Next generation PSG

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 7 May 2005 11:01 am

A different tuning/setup structure, a different mechanical structure with a 30” scale, an alternative pickup arrangement, an on board voltage follower HiZ in (over 5 meg ohms) with LoZ out for line driving capability (and sound card inputs) give the BEAST (see Per Berner’s post re BEAST for detailed photos) brawn and sharp horns, now for the BRAIN for the BEAST = the laptop or smaller computer.

After the signal leaves the PSG via any buffer boxes and the volume pedal, it usually goes to stomp boxes for effects and to a preamp, and other rack items for effects/tuner/, maybe power amp(s) etc. … thence to speakers and/or mixer(s). There are several arrangements possible for the floor and rack items.

The proposal is that the floor and rack items, and associated cables may be done away with by using the computer, and software as the BRAIN/control center. The computer may contain the sound card as preamp, the CD/DVD for tracks … the software may supply preamp, mixer, effects, tuner, backup and recording functions for later editing … then the computer again supplies the wireless communication with the power amps and speakers. The power amps may be incorporated into the speaker cabinets (Active speakers).

The laptop computer would be placed at or in front of the player making controlling the software and reading the screen easy. The screen could be the visual presentations common to BAIB (tuner/sheet music/lyrics/fake sheet/recording), or similar screens from the popular recording/editing software, test software such as FSA, and software effects.

In such a scenario, the PSG is setup for practice, live performance with a group or as a single, as recording/editing studio, CD/DVD burner, connected to the net or to the Active speakers in either a wire or wireless mode (your choice).

At the moment there are certain obstacles to such a setup/approach. The largest one is in the minds of the PSG players … the PSG is problem enough, so is a computer, but the two together are a fearsome thought! The recording studio folk have had to make the transition in their field, the PSG (and other) players will also make the change; when?

Another obstacle is a thing called latency = I do it now and it happens later. The software effects are both many and great in recording/editing programs, but up till now the effects have been applied to tracks that have been recorded. We need some of these at the input to the chain for use in live performance, and for use on the input of the recording. A certain amount of latency appears to be acceptable for the last two functions. High $ recording/editing software is starting to allow use of the Effects at both the input, and after the track(s) are recorded. To do this they have worked at reducing latency to an amount that seems to satisfy their very fussy requirements. The target value is the impossible zero … 2 to 10 milliseconds, even 20 or 30 should work for live performance use with PSG.

The effects protocols have names like VST, DX, ASIO, with ASIO being the latest; ASIO means Audio Streaming Input Output. This is the best hope re the live performance effects and the latency issue at the moment.

This approach lends itself to synth/sampler/MIDI software programs added to the PSG repertoire as a natural progression.

There are some forum folk that have knowledge in the above mentioned areas that could expedite matters, please share data and ideas. Let us build the next generation PSG (if it can indeed be called that).

Karlis Abolins · Post by **Karlis Abolins** » 7 May 2005 1:30 pm

Ed, I have been following your beast topics with great interest. This section on computers is really interesting.
I think it is important to separate those items which are "real time" versus those which are "canned".
The canned items are the BIAB items. Things that you prepare ahead of time and run when you need them.
The real time items are the signal processing functions that we all have to a certain extent. If you look at the computers like the POD XT which are signal processors, you can see that they are optimized for real time operation with minimal latency. The advantage of this kind of computer is that you can hook it up to a variety of devices and keep the "sound envelope" constant. you can hook it up to an amp, direct to a pa, via USB to a computer. Whichever path you use, you will still get the sound you want.
I think for the time being, it is advisable to keep the devices separate. The POD XT type of device is fairly large but self contained. Most computers for the canned software are larger and more complex. I think that will change in the future and we will be able to put a small computer with screen and i-o devices on a rack or leg bracket.

Karlis

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 8 May 2005 8:45 am

KA;
Good input, ..maybe we can take this PSG kicking and screaming into the TODAY world. It is the best controller for the virtual instrument that I can think of, plus has the most flexible beautiful sounds of it's own.

To Les in another thread ... good inputs. I am at present researching the myriad record/edit softwares for suitable application in this project. N-TRACKS has a great FAQ section and flexible performance features re effects.

