Volume Pedals- What is really the best in terms of sound and

Lincoln Goertzen · Post by **Lincoln Goertzen** » 18 Jul 2001 9:55 am

I am about to order a PSG, and need a volume pedal. I thought about a Goodrich 120, but maybe the L120 is more comfortable to use. Is it?
Does half an inch in height make a meaningful difference?

As a more general question, I have heard that 'pot' pedals do not change the sound at different levels, while light beam pedals do. There are also those who say the opposite. Who is right?
Thanks, Lincoln

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 18 Jul 2001 10:21 am

The height really just depends on what you are more comfortable with. I used a L120 for a long time and then bought a new 120 "factory second" at St Louis one year and it turned out I liked it better.

As far as the "light beam". They don't make those anymore, they went out years ago. There is the Hilton Infrared and the new Goodrich CDS, which are electronic. The Hilton has had "rave" reviews and has been out for a couple of years. The Goodrich CDS is relatively new and I've only seen one person that has one and they like it, although they said they also have a Hilton.

The pot pedal, according to many, does have a slight "coloring" difference between a low level and full volume pedal level. I don't hear it, but then I have a Lawrence 710 pickup which seems to be less affected by external devices than some pickups.

Jeff A. Smith · Post by **Jeff A. Smith** » 18 Jul 2001 10:41 am

I have a Goodrich L120. I guess I am fairly tall and have long legs, because without the low-profile pedal, I would probably have to buy pedal rod extensions to get my legs under the guitar and not raise it to where the pedals would be angled too far upwards. I think the comfort issue between the 120 and L 120 comes down pretty much to your height.

Another thing is that the height of the pedal changes the point where your right knee contacts the knee levers. Higher= shorter travel but more difficult push.

After reading the Forum discussions on pedals, the consensus seems to be that pot pedals will trim off some highs, regardless of the level. Mine seems more bassy at lower volume than it is on full, but I don't necessarily see that as undesireable. It can add another dimension of dynamics. On the other hand, it's said of the Hilton that the tone is the same regardless of the volume level. Many like that.

My take is that most on here agree that the high dollar Hilton and Goodrich pedals do less to the sound than a pot pedal, when they are properly adjusted.

jerry wallace · Post by **jerry wallace** » 18 Jul 2001 1:03 pm

Lincoln,you cant go wrong with any of the Goodrich or Hilton pedals..Its really just how much you want to spend..As far as the low or high models.I think its whatever you get used to..If your on the tall side the low might be best..I am 5 11 1/2" and I use the standard height..However, things like wearing Boots with a tall heel while playing can make my standard model almost to tall..

------------------
Jerry Wallace- "98 Zum: D-10,8+8, "96 Zum: D-10,8+5,Nashville 1000,Session 500 ,Session 400 head only amp,Tubefex,ProfexII, Artesia, New Mexico
http://communities.msn.com/jerrywallacemusic

[This message was edited by jerry wallace on 18 July 2001 at 02:06 PM.]

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 18 Jul 2001 3:36 pm

An extra inch in pedal height (sometimes half an inch!) is VERY significant, for comfort reasons. If you're just starting, get a low-profile pot-pedal. That couple of hundred dollars you'll save can be put to better use on lessons, tapes, or CD's.

Then...when wifey asks "What do you want for Christmas?"...let HER spring for the hi-buck pedal!!!

[This message was edited by Donny Hinson on 02 August 2001 at 03:11 PM.]

jerry wallace · Post by **jerry wallace** » 18 Jul 2001 4:17 pm

Donny,your already giving him "lessons"...In how to "play the wife" ..I wonder what key thats in , I bet its B#...

------------------
Jerry Wallace- "98 Zum: D-10,8+8, "96 Zum: D-10,8+5,Nashville 1000,Session 500 ,Session 400 head only amp,Tubefex,ProfexII, Artesia, New Mexico
http://communities.msn.com/jerrywallacemusic

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 18 Jul 2001 8:10 pm

I know...like all my ex-wives used to say...

"What a guy!"

gary darr · Post by **gary darr** » 19 Jul 2001 2:58 pm

This might be a little off track but has any one tried the morleys, I've been seeing these in the musician friend magazines for a pretty fair price.Are they too tall for steel players? they are advertised to be a infrared type pedal

------------------
sho-bud,session 500,american standard strat,shecter tele,peavy classic 50

Hal Higgins · Post by **Hal Higgins** » 19 Jul 2001 8:01 pm

I've used a number of different volume pedals over the last 31 years...but my favorite pedal is the one I just purchased a week ago.....it's the Hilton....it's smoother and quieter than any "pot" pedal I've ever had. I tried the light beam pedal when it first came out and didn't like it because it changed the tone of my guitar. I was skeptical of the Hilton when I first heard about them....but I wouldn't have anything else now.

