Why can't the Emmons people build a Legrand
that sounds like a PP? They can't or will
not?
J.C.
What's the deal?
Moderator: Shoshanah Marohn
While it it might be technically possible, I doubt it would be worth the effort. The small (IMO) difference in sound, just wouldn't be reflected in their sales. They are back-ordered as it is.
Why rock the boat; from a purely business standpoint?
Finally this; NO Matter what they did, EVEN if the sound could be proven to be EXACTLY the same, some would always maintain,
"it don't sound like a P/P". That simply is human nature.
carl<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by C Dixon on 01 May 2003 at 09:02 AM.]</p></FONT>
Why rock the boat; from a purely business standpoint?
Finally this; NO Matter what they did, EVEN if the sound could be proven to be EXACTLY the same, some would always maintain,
"it don't sound like a P/P". That simply is human nature.
carl<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by C Dixon on 01 May 2003 at 09:02 AM.]</p></FONT>
-
David Doggett
- Posts: 8088
- Joined: 20 Aug 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
Maybe I'm wrong, but I would have thought they gave it their best effort. And they certainly had access to all the secrets of the P/P sound, did't they? I thought the consensus was that the P/P sounds better because the changer and fingers are more solid and so absorb less energy from the strings, leaving them with more volume, more sustain, and better harmonics. All-pull changer fingers are thinner, and they are split, both of which drain off vibrational energy. And possibly being up against all those nylon adjusters dampens things a little. I would imagine if you took identical bodies, necks, nuts, tuners and pickups, and dropped in the different changers and undercarriages you'd get a different sound in each. Probably pretty much the difference we hear between Emmons P/Ps and Emmons all-pulls. That would be an interesting experiment - maybe somebody's already done it.
There are a number of reasons offered as to why the P/P has "THAT" sound.
IMO, the reason is mostly because all fingers are spring loaded hard against the cabinet. Thus, the string's vibration is transmitted from the string, to the finger (raise AND/or lower) to the cabinet.
EVEN though some fingers may be moved away from the cabinet; during drops (or half-tone raises), there are enough strings left to maintain this "body contact".
In essence, we have the same situation as Rick bakelites (an other guitars) where the strings are brought up thru the body; rather than be attached to a tail piece.
All pull guitars, by their nature, do NOT have this body contact. IE, the changer fingers float; not only at rest, but when raised OR lowered.
Carter Guitars have an option called BCT (Body Contact Technology) that permits the changer fingers to be held against the body. I am told it makes a decided difference in the sound. Its sound has been "likened" to the P/P.
The jury is still out on this premise I think. But who knows? IF true, then that pretty much proves my thesis.
carl
IMO, the reason is mostly because all fingers are spring loaded hard against the cabinet. Thus, the string's vibration is transmitted from the string, to the finger (raise AND/or lower) to the cabinet.
EVEN though some fingers may be moved away from the cabinet; during drops (or half-tone raises), there are enough strings left to maintain this "body contact".
In essence, we have the same situation as Rick bakelites (an other guitars) where the strings are brought up thru the body; rather than be attached to a tail piece.
All pull guitars, by their nature, do NOT have this body contact. IE, the changer fingers float; not only at rest, but when raised OR lowered.
Carter Guitars have an option called BCT (Body Contact Technology) that permits the changer fingers to be held against the body. I am told it makes a decided difference in the sound. Its sound has been "likened" to the P/P.
The jury is still out on this premise I think. But who knows? IF true, then that pretty much proves my thesis.
carl
Here's a little story about how well an Emmons PP does with the string vibrations.
I had Mike Cass do a complete restoration on my 75PP last year. I have owned the guitar since it was new and it was my main "player" for most of the time since I got it. Being as it's a Wood bodie W/wood necks, it took quite a long time for Mike to get good "spraying" weather in Nashville do re-do the lacquer finish.
I was playing a Sierra S-12 8/5 while my PP was being done and had gotten so use to the single neck guitar that any thoughts of a "neck selector switch" had long since left my brain.
After I got my PP back (came out great too)
and was playing it again, this happened.
I went into my music roon and sat down to play some on the E9th neck. I was only getting about 20% of the volume that I should have been hearing. Checked the amp, pedal, cords...everything was fine. Great tone, just no volume to speak of. Checked under the guitar to see if the jack was bent or touching something...nope, all ok.
Then it jumped up and hit me in the face...."the neck selector switch"!!!!!!!
I had been playing the C6 neck the last time I was playing her and had left it on that neck!
So even with the "switch" set for the C6th neck and me playing on E9th, I was still getting great tone, just no volume.