Post by **Joey Ace** » 11 May 2005 4:55 pm

Ed,
If you don't get more replies here, just ask and I'll transfer this to Pedal Steel.

I understand why you posted here, but I suspect
many of the expermenter-types might miss it here.

Joey[This message was edited by Joey Ace on 13 May 2005 at 12:57 PM.]

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 12 May 2005 6:23 am

Joey;
Thanks for the concern. Do what ever seems to fit. Gestalting the PSG issue would indicate under Pedal Steel ... parsing it would indicate different categories for the associated components. Personally, I lean toward Gestalting it.

Bob L: Right on ... = think ahead![This message was edited by ed packard on 12 May 2005 at 07:25 AM.]

Post by **Joey Ace** » 12 May 2005 1:00 pm

ummmmm.....
I think that means you want it moved....

(where's Bill Hanky when you need him, he could translate)

moving from COMPUTERS to PEDAL STEEL , Good Luck!

Jim Palenscar · Post by **Jim Palenscar** » 13 May 2005 7:14 am

I see this as developing into a PCMCIA deal where you simply slide in the appropriate card (having 3-4 slots) and have choices of sound card, effects processors, recording/playback software, etc- maybe simply a bank of usb devices via a small hub?

Dick Wood · Post by **Dick Wood** » 13 May 2005 9:39 am

Joey,You took the words right outta my mouth. After reading Ed's post I thought it was Bill Hankey in a Ed Packard disguse for a minute.

I miss Bill, where is he these days?

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 13 May 2005 10:03 am

In a copy of Guitar Player magazine several months back, I read that (Mahavishnu) John McLaughlin's current setup consists of a six-string solidbody electric into a laptop computer into the PA. I think it was in an article about a tribute concert at a Hendrix museum opening? I'll try to track the issue down, but obviously there are people already working in this direction, there's bound to be some stuff online somewhere.

(Edit: O.K., I found it):

"currently I'm using a Godin LGXT with Synth Access. I began using the Godin while recording my DVD, which we'll get to, and I was so happy with its MIDI capabilities that I had to try it with Shakti. It's the best MIDI controller I've ever used. Routing it into the laptop through a Roland GI10 MIDI interface there are no glitches, and only about 1.5 milliseconds of latency. It's unbelievable!
'What software are you using?'
On the road, I'm running Logic Platinum 5 with Spectrasonics Atmosphere and Emagic ES2 synthesizer and EXS-24 sampler plug-ins on a Mac Titanium PowerBook. It's a very powerful combination that allows me to emulate many of the sounds I'd gotten previously using hardware, while also providing the architectural flexibility to create lots of fantastic new sounds."
http://www.guitarplayer.com/archive/0204/0204_features4.htm [This message was edited by David Mason on 13 May 2005 at 03:33 PM.]

Jack Francis · Post by **Jack Francis** » 13 May 2005 10:21 am

Ed
I read your posts and invision you sitting there in the mountains (keeping cool) like that statue of the thinker! VERRRRY COOL STUFF!

[This message was edited by Jack Francis on 13 May 2005 at 11:22 AM.]

Brent LaBeau · Post by **Brent LaBeau** » 13 May 2005 12:52 pm

Your concept for combining the pc utilities into a "next generation" psg isn't that far fetched.
My practice setup consists of:
my Sho~Bud LDG >
volume pedel >
M-Audio mobil pre (not ideal but very accessable) >
IBM thinkpad running Native Instruments Guitar Rig>
headphones or powered monitor or Fender Bassman combo

The M-Audio box set to "very low" latency is pretty dead on, and it's usb!
Just imagin a pci card into a MOTU type AD/DA converter.
All of which can be whittled down to about the size of a couple of packs of smokes.
And I get the entire virtual amp rack with too much flexability!
Sometimes I spend more time finding cool tones than I do finding the cool licks.

Rev.Brent LaBeau

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 13 May 2005 1:27 pm

If I had my druthers..

Pick up to a modified black box
with volume pedal I/O back into the BB
and then a built in A to D @ 192khz 24 bit.
That digital signal would leave via 1384 Firewire to the computer.