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 20 Jul 2001 2:11 am

I just looked at the Musician's Friend catalog and the Morley's are NOT listed as "infrared", just "electro-optical". Who knows what that really means. The pedal is designed to Steve Vai's specs for lead guitar. It also looks like the guitar cords plug in from each side. Plugging in a cord on the left side of the pedal could get in the way.

Jeff Peterson · Post by **Jeff Peterson** » 20 Jul 2001 5:46 pm

Morley's are light pedals. They are smooth, and work well......not the best choice for steel. Pot pedals are just that...period. Your only choice in the matter is how it is encased. The performance of the pedal is restricted to the quality of the pot. Hilton's deliver what they promise....at a price. If Kieth sells enough of them, or competition gets heavy, maybe the price will drop. If price is no object......Hilton. If you're on a serious budget....Bobbe Seymour sells a Cobra Coil pedal for steel..one in/one out pot pedal for the non-complicated set up, at a lower price than the other pedals mentioned.
Literally, when you use a pot pedal....the brand you use is nothing...name dropping. Some guys like to pay way too much for a brand that does nothing more than a more inexpensive model just to say, 'I have one of these....I wouldn't play anything else.' peace....Jeff

Quesney Gibbs · Post by **Quesney Gibbs** » 21 Jul 2001 1:57 am

Don't knock the old light beam pedal...I have had a Goodrich light pedal for many years and never had a bit of trouble with it. Perhaps I am tone deaf but I have never noticed any tone change in my guitar.

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 21 Jul 2001 3:07 am

Jeff, I'll agree most pot pedals are the same electronically as almost all use the same standard Clarostat 500K pot.

But, there are differences in feel, height, angle and width of the tread.

Tim Rowley · Post by **Tim Rowley** » 23 Jul 2001 7:24 pm

In terms of comfort and portability, I like a pedalbar-mounted volume pedal. Mine is the common Emmons with a 500K Clarostat (Allen-Bradley type J) pot and it works great. The similar Derby bar-mount volume pedal works just as well for me also. I keep the pedal angled 12-15 degrees left so it's on a natural angle with my right foot. If I have to move the guitar, the volume pedal stays right there on the pedalbar.

Tim R.

Buck Dilly · Post by **Buck Dilly** » 24 Jul 2001 5:10 am

I don't think anyone mentioned an impedance matching device. All pot-type volumn pedals have loading characteristics. If you add an impedance matching device (which only some vol-peds have) before the pedal, you will not lose any ofthe nice top end of the steel. Single coil pickups are more prone to hi-end loss, and most steels use these pickups. ANy pre amp device (EQ will do also) will do the job. Many steelers seem to like the Goodrich Matching devices. I have a matchbro and I like it a lot. When I record I always use a matching device, regardless of instrument or application. Buck

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 24 Jul 2001 6:14 am

Since I upgraded to the Lawrence 710 pickups, I find I don't need a matchbox type device. I get better sound going directly to the Goodrich 120 pedal. I have a MatchBro (original model with the tone control in the bypass mode) but many times I'll unplug the MatchBro and go direct, unless I need the MatchBro for the dobro sound.

With the original Lawrence 705 pickups, that came on my Franklin, a matchbox type device helped out.

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 24 Jul 2001 11:14 am

"A pot volume pedal changes the tone from minimun to maximum".

NO way! At audio frequencies, ANY capacitive or inductive properties there might be is sooooooo small, NO human could ever hear its affect.

What causes many people to feel there is a tonal shift is the reason manufacturers put "loudness" contols (and switches) on hi quality stereo equipment. When the volume is low, we do not hear bass frequencies respectively speaking, as loud as we hear them at higher levels.

This then, make us think there is a fall off in the highs at higher volume leves. When there is NONE at all.

Humans do NOT hear equally, different audio frequencies at varying levels. This phenomenon is called the "C weighting" factor and is used by audio engineers to build in compensators (sometimes switchable) to counteract this deficiency of the human ear.

The feeling by many that certain frequencies at different levels are "colored", is a result of this human characteristic and NOT the equipment itself in most cases. This is never more true than in the case of a pot volume pedal.

A "POT" volume pedal is purely resistive. It takes capacitance and/or inductance to change tone in any electronic device. A pure resistor can NOT do it!

What tiny tiny tiny bit of capacitance (and virtualy NO inductance) there is in a pot volume pedal would change the tone sooo little (if at all), NO human could ever hear it.

And there is NO way the statement "a pot volume pedal changes tone" could ever be proven in controlled double blind tests.

carl

Jeff A. Smith · Post by **Jeff A. Smith** » 24 Jul 2001 1:13 pm

Carl-

That's very interesting. If I understand you correctly, though, you're saying that the descibed phenomena makes someone feel there are less highs at higher volume levels, because bass frequencies are not as obvious at lower frequencies.

As I have understood the posts of others, and what my own experience SEEMS to be, is that a pot pedal sounds more bassy at LOWER volume levels. There SEEM to be more highs at HIGHER volume levels. Maybe someone has experienced the opposite effect, but I've always thought people were referring to the effect as I describe it. I've always taken it for granted on guitar also, that if I turn the volume pot down on my guitar, the tone will also become somewhat bassier and less distinct.