I don't know if an "all pull" guitar will do that or not. The "all pull" guitars I own are S-10's and there's no switch on them!
JE:-)>
------------------
Emmons D10 8/4 P/P -75'
Fessenden SD-10 3/5
Session 400
Nashville 400
Bandit 112
I had Mike Cass do a complete restoration on my 75PP last year. I have owned the guitar since it was new and it was my main "player" for most of the time since I got it. Being as it's a Wood bodie W/wood necks, it took quite a long time for Mike to get good "spraying" weather in Nashville do re-do the lacquer finish.
I was playing a Sierra S-12 8/5 while my PP was being done and had gotten so use to the single neck guitar that any thoughts of a "neck selector switch" had long since left my brain.
After I got my PP back (came out great too)
and was playing it again, this happened.
I went into my music roon and sat down to play some on the E9th neck. I was only getting about 20% of the volume that I should have been hearing. Checked the amp, pedal, cords...everything was fine. Great tone, just no volume to speak of. Checked under the guitar to see if the jack was bent or touching something...nope, all ok.
Then it jumped up and hit me in the face...."the neck selector switch"!!!!!!!
I had been playing the C6 neck the last time I was playing her and had left it on that neck!
So even with the "switch" set for the C6th neck and me playing on E9th, I was still getting great tone, just no volume.
I don't know if an "all pull" guitar will do that or not. The "all pull" guitars I own are S-10's and there's no switch on them!
JE:-)>
------------------
Emmons D10 8/4 P/P -75'
Fessenden SD-10 3/5
Session 400
Nashville 400
Bandit 112
-
David Doggett
- Posts: 8088
- Joined: 20 Aug 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
Carl's theory may be better than mine (or both these theories may contribute to the P/P sound). But the part of his explanation about "body resonance" puzzles me, and I'd be interested if anyone has some actual experimental data on this puzzle (as opposed to my mental speculations).
A vibrating string has very little sound on its own. Acoustic stringed instruments work by transfering the string vibration through the saddle and bridge to the top or resonator of the instrument (the thin wood of fiddles, guitars, and mandolins, the drum head of banjos, and the thin metal resonator of Dobros and Nationals), and this resonator's vibration may be altered with various designs of body shape, sound hole, etc. But there is a tradeoff. A thinner more flexible resonator drains off the vibrations more quickly and so is louder, but has less sustain (the banjo) and less rich overtones. Fiddles also have little sustain and weak overtones when plucked, but make up for it with constant bowing. Guitars strike a compromise and have less volume than a banjo, but more sustain and richer overtones (which add to the timbre).
Now an instument with a magnetic pickup can get no direct electric sound from the wood of the top or body (try waving a piece of wood over the pickup). There is no acoustic sound, only the electric signal created in the magnetic field by the movements of the metal strings. When they invented electric guitars they figured this out quickly and started making solid body instruments with more sustain and richer overtones. You get this because the solid wood body vibrates or resonates little, leaving most of the vibrational energy in the strings. But of course you can't hear didly with the electricity turned off.
Hollow-body electric guitars are a mixture of acoustic and electric sound. But the acoustic sound is very soft and is quickly lost as the volume is turned up. The electric sound of hollow-bodies has less sustain, but a more mellow sound (fewer high overtones). My theory is that the electric sound gains nothing from the resonance of the wooden top, but is altered to its more mellow tone by having the high overtones and some sustaine drained off by the top of the guitar. We hear that the different resonances of different top and body materials and shapes change the electric sound, but my theory is that they do so by subraction rather than addition.
If that theory is correct, the best sustain and richest overtones would come with the nut and saddle firmly embedded in a block of diamond, or a big solid piece of metal. In a wood solid-body guitar, the rock maple gives good sustain and rich overtones because it is very hard and rigid and resonates less and drains off less vibrational energy. A softer piece of solid wood will absorb more vibrations and the electric sound will be darker or more mellow (fewer high overtones) and will have less sustain.
The counter theory, which most steelers seem to believe, is that different bodies and necks not only can subtract from the tone, but can also add to it if the body resonates and feeds back some of that vibration to the strings, sort of like what happens when a bass reflex speaker boosts the lows around the cabinets resonance frequency.
I find that hard to believe. That kind of resonance would seem to be only at whatever frequency the body resonated at, and would cause a peak there that would probably cause undesirable and uneven tone at different frequencies.
So the subtraction theory is that if holding the fingers of a P/P against the body improves the tone, it does so my preventing any vibration of the changer from subtracting vibrational energy from the strings, not because the body adds resonance.
