systems, the vibration transients from higher frequencies typically damp out more quickly than lower frequencies. In cases where this is true, picking to get as close to a pure fundamental would lead to longer apparent sustain, since more of the spectral power would be in lower frequencies.

I'm not sure if you can add much sustain with vibrato but you can maximize what sustain you have with it.

I'm not exactly sure I understand the difference between "adding sustain" and "maximizing sustain". To put on my systems engineer hat on for a moment, sustain time would be defined as the time interval between the maximum signal envelope amplitude after picking and some relatively small pre-determined fraction of that. In other words, to me, maximizing sustain means lengthening that time as much as possible. My suggestion was that a combination of factors - picking to get the longest free transient possible, bar excitation, volume pedal manipulation, and some level of regenerative acoustic feedback between the amplifier and steel - could be manipulated to give longer sustain time. Anyway - I'm not exactly sure I understand the distinction.

On the subject of bar excitation - I think only a controlled experiment will convince anybody one way or the other. It's on my (unfortunately very long) list of things to do. It would involve setting the system up somewhat below the acoustic feedback unity-gain point where steady oscillation occurs spontaneously. In other words, the acoustic feedback interaction would perhaps lengthen the sustain some, but not lead to a steady oscillation - it would still decay. Then I would attempt to push the signal up to the unity-gain point via bar manipulation only. If I can push the decaying signal into a steadily oscillating or growing signal, then I will be confident that I am adding positive energy to the string vibration.

Just saw this:

Seriously though, this whole argument seems to me to be all semantics. In fact, it reminds me very much of the whole tone vs timbre arguments.

Yup, we're spending some time in that zone alright.

[Donny Hinson]

I thought most any good guitar player knew that vibrato increases sustain...so I'll throw these in just for giggles!

Many soloists vibrato almost any note which is allowed to ring for any length of time as vibrato increases sustain and helps to make the note sing.

from Wheat's BassBook: A Comprehensive Method & Resource for the Electric Bass Guitar.

A well-developed vibrato increases sustain, makes notes "sing" expressively, and ranges from subtle to over-exagerated.

from The Guitar Cookbook, by Jesse Gress.

When a string is bent the note will naturally decay more quickly without a strong vibrato to support it. If you don't already know this, adding vibrato to a note (especially a bent note) can drastically increase the life and sustain of the pitch.

from Perserverance, Vibrato Control and Picking Hand Discipline, by Tom Hess.

However, if it's empirical data you want...

Vibrato is created by the motion of the player’s finger back and forth on the finger board. The variable string length causes a constant frequency modulation. Vibrato is used because it gives the sound more depth and sustain.

from Perception-based control of vibrato parameters in string instrument synthesis
Hanna J¨arvel¨ainen
DEI – University of Padova, Italy
Helsinki University of Technology, Laboratory of Acoustics and Audio Signal Processing, Finland

As Perry Mason would say..."Does Prosecution wish to cross-examine?"

[Richard Damron]

Jim Sliff -

I find some of your arguments to be well taken, HOWEVER - my background forces me to rebel - and ultimately reject - any claim of scientific study without any reference to such study and, of course, the documentation which invariably accompanies said studies.

Others may be taken in by your casual references to so-called "proven fact" but I am not one. "Proven fact" is just that - and should be found within the literature for all to peruse. Cite the reference, Jim, and convince those of use who have worked within the field of acoustics in materials for many years that you do, indeed, know of that which you purport to be true.

Anything less should be construed as nothing more than window dressing designed to impress those lesser knowledgeable folks who, in reality, look to others for honest information and edification. Anything less than full disclosure is disingenous at best.

I regret having to be so hard on ya Son but the truth is the truth is the truth and guessing games and BS are not allowed.

Respectfully,

Richard

[John Billings]

As I said earlier:
"one can actually start a note with hard-pumping left-hand vibrato alone."
That's because you're actually scraping the string against the fingerboard and the fret. If you put your ear right down there where you're pumping, you'll hear the scraping that actually excites the strings.

"Vibrato is created by the motion of the player’s finger back and forth on the finger board. The variable string length causes a constant frequency modulation. Vibrato is used because it gives the sound more depth and sustain."
This one is just describing vibrato, and has nothing to actually do with sustain.

[Richard Damron]

Donny -

The "Prosecution" would like to ask a question.