Why a moded black box? Because even today I don't think we can duplicate it's positive loading effects on the pick with any digital solution.

Even in the best high end studios tube pre-amps are much sought after for warming the sound before A to D conversion.
As in they spend $8000 for a 2 channel tube preamp...

Yes I did see some earlier thoughts on the preamps,
but I disagreed on the basic philosophy as being too dry.

Now if IN ADDITION to the above you also had a infrared or other mini laser source pick up reading EXACT string vibrations,
and then can blend the two signal types I would say go for it.
This also could be used for midi triggering.

Firewrie has huge through put, since you can run multi chan. 192k if needed.
In the practical realm this will be invisable compared to output mediums.

USB is quite strong, but not enough through put for bi directional at 192k.

Once in the computer a basic small audio mix / recording app will work.

But it must be multi thread multi tasking, since BIAB and such
and midi must be able to work on top,

Next for use with BIAB as a writers environment you would want a sound controler app that accepts BIAB midi file output. while the audio is still running below.
Out put the mid file from BIAB,
and open in the app without losing the existing sound control for the steel.

Another issue is running that app and switching to and from biab,
they should NOT be fighting for the midi interfaces access. Or at least playing nice.

You would need plug ins as
amp emulators,
dynamics control
enviromental controls ( rever delay)
psyco acoustic control
and automatable paremater control and patch changing.

Program patch changes from a mid foot or hand controler,
and individual paremter controls from a touch screen mounted on the steel or other type of controlers.

Master levels might be controled by midi also , and might, obviate the need to the volume pedal direct from the mod'd BB,
but then again it might not have the feel prefered.

Still some technical nabob might also be able to program multiple pedal curves and make them as presets.

You could have one patch with the midi volume patched after the amp emulation , but before the compressors and reverb.

And next patch before all but the A to D. feeding the amp emulation, but also a side chain for clean sound.
it should alow a minimum of 4 separate poarallel routings of the steel sound in stereo (4in to 8out chan) mixed to two or one out.

It needs to be a very advanced app to switch between various routing patchs fast and cleanly.

Or do partial routing changes with out affecting other parts.

Firewire out to a master control pre-amp D/A
into the poweramp of the day
out to full range speakers 20hz-20khz.

And on OS-X on a Mac...

TALL enough order...
[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 13 May 2005 at 02:30 PM.]

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 18 May 2005 3:23 pm

OOOOOHHHH what DD said! And some think an interpreter is needed for my “stuff”. Yes DD, a VERRRRY (shades of Carl Dixon) TALL order. I wonder if Thai food makes one think that way? The day will come, but for now, I have a more modest take on this project and the attendant finances.

It would satisfy me if preamps, stomps, tuners, rack effects and the likes were replaced with a little “onboard” box, and software, with the computer on the dashboard as the control element. This won’t replace the $$$$ recording functions, but will cover the basic performance effects, backup tracks, and allow poor man’s recording to laptop/tablet. Follow this with wireless from computer to active speakers. How close is this?

I spent two days with a chap from Atmel. Atmel makes the wafers/chips for digital wireless. They are working very diligently to design and market digital wireless technology that will do everything from turning your home lights on and off, to devices that would allow control of remote amplifiers/speakers, and more.

Yesterday, I went down the mountain to Phoenix, and Fry’s electronics. Surprise … there I ran across a little box that comes close to fitting the bill for an on the PSG interface between axe and computer. It is the M-AUDIO FAST TRACK …. A USB 1.1 device (no batteries or wall warts), 5 ½” X 3 ½” X 1 ½” with the large sides flat and blank for easy use with velcro to attach to the instrument. XLR mic in, ¼” instrument or line in (choose via switch), RCA lines (LR) out, headphone out, and a couple of other controls. The software contains many more effects than I would need for instant access. ASIO is
included. US$ 99. I got one to mess with.

First issue is that the input impedance is such that it tone sucks the PSG pickup, so the Voltage follower buffers are still a must have for me. Next nasty is that it is XP only at the moment. I would expect that fire wire, and Mac units would follow; in any case, a start.