I'm not exactly sure how to prove whether lack of subtraction or addition of resonance improves tone in solid-body instruments. I guess if lack of subtraction is the mechanism, then if everything else is held equal, a thicker rock maple body (less ability to resonate and subtract vibrational energy) will sound better than a thin one which can "resonate" more but will thereby subtract vibrational energy and sound worse (at least as far as the electric signal goes). This would be a tricky experiment, because a thicker soft wood body would hurt tone by absorbing more vibrational energy. Making the soft body thinner might improve tone by absorbing less without actually adding any resonance. So this depends on having very hard wood.
It's a tricky problem, and maybe nobody cares - it's almost a philosophical or semantic issue.
But there are probably some sound physicists out there somewhere that know the answer. 
Okay, just read Jim's post and am now thoroughly confused. How did vibrations get from his E9 stings through the wood body to the pickup on the C6 neck?!? What metal made the C6 magnetic fields vibrate?!?
<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by David Doggett on 01 May 2003 at 04:25 PM.]</p></FONT>
A vibrating string has very little sound on its own. Acoustic stringed instruments work by transfering the string vibration through the saddle and bridge to the top or resonator of the instrument (the thin wood of fiddles, guitars, and mandolins, the drum head of banjos, and the thin metal resonator of Dobros and Nationals), and this resonator's vibration may be altered with various designs of body shape, sound hole, etc. But there is a tradeoff. A thinner more flexible resonator drains off the vibrations more quickly and so is louder, but has less sustain (the banjo) and less rich overtones. Fiddles also have little sustain and weak overtones when plucked, but make up for it with constant bowing. Guitars strike a compromise and have less volume than a banjo, but more sustain and richer overtones (which add to the timbre).
Now an instument with a magnetic pickup can get no direct electric sound from the wood of the top or body (try waving a piece of wood over the pickup). There is no acoustic sound, only the electric signal created in the magnetic field by the movements of the metal strings. When they invented electric guitars they figured this out quickly and started making solid body instruments with more sustain and richer overtones. You get this because the solid wood body vibrates or resonates little, leaving most of the vibrational energy in the strings. But of course you can't hear didly with the electricity turned off.
Hollow-body electric guitars are a mixture of acoustic and electric sound. But the acoustic sound is very soft and is quickly lost as the volume is turned up. The electric sound of hollow-bodies has less sustain, but a more mellow sound (fewer high overtones). My theory is that the electric sound gains nothing from the resonance of the wooden top, but is altered to its more mellow tone by having the high overtones and some sustaine drained off by the top of the guitar. We hear that the different resonances of different top and body materials and shapes change the electric sound, but my theory is that they do so by subraction rather than addition.
If that theory is correct, the best sustain and richest overtones would come with the nut and saddle firmly embedded in a block of diamond, or a big solid piece of metal. In a wood solid-body guitar, the rock maple gives good sustain and rich overtones because it is very hard and rigid and resonates less and drains off less vibrational energy. A softer piece of solid wood will absorb more vibrations and the electric sound will be darker or more mellow (fewer high overtones) and will have less sustain.
The counter theory, which most steelers seem to believe, is that different bodies and necks not only can subtract from the tone, but can also add to it if the body resonates and feeds back some of that vibration to the strings, sort of like what happens when a bass reflex speaker boosts the lows around the cabinets resonance frequency.
I find that hard to believe. That kind of resonance would seem to be only at whatever frequency the body resonated at, and would cause a peak there that would probably cause undesirable and uneven tone at different frequencies.
So the subtraction theory is that if holding the fingers of a P/P against the body improves the tone, it does so my preventing any vibration of the changer from subtracting vibrational energy from the strings, not because the body adds resonance.
I'm not exactly sure how to prove whether lack of subtraction or addition of resonance improves tone in solid-body instruments. I guess if lack of subtraction is the mechanism, then if everything else is held equal, a thicker rock maple body (less ability to resonate and subtract vibrational energy) will sound better than a thin one which can "resonate" more but will thereby subtract vibrational energy and sound worse (at least as far as the electric signal goes). This would be a tricky experiment, because a thicker soft wood body would hurt tone by absorbing more vibrational energy. Making the soft body thinner might improve tone by absorbing less without actually adding any resonance. So this depends on having very hard wood.
It's a tricky problem, and maybe nobody cares - it's almost a philosophical or semantic issue.
But there are probably some sound physicists out there somewhere that know the answer. Okay, just read Jim's post and am now thoroughly confused. How did vibrations get from his E9 stings through the wood body to the pickup on the C6 neck?!? What metal made the C6 magnetic fields vibrate?!?
<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by David Doggett on 01 May 2003 at 04:25 PM.]</p></FONT>-
Chip Fossa
- Posts: 4366
- Joined: 17 Sep 1998 12:01 am
- Location: Monson, MA, USA (deceased)
WOW, David...
