Peterson Sweetners

[John Sims]

Thanks b0b!!! That's what I figured but wanted to be sure...Also, thanks for your sweetners!

[Mick OGrady]

Guys, attached is the list of PSG Sweeteners in my Stroboplus HD.

There are several options for E9 guitars.

Am I correct in assuming I would use SE9 for open strings and SP9 for pedals and levers?


Thanks,
John in Ohio

I just received mine yesterday and was told by somebody that the SE9 was for open strings and SP9 for levers and pedals. I noticed the SP9 worked on open strings and levers as well. Somewhere on the Peterson site it says that the SE9 is for a 10string steel (i.e. without pedals and levers) The Peterson site is pretty functional for loading and organizing the "sweeteners" and other settings the way the user wants them.

[Samuel Phillippe]

Geez guys my head is getting dizzy.....thank god I'm not at your level playing with pros.
I tune 440 and tweek the strings that sound out with my acoustic guitar playing partner. He strikes a chord and then I tweek to it.

But let me clearify something..... I DO NOT play psg for the general public yet nor with a band so PLEASE DON'T take my comment wrong. If I get good enough to do that, THEN I will review this subject matter which is all very interesting.

Thanks to all of you for giving me a real education on this forum.

Sam

[Jack Stoner]

The SE9 is for the open strings on a Pedal Steel Guitar. The SP9 are the pedals and knee levers (that were common 30+ years ago when Jeff Newman documented them). These are based on the E's tuned to 442.5 Hz. The OE9/OP9 is the original Newman settings from the late 70's/early 80's and the E's are tuned to 440 Hz.

My JE9, available to download from the Peterson library, combines the SE9/SP9 into one program and also has knee lever settings that are common today but were not back when Newman created his charts. Additions include 1st string F# to G# raise, 2nd string D# to E raise and several more. I also have JKL which has the 4th string F# raise and 4th string D# lower, that couldn't be in the JE9 as those notes are on other strings with different offsets. Not a big deal as these rarely need tuning on most guitars. E-mail me if you want my documentation on these.

My JE9 works in the older StroboPlus HD, new StroboPlus HDC and in the StroboClip HD.

[Alan Bidmade]

Jack's settings are the best, by far. perfect on my Ben-Rom.

[Ken Metcalf]

Since Peterson doesn't show their offsets or temperaments. I decided to check them again since I have recently switched and started using U12 and P12 on a new StroboStomp.
I tune the Es to U12 and spin over to cents on a StroboPlus and click on that.
By dialing the cents until the strobe stops I can tell what the offsets are. Correct?
I like the U12 temperaments but it appears to me that the Es are roughly 12 cents sharp.
It sounds good with a band but it is really sharp?
I like the Peterson for quick tuning on the band stand but it is kind of a head scratcher for me. :/

[John Sims]

Ken, I shared & uploaded my Jeff Newman tuning E9 for U12 on Peterson's site. I named it NEW. This is my first attempt at making a tuning for a strobe tuner, and my first strobe tuner (StroboClip). I love it!. I've always used a Boss TU-12H.
Here's what I did from lowest to highest strings, and it sounds great on my steel (cents):
B0- +8
E1- +10
G#1- -4
B1- +8
E2- +10
F#2- +6
G#2- -4
B2- +8
E3- +10
G#3- -4
D#4- -4
F#4- +6

[b0b]

Listing strings from low to high makes my brain hurt!

[John Sims]

Listing strings from low to high makes my brain hurt!

I just read them off of the web site slider left to right. Sorry b0b, take 2 Tylenol and call me in the morning...

[Tucker Jackson]

I hate that Peterson took Jeff Newman's free tuning chart, rebranded it as "sweetened" and then hid the underlying numbers from people like it's their trade secret. Jeez.

