I Think I'm Ready For A Volume Pedal, But Which One?

Doug Burling · Post by **Doug Burling** » 10 Apr 2012 1:21 pm

I'm using a Sierra S8 through a Fender Princeton Reverb, but I'm considering a Nashville 112. Which volume pedal do you recommend?

Mike Neer · Post by **Mike Neer** » 10 Apr 2012 1:45 pm

I think the Goodrich pedal (120) is real nice, but the one I have needed a replacement pot not long after I bought it, which put it on my sh*t list. I did eventually replace the pot with one from Tom Bradshaw and it is very reliable and quiet now. I don't know if Goodrich ever straightened that issue out.

Brian Hunter · Post by **Brian Hunter** » 10 Apr 2012 3:38 pm

Just dropped an envelope to Mr. Bradshaw into the mail myself today. My Goodrich was great. Bought it used too but the pot went. The new one should do the trick. I'd like to try a Hilton some day when I can afford it.

Dom Franco · Post by **Dom Franco** » 10 Apr 2012 4:19 pm

I have had many volume pedals over the years, all have worked ok.
My suggestion is to get the lowest profile pedal you can find/afford.

This is especially important if you will be standing. It is very hard to balance yourself with a tall pedal.

If playin with a lap steel, it can be tricky because your steel will be at an angle with one foot on a pedal...

I use a stand with my steel, so the pedal height is not too big a problem.

I used to use a morley (high profile) and when I wore my cowboy boots my leg wouldn't fit under my pedal steel!

Dom

Fred Justice · Post by **Fred Justice** » 10 Apr 2012 4:44 pm

Hilton / Free Shipping

Ron Whitfield · Post by **Ron Whitfield** » 11 Apr 2012 2:44 am

Or, you could go the cheaper pinkie route and use the non-pedal volume knob...

Mark Mansueto · Post by **Mark Mansueto** » 11 Apr 2012 2:56 am

I've never used a Goodrich so I'm wondering what makes this pedal better than others?

Doug Burling · Post by **Doug Burling** » 11 Apr 2012 4:43 am

Mike Neer wrote:I think the Goodrich pedal (120) is real nice, but the one I have needed a replacement pot not long after I bought it, which put it on my sh*t list. I did eventually replace the pot with one from Tom Bradshaw and it is very reliable and quiet now. I don't know if Goodrich ever straightened that issue out.

Mike, Thanks for the recommendation. But if I've got this right, would I need to replace the original pot with one from Tom Bradshaw because the original pot is not quiet? Explain ""quiet". Is the original pot noisy?

Peter Darling · Post by **Peter Darling** » 11 Apr 2012 4:54 am

I think that that is a very fair question.
I used a Jim Dunlop high gain pedal without any problems. Now and again I experienced some weird noises from it and later discovered that I had not plugged in the jack lead properly. My fault! Anyway I was advised that Goodrich was the thing to have so I bought a very little used 120. I needed to manipulate this one more so than the Dunlop and found that the degree of movement needed was indeed adjustable.
They have had problems in the past with pot failure but if fitted with the new one million cycle pot then you should be OK.
They are built like an Abrams Tank and have a nice feel to them. By that I mean it's a big pedal and it's like the accelerator to a JCB or in American terms the biggest damned monster truck you can think of.
About the only thing that can go wrong with them IS the pot unless you accidentally run over it with your steam roller.
Conclusion????? In my opinion....A good well made pedal which is very strong structurally and works well but nothing to really write home to mum about.

Doug Burling · Post by **Doug Burling** » 11 Apr 2012 6:11 am

Ok! Now I'm really confused. I've been reading post/reviews here in the forum history. I'm reading about "Tone Sucking" of the passive volume pedals like the Goodrich. Then I read others saying they like the Goodrich passive pedals because of the tone. On the other hand I read how transparent and clean the Hilton sounds, but others say it sounds sterile. I understand that we all hear things differently. What I can say is the last thing I want is "Tone Sucking". "Transparent" sounds good to me. That is unless someone can explain why "Transparent" is not Good.

The other issue that kept coming up is the fact that the passive pedals use a long lasting battery instead of a power supply that needs to be plugged in. Who wouldn't want the battery over the power supply for convenience. That said, I certainly wouldn't sacrifice tone for convenience.