Just finished your post, and undisputably,
you sound like you know what you are talking about.
I don't know, but I play a U-12 Williams, keyless, all-pull
git-box.
It sounds real great to my ears.
I used to have an S-10 Emmons P/P years ago.
It, too, sounded great.
I just don't get it. What all the micro-fuss
is all about P/P versus all-pull.
I really can't hear much of a difference.
Great, informative post, however.....
Chipper<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by CHIP FOSSA on 01 May 2003 at 07:37 PM.]</p></FONT>
Just finished your post, and undisputably,
you sound like you know what you are talking about.
I don't know, but I play a U-12 Williams, keyless, all-pull
git-box.
It sounds real great to my ears.
I used to have an S-10 Emmons P/P years ago.
It, too, sounded great.
I just don't get it. What all the micro-fuss
is all about P/P versus all-pull.
I really can't hear much of a difference.
Great, informative post, however.....
Chipper<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by CHIP FOSSA on 01 May 2003 at 07:37 PM.]</p></FONT>
-
Rick Aiello
- Posts: 4701
- Joined: 11 Sep 2000 12:01 am
- Location: Berryville, VA USA
- Contact:
Bakelite and cast aluminum seem to enjoy some popularity<SMALL>best sustain and richest overtones would come with the nut and saddle firmly embedded in a block of diamond, or a big solid piece of metal</SMALL>
Maybe a good jeweler could cut the nut and bridge from the diamond body of your "Gem".
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR><SMALL>
But the part of his explanation about "body resonance" puzzles me, and I'd be interested if anyone has some actual experimental data on this puzzle (as opposed to my mental speculations).
</SMALL><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A nice discussion on body resonance can be found here ....Harmos Sound
------------------
<font size=1>www.horseshoemagnets.com </font><FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Rick Aiello on 02 May 2003 at 07:42 AM.]</p></FONT>
-
Peter
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR><SMALL>Why can't the Emmons people build a Legrand
that sounds like a PP? They can't or will
not?</SMALL><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why don't you ask the experts?
EMMONS GUITAR Co.
Ron Lashley.Jr - President/Owner
PO Box 2044 * 1771 E. Webb Avenue
Burlington, North Carolina 27216-2044
Tel: 336-227-2782
Fax: 336-222-1911 www.emmonsguitar.com
email: ronlashley@emmons.com
------------------
<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#000000">Peter den Hartogh</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#0000ee">Fender Artist S10</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 color="#004400">Remington U12</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#ff0000">Hilton Volume Pedal</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#8e236b">Gibson BR4 lapsteel</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#008800">Guya "Stringmaster" Copy</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#000000">MusicMan112RP</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#880000">Peavy Rage158</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0> - My Animation College in South Africa</FONT>
that sounds like a PP? They can't or will
not?</SMALL><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why don't you ask the experts?
EMMONS GUITAR Co.
Ron Lashley.Jr - President/Owner
PO Box 2044 * 1771 E. Webb Avenue
Burlington, North Carolina 27216-2044
Tel: 336-227-2782
Fax: 336-222-1911 www.emmonsguitar.com
email: ronlashley@emmons.com
------------------
<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#000000">Peter den Hartogh</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#0000ee">Fender Artist S10</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 color="#004400">Remington U12</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#ff0000">Hilton Volume Pedal</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#8e236b">Gibson BR4 lapsteel</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#008800">Guya "Stringmaster" Copy</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#000000">MusicMan112RP</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0 COLOR="#880000">Peavy Rage158</FONT>-<FONT SIZE=0> - My Animation College in South Africa</FONT>
-
Tony Prior
- Posts: 14522
- Joined: 17 Oct 2001 12:01 am
- Location: Charlotte NC
- Contact:
Yes..I think Peter is mining Gold here and C. Dixons comment above also defines the situation.
I have stopped by to see Ron Jr. a few times since his return to the Emmons factory and I would think that Ron Jr. would say something along these lines. This is not a Ron jr. quote...
"Great Idea, but I can't afford the time to experiment right now as we have way to many orders to fill"...
In business this is a wonderfull problem to have...
TP
Oh yea..what if Ron Jr. is doing some experimenting behind the scenes and is just keeping it quite at this time..Uhmm..one never knows...
I have stopped by to see Ron Jr. a few times since his return to the Emmons factory and I would think that Ron Jr. would say something along these lines. This is not a Ron jr. quote...
"Great Idea, but I can't afford the time to experiment right now as we have way to many orders to fill"...
In business this is a wonderfull problem to have...