I certainly won't try to make the case scientifically that this truly happens, because I can only say it has always SEEMED that way.

From the way I've understood posts on the Hilton pedal, others think that it maintains the same high frequency clarity at LOWER settings, unlike a pot pedal.

Does this make scientific sense?

Jeff

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 24 Jul 2001 2:36 pm

What Carl is saying is true. Different frequencies tend to be heard at different levels of amplitude, at different volume level settings. This is the reason for EQ controls on amps or a graphic equalizer so that the various frequency bands can be attenuated or boosted so they all sound approx the same level.

The Peavey "Parametric EQ" control that's on many steel amps is basically a variable frequency level adjustment, similar to a Graphic EQ except you only have one frequency you can set it to and then you can either attenuate or boost that frequency - and in the case of the E9th tuning generally around 800Hz is cut to equalize out the response.

This has nothing to do with volume pedals, but since it was brought up.

Fred Murphy · Post by **Fred Murphy** » 24 Jul 2001 4:14 pm

What I like about the Hilton pedal is the improved sustain I get. The fall off of volume does not require near as much travel to keep it level. I know the pros don't seem to have a problem with sustain, but with not so good of a picker like myself, I need it. Also, I tried the electronic pedal made by Goodrich,(not the new laser one) and could not use it with my Emmons, with stock pickups on it. It created a terrible hum. This is one pedal I would pass on. The other Goodrichs, with the normal pot,I like.

Jeff A. Smith · Post by **Jeff A. Smith** » 25 Jul 2001 5:20 am

Last night I did some non-scientific experimenting, and I think it's possible that the effect I described above, of my Goodrich L120 losing more highs on lower volume settings could be kind of an illusion based on two things:

(1.)The sharper impact highs have at higher levels being absent at lower levels, and how the bass and changes in it perhaps doesn't draw the attention.

(2.)It seems possible that some of the very high frequencies that give the sound its clarity, immediacy, and character are not as loud to start with, in comparison to the main body of the signal. At lower settings, these frequencies would be among the first to become inaudible to the ear. (Hard to really say about this one.)

I also found some indication of the effect that Carl describes above, of the signal becoming more thin with LESS BASS at lower settings.

So I guess what I've always took for granted has possibly been an unexamined subjective impression, at least to a great extent. Someone could make the case that pot pedals don't change the tonal frequency range at different volume levels, and I would think that is entirely possible.

I've never tried the Hilton, but there has been at least one thread on here recently that discussed the Hilton's tonal consistency throughout its range, and the fact that it maintained clarity and high frequencies throughout the range of movement,contrasting that with a pot pedal. Maybe that thread was kind of an exception in talking mostly about high frequencies, I don't know. My curiousity is peaked now. Does the Hilton appear to many to effect the sound less only as a whole, or also with relation to different volume levels? If a pot pedal really doesn't change tones at different levels but appears to some people to do so, what would this say about the Hilton, if people have the impression that it does this less than a pot pedal or not at all? Maybe if the Hilton keeps more of the original signal, it doesn't as readily reach a point where some frequencies become inaudible to the ear at lower volume settings. [This message was edited by Jeff A. Smith on 25 July 2001 at 06:51 AM.]

Fred Murphy · Post by **Fred Murphy** » 25 Jul 2001 6:07 am

I'm about half deaf after 40 years of factory work, and 35 years of bar playing, but to my ears the Hilton is an improvement in tone, through out the travel. To me the normal potentiometer does not sound the same at low volume or at the full open range, as it does in the middle. It may only be in my mind, but then that is what I'm am trying to please in the first place. To each his own.

gary darr · Post by **gary darr** » 25 Jul 2001 8:33 am

Sorry Jack, I was mistaken, I guess I just wanted it to be a infrared type for $53.00 . I used to play with a guitar picker that used a morley vol/wah back when they first came out. it sounded pretty smooth I just didnt know how suitable they were for steel. The old ones had a pretty tall profile but it lookes like the newer one are shorter.

------------------
sho-bud,session 500,american standard strat,shecter tele,peavy classic 50

Bill Llewellyn · Post by **Bill Llewellyn** » 1 Aug 2001 8:16 am

Carl is absolutely right on about our ears... they become less sensitive to highs and lows as sound becomes softer. That's why the "loudness" button on people's stereos has a U-shaped frequency response to it--our ears in reverse! (People tend to like boosted bass and treble anyway and often leave loudness on all the time.)

Regarding the PSG pickup and volume pedal question, Carl is also absolutely right that the parasitic inductances and capacitances within the pedal itself are negligable and cannot noticably effect the sound. Could the external cable capacitances be non-negligable, though? I know hifi buffs pay extra $$ to get low-capacitance cables....[This message was edited by Bill Llewellyn on 01 August 2001 at 10:54 AM.]