With reference to my jazz guitar, the application of vibrato BETWEEN RAISED FRETS appears to impart some energy INTO the string - i.e. - actively changing the tension - a contributing factor? Bar vibrato as regards the PSG does nothing more than "stop" the string at a given point(s). Stringed instruments of the violin family are obviously not germain to the studies which you cite since the bow is constantly supplying energy to the string. FRETTED instruments appear to be the focus of those studies.

The question: In what manner does the steel bar impart energy INTO the string so as to increase its' sustain since there must be a force which tends to counterbalance the natural decay of vibration due to internal molecular "friction"?

Your witness, Mr. Mason.

Respectfully,

Richard

[ed packard]

All bars are not equal in smoothness (by measurement using a "Zygo"). Moving the bar (vibrato) passes energy to the string. The rougher the bar the more the contributed energy to the string = increased sustain...particularly noticeable above the 12th fret. Think coefficient of friction.

The bar actually polishes the string. It does not show with metal bars as the bar is the same color as the residue. A poorly made Zirc bar(white) will show this up quite quickly.

[Dave Mudgett]

All bars are not equal in smoothness (by measurement using a "Zygo"). Moving the bar (vibrato) passes energy to the string. The rougher the bar the more the contributed energy to the string = increased sustain...particularly noticeable above the 12th fret. Think coefficient of friction.

That is also my experience, Ed. Are you guys really saying that if you have the volume up, you never hear any bar-string noise? I guess we don't have to worry about any more of those "How do I get rid of that scraping noise when sliding up and down the strings?" threads, right?

With can theorize all day and night about whether - and if so, how - vibrato or other bar manipulation can impart energy to a vibrating string. I said earlier that I think only a properly controlled and carried out experiment will really answer this categorically. That opinion is unchanged.

[John Roche]

If you have the back legs on your steel higher then the front legs you will looses sustain , trust me.. try it and see..

[Glyn Bone]

WOW!!!

As me ol` mate King Arthur ( of round table fame ) would be wont to state :-

" Holy Crappeth lad....thou hast opened a veritable Pandora`s Box with your question !!!

To be honest, the response has been TOTALLY unexpected !!! ( never asked a question that got more than a couple of replies before )

And in ALL the answers I for one, have found much of interest, even though some aspects of the answers have gone way over my head, I have managed to glean some very interesting things from all of this.

For one..the weight of the bar....I have just recieved a new BJS bar of 1" dia. and 11.7 oz weight.....and YES, it has helped a lot with the SUSTAIN in the higher register, as well as that I am hearing a slight difference in the `tone` produced...I can`t quite put my finger on it, suffice to say I find it pleasing.

I have made a few small adjustments to my amp settings too...as per one of the answers....and got a good result there as well,
Now I am working on my `physical` intonation...ie..that which is input by myself.....hands, bar placement...picking technique...position of picking hand.ect ect....at this rate I`ll be after someones job

I wish to thank ALL who have come forth with answers, definitive or otherwise, they are ALL worthy of consideration and trial IMHO

I sincerely hope that this thread doesn`t de-generate into a `slanging match` though...we all have different ideas...proven or theoretical and I for one respect EACH and EVERY one of the thoughts put forward here.

Thank you one and all...and thank you b0b for providing a forum for such good discussion.

Take care and respect each other

[John Roche]

Don't dismiss my reply about the height of the legs..

[Donny Hinson]

The question: In what manner does the steel bar impart energy INTO the string so as to increase its' sustain...

Who said the bar must impart energy INTO the string in order to produce more sustain?

[Jim Sliff]

Your constant rant that 6-string knowledge is holy, complete and perfect, and steel knowledge is ignorant drivel is obnoxiously condescending, gratuirously self-serving, and completely beside the point

That's not what I've said David - don't exaggerate or load on a bunch of BS.

Dave M - I don't know why I'm bothering, since you keep ignoring it, but The Acoustical Foundations of Music - which I mentioned earlier in the thread - is something you might want to read. I think this is the 4th time I've told you that I've given you at least one source to go to; apparently you choose to continue to try to claim your immense technical library exists and the asked-for source does not.

R. Damron - I cited a specific reference which apparently you are also choosing to ignore. Asked and Answered. Your post is irrelevant.

b0b - actually, yes - there have been attempts at trying to install a string-specific eBow-like device under strings. II don't recall any commercial production versions, though except the Fernandez which was a different concept - it couldn't start string vibration as I recall. It seems it'd be kind of weird to play a multi-string eBow, as you'd have to constantly damp every string you don't want vibrating.