TP
Oh yea..what if Ron Jr. is doing some experimenting behind the scenes and is just keeping it quite at this time..Uhmm..one never knows...
-
Johan Jansen
- Posts: 3328
- Joined: 4 Aug 1998 11:00 pm
- Location: Europe
- Contact:
Don't get me wrong, I love the PPsound, but if :
There was an All-pull guitar first, and now we lived in a PP guitar decade, wouldn't we be haunting for the all-pull sound?
Don't we all always have the idea the retro-thing is better: 58 Fenderguitars
Old Standel Amps, 57 chevy
Yeah, that good ol'times
Just a thought...
There was an All-pull guitar first, and now we lived in a PP guitar decade, wouldn't we be haunting for the all-pull sound?
Don't we all always have the idea the retro-thing is better: 58 Fenderguitars
Old Standel Amps, 57 chevy
Yeah, that good ol'times
Just a thought...
-
Steve Stallings
- Posts: 2752
- Joined: 9 Sep 1998 12:01 am
- Location: Houston/Cypress, Texas
Well....
I've played both and like both of them. My D10 Legande II with BL710s is one honking guitar.
------------------
God Bless,
Steve Stallings
www.thenightshiftband.net
I've played both and like both of them. My D10 Legande II with BL710s is one honking guitar.
------------------
God Bless,
Steve Stallings
www.thenightshiftband.net
-
Steve Stallings
- Posts: 2752
- Joined: 9 Sep 1998 12:01 am
- Location: Houston/Cypress, Texas
<SMALL>Carter Guitars have an option called BCT (Body Contact Technology)</SMALL>
I have no connection with Carter and no longer own one, but I do know that this is not an option on current guitars. It is standard and an integral part of their design.
------------------
God Bless,
Steve Stallings
www.thenightshiftband.net
-
David Doggett
- Posts: 8088
- Joined: 20 Aug 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
Chip, I don't know diddly about what I am talking about. I'm just thinking out loud here.
As for the different sound of the P/P, here's my experience. Last summer on vacation I stopped in at Bobbe Seymour's and played every one of the dozen or so pedal steels he had, one after the other, through the same volume pedal, amp and settings. They all sounded roughly the same with minor variations, except for the two P/Ps that were there. They simply had more response, better string separation, richer overtones, more sustain, and just an undescribable sizzle to the sound. It was very noticeable to me in the side-by-side comparisons, and I would think it would be to anyone else playing those guitars.
Now maybe changing the amp settings and just getting down on the volume pedal a little more would make the difference less noticeable to a listener (I can't necessarily tell if someone is playing a P/P on recordings, maybe not even live). But when you play them you can easily feel the difference in sound response (of course you can also feel the clunky action of the P/Ps, but that's another story).
Based on that sound, I bought a rare S12 extended E9 P/P just to have around for my own enjoyment. I don't play it out yet because it has a very limited setup (3 and 4) and the extra two strings don't even have any raises or lowers on them, and I've had a hard time finding parts and the time to get it set up right. I don't even know yet what I want the final copedent to be, and I might even want it to be a universal. But it will be a real joy to play someday. Looks nice too, derby red. <FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by David Doggett on 02 May 2003 at 09:43 AM.]</p></FONT>
As for the different sound of the P/P, here's my experience. Last summer on vacation I stopped in at Bobbe Seymour's and played every one of the dozen or so pedal steels he had, one after the other, through the same volume pedal, amp and settings. They all sounded roughly the same with minor variations, except for the two P/Ps that were there. They simply had more response, better string separation, richer overtones, more sustain, and just an undescribable sizzle to the sound. It was very noticeable to me in the side-by-side comparisons, and I would think it would be to anyone else playing those guitars.
Now maybe changing the amp settings and just getting down on the volume pedal a little more would make the difference less noticeable to a listener (I can't necessarily tell if someone is playing a P/P on recordings, maybe not even live). But when you play them you can easily feel the difference in sound response (of course you can also feel the clunky action of the P/Ps, but that's another story).
Based on that sound, I bought a rare S12 extended E9 P/P just to have around for my own enjoyment. I don't play it out yet because it has a very limited setup (3 and 4) and the extra two strings don't even have any raises or lowers on them, and I've had a hard time finding parts and the time to get it set up right. I don't even know yet what I want the final copedent to be, and I might even want it to be a universal. But it will be a real joy to play someday. Looks nice too, derby red. <FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by David Doggett on 02 May 2003 at 09:43 AM.]</p></FONT>
-
Jackie Anderson
- Posts: 512
- Joined: 17 Jun 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Scarborough, ME
David, that's good thinking, and if you haven't already mined some of the older threads pursuing this and related issues, I'm sure you will find them engrossing.
