Pedal And Knee Lever 'Set In Stone' Designation

[richard burton]

This forum is big enough to have the clout to stop any further ambiguous pedal/knee lever designations, and should now offer up the definitive nomenclature.

I'll suggest the following for E9 steels:

A pedal raises 5 and 10 a tone

B pedal raises 3 and 6 a semitone

C pedal raises 4 and 5 a tone

D lever drops 2 a tone, and 9 a semitone

E lever drops 4 and 8 a semitone

F raises 4 and 8 a semitone

[Ryan Barwin]

Good idea.

G lever raises 1 a whole tone and 2 a semitone, and drops 6 a whole tone; or raises 1 and 7 a semitone...what do you think?

X lever drops 5 and 10 a semitone.

[Richard Sinkler]

I've seen in the past where the G lever was the 1st and 7th strings raised 1/2 tone (F# - G)

[John Peay]

Good idea.

G lever raises 1 a whole tone and 2 a semitone, and drops 6 a whole tone; or raises 1 and 7 a semitone...what do you think?

X lever drops 5 and 10 a semitone.

I'm in the midst of deciding on my copedent for a new guitar, and have it pretty much under control except this pesky G lever.

If I raise 1 and 7 a semitone, could I also put the 6 lower on here, dropping it a semitone? What about going a full tone on the 1 raise and the 6 drop? And what about half stops? "Copedent paralysis" has set in for sure!

[Clete Ritta]

See, already we're off to a bad start!
Just kidding.
I think this is a great idea! So far richards are all good, and the G lever I vote for 1 and 7. 6 lower would then be a modified G lever?
A forum committee should be appointed to tally the public consensus, polls taken,
and some standard designations made that we can all live with, one step at a time.

Clete

[Bobby Bowman]

My question is why! I'm not saying it's wrong to have a "sorta" standard copedent. But to chisel it in stone, in my opinion, is not a good idea. To me part of the beauty and concept of a pedal guitar is the ability to put varied set ups on it. I think the same way about tunings. Put on there what you want, need and like for your own interpretations.
In general, it makes the guitar no difference what and or where you put or place the pitch changes, or for that matter, what the pitch changes are as long as the guitar is capable of those changes.
I feel that the main reason the pedal steel has not been fully accepted in some venues of music is because "we the steel players" have ourselves caused it with our "mostly" closed minds that it is primarily intened and used for a certain type of music,,,predominantly Country.
Thank goodness there are a handful of steel players that view it differently.
All that being said, let me say that I play mostly country, primarily because that's what I prefer to play. But to limit players, tunings, set ups and so on,,,is wrong and will keep the pedal steel guitar stereo typed as a one or two venue instrument.
BB

[CrowBear Schmitt]

Richard, i adopted that naming years back cause it made sense to me
it would be helpful to have these set as a standard of course, as y'all know, you can take a horse to water but...
what about the many written methods & courses that have been published over the years who name them levers differently ?
what is done is done

[Bobby Bowman]

Richard,
I think I mis-read your post. I still stand to what I said, but after rereading your post, I don't think what I expressed applies to what you were saying.
My apoligies sir.
BB

[Patrick Laffrat]

name pedal and levers by letters? why not?
say what they do ? no of course!
please dear Richard let us dream!...

[Carson Leighton]

I think Richard has a great idea..It would make reading tab a whole lost easier if there was a standard notation system,,just like reading the standard note system...The way I see it anyway...Carson

[Jeshua Lehman]