The BEAST’s two pickups with two coils each are set up to be switched series aiding, series opposed, parallel aiding, parallel opposed, and blended as well as having the on instrument (in the neck) buffer amps, so the M-AUDIO goodie (guitar/mic recording interface) mates well with it. I really think that it is superfluous as the on board buffers might as well go direct to the sound card’s inputs if the computer is close to the PSG.

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 18 May 2005 4:25 pm

Latency isn't really a function of processor speed or bandwidth. To determine the MIDI pitch of a vibrating string, you need to know its wavelength. You don't really know the wavelength until 1/4 of the wave has arrived.

The early pitch-to-MIDI converters waited for the full wave (or two!) before they started the conversion. This accounts for the dismal latency of those devices, especially on low notes. Roland gradually improved the technology to its current state, which has a noticable but bearable latency.

But you still need to process each string separately. Separating the three notes of a changing chord to 3 MIDI notes in real time is far beyond the capabilities of software, even today. But it's not impossible to handle pitch-to-MIDI on 3 different signals concurrently. It's one of those problems that's easily solved by throwing processor power at it.

A Sarno Black Box? You'd need a dozen of them, and I really don't see the point if your goal is digital electronic music from your pedal steel.

Band-in-a-Box? Hey, I like it as a practice tool, but not for serious music. It's a toy. If I had a real good steel-to-MIDI coverter, I'd want to drive great samples like the Vienna Symphonic Library with it.

Ed's dashboard is a cool idea, but it would be obsolete a few years after it was built. I like the model we have today, where instruments are built to a more timeless specification, and audio equipment evolves around them. The Sierra pickup slot can accomodate trendy devices without compromising the universal integrity of the instrument.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/Hotb0b.gif" width="96 height="96">Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Sierra SD-12 (Ext E9), Williams D-12 Crossover, Sierra S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop 8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster (E13, C6, A6)[This message was edited by b0b on 18 May 2005 at 05:29 PM.]

J D Sauser · Post by **J D Sauser** » 18 May 2005 11:41 pm

b0b said:

So, maybe it's into the picu up that you'd have to incorporate the "device"?

Still, I think that "effects" and sound/tone precessing is of limited universal appeal. What however may in my opinion become attractive at least to the newer generations of players is a mechanics free PSG, which would have on the fly programmable changes... this would also eliminate pedal combinations limitations in JT.

... J-D.

MUSICO · Post by **MUSICO** » 19 May 2005 1:57 am

Hi, JD

We are a wierd lot in Spain. I thought the same thing as you.

I use a Roland VG88 that can do separate variable pitch shift on each string. It would be possible to have two hexaphonic pickups on a steel and pedals that control pitch shifters. You could have as many copedants as you wanted...as many splits...even strange things like "if pedal A is down then lever z raises string one...but if pedal A is not down then lever z lowers 2 and raises 5".

The pitch shifting technology is there. Lots of the Crosby Stills Nash tyoe harmony you hear nowdays is just one person and a TC Helicon Voice harmonizer....it can even let you sing and automatically provide 3 part harmony of your own voice morphed into a tenor and a female soprano.

Jeremy Williams
Barcelona Spain

P.S. When you fancy a weekend in Barcelona, just call. I have a nice attic with sea view and a PSG that needs oiling and tweaking.

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 19 May 2005 2:20 am

I see the midi source pick up and the audio as two separate things.

A laser split into 10 partial beams,
bouncing of the strings into 10 close mounted recptors, in somthing like a horshoe pickup / hand , wrist rest would work for that.
Then sampled and read as frequency.

Midi and sound shouldn't be handled in the same I/O loop.

Even with all the configurations of the pickups, I suspect it is still only going out as one or two signals.

I would vote for two discrete signals in parallel.
One for each pickup, or a post buffer blending system.

Or 4 outs, bass and treble for each pick up
for a 4 channel matrix. sub mix to two.
Think of it as a pickup for Boowah, and the bottom octave,
and another for the Whining highs.
It would adress the issue of "string separation" better.

