The Steel Guitar Forum

In my case, too much sustain can be a bad thing. One of my steels just sustains forever, even without the volume pedal. The problem occurs when I want to play the next note and it is still beautifully sustaining and sounding great...I just want to keep listening to that beautiful sustaining note and forget about playing the next two, or three passages. Be careful what you wish for gentlemen, you just might get it. One other observation is that when I sit down behind an incredibly beautiful all wood steel my head just assumes that it sounds great, and my eyes are more often right than my ears.
Duncan

Michael, I have to agree with your assessment of the Sho-Bud, it's sweet in your hands.

I have a Sierra with no sustain at all. If I don't use a compressor, it rings like clay. It's a S12 set up as a 10 string 3/5. I'm always new at it and 10 is enough. The other pedals are long gone, however the bellcranks and crossrods are still in place. Does all the extra, unused stuff kill the sound? Sounds as bad with all twelve strings.
Mike

In some cases, the tone bar may come into play with regards to sustain. I just switched back to a BJS bar after a spell of using different brands, and I can tell the difference in sustain, especially above the 15th fret. This thing is as smooth as silk. Not all bars are created equal, as all BJS owners can testify.

I experienced a similar thing with my guitar after it came back from John Coop's shop. The tone and sustain JUMPED to a new level. My guitar is a '71 Professional, and all the hardware underneath rattled terribly--tons of slack. Yet, not knowing the potential hidden in that guitar, I thought it sounded pretty good just stock. Boy, did I ever get a pleasant awakening!!!

Slack dampens tone/sustain. Poor quality or even wrong metal dampens tone/sustain. Those metal parts put together and mounted too loose dampens tone/sustain. Wood that is too soft dampens tone/sustain. Wood that is too hard dampens tone/sustain. Wood not seasoned well enough is lacking in tone and sustain. There is MUCH that does not meet the average eye, that makes or breaks tone/sustain. If it is not ALL there together within range of yours and mine ear, an amplifier isn't going to save you either---you have to have SOMETHING to amplify, after all. And then it goes on from there --quality strings, a good TONE bar, good cables, pickup, good v. pedal--we all hear a difference between the high quality goods, and the budget goods. BJS bars for intance, I feel and hear a huge leap in quality--tone and sustain, but that's just me.

That being said, Coop has made it his mission to craft the finest parts of exact precision, crafted from the most resonate metals possible. Proper installation has a large bearing on the results. The super fingers he makes with the PROPER quality metal alloys coupled with the use ball-bearings, right on down to the metal in the teardrop knee levers that he crafts, and all the parts in between, that Coop installs into these 30-40 year old vintage-seasoned, resonating birdseye maple shobud bodys are what add up to what Mikey D. and a few others out here are experiencing.

If you don't believe that what metal you use is important, when's the last time you have seen a tuning fork made out of lead??

I came across this thread in my search for ways to improve the sustain of my mica MSA Classic S-10. Though a newby I don't think the sustain problem is as hopelessly complex as some have indicated.

The sustain game is to keep the mechanical energy in the string between the bridge and the nut. Assuming a reasonably stiff guitar and bar the most suspect place for the string to lose energy is between the nut and the barrels of the tuning machines. The bar only stops the transverse excursion of the string. Neither the bar nor the fingers behind it do squat to stop the variation in string tension that passes on through the nut to the portion of the strings beyond the nut.

Ideally the stings would be clamped at the nut keeping any energy from spilling over. Obviously this would complicate tuning. Since that is out we want to increase the mechanical impedance of the nut as much as possible.

One way to increase the impedance at the nut is to increase the angle of the strings over the nut - the greater the angle the more the string tension is converted to downward force on the nut and the greater the impedance. This can be done to a small extent without add-on devices by having the strings come out from under the tuning barrels rather than over. On electric guitars this is accomplished with string trees or angled headstocks.

On a PSG the nut could also be made to be higher off the fretboard (at the expense of creating a slant to the strings).

The downside of increasing the angle is increased wear at the roller nut and the increased pressure on the roller nut axle, but I would rather replace my rollers/axle every few years and have more sustain.