When I posted my question last week on the names of my pedals and received the rapid answer that there was no standard name; I immediately started to think of a way to standardize the petals names. Although the present letter system has stood for years as Mr. Dixon stated; I believe it is time to change to something that allow a change in the future to be incorporated with no future confusion. I understand this will make some players mad when I suggest abolishing the "A" and "B" pedals, but for this change to be affective I believe it would absolutely be necessary. The first big problem is the number of letters! It is preferred that we stick to one letter per pedal, but I was unable to derive a system at would allow for that. Nevertheless, I challenge someone to make a logical system that does because that is what is needed. The system I have decide would be best would be to go off the theorized change in chordal structure that each pedal makes. At the present time, I was think along the line of Nashville number system. This would help beginner to learn both the function of the pedal and theory at the same time they were playing; thus when they play an augmented progression in tab they notice that they played something like F F+ Dm F#o7 and thus will think of it when playing elsewhere.. So I say all of that to propose a system along the lines of

furthermore, I would foresee have the possibility of overlapping names for C6, E9, and Universal, but I don't foresee that as a problem because it would be know the tuning in which the pedal was used for. It also might help the amount of letters if certain groups of petals also received a name such as the A and B pedal together. It would be easy to call the A and B pedal the "IV" or "4" pedals as that is the chord that it goes to. Also the B and E pedal lever combo would be "V7" or "57". Also, in order to use numbers as the names of the petals and levers we would have to work out a way for it to be incorporated into tab, a few suggestions would be to bold or italicizes the pedal name to differentiate between a pedal and fret position. I will elaborate further after some feedback, but would rather leave it up to ya'll to develop it into a working system as I lack both PSG and music theory experience. I am not very versed in music theory or English, so I would appreciate help on any errors. Thanks. Have a nice day!

[richard burton]

Awww.....
Forget it

[Richard Damron]

No, Richard! Don't forget it!

Yours is an excellent idea which should be persued by all in order to standardize the nomenclature.

Respectfully,

Richard

[Storm Rosson]

Agreed Richard, for a "standard Emmons" 3+5 ,your setup should be THE standard imo too. Any personal changes should be considered just that...personal. I think this would greatly help all starter players and old memory dead codgers like me with tab and other learning aids....Stormy

[Kirk Eipper]

Oh great, here we go! LOL

[Jeshua Lehman]

I believe my haste in posting this morning may have scared some people away from my idea. I am not looking to rapidly change the names we are calling pedals and levers, but rather to start the progression to a logical system. This will take years and will start with the manufactures and individuals writing tab. Nevertheless, I doubt we will see a complete transformation within the next 10 years, and many of ya'll will probably decide not to change. There is nothing wrong with that, it just doesn't make since to establish a system of naming pedals that has no basis and set that is stone so that the same problems are still present when are kids are learning to play in 20 years. When I was working writing up the proposed names this morning I was looking at the A pedal; previously I have only used it when also using the B pedal or F knee lever. I then realized that it creates the minor for the major E. I have now been playing around with that this afternoon. I encourage you to think on this and give input that this problem can begin to fade into the history of PSG.

[Larry Bell]

I love standards
We have so many to CHOOSE from . . .

[ebb]

i think jeshua has a great point about the enlightenment that would come through the clarification of function

just as the nashville number system simplifies superfluous detail to function once you know the tonal centers so could this eventual endeavor do so across tunings

i also believe that richard has a point for the beginner/tab set to make it less ambiguous for them to get immediate results before their life long immersion into the mysteries of why it all works if they so choose

[Brint Hannay]

Where tab is concerned, I am puzzled by the fact that the Musym-Tab system devised by Jimmie Crawford in the Seventies has not become the standard approach. It is impeccably clear, precise, and logical. No "naming" of pedals or levers is used; any note that is to be sounded is indicated by a fret number on the line for its string (as in other tab), and any mechanical contribution to the pitch of that note is indicated by the musical symbol for the amount of mechanical pitch change up or down (#, b, x, bb) next to the number. It's up to the player to know where (and if) that change is available on the guitar he or she is playing.

Where written or conversational verbal communication is concerned, though, having simple "names" for pedal and lever changes is handy.

[Pat Comeau]

I really think that we should have a vote or poll on this...Richard's idea makes alot of sense with beginners reading tabs ect..., i don't see why there shouldn't be a sort of standard numbering or naming of levers and pedals, anything else would be personal or customized setup copedent.


i'm all for it

[Kevin Hatton]

I vote for Richard. Set that in stone.