Even with the buffers for each pickup output, I would still want BB's to warm the sound before the M audio.

The M audio is a decent box, and with ASIO it is not only for XP, but can connect to other software if the ASIO driver is provided.

It should be available on the website.

I mostly agree BIAB is light weight, but it also has some powerfull arrnaging abilities, coupled wioth a high end sequncer audio editor program.

If you go with a touch screen on the computer and a softweare based suite of sound plug in's most any thing is possible.
Protools Free on a fast laptop would work.

I would add amp farm, Waves renaisaince compressor , Renaisaince EQ and delay and Lexicons or TC's reverb programs.

A basic verions os Qbase would also work, though I could make better patchs with The other set up.

The one issue is speed of switching sounds.
Larger patchs take more time to load.

Yes Ed the Thai food DOES make my brain function better.
That's one reason I am heading back down there.

If I had my druthers...

Each string would have a 4-6 inch long
4 magnet poles placed to the resonant points of the string.
with individualy calcukated windings for each pole
along the strings picking area length.
Hello, Jerry Wallace!

Or 48 different pickups to chose from in matrix for getting the best possible tones from EVERY string....
Picking position and level, buffer each simply then blend it to any of 1, 2 or 4 outputs.

In this manner the soud of each string can be optimised for the players touch and tone preferences.

D5

[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 19 May 2005 at 04:16 AM.]

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 19 May 2005 3:23 am

I really like the idea of a steel guitar with 48 pickups, a dozen Black Boxes and a dozen laptops with 4 or 5 sound programs each. Who do I send my check to? And can I arrange for Buddy or Paul + a programmer + a sound engineer to sleep in my closet for a few years to teach me how to play in the first place, because there sure as tootin' won't be room for them in the house with all this stuff in here? Maybe we could teach a robot to play the damn thing too, and I could just kick back in my easy chair and listen! Oh wait... I already HAVE all these CD's....

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 19 May 2005 7:34 am

Gee Dave Mason, I guess that you don’t like a real challenge … be careful, one or more of those guys may come out of the closet!!!

I also think in terms of the PSG being used for several distinct functions:

There are those that just want a bit of reverb, delay, chorus, and maybe a RAT (overdrive/fuzz) type effect to flavor their sound for real time playing; maybe a tuner also.

There are those that would add BIAB/JAMMER or similar for practice/performance setup, maybe add a software edition of Virtual Sound Canvas. These same would probably also like the CD tracks available and near at hand.

There are those that would add a sequencer … POWER TRACKS for the BIAB folk, and $$$$ ones for the recording buffs.

There are those that would want MIDI for accompaniment or recording or ?. Lots of good downloadable stuff available for free. MIDINOTATE is a program that works well for the download/edit/play of MIDI files.

And there are those that would want the PSG available as MIDI output (individual string pickups). I use the ROLAND GR1 with the six string GPK2 pickup, and slide it beneath the strings that I want MIDI’ed.

In each of the above conditions, there is an external box or more of some sort … racks, separate cabinets as in the GR1, the CD player, the computer, etc. To me it makes sense to have these items in front of the player, and within reach; hence the “dashboard” comment.

Once upon a time there were no software effects, no BIAB/JAMMER/sequencer/software synth-sampler functions/multitrack-editable pgms, and no MIDI. Then separate boxes/hardware were born for those functions. Now many of these have become software and reside on a laptop computer. The computer has a display and has clickable controls for the on screen functions. The computer(s) is/are the “dashboard” and belong in front of, and in reach of the player in each case.

Since several pgms may be running at one time, the 17” wide screen is desirable, or for the cases where pgms might interfere with each other, two computers. For those that would still want their pet boxes within reach, put them in the “dashboard” tray.

What I am using for my dashboard (to hold the computer) is a serving tray just larger than the computer’s footprint. It is in front of me on the PSG. I have not decided how to attach it yet … maybe something that extends down to the pedal bar.

There are some CPU speed limited items in the above mentioned functions. It was not that long ago that CPU speed was a fraction of what it is now, and memory was priced out of sight. The point is that speed will continue to increase, software will continue to decrease in price and increase in function, more hardware functions will convert to software, new and wonderful software functions will be created, and all will be computer controlled; time to get the computer on the dashboard.