But we have the info we need right here on B0b's site, at least for one flavor of their pedal steel sweeteners. There are charts for E9, C6, and E9/B6. It think these are the main ones that people are selecting in the Peterson tuner (i.e., E9 has E's set at +10 or 442.5 Hz)

https://b0b.com/wp/copedents/jeff-newma ... charts/#e9
.

[Tucker Jackson]

I like the U12 temperaments but it appears to me that the Es are roughly 12 cents sharp.
It sounds good with a band but it is really sharp?

It might be more like +10.

That E note (and therefore, the E chord) is only sharp at the nut. We don't play much at the nut. Once you put the bar on the strings and start playing at different frets, your ears will automatically tell you to roll that bar back slightly below the fret line. This puts your root note in tune with the chord the band's playing.

[John Sims]

Thanks Tucker! Now to do a custom sweetener for the pedals and KL's...Jack Stoner's are right on the money.

[Tucker Jackson]

Great!

And for anyone confused about this whole issue of WHY Newman set the E's sharp of 0 at the nut, here 'tis. It's about centering the whole system. Some chords are sharp of 0, others flat, but you can put the bar on the fret line and it will be closer to where you need the bar to end up (after automatically, subconsciously making a micro-adjustment by ear).

The Evolution of the Newman Chart

Newman originally had the E9 chart set with E's at +0.
If you then walk through and tune the rest of the intervals close to JI, as he did, it automatically puts the C# note far flatter than where the E note is set. In most positions, this isn't a problem... but in the A+F position, that really flattened C# is the root note of the chord-- and you have to make the root note match the band (rather than, say, having to match the 3rd or some other tone in the chord).
So the A+F chord is far flat of the E. You just have to push the bar a little higher above the fret line to play it in tune. Nature of the beast with sweetened tunings.

And the AB-position "A" note was purposely set flatter than E to build in an assumption for cabinet drop. As in, you step on AB and the E string annoying drops several cents... but lands in line with the 'A' note because you've anticipated this and purposely tuned the "A" note a little flat to where you think E will land. Boom! You've 'tuned out' cabinet drop for the pedals-down position.
So you have these three positions spread out below the nut like this -- and your other chord positions of all types sit between the two ends of this spectrum:


[tab]

Older Newman (Peterson) Chart with E’s at +0


C#(-16)(A+F position) A(-6) E(+0)
-------------------------------------------------------------
^
The Nut(+0)
[/tab]
Note how the above positions, taken as a whole, are not centered over the nut – if you put the bar over the fret marker, the E position will match the band, but most other positions won't. In particular, tuning this way would require some serious bar movement above the fret line to get A+F in tune with the band. Works fine to do that, but it merely looks odd to be so far to the right of the fret marker. So odd, that a lot of players just wouldn't do it (or more likely, didn't understand that they needed to do this and it was normal). Instead, they religiously put the bar ON the line and pronounced the tuning system was 'out of tune.'

Newman responded to criticism and created a new chart below where everything was just moved to the right by an equal amount (which lands the E’s sharper than 0... he decided that +10 looked about right, but there's nothing magic about that number. Adding +8 or +6 across the board would have worked fine too to shift the whole tuning a little to the right):


[tab]
Newer Newman (Peterson) Chart with E’s at +10


C#(-6)(A+F position) A(+4) E(+10)
-------------------------------------------------------------
^
The Nut(+0)
[/tab]
Everything is just slid to the right by 10 cents to more closely center the entire tuning over the nut (and therefore, fret lines). If you put the bar directly on the fret line, that puts the bar closer to the actual correct spot where your ears will then have you micro-adjust the bar to (well… obviously, not closer for the open E position, but closer for the tuning as a whole).

With this version of the chart, people stopped complaining as much that they struggled and sounded flat, especially when using the A+F position.