Looking at Michael's photo of his Sho-Bud, a guitar renowned for having good sustain, I can't help but notice the shortness of his headstock compared to mine and the resulting increase in angle of his strings over the nut.

If anyone knows of any bolt-on device to increase the angle of the strings over the roller nut, please let me know. I would like to find a bolt-on roller string tree for my MSA but I've never seen such a beast.

The volume pedal is a fine solution until you come to recording where it beats your signal-to-noise ratios into the dirt. Of course you can design your parts to not need the sustain but even as a newby I am already running into melodic lines requiring a lot of bar motion between picks that would benefit greatly from more sustain.

Oops, it's time to duck, see ya.


phred

If you don't believe that what metal you use is important, when's the last time you have seen a tuning fork made out of lead??

The old bakelite Rickys were famous for their sustain, with almost no metal in them, to speak of.

Neil Getz wrote: The downside of increasing the angle is increased wear at the roller nut and the increased pressure on the roller nut axle, but I would rather replace my rollers/axle every few years and have more sustain.

It's not the rollers that wear out - it's the strings! Increasing the angle at the nut increases string breakage.

I've had my curly maple Carter S12 now for going on 12 years... and I swear it justs keep improving on tone and sustain as the wood ages. Glad I sprung for the wood body personally.

Neil, I have a 1970 MSA mica body, and it has killer sustain. May I suggest you have someone check out your guitar before you alter the design? Might slap a set of Jagwire strings on that puppy... I absolutley love 'em.

David-
I use Jags. It's possible that I am simply asking too much from my MSA or any mark PSG. I have no access to any other PSG with which to compare mine and little experience. For all I know from experience it may have as much sustain as any PSG out there. Still I could use some more so I'm trying to find/figure out how I might get it. I'm not about to start hurting my MSA - I'd much rather play it and deal with it than tinker with it or send it away for a couple of weeks. Just thought there might be some fix out there that I didn't know about.

b0b-
Consider a nut roller with a radius the same as the bridge. The string could still be pulled downward past the nut with no more reason to break than at the bridge. Still I would rather break strings twice as often and get a substantial sustain increase. But I use fairly heavy strings on my guitars (6-string and PSG) so string breakage has been a relatively rare event.

Darn, I liked all of the answers, as to sustain. But I truly feel that the wood has a little to do with it, (possibly tonewise) but I'm thinking the pickup, has most all to do with it.

Try this sometime. Take a pickup with a weak magnetic pole piece in it, and put on a new string over that weakened pole. Any BRAND, and then report what you got for sustain.

Now, take a pickup that has very strong magnetic pole pieces in it, and do the same as above, "On the same guitar" Then let us know what you heard.

Guaranteed, you won't believe the difference of what you'll hear afterwards...

What I found to be taking place was the strings were vibrating long enough for a ton of sustain, but the pickup was too weak to pick up any of it, after the initial picked strings ring.

Pickups, definitely make all the difference in the world.

I was once told that a pickup is either good (works) or it's bad (doesn't work). That's not true at all. The magnetic pole pieces lose their magnatism after a period of time passes, and slowly fails to properly transmit the signal to be amplified.

And yes, there are also many other things, but most of them, contribute more to the tonal quality.

But again, that's simply my opinion on what I've found through the many years of wondering.
--------------------------------------------

On a lighter note. All strings have self dampening properties that we can't overcome, as does anything else, or we could all make billions, as in inventing perpetual motion.

Don,
I have to take exception.
I remember reading that Buddy Emmons would strum the strings of an unamplified guitar and then grab one of the guitar's legs.
If he could feel the vibrations in the leg of the guitar, it was a good one.
I believe that if a guitar can pass the vibrations of the strings throughout the instrument, then you will have sustain.

Erv, I've read lots of things myself as well. But what I posted was in actual experience, and not simply on one ocassion, but on many as in 6 string guitars as well.

I play a G.E.S., that everyone who's sat down and played her says, she has the best sustain they've ever heard coming out of a steel. But, I don't think they ever reached down and grabbed a leg to find out. But, I'll try it and let ya know what I feel.

The topic of sustain is one that's older than dirt and will never be satisfactorily answered to everyone's taste or desire to know.