[Dave Mudgett]

Hey - one more thing here. Let me please explain why I'm digging so deeply into this thread.

The last several months I have been extremely unhappy with the tonality, chime, and sustain in the upper register of my playing. I've been listening to a lot of players lately who really have it together way up there, and I find myself seriously lacking. The people I work with think I'm making good progress with that stuff, but I'm not happy.

So - the question comes up: What is the problem? Is it my steel guitars? Is it my volume pedals? Pickups? Effects? Amps? Speakers? Cables? Bar? Strings? Picks? Or is it primarily me?

You see - this is a critical question to somebody in my position. Anyone trying to make real progress must always figure out which in direction they should proceed. All the hard work in the world doesn't help if you're marching in the wrong direction.

For example, if the problem is fundamentally with my technique and I fool around with equipment, it does no good. Or conversely, if the problem truly is that, as some have said - "Boy, you just gotta' get yourself a nice old push-pull - nothin' else is gonna cut it up there the way you want it." - then working like a maniac on the wrong equipment will just get me frustrated.

So - lest you think I'm trying to be a smart@$$ - I am really trying to diagnose what the real issue is here. I have been working on that part of my technique for the last few months, and I lean to "It's me." But on the other hand, I don't claim to have "the answers" here. I'm searching.

[Jim Sliff]

Dave - when you put it that way, there are several things to look at...and I don't think any are you as a player.

First, of course, is ensuring everything is relatively sturdy on the instrument - loose nuts, bridges, tuner assemblies and even body parts, legs, etc. can kill sustain.

You also have possibilities in amplification, which is really common with higher-register problems in (oh, no!!) 6-string guitar as well. With a tube amp, often simple power tube changes and/or rebiasing can make a huge difference. Preamp tubes can really effect top end response, and I've worked on amps where guys have wanted what I'd consider "icepick" treble and gone through handfuls of 12A*7 tubes, 5751's and the like until the right one "clicked" with a particular amp and playing style. With SS amps EQ makes a big difference (obviously on tube amps as well), and NOT using the same settings everywhere - that's something many players do and it's not tonally "productive"; you have to alter your settings for different venues (you know that one, we've both mentioned it before...I'm mentioning it more for the benefit off others who may be looking for "typical settings" for their amp - and there aren't any).

Poor cables in an effects chain can cause problems in top-end; some instruments seem to respond better to certain types of strings than others (i.e. nickel vs stainless on the wound strings).

That's one reason I listed many of these factors earlier - they ALL have an effect, and the relationship between some of them is symbiotic; change on thing and you are forced to change something else.

But the first things I would do are (assuming reasonably fresh strings and a solid, responsive amp/speaker(s)) experiment with pickup height and tighten every "fixed" screw and bolt on the guitar (not OVER-tighten, but just ensure nothing is loose). I've seen dramatic improvement in overall frequency response of (darn it, here we go again) 6-strings simply by checking, tightening (and replacing some) every connecting part on a guitar, down to the string retainer on the peghead. I used to do new guitar "tuneups" - players would bring me off-the-rack Strats, Teles, Les Pauls, etc., and I would virtually dismantle and rebuild them, including fret dressing, relief adjustments, nut replacement etc. etc. Results always resulted in improvement; in some cases it was very significant. Might be similar in some ways to the "Tommy mods" done on steels.

I realize that's a laundry list and not all that specific, but maybe the couple of starting points will give you some positive results. Good luck - it's always challenging!

Jim

[Brint Hannay]

I dunno, Dave--Are you using different steels and having the same concern? My own experience, FWIW, as I mentioned in another (I think) thread, is that I have one particular steel where I am somewhat disappointed with the tone and sustain in the high range, and several others that I am not disappointed with. Given that I am the same player, with the same bag of available technical strengths (if any) and shortcomings (no question there), and the same cables, volume pedal, amp(s), etc., I am forced to conclude that it has to do with the guitar.