You may be right that a lot of an electric instrument's overall sound results from "subtraction" of some of the vibrations that the strings are producing. However, there is a substantial following for the concept of "co-vibration:" that other parts of the instrument do influence the "coloration" (I am trying to avoid the "T" word) of the overall sound (including the sound picked up by a magnetic pickup from the string) by vibrating together with the string. I suspect that this involves reinforcing some parts of the sound as well as subtracting some other parts.
Apart from the "coloring" of the instrument's sound, you are surely right that sheer energy loss is an important factor in its sustain and volume, and in steels we prize lots of both. However, there is a lot of confusion about whether energy loss is minimized by using a body material that is "hard," or "dense" or "heavy." I think the key characteristic is modulus of elasticity, i.e the ratio of a material's stiffness to its mass. The benefit of a high "modulus" is that a material returns a higher percentage of the energy fed into it. Ivory, for example, has a fairly high modulus, which obviously works well in billiards.
Yes, hard rock maple has a high modulus of elasticity, and happens to be "hard" and "dense" or "heavy;" but some of the spruces have a much higher modulus, and are obviously "light" and not "dense" or "heavy" -- and make great sound boards. Ergo,it isn't "hardness" or "density" or "heaviness" (I think we mean "mass") that results in less loss of a string's energy. In fact, it seems more likely that mass, per se, may absorb a string's energy.
Swamp ash is in between maple and spruce in both physical respects, and many like the combination of its volume/sustain potential and its sound coloration effects. Aluminum has a high modulus and is "light" but doesn't seem to provide much coloration. My aluminum and swamp ash Fender 2000 does that same trick where you can hear the "non-selected" neck -- but that's only when I bother to turn on the amp, which I often don't do for practicing, because it is so loud (and sweet) sounding by itself!
But guess what has a much, much higher modulus of elasticity than any wood or metal, and is "lighter" than any of them, and is reputed to sound pretty fine? Yep - carbon fiber composite.
Interestingly, Reece has told us that MSA has produced differences in the "color" of the sound of the Millenium by changing the makeup of the core, which I suspect means using various woods. Various models of Sage Harmos' instruments use different woods at the ends of a very light and inherently stiff carbon fiber structure which apparently help produce different sound characteristics. Although the equation is complex, it seems clear that achieving the sounds we want from steel guitars involves both "energy conservation" and "co-vibration."
You may be right that a lot of an electric instrument's overall sound results from "subtraction" of some of the vibrations that the strings are producing. However, there is a substantial following for the concept of "co-vibration:" that other parts of the instrument do influence the "coloration" (I am trying to avoid the "T" word) of the overall sound (including the sound picked up by a magnetic pickup from the string) by vibrating together with the string. I suspect that this involves reinforcing some parts of the sound as well as subtracting some other parts.
Apart from the "coloring" of the instrument's sound, you are surely right that sheer energy loss is an important factor in its sustain and volume, and in steels we prize lots of both. However, there is a lot of confusion about whether energy loss is minimized by using a body material that is "hard," or "dense" or "heavy." I think the key characteristic is modulus of elasticity, i.e the ratio of a material's stiffness to its mass. The benefit of a high "modulus" is that a material returns a higher percentage of the energy fed into it. Ivory, for example, has a fairly high modulus, which obviously works well in billiards.
Yes, hard rock maple has a high modulus of elasticity, and happens to be "hard" and "dense" or "heavy;" but some of the spruces have a much higher modulus, and are obviously "light" and not "dense" or "heavy" -- and make great sound boards. Ergo,it isn't "hardness" or "density" or "heaviness" (I think we mean "mass") that results in less loss of a string's energy. In fact, it seems more likely that mass, per se, may absorb a string's energy.
Swamp ash is in between maple and spruce in both physical respects, and many like the combination of its volume/sustain potential and its sound coloration effects. Aluminum has a high modulus and is "light" but doesn't seem to provide much coloration. My aluminum and swamp ash Fender 2000 does that same trick where you can hear the "non-selected" neck -- but that's only when I bother to turn on the amp, which I often don't do for practicing, because it is so loud (and sweet) sounding by itself!
But guess what has a much, much higher modulus of elasticity than any wood or metal, and is "lighter" than any of them, and is reputed to sound pretty fine? Yep - carbon fiber composite.
Interestingly, Reece has told us that MSA has produced differences in the "color" of the sound of the Millenium by changing the makeup of the core, which I suspect means using various woods. Various models of Sage Harmos' instruments use different woods at the ends of a very light and inherently stiff carbon fiber structure which apparently help produce different sound characteristics. Although the equation is complex, it seems clear that achieving the sounds we want from steel guitars involves both "energy conservation" and "co-vibration."