Re processing speed and frequency recognition: Shannon’s law, if I recall correctly, states that it takes two samples of a wave to determine its frequency … I believe this was for a sine wave in an unknown frequency range. The PSG does not produce sine waves except in mixed form = complex wave of limited/known harmonic content. If we know the string, we know the frequency range to be expected. If we know the frequency range to be expected, we can create an algorithm that shortens the frequency calculation time. CPU speed will help with the algorithm, but the sampling rate is too low to be of concern re CPU speed.

How can we know what string to use in the freq’ range calculation? The individual string pickups will supply this info. Sensing neck position will allow further efficiency from the algorithm.

For the pitch shift crowd, we will need to know the changes (pedals and levers) that are activated. This is not a problem. There was a chap (CHRIS?) in WA state that used the activated changes recognition, individual string pickups, and neck location functions to make a device that wrote tab for what you played while you were playing it. Jimmy Day was involved in trying it out.

Re the laser type pickups … I recently obtained a laser level from Sears & R that gives a laser line instead of a point. This type of thing can be used as the light source for the pickup … individual string photo devices for sensors. It could probably be done with LEDS, lenses, and photo sensors. Having equal spacing between the strings at both ends of the neck would allow moving the optical (or other type pickup) to any desired location. Optical allows other types of string materials (other sounds) if one desires.

It appears that there a few folk on the Forum that think beyond the convention of the day, and some are DOING some of the experiments. I see the computer as the great control element of the future for the PSG. Placing it front and center of the instrument seems logical.

For the standard guitar player, having it on a mic’ stand would work. The issue would be the need to be wired to the computer and moving around. The PSG player does not have this problem as they are “sedimentary” so to speak.

A number of years ago on the Forum we made the case for the PSG as the ideal controller for the “virtual instrument” … I still believe it.

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 19 May 2005 1:30 pm

“sedimentary” LOL good one.

My logic of the matrix pick up system is similar to the individual midi string pickups.
it is also tuning in the best possible tone or tones from each very different string.

Just look at how much different the
s12 vs s6 vs s1 are on a given 12 string.
Or a C6 neck for example.
String separation or definition is important for many in the analog domain, befoe it goes digital.

A very different set of tonal characteristics.
I bet you get less mud from a low B,
using some left pick up for body
but more right pickup for clarity
and little of the middle two.
Tweak it an leave it.

Thinking Left, Center Left, Center Right, and Right poles on the pickups.

String 1 would want more left and less right and maybe a blend of the middle two to be sweet and warm etc.

Once you have made your general settings it's not like you must work them all the time.

Nor that you must use only that set of settings, after the buffers you could have 2-3 taps and set up 3 different tones to outputs,
then just decide I want this group or that group.

And the have a stereo Black Box to add warmth and then into the M-audio etc.

If we really are talking optimising the outputs of a steel,
we need to consider the great range of available strings
and their physical compositions and frequency ranges.

I can't believe they are all best served by a pick up
optimised across all their ranges ensemble,
versus being specific to each strings needs.

A simpler version would be 2 poles with magnet,
per string but each able to slide to position and be fixed.
Not as solid moving wires to die etc.
but maybe cheaper and a triffle more flexible in some ways.
[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 19 May 2005 at 02:32 PM.]

Al Marcus · Post by **Al Marcus** » 19 May 2005 2:11 pm

Let's start with something I would like to see for now... Carl Dixon, where are you??. It is what he has been working on and suggested.

For me I would like 5 pedals and 5 knee levers which with a switch on each one to give me the tuning possibiltie of 10 Pedals and 10 knee levers. All on a S12 or D10 neck.

Now that seems reasonable and simple enough for a start. Then put a Midi on it and a regular pickup with a switch to use either one, when one desires.....al

.

------------------
My Website..... www.cmedic.net/~almarcus/

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 21 May 2005 8:09 am

Glad to see Dave M’s impedance explanation in another thread; if these types of things are said often enough their meaning re the PSG tone will be better understood by many, if not all. The only difficulty is that “technical” talk is like putting a target on your back … not comfortable for the thin skinned or the intolerant.