Can anyone give me the straight poop on all this? Maybe those who have had experience with the Goodrich and Hilton would give their Pros and Cons of each.

Thanks, Doug

Post by **Brad Bechtel** » 11 Apr 2012 6:52 am

This belongs in Electronics, not Steel Without Pedals.

I own a Goodrich L10K volume pedal that I got when I bought my pedal steel. It worked really well, then started becoming scratchy about a year ago. I set it aside and went back to using my old Ernie Ball volume pedal.

When I went to the Texas Steel Guitar Jamboree, I stopped by the Goodrich booth and bought a new potentiometer. I asked plenty of questions and they showed me how easy it was to replace the old pot. When I got home I did just that. It took me less than a half hour all together once I found the proper sized Allen wrench.

I now use the Goodrich instead of the Ernie Ball. I find them both very usable, but the Goodrich seems smoother (in the sense of having the contrast between no volume and full volume).

Tony Glassman · Post by **Tony Glassman** » 11 Apr 2012 6:54 am

If you want a pedal that does not color tone (cut highs) then they're only two answers. Neither is cheap nor do they use volume pots.

- Hilton

- Telonics

Peter Darling · Post by **Peter Darling** » 11 Apr 2012 7:11 am

Yeah Brad I agree with you mate.
It is an electronic problem because the only thing that can make any difference to "tone sucking" etcetera IS the potentiometer . Personally I have had no problems with "tone suck" both with my Goodrich 120 or the Jim Dunlop. I have not experienced "tone suck" from either forms. I think we are able to proceed quite normally without having the horror of "tone suck" as a threat!
Stop worrying so much!
Pete

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 11 Apr 2012 7:48 am

The thing that makes Goodrich better/more popular than the other passive pedals is the heavy-duty housing. I suspect it would survive anything the late Mr. Swayze did to a Timex.

As to Tone Suck, it's usually minimal, but noticeable. For lap steel, I would imagine that the on-board volume pot, being the same circuit, "pre-sucks" the tone, so a passive pedal would have minimal effect (conclusion based not on technical knowledge, just filtered through what I call my common sense, since the pickup already saw a load).

For pedal steel, like others said, there are lots of buffers out there that preserve the tone. My two favorites are the Lil Izzy and the EHX Holy Grail (only acts as a buffer when on).

Or you can avoid the phenomenon with the Hilton or Telonics.

Doug Burling · Post by **Doug Burling** » 11 Apr 2012 7:49 am

Georg Sørtun wrote:
Doug Burling wrote:Ok! Now I'm really confused. I've been reading post/reviews here in the forum history. I'm reading about "Tone Sucking" of the passive volume pedals like the Goodrich. Then I read others saying they like the Goodrich passive pedals because of the tone. On the other hand I read how transparent and clean the Hilton sounds, but others say it sounds sterile. I understand that we all hear things differently. What I can say is the last thing I want is "Tone Sucking". "Transparent" sounds good to me. That is unless someone can explain why "Transparent" is not Good.
See http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopi ... 98#1924998 and other posts in that thread.

From listening to how steelers explain their experiences with passive VPs, I think many get the loading of the PU via VP to AMP badly balanced and thereby get unnecessary "tone suck". With the right balance of loads, "tone suck" caused by passive volume pedals is minimal.

Basically. Low-impedance PUs through high-ohm volume pedal into high-impedance amp-input, affect tone very little if at all. High-impedance (hot) PUs are much more sensitive to load-changes, so when a high-impedance PU is going through high-ohm volume pedals into low-impedance amp-input, high frequency tone gets affected as the player vary the load on the PU with/through the pot. With a low-ohm VP loading a high-impedance PU the "tone suck" is constantly too high.

Any form for high-impedance-input / low-impedance-out buffer-amp or "active" volume pedal (VP with built-in buffer-amp), make the load on the PU a constant high impedance and keep a low-impedance towards the amp-input, so tone doesn't change as the VP is operated. Also doesn't matter much what input-impedance an amp has, when there's a buffer or active volume pedal between it and the PU.