One factor, which I have seen mentioned among the testimonials on Bill Lawrence's website, is the problem of hum with single coil pickups. On the guitar I've mentioned, and others with single coils, to a lesser degree, I find that, when I hear the hum climbing into my output as I gradually depress the volume pedal to sustain high notes, I can't tolerate the hum and its interference with the note(s) I'm playing, and am literally unable to keep from backing off, thus rendering the possible actual sustain of the note itself moot. This factor makes maximum sustain of the note itself, physically, by the guitar, and thus optimized signal-to-noise ratio as the note decays, a crucial factor in my comfort level while playing. Humbucking pickups help, of course, but there's a trade-off in tone loss, IMO.

[Dave Mudgett]

Jim - you're making the assumption that it's my equipment. If you're right, this is all good advice, which I already follow. There may be some subtle things related to pedal steel mechanics that I just don't know what to do with, but I already do the steel adjustments, tightening and straightening; amp adjustment and maintenance; and so on.

But I have a bunch of steel guitars and amps of various sorts. Some of them have been carefully set up by someone else, and some by me. Overall, most of them sound very good, to my ears. It's not that they sound bad or don't have generally good sustain above the 12th fret - not at all. But when I compare what I sound like up there, as compared to what top players sound like up there using the exact same equipment, I believe I come up short. Sustain is one of the key issues. When a really top player uses the same exact equipment, they are able to extract things I can't.

All this leads me to believe that I may well need to change my high-register technique. Maybe I'm wrong - maybe it's my equipment. But I think it's technique for me. Incidentally - I notice this same phenomenon on guitar. I've been playing guitar a lot longer than steel, and I can wring tone out of the high register of a guitar a lot easier than out of the high register of a steel. I think the difference is 40 years experience, as compared to 8 or 9. When I listen to inexperienced guitar players, it doesn't much matter whether they're playing a cheap Epi Les Paul or a real '59 Les Paul flametop. IMHO.

I think the high register requires more work in the sustain department. A well known "rule of thumb" about the natural free transient response of typical vibrating mechanical systems is that higher frequencies tend to damp out faster than lower frequencies. Even when a guitar is ship-shape, one should expect to have to work harder on sustain in the upper frequency register. The idea is that if the damping ratio is roughly the same for all frequencies, then all frequencies damp out in roughly the same number of cycles. Therefore the higher frequencies damp out more quickly. This isn't iron-clad, but is a typical behavior.

Like I said - if I spend all my time on equipment and that's not the real problem, then that time is for naught. Nobody can gauge that without doing a detailed analysis of my playing and my equipment.

BTW - if you had said "Acoustical Foundations of Music" by John Backus, I would have known what you were talking about. Yes, it's a good book, but I'm not sure it addresses the specific issue I was talking about. I was talking about using bar manipulation to add energy to the vibrating string as the free transient response decays. I'll read it over. But I think you should consider Ed Packard's post. If there's someone here who has actually done serious experimentation on PSGs, it's Ed.

Brint - as I said - I have a wide variety of pedal steels. I have old Sho Buds, a Zum, a Fessenden, a Carter, an Emmons LeGrande, and a couple of others. Pickups range from an original Sho Bud to a Truetone to a couple of George L's to a couple of Lawrences to a couple of Tonealigners. I understand the issue with a high hum noise floor and sustaining with the volume pedal. I have steels set up with both single-coil and humbuckers. I have effects and amps galore. Tube amps, solid-state steel amps, Tubefex, Pods, whatever - I have it.

I think the steels and amps generally sound good. But I have never been completely satisfied with the sustain in the high register. I don't care whose steel I play on - if I'm at Bobbe Seymour's or in my basement or on someone else's steel. Bobbe or someone like that can sit down to the same equipment and pull it out in spades.

So I think it's probably more "me" than "the equipment". I'm not beating myself up here. I'm listening to the best players I can find, and I want to shoot for that level of tone and sustain. I'll bet I'm not the only one around here who comes up short. Or maybe you all have this figured out.

[Bob Hoffnar]

Dave,
If you want to know what to do to improve your upper register playing take a day off and spend an hour or two with Buddy Charleton. The problem with trying to communicate on the forum about something as subtle as what you are talking about is the answer is a little different for everybody. It is an individual ergonomic issue that is best dealt with in person.
Charlton will know exactly what to do. If you are unable to to do that I would look into Joe Wright's material. From the way you talk it seems like the problem is with your right hand. I would look there first. The key will most likely be to learn to hear what you want to play and then have your hands be relaxed and trained enough to do it without struggle.