The voltage follower op amps solve the high frequency loss (tone sucking) from pickup loading on the BEAST. They can be either built in, or applied at the output jack(s) in the form of a small box.

OK, in this thread we have arrived at the point where the effects are software, and the control component = laptop computer or smaller, is mounted by or in front of the player. If “dashboard” seems an in appropriate description, try “heads up display”. Tommy D has a nice arrangement for attaching the POD to the PSG leg. I will use something like that for attaching the heads up display to the PSG, but I think that I want the screen in front of me.

There are a couple of “effects” that would be nice for the PSG, and that to my knowledge, do not exist yet.

The first is a sustain control. The FSA-FEA Emails showed the harmonic content vs. time for the BEAST in the form of 0, 2, 4, 8 seconds after exciting the strings. They showed the amount of amplitude loss for the different parts of the frequency spectrum as a function of time. The sustain software effect/plug in would/could eliminate (modify to suit) the change in tone vs. time. Oversimplified, the correction looks like a variable slope vs. time filter with a moveable pivot (starting point) also based on time. Nice C++ job for someone.

The other would be the “emulator” for the different types of steel … there are lots of cabinet/amp/speaker/pickup/guitar emulators but as far as I know, none for steel; so many things to do, so little time.

To date, I have developed my C69 tuning/setup, the PST hardware for integrating the tuner/changer into a single unit, a quick change string attachment method, an extended 30” scale, a rail mount system for the neck/fret board, a method to keep rods from falling out when unloaded, the pickup impedance buffer circuitry, a heads up display and control panel to put the software for effects plus the BIAB/JAMMER/sequencer/tuner/CD player etc. in front of the player. The bridge element is changeable for tone/sustain variation, a simple string planarity correction device if this device is used at the players left. There are two pickups on the 30” scale, and the changer/tuner is at the players left (all tuning adjustments are done with the fingers that do not have picks on them). Stomp boxes and rack mounted preamps/effects and associated cables are gone.

The remaining changes are the drop in LCD programmable neck/fretboard (external 2nd monitor for the computer), and the wireless communication from the computer to the active speakers to eliminate more cables.

The pedal/changer 5 for 10 mechanical switching will be left for the chap that started it … as will the tube/valve devices; again, I lean more toward the software/computer solutions now that I have the mechanical changes that I want in the instrument.

Most of the above is not dreamware, it has been reduced to hardware. The underside of this PSG instrument still looks like the underside of the old Olivetti typewriter … someday … someday …

AL M: I use the ROLAND GR1 & GPK2 that allow MIDI and blending the MIDI and standard mag' pickups on the BEAST.

DD, see what I got for eating too much THAI food? Happy Goong to you!

What is missing in the above described contraption?

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 21 May 2005 8:48 am

A sustainer is basically a controlable compression expansion envelope.

If your attack is a bit above threshold,
then the release can be set so that it
gives the impression of sustain.
We do the same with our volume pedals.

There are several compressor patches with high programability
for attack, decay, sustain, release
and some do expansion as well.

There are also several that are multi band,
each band programable to fit that frequency ranges characteristics.
TC Electronics has some, Waves has C4 and several others

You can change the band cross over freq,
amount of boost or lowering in a band
as well as what happpens over a threshold you can set.
does it boost or cut and how much and at what rate of change etc.
Plus there are optical vs elctro style presets.

Which plug in you choose depends on the software platform you choose.

Need more info.

I have been making my own Papaya salads since I got back.
Bien picant!
2 weeks and I am back down there.[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 21 May 2005 at 09:53 AM.]

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 21 May 2005 9:01 am

DD: After doing the FSA work on Tone/Sustain, I find that the compression, even with band control, does not maintain the harmonic content found in the first half second of excited string(s), hence the slope vs. time comment. This would be different on a per instrument basis for emulating different steels (favorite vintage sounds) also.

I don't know what I would do if i did not have the PSG thing to amuse myself with ... might have to do the Pacific Rim thing again!

Did you get to the "monkey temple"?