Whether one calls the sound from a constantly-high-impedance loaded (buffered) PickUp "transparent" or "sterile", depends mainly on where one comes from. I prefer "transparent"

Doug Burling wrote:The other issue that kept coming up is the fact that the passive pedals use a long lasting battery instead of a power supply that needs to be plugged in. Who wouldn't want the battery over the power supply for convenience. That said, I certainly wouldn't sacrifice tone for convenience.
Passive volume pedals do not use batteries or any form of power supply. "Passive" means it is "just" a volume potentiometer in a pedal.
The potentiometer must be replaced from time to time because it gets worn down by pedal-pushing or damaged by air-pollution - making it produce "scratch-noises" or uneven volume changes when operated.

Georg, thank's for the information. Now that I've read it, I'm not sure I understand most of it. I'll be the first to admit I'm challenged in this area. Ohms, low impedance, high impedance etc is way over my head. My Sierra S8 has the George L10 and I'm going through a Fender Princeton Reverb Reissue. Do you think I'd be ok with this setup with the Goodrich or would I experience what some call "Tone Sucking"? I'm thinking about trying out a Peavey Nashville 112. Would the Nashville 112 work better?

Thanks, Doug

Mike Neer · Post by **Mike Neer** » 11 Apr 2012 8:01 am

You will be just fine with the Goodrich.

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 11 Apr 2012 8:05 am

Doug, the "Tone suck" is an interaction between pickup and volume pedal, the choice of amp won't affect it. Tone Suck is a slight rolloff of the highs and a certain change in the mids.
Rather than avoiding it, many choose to twist the knobs to find a tone they like.
Or buffers are out there that range from fifty bucks on up. I like my Lil' Izzy buffer, but I can play without it and get a real good tone.

James Hartman · Post by **James Hartman** » 11 Apr 2012 8:40 am

Lane Gray wrote:Doug, the "Tone suck" is an interaction between pickup and volume pedal, the choice of amp won't affect it. Tone Suck is a slight rolloff of the highs and a certain change in the mids.
Rather than avoiding it, many choose to twist the knobs to find a tone they like.
Or buffers are out there that range from fifty bucks on up. I like my Lil' Izzy buffer, but I can play without it and get a real good tone.

Here's some common sense. Concern about "tone suck" can easily get exaggerated beyond reason.

Some folks like buffered pedals, some don't - a subjective choice. Have to experiment and decide for yourself.

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 11 Apr 2012 8:55 am

Agreed. Tone Suck didn't bother all the lap steel stuff from the 30s on up, nor all the pedal steel recorded before the early 80s.
I suspect, rather than being an ACTUAL bother, Tone Suck is something on which folks dissatisfied with their tone can place the blame. But once the new wears off of the buffer or that Hilton pedal, or that Black Box, you still got your hands.

Doug Burling · Post by **Doug Burling** » 11 Apr 2012 9:54 am

Thanks for all your input. The people on this forum are extremely helpful. I think "Tone Sucking" really got my attention and I maid it into more than it is. This really doesn't make any sense since so many people use and love the the Goodrich. Since I do most of my playing sitting, should I go with the L120 or the standard 120? Or maybe it really doesn't make any difference.

Ransom Beers · Post by **Ransom Beers** » 11 Apr 2012 9:56 am

Just buy the Goodrich L120(low profile) & be done with it,you'll be happy you did.

Justin Griffith · Post by **Justin Griffith** » 11 Apr 2012 2:15 pm

Doug Burling wrote:Since I do most of my playing sitting, should I go with the L120 or the standard 120? Or maybe it really doesn't make any difference.

How tall are you/how much room under your guitar? If it is close, I'd go with the L-120.

I used a L-120 for years and once I discovered Mr. Bradshaw's Dunlop pot, it was great.

It looks like the "tone sucking" has been covered in detail, but I have to say this:
Telonics pedals give you the best of both worlds. I know they cost a little more, but they are worth every dime. If you can try one, do it!

Good luck in whatever you decide.

Rick Winfield · Post by **Rick Winfield** » 11 Apr 2012 5:03 pm

I'm with Mr. Neer on this one
Goodrich 120 and Tom Bradshaw pots.
Use my pedal every day for hours, and the Bradshaw pots can't be beat, IMHO
Also
a good used one, that's priced right, can often be found here on the forum
That's how I got mine, several years ago, and never had a problem.
Good luck whatever you decide
Rick

The Steel Guitar Forum

I Think I'm Ready For A Volume Pedal, But Which One?

I Think I'm Ready For A Volume Pedal, But Which One?

Goodrich swell pedals

Volume pedals

Goodrich