I say, whatever works for the particular individual, will be about as close as we'll ever get to perfection of perfect sustain. So my question then would have to become, what is so called, preferably perfect sustain? I don't believe there is any such thing. I believe every player, listener or whoever, hears things quite differently.

But again, I'll have to say, that if and when a pickup starts going bad, darn near all of the sustain goes with it. That's Fact..

Dons comments are very true, indeed. But I believe pickups are just part of the equation. The same great pickup in different guitars would yield different results in tone and sustain, I believe, and the differences would boil down to construction and construction materials. Also, the pickup would need to be properly adjusted to the strings for optimum performance. Just my personal opinion. Your kilometerage may be not the same.

One thing I've found with pedal steel guitars is that each one is different. Each one has its own positives and negatives. A builder can build two guitars just alike and they'll play similiar but not exactly the same. I'm yet to find the perfect guitar. A good player will take a guitar (pro model) and find the sweet spots on it. He'll also find the weak spots or negatives with each one. Personally, I prefer a wood body with mica covering, humbucker pick ups and a finely tuned undercarriage as the things that work for me. There's several builders out there that are building great guitars. I compare it to vehicles. It's a matter of personal choice. All pro models have sustain, some are different on the sustain level that others are. It's like Tommy Young stated, there's several factors that go into the sustain factor. He knows exactly what he's talking about. Just play a guitar he's modded and you'll see. I've played three of his modded guitars, so I can tell you, it's the real deal. Mikey has a good topic going here. Next!

When the valid concrete results of experiment don't match up to theory, don't throw away the experiment results - the problem is generally in the theory

- Dave Mudgett

And, you're trying to wipe out the reason to exist for all 42 different guitar forums?

I am somewhat happy with the tone/sustain/tuning/
sound/playability of my guitar.

I think I need therapy...........

Sorry gents but this horse aint quite dead yet. Ever since I came across this thread I have been trying to find a text online (without success) that I saw when I was taking a college course called “The Acoustical Foundations of Music” back in the early ‘70s. It showed the acoustical properties of various hardwoods in graph form by plotting their absorption coefficients. I remember the graph for hard maple showed a really interesting curve. Good highs and lows with a beautiful dip into the midrange. What made a real impression on me was the curve maple showed was almost the exact inverse to that of the response curve of the human ear. Meaning? When you build any kind of solid body electric guitar from hard maple the result, all other things being equal, will be an instrument with a “naturally” balanced tone that is a bit on the thin side since the frequencies that are being “absorbed” by the resonance of the body of the guitar are more those in the midrange. I think this explains the value of steel cabinets made from hard maple mostly from a tone standpoint and not one of sustain. Since MSA builds really nice sounding steels from carbon composites (THE FUTURE IMHO) AND Sierra from aluminum it really seems to me that as far as the body of the guitar is concerned you can get good SUSTAIN from any material that provides enough density and mass. If the material has an absorption coefficient curve that mimics hard maple (are you listening MSA?) so much the better since we all agree that sounds good. The newer carbon MSA have been described as having a nice “neutral” tone so I bet the material has a nice flat curve. Hard maple is a good material for a steel cabinet for sustain reasons because it is hard and dense enough to do the job but gives good tone only because the energy it does absorb from a vibrating string is more in the midrange leaving nice a nice flat curve in the high and low range. Bob made a good point about the material the changer is made from and all the other components play as well. But since we all focused mostly on the material of the body that’s what I’m talking about here. The area between the changer and the nut isn’t called the “soundboard” for nothing. I guess what I am really saying here is that any solid body electric instrument works exactly the opposite from an acoustic instrument with regard to the material it’s made from in one critical sense at least. You want a spruce top on your acoustic guitar because it DOES resonate at the frequencies you want to produce. It’s essentially an air pump. What do you think a steel would sound like made from spruce? An acostic guitar with a maple top? You want the material in the solid body NOT to resonate at the frequencies you want to produce since these are frequencies you will loose from the body absorbing the energy of the vibrating string. As far as the body and “soundboard” are concerned these are the overall parameters governing tone AND sustain – the proper amount of the material (mass) and the absorption coefficient of the material.

http://s75.photobucket.com/albums/i287/ ... tor=bottom

I have said too much already on the sustain subject...a search will provide yards of my previously written inputs.

