Volume Pedal Change

Howard Smith · Post by **Howard Smith** » 20 Jun 2012 10:13 pm

I just swapped my Hilton Lo Pro, for a Goodrich 120 today, just to see how it would affect the sound of my guitar. It doesn't seem to have as much output, and the taper is different, but I believe I like the tone of it better. Don't know what to do.....maybe I need both. Has anyone else had a similar experience? Also I'm not using anything else expect the Goodrich Pedal, no sustain box. I talked to Keith Hilton about this once concerning his pedal, and he told me the digital sustain was built into the my Hilton pedal.

Bud Angelotti · Post by **Bud Angelotti** » 21 Jun 2012 3:57 am

It's not you imagination. Unless I'm mistaken, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, the goodrich doesn't have the same output. The way the string turns the pot on the goodrich, it doesn't allow for full rotation of the pot. Depending on how the string is set, if the pot is turned all the way off, it won't open all the way on. And if it's set to turn all the way on, it won't pedal all the way off, to no volume. The taper on the goodrich can also change depending on what type of pot is in there. Thats just the way it is. This is not to be-little the Goodrich. The Hilton just has more features. Apples & Oranges.

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 21 Jun 2012 4:45 am

Howard, if you read most of the posts here on the subject, both Paul Franklin and one other Nashville guy (I want to say Tommy White, but I am trying to relinquish my motto of "Often in error, seldom in doubt") have reverted to the good ol' Goodrich. I like mine, although I do use a Lil' Izzy in front of it.

Dan Beller-McKenna · Post by **Dan Beller-McKenna** » 21 Jun 2012 6:28 am

Howard, I had exactly the same reaction with the Hilton and Goodrich. The Hilton is a great pedal, but it sounded too edgy for me. I do think I get a better (cleaner?) tone if I put a live pedal of some sort (in my case reverb and delay) between the vp and my amp. It is a buffering issue (which is something you can find a tone of info on by doing a search on the site). I also remember a post from someone who managed to get the full sweep from off to full volume on passive pedal by making the shaft around which the string wraps a larger diameter somehow. I forget how they did this.

Dan

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 21 Jun 2012 6:39 am

Umm, you'd make the brass collar smaller, so it would spin faster as the string moved across it. A lathe (or perhaps a drill and a tight fitting bit) and some sandpaper could do it.
If you have a long-shafted pot, I don't recommend eliminating the collar, a naked shaft is too small, and you can break the internal stops as the pedal range will exceed the range of the pot. I broke stuff so you don't have to.

Dan Beller-McKenna · Post by **Dan Beller-McKenna** » 21 Jun 2012 6:42 am

Ooops! Bigger, smaller, what's the big deal (and this is why I am not an engineer, haha!)

Tommy White · Post by **Tommy White** » 21 Jun 2012 7:17 am

Lane, bingo! You're correct. The collar would need to be smaller.
My Goodrich and old Sho-Bud pedals are adjusted so they just barely turn off, allowing for more use of the center of the pot, which again, to me is the sweet spot. I have plenty of travel and volume without any kind of buffer or preamp.

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 21 Jun 2012 8:07 am

I suppose if someone REALLY wanted full range from his/her pot pedal, I'd suggest replacing the brass collar with a long-shaft pot with the shaft wrapped in duct tape.
If the women don't find you handsome ...

Paul Sutherland · Post by **Paul Sutherland** » 21 Jun 2012 9:34 am

Tommy White uses pot volume pedals, and he does not use buffers (impedance matching devices) or preamps.

More proof that tone is in the hands, not the gadgets.

Howard Smith · Post by **Howard Smith** » 21 Jun 2012 10:16 am

This is real good information ya'll. Being a new player on PGS, you guys certainly make learning this instrument much easier...many thanks.

admin · Post by **b0b** » 21 Jun 2012 11:52 am

I have no need for a volume pedal that goes all the way off. I think it sounds hokey to fade in from total silence.

Ray Anderson · Post by **Ray Anderson** » 21 Jun 2012 2:07 pm

Ditto! b0b.

David Nugent · Post by **David Nugent** » 21 Jun 2012 3:57 pm

Dan...I had the same problem with my Hilton sounding slightly "edgy". Turning back the volume setting located on the base of the pedal smoothed it out nicely.

Sonny Priddy · Post by **Sonny Priddy** » 21 Jun 2012 4:43 pm

I Had A Hilton Traded It For A Pot Pedal I Like The Pot Best. Sonny.

Kenny Radas · Post by **Kenny Radas** » 22 Jun 2012 7:00 am

Are most players using the GL or Bill Lawrence cable with the pot pedals? I would guess the cable would have less effect on the sound with the Hilton or with a buffer??? Anyone like cable that roll off more highs??