[Franklin]

Can you have a standard tab for a non-standard instrument?

The Nashville number system is accepted.....I never see two chart writers use the same symbols for everything....We still have to ask, "What does that mean"?

PF

[Larry Bell]

Brint pretty much sums up how I feel about it.

Once you have been playing many years, learning and using the sounds and feel of the instrument, it doesn't matter what you call a pedal or lever -- it's "the one that makes THAT sound" and you recognize and need to use THAT sound. With the D lever example, knowing that without that change on strings 8,6,5,2 give you a Ma7 chord with the 7th tone on the 2nd string. When you press the lever, it becomes a DOMINANT 7 chord. You learn to relate MOVEMENT to MUSIC.

It IS NONVERBAL. It's associating a SOUND with a MOVEMENT. What alphabetical character you use is irrelevant IMHO. Further, I feel that sticking a letter or number on that function may make it more difficult to develop that critical EAR-BODY understanding of what that pedal or lever does.

I've never used the term 'D lever' in conversation with steel players. I would say 'lower your 2nd string'. It is FAR MORE IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT STRINGS ARE PULLED WHAT INTERVAL AND TO KNOW WHAT THAT SOUNDS LIKE AND HOW IT CAN BE USED MUSICALLY.

Another problem I have with 'D Lever' is not only that the name is not descriptive -- doesn't tell you which strings are pulled, IT DOESN'T EVEN TELL YOU WHERE TO FIND IT ON YOUR GUITAR. So, with the 'D lever' system, you have the letter (D), the position (RKR), and the strings (2 and 9) that you have to keep straight. If you train yourself to know when you push RKR the 2nd string lowers 1/2 step you eliminate the arbitrary name from the information you must store.

Learn to think MuSymTab -- as Brint alluded to above. The tab shows the string being raised or lowered. Your brain tells you which pedal or lever raises or lowers that string.

IMHO, a good player should be able to go through each pedal and lever --BLINDFOLDED-- WITHOUT THINKING -- and play EACH CHANGE on your guitar. Pick the string accurately and know how far it pulls. For the E to F lever, play 8 -- raise 1/2 step then play 4 -- raise 1/2 step. Do that for every change on your guitar. Onstage you don't have the luxury of thinking about ANYTHING -- it's all REACTION. You'd better know it WITHOUT THINKING.

Sorry for the rant -- I just hate to see people waste time on something so insignificant. I think using letter designations for knee levers can get in the way of learning.

[Jim Lindsey (Louisiana)]

I've written a lot of tab in my day (E9th), but only for myself and have never written it for anyone else so far (if I'm learning a difficult song or lick, I have a habit of tabbing it so that, if I don't play it for a long time, I can go back and refresh my memory later on if I happen to forget something).

While I do use letters like A, B and C for pedals, I've never really considered trying to label knee levers. Knowing, of course, the functions of my knee levers, when writing tab for myself I use this method: for knee levers I merely use an "up" arrow and how far the string is pulled for raises, or a "down" arrow and how far the string releases for the lowers. A quick example is below:



In the example above, I see the down arrow with "1/2" beside it on the 8th string and I know it's my E to Eb knee lever. Of course, I just write tab in this manner for myself, but it's always worked well for me. I see an up or down arrow with how far the string is pulling or releasing and I immediately know exactly which knee lever it is on my guitar.

[Larry Bell]

Y'know, Jim
That system is very similar to the one Brint and I were describing. In music we have #; X (double sharp); b; bb (double flat). Jimmie Crawford and others adopted those symbols into the MuSymTab system that also included a music staff with std notation. I've always done as you mention -- tab mostly to remember stuff I'd sweated bullets over -- and always used ABC for pedals but indicated up or down (# or b) and how far (X for whole step raise; bb for whole step lower) for knee levers.

The important part is not what symbol you use -- it's learning to see pedal and lever function like we play: by how far it raises or lowers a given string.