For experimental results, and more, go to the PHOTOBUCKET site above. Pictures of the mechanics, graphs of the 0,2,4,8 second spectrum (sustain) values, measurements, materials, etc. for 32 or so PSGs. Done at Jim Palenscar's shop.

Pickup proximity to the strings was also looked at by Jim...talk to him.


Per Dave M "Where is Ed Packard?".
Working on a rather complete chord encylopedia for C6, E9, Bb13, etc. It will be an "electronic workbook", down loadable, editable...a PSG resource of sort with chord type location lookups....and lots of charts.

Edp

To me personally....my Mullen and Sho-Buds have great sound, call it sustain or whatever. However....after a couple of hours into a gig the people I am playing to don't care about sustain, just their next 'long neck' and can I make it home after closing.

Gary C., thank you for making the point that a solid body electric guitar has opposite requirements than an acoustic guitar. Most people on the Forum seem to believe it is the resonance of the body (and possibly the neck) that gives their steel guitar it's tone, and that instruments with poor tone must not be resonating well. I agree with you that resonance in the body drains vibrational energy from the strings. Of course a soft, mushy body also drains string energy. A very hard, stiff body would seem the ticket to sustain.

However, I think this "resonance" myth come partly from the truth that feeling the vibrations in the legs is a good sign. But that just means that all the joints and connections of the head, nut, changer and body are tight, even down into the legs. I think a hard, non-resonant body will translate more vibrational energy into the legs than a flexible resonant body.

But of course the hardness and resonance of the body can affect tone in ways other than simple sustain. A very hard, non-resonant body might create a harsh or shrill tone. Imagine a solid block of diamond with a nut and bridge chiseled into it. That might be the ultimate in hardness, and non-resonance. But it might be too bright and shrill. Maybe some of the tone of favorite old wood guitars comes from the resonating body absorbing some of the highs and making the tone more warm and pleasing.

The type of maple used has been discussed in the past on the Forum. One thing that came out is that even grain hard maple may sound better than curly and highly figured maple. The figuring is irregularities that may not have the even hardness of an even grain. Also, on the GFI site Fields comments (don't know if the text is still there) that when he went from solid maple to die board, the tone and sustain improved dramatically. That is a laminate, but not like the usual plywood made from soft wood. It is layers of hard maple interleaved with hard resin or glue.

I think I read Buddy saying (quite a while back) that the aluminum necks were pretty much a cosmetic thing and weren't really an intentional tonal or sustain addition. I guess it might effect both. Personally I think that pickups and technique have more to do with sustain. I don't believe I've heard a steel I didn't like the sound of.

David I think you are right about the whole leg resonance thing. Its a sign that the changer, nut, and soundboard are doing their job by not being resonant. I also wonder if the resonant frequencies of the legs might also be a "secondary front" in the sustain battle since they are obviously resonating enough to feel it with your hand. What if the legs didn't resonate either? Also I think your hypothetical "diamond" guitar WOULD sound good and not "shrill". After all, Aluminum provides a nice tone and so does carbon fiber which I've got to believe is extremely rigid. My take is that it would a) sound similar to carbon fiber and b) cost EVEN MORE THAN AN MSA MILENIUM making the whole thing downright silly to complicate. You get what you pay for with the MSA at least! Lastly I really like the use of die board from a manufacturing standpoint. It seems like it would be way more consistent than hard maple which, as you point out, can vary in its tone properties a lot. GFI owners are often reporting that their guitars have a great "live" tone with a lot of harmonic content which does not at all surprise me. Scale length has an impact on tone and sustain also. I recently read an article written by a luthier in which he compared a Les Paul (shorter scale) to Strat (longer scale) and his comment was something like the shorter scales tend to give a mellower "woody" tone with less high frequency content and longer scales a more live tone. Ever notice how much better the low notes sound on a long scale Fender jazz bass? Great definition from the high frequency content. Although I'm not clear on why longer scale are reputed to provide more sustain as well.

As I get older, I sustain less and someone told me I was harder headed