-
David Doggett
- Posts: 8088
- Joined: 20 Aug 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
Jack, the co-vibration you talk about seems to be the body resonance other people speak of. There may be something to that. I guess between having a body that absorbs string vibrational energy because it is soft, and a body that absorbs some energy because it is stiff and thin enough to vibrate a little, the latter would be preferred because maybe it can return some of that vibration back to the strings. In an acoustic instrument you are not really hearing the strings vibrate, you are hearing the top vibrate. Transducers and piezzo electric pickups, etc., can pick up that vibration from the top. But with magnetic pickups you hear nothing from the top or body, only the electrical signal generated by the magnetic fields in response to the metal string vibrations. I just have a hard time imagining that any resonance of the body of a solid body with magnetic pickups would do anything but cause unwanted dead spots and loud spots in the frequency spectrum.
But I'm puzzled about the spruce. That is a soft wood and is used for acoustic guitar tops because it is light and flexible with adequate strength. The Spanish also use cedar for tops. But that is completely different from a solid body situation. I would think spruce or any other soft wood would make a poor solid body electric instrument. People started using rock maple for solid bodies because it is one of the hardest of the hard woods. Are you thinking about spruce in piano soundboards? I think by design a piano soundboard does vibrate and contribute to the volume, it is an acoustic instrument.
I'm still trying to figue out Jim Eaton's post, and now you say you can also get sound from the pickups of the neck not being played. It's hard for me to imagine how the virating body wood creates vibrations in the pickup magnets of the neck not being played. Maybe there is some electrical signal from the pickup in the neck being played that is bleeding through the wiring and getting to the amp even though the neck selector switch is flipped. I wonder if this would happen if you disconnected the wires to the pickup of the neck being played?
But I'm puzzled about the spruce. That is a soft wood and is used for acoustic guitar tops because it is light and flexible with adequate strength. The Spanish also use cedar for tops. But that is completely different from a solid body situation. I would think spruce or any other soft wood would make a poor solid body electric instrument. People started using rock maple for solid bodies because it is one of the hardest of the hard woods. Are you thinking about spruce in piano soundboards? I think by design a piano soundboard does vibrate and contribute to the volume, it is an acoustic instrument.
I'm still trying to figue out Jim Eaton's post, and now you say you can also get sound from the pickups of the neck not being played. It's hard for me to imagine how the virating body wood creates vibrations in the pickup magnets of the neck not being played. Maybe there is some electrical signal from the pickup in the neck being played that is bleeding through the wiring and getting to the amp even though the neck selector switch is flipped. I wonder if this would happen if you disconnected the wires to the pickup of the neck being played?
-
Rick Aiello
- Posts: 4701
- Joined: 11 Sep 2000 12:01 am
- Location: Berryville, VA USA
- Contact:
Picture a guitar where the pickup IS NOT attached to the body at all ... say it is suspended over the strings.
If the pickup remains perfectly still and the strings are set into motion ... the resulting disturbance in the magnetic field would generate a signal.
If the strings remain perfectly still and the pickup is moved back and forth ... the resulting disturbance in the magnetic field would generate a signal.
In real life ... it is the SUM of the magnetic field disturbances caused by the vibrating strings AND by the pickup's movements relative to the strings that produce the actual signal leaving the pickup.
<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Rick Aiello on 02 May 2003 at 01:35 PM.]</p></FONT>
If the pickup remains perfectly still and the strings are set into motion ... the resulting disturbance in the magnetic field would generate a signal.
If the strings remain perfectly still and the pickup is moved back and forth ... the resulting disturbance in the magnetic field would generate a signal.
In real life ... it is the SUM of the magnetic field disturbances caused by the vibrating strings AND by the pickup's movements relative to the strings that produce the actual signal leaving the pickup.
<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Rick Aiello on 02 May 2003 at 01:35 PM.]</p></FONT>
-
David Doggett
- Posts: 8088
- Joined: 20 Aug 2002 12:01 am
- Location: Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
Rick, any movement of the pickup in relation to the strings caused by body resonance has got to be negligible. First of all, the strings being attached through the changer to the body, they would move with the same body resonance, so there might be no relative movement between the strings and pickup. You can knock on the body and hear all the strings. But if you damp the strings with your hand, you don't hear anything. It's the strings vibrating you hear with the knock, not the body vibrating the pickup under the strings. But it is an interesting idea, moving the pickup and not the strings. It's just hard for me to imagine body resonance could move the pickup enough to be heard.