[David Doggett]

[regarding not using ammonia on aluminum] “This is another on of those things well-known in the 6-string world that (and I know some people think the comparisons aren't valid - but they are) apparently hasn't reached the steel world.”

"steel voodoo"

Those are your quotes, Jim. Sounds to us like you are saying “that 6-string knowledge is holy, complete and perfect, and steel knowledge is ignorant drivel,” my admittedly hyperbolic and argumentative paraphrase. You of all people are not going to object to us responding to your hyperbole and argumentativeness with the same, are you?

I venture that there are some in the steel world who know as much about the effects of ammonia on aluminum and the physics of sustain as some people in the 6-string world. And from either world they are not necessarily participating in these discussions. So you don’t really know the depth of knowledge in the steel world. And there are those in both worlds who don’t know much about any of this stuff. And maybe some of them are participating here. So what? This supposed comparative knowledge in the two worlds is completely irrelevant to any of these discussions. Yet you constantly try to rub our noses in your low opinion of the knowledge in the steel world. Knock it off. Stick to the subject.

Fact is, most steelers had long experience on 6-string before taking up steel, and many are still very active 6-string players. I’m not, but I do subscribe to Guitar Player Magazine, as I’m sure many others here do. So your whole concept of the two separate and different worlds is bogus. It’s self-aggrandizing BS that is irrelevant and irritating.

Furthermore, I don’t recall anyone here saying that ZERO in 6-string physics or playing techniques is relevant to steel physics and playing techniques. Where these things overlap, they are relevant, where they don’t they aren’t. Yet you have now set up this zero-overlap-steeler’s-myth as a straw man, so that now each time you point out an obvious overlap, you can gloatingly proclaim that as some sort of victory over us poor ignorant steelers with our no-overlap “steel voodoo” myths. Such transparent straw men are very effective in politics and courtrooms. But they are not such good form in technical discussions among friends trying to learn from each other. It’s obfuscation.

You know, I’ve always resented it when your BS sidetracks threads into arguing about the manner of argument rather than the actual subject of the discussion. Maybe, I’ve been looking at this all wrong. Maybe it will be more interesting to call you on every one of your smokescreen techniques and just forget about the real discussion points.

…Naw, I think I’ll go practice. You have a good day.

[b0b]

I think that the key to getting maximum sustain is to pick harder, and know your volume pedal's taper really well. Often the people who complain that they can't get any sustain have a very light touch. If the string doesn't have a whole lot of energy to start with, you reach the max on the volume pedal quickly and then it dies.

You have to heel down on the attack, pick hard, and then match the decay envelope with your right foot. It's not an easy technique to master - which is why it can bring a grown man to tears.

[Jim Sliff]

b0b makes a very good..and simple...point about high-register playing. If you have a light touch, you DO need to bear down more on the top end, although as Bob Hoffnar notes a "loose" right hand is also helpful - it's a fine line, and Dave M., you might think about your 6-string right-hand technique a bit more and see if there's anything significantly different about your attack (other than the different types of picks). That's something technique-wise that is very similar between the two instruments.

David D. - not to belabor things, but those comments are made in response to posts either dissing 6-string comparisons or "isolating" steel as somehow an exception to the effect of physical laws that seem to govern other stringed instruments; if you think it so irritating, go jump the steel players who claim the comparisons aren't valid while you're on a roll. I think you're overreacting a bit, but I'll try to add a few more "winks" and "grins" to my posts in the future so you'll realize I'm not being as intentionally nasty as you think. One thing I would like you to think about though - while you are right that most steelers come from a guitar background (and I'm well aware many with knowledge of varying degrees do not post), I would tend to think I'm correct in saying they don't have a guitar tech background, have not built and seriously restored instruments, nor have classroom study in instrument construction and acoustic theory - and what you term "BS" might just have a bit of cellophane wrapped around it, something you might not be able to claim, sir.

[P Gleespen]

Sustain is in the hands.

[ed packard]

Dave M...Is your right hand grip such that the fingers (picks) attack the strings in the same manner as those that have a "good" high end sound? Check your picks against theirs for the wear area...some folk slide off the string, and some come directly off.

Different gauges = different sound also.

I have never noticed if John H rolled or slid his bar in the high country.

[David Mason]

How do you guys ever find time to practice?

Say, do you think ET or JI tuning sustains better?