All the internal relationships remain the same between the two charts, so all the intervals and chord positions sound exactly the same as before… provided you now put the bar in a slightly different spot. Except for the obvious differences at the nut, a blind player who does all of his bar intonation by ear would not be able to tell the difference between the two charts. The new chart was created for those of us who are sighted… it’s all about how the bar looks in relation to the fret marker. You could achieve the same result by going the opposite way and use the original chart... and get that better fret-marker visual alignment thing by ungluing you fretboard and shifting it slightly to the left. The point is, all this is about better visuals that help you do better bar placement rather than actually creating a better-sounding tuning by putting the E's sharper than before.

Also, this entire issue of 'tuning E's sharp' is only somewhat related to cabinet drop... only somewhat driven by the fact that the system has already incorporated an internal setting to address cabinet drop (setting A's flatter than E's). Even if there were zero drop on a given guitar (and the A note in the pedals-down position could therefore be tuned to the same offset as the open E) the need would still exist to center the tuning. The big driver of wanting the E's set sharp of the line is the A+F position's perpetual flatness; any tuning system that is not straight-up will always put the A+F position far flat of open E. It's therefore smart to center the tuning by starting the tuning process with the E's sharp of zero by a certain degree.

[Ryan Bramlett]

My JE9, available to download from the Peterson library, combines the SE9/SP9 into one program and also has knee lever settings that are common today but were not back when Newman created his charts. Additions include 1st string F# to G# raise, 2nd string D# to E raise and several more. I also have JKL which has the 4th string F# raise and 4th string D# lower, that couldn't be in the JE9 as those notes are on other strings with different offsets. Not a big deal as these rarely need tuning on most guitars.

Jack, I appreciate these changes, but did you also make some tweaks to Newman's setup for tuning the individual strings? I'd like to download something new for my tuner (i've used SE9 and SP9 for about a year now) because i had NO idea these user tunings were out there!

[Ryan Bramlett]

I've also done some reading up on b0b's BE9 tuning, and have downloaded that one, as well. One thing I appreciate is that it appears to combine tuning open strings and pedals/levers into one setting. That's a big plus for convenience.

I don't think the SE9 and SP9 sweeteners that you get from the factory are too bad. But i have noticed that while using them, the 7th chords I play using LKL sound out of tune compared to the same 7th chord using the B + LKR combo. (I have the standard E9 copedent) And major chords that i play using the A + LKL configuration don't sound all that great either compared to playing them open or with A + B engaged. Of course, I don't know if this is the fault of the sweetener, the guitar, or the player.

anyway. will be trying Jack's vs. b0b's tuning, we'll see what happens.

[Brooks Montgomery]

With all the myriad of opinions on these sweeteners, here’s (hopefully) a simple question: when tuning and plucking the string, pick on? Or pick off?
I’ve read that no pick makes for a more accurate (or stable) note …..

[Tommy Mc]

I hate that Peterson took Jeff Newman's free tuning chart, rebranded it as "sweetened" and then hid the underlying numbers from people like it's their trade secret. Jeez.

You have to dig around a bit on Peterson's website, but they do have the offsets for the sweeteners available....and do give Jeff Newman credit. The sweeteners start on pg. 7 of this document:
https://www.petersontuners.com/media/pd ... _Steel.pdf

[Ryan Bramlett]

With all the myriad of opinions on these sweeteners, here’s (hopefully) a simple question: when tuning and plucking the string, pick on? Or pick off?
I’ve read that no pick makes for a more accurate (or stable) note …..

i'm absolutely a "pick off" person when it comes to tuning. for some reason it comes much easier to me that way. Although i'm often tuning between songs and trying to stay quiet, and unamplified strings do sound louder when picked than plucked...

[Tucker Jackson]

You have to dig around a bit on Peterson's website, but they do have the offsets for the sweeteners available....and do give Jeff Newman credit. The sweeteners start on pg. 7 of this document:
https://www.petersontuners.com/media/pd ... _Steel.pdf

Thanks for shining a light, Tommy! Good on them for giving Jeff credit. Having those numbers will make it easier to have future discussions about what the numbers represent.