Frank Parish · Post by **Frank Parish** » 23 Jun 2012 3:36 pm

Tell you what, I prefer the pot pedals either an Emmons style or the Goodrich whichever is in my seat at the time. I have a Hilton and have always liked it too and it's got more than enough features to make me happy but the old pot pedal just hooks up a lot faster cause you don't have a chord to mess with. I like the way the old pot pedals respond better too and there never was anything wrong with the tone in them. All that said last night a nearly new Derby (Emmons style pedal) just bit the dust and the pot started scratching. Last week the pot got loose in there and I tighted it up only to find it was cutting out so I took it apart and shot some cleaning fluid in it and then a drop or two of some thin oil kinda like sewing machine oil and it was back to working fine. That lasted for one very loud gig downtown and since it was so loud I may have never noticed it was scratchy so I'm back to using the Hilton again. I let a Goodrich electronic pedal get away from me a while back and now I wish I had it back. I used the pot pedals for over 20 years and then all of a sudden it seems there isn't a decent pot to be found! I can say the Hilton has never failed me and Keith even said if it ever did he'd fix it free so it's hard to beat that. He's a good ole boy and will explain it to you if you don't know how it works. I'm not getting rid of the Hilton but I'm back to hunting a good pot for that Emmons style pedal.

Brendan Mitchell · Post by **Brendan Mitchell** » 23 Jun 2012 5:12 pm

Lane Gray wrote:I suppose if someone REALLY wanted full range from his/her pot pedal, I'd suggest replacing the brass collar with a long-shaft pot with the shaft wrapped in duct tape.
If the women don't find you handsome ...

They should at least find you handy .....
Love that show , we only got to see a few in Australia .

Claire Winter · Post by **Claire Winter** » 24 Jun 2012 2:21 pm

As a retired pro audio mfg gal, my opinion is that it is a design shortcoming that doesn't allow the pot to make its full swing on these pedals. Lane is right, making the brass collar smaller increases the pot swing (smaller trailer wheels turn more times per mile!). If I were to design a passive volume pedal, it would allow full pot swing AND have an easily adjustable low stop to set the minimum level.

I'm considering fabricating a design that lets the player select minimum level from the guitar itself (with pedal off, turn a knob to set minimum sound). I'm not experienced enough playing steel to know if this would be desirable--I won't pursue it if y'all pan it. But it seems to me that it would be nice to come in from full off on some tunes, and then with a twist of a knob at the guitar jack set the low end to your "attack" volume and then bring it up from there for max sustain. Seems to me this would allow a very consistent picking volume since this is done with the pedal full "off"--very repeatable. I'd probably put a flip switch to select between full-off and a preset minimum.

Am I one of the few female Red Green fans out there? Hilarious show!

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 24 Jun 2012 2:27 pm

I don't think that makes much sense, since you'd be adding a resistor before the pedal, but would want it to go away when you drop the hammer.
Making a collar sized to allow the full swing makes more sense

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 24 Jun 2012 6:53 pm

Claire Winter wrote:If I were to design a passive volume pedal, it would ... have an easily adjustable low stop to set the minimum level.

That can be done with a pot; you don't need to open it up and futz with the string. I have a Roland pedal with that feature.

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 24 Jun 2012 7:32 pm

b0b wrote:I have no need for a volume pedal that goes all the way off. I think it sounds hokey to fade in from total silence.

For those of us who play more than one instrument, in live performance, all the way off makes sense when we're playing the other instrument(s). (Given that almost no PSG has a volume knob on the guitar.)

Claire Winter · Post by **Claire Winter** » 24 Jun 2012 11:41 pm

I'm not talking of a blocking resistor, Lane, that wouldn't make sense I agree. I'm taking a signal mixing approach instead. I'm going to build up a passive version this week and try it out. I'll let you know the results and describe the signal path.

BTW Bobbe Seymour's site sells the smaller diameter pot collar for full pot swing, for a bit over $12 + SH. I can't make one that inexpensive in my own shop! That way you get full power on and full off as well. (Still feel the mfr should have shipped them that way!) Here's a link: http://www.steelguitar.net/volpedal4.html

steve takacs · Post by **steve takacs** » 25 Jun 2012 1:14 am

No doubt, variety is the spice of life as can be seen here regarding choice of pedal. I prefer the Hilton myself. stevet

The Steel Guitar Forum

Volume Pedal Change

Volume Pedal Change

Good Info Guys

Vol Pedal.

Cable with Pot Pedal??

Hilton for me