I just figured that when I had my little "brain fade" with the selector switch being on the C6th neck and being able to still hear the E9th neck, that it was the vibrations from the E9th neck going through the body of the guitar and causing the C6th strings to vibrate like the drone strings on a Sitar.
JE:-)>
JE:-)>
-
Rick Aiello
- Posts: 4701
- Joined: 11 Sep 2000 12:01 am
- Location: Berryville, VA USA
- Contact:
The body of a guitar will resonate in concert with the strings, of course, but the tonal envelope (complex wave function) will be quite different for a 0.016 plain steel string and a 15 lb Ricky bakelite body ...<SMALL>First of all, the strings being attached through the changer to the body, they would move with the same body resonance, so there might be no relative movement between the strings and pickup</SMALL>
When I'm putting together one of our horseshoe magnet pickups ... I'll attach the hot and ground directly to the jack and tap my fingernail on the magnets ... just to make sure I have it grounded to the mounting plate correctly ... And I get quite a "thump" ...<SMALL>It's just hard for me to imagine body resonance could move the pickup enough to be heard</SMALL>
<font size = 2> And I'm not referring to "microphonic pickups" here ... </font>
The pickup isn't even in the guitar ... just the movement of the non-magnetic ferrous pole pieces disrupting the magnetic field produced by the external flux source. The bobbin is secured tightly to the magnets .. which illustrates that even the most minute vibrational movement of a ferrous pole piece can disrupt the magnetic field and produce a signal.
Granted I only have non-pedal steel guitars with very powerful pickups ... but these basic ideas should apply to any electric guitar ...
I was just tryin' to help explain the phenomenon you were asking about ...
------------------
<font size=1>www.horseshoemagnets.com </font><FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Rick Aiello on 02 May 2003 at 08:34 PM.]</p></FONT>
-
Damir Besic
- Posts: 12261
- Joined: 30 Oct 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Nashville,TN.
- Contact:
-
Louie Hallford
- Posts: 994
- Joined: 28 Jan 1999 1:01 am
- Location: denison tx
This is the scenario I picture as to why no manufactuer builds a steel guitar that sounds like the old push pull.
My quess that many of them try.
My other guess is that even if they built one that did sound like the original PP most PP lovers would still be looking for old PP's because they would never accept that the new ones sound as good as the old ones.
Another quess is that if the Emmons company started building the PP again it still would not be accepted as being as good as the originals. Even if it was people would prefer the push pulls because of mechanics.
My last thought is that regardlesss of the brand, if Buddy Emmons played it, it would sound like an old PP... So to solve all our steel playing displeasures I think we should all play and sound like Buddy Emmons, and not worry so much about brands. Johhny Cox or someone else smarter than me will have to take it from here and tell all of us how to do that. Another advantage of all us sounding like Buddy is that we could get Buddy out of retirement and let him do all the playing. The rest of us could then quit playing and buying guitars and save a lot of money. Builders also would benefit as they would not have to get up and go to work every day and take chances on losing their money trying to build guitars that sound like old push pulls.
Don't worry,your mind is OK. All that didn't make sense to me either when I read reread it..<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by louie hallford on 17 May 2003 at 08:04 AM.]</p></FONT><FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by louie hallford on 17 May 2003 at 08:06 AM.]</p></FONT>
My quess that many of them try.
My other guess is that even if they built one that did sound like the original PP most PP lovers would still be looking for old PP's because they would never accept that the new ones sound as good as the old ones.
Another quess is that if the Emmons company started building the PP again it still would not be accepted as being as good as the originals. Even if it was people would prefer the push pulls because of mechanics.
My last thought is that regardlesss of the brand, if Buddy Emmons played it, it would sound like an old PP... So to solve all our steel playing displeasures I think we should all play and sound like Buddy Emmons, and not worry so much about brands. Johhny Cox or someone else smarter than me will have to take it from here and tell all of us how to do that. Another advantage of all us sounding like Buddy is that we could get Buddy out of retirement and let him do all the playing. The rest of us could then quit playing and buying guitars and save a lot of money. Builders also would benefit as they would not have to get up and go to work every day and take chances on losing their money trying to build guitars that sound like old push pulls.
Don't worry,your mind is OK. All that didn't make sense to me either when I read reread it..<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by louie hallford on 17 May 2003 at 08:04 AM.]</p></FONT><FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by louie hallford on 17 May 2003 at 08:06 AM.]</p></FONT>
-
Gene Jones
- Posts: 6870
- Joined: 27 Nov 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Oklahoma City, OK USA, (deceased)
- Contact:
As "someone" has said...ignorance is bliss, so in line with that, I have never "lusted" after a PP!
Gene
www.genejones.com
Gene
www.genejones.com