The Steel Guitar Forum

Well guys... from a Silvertone to a Ric and on to the most modern pedal guitar, they all sound like a steel guitar to me! Different? Sure, but still they sound like a steel guitar. Get over the equipment issue. That will never improve your technique. I've used this analogy before: It doesn't matter if I buy the newest and greatest golf club on the planet if I go out there with the same old swing.

Back to the point Maurice is trying to make.

Johnny Cox is in my opinion the best chameleon player I know of. Yes he has his own style as well, but I promise you he can sound like Buddy, Lloyd, Weldon, John Hughey, Jimmy Crawford, Hal Rugg, Tom Morrell, Curley, Maurice, and I believe anybody else he choses to. This is a guy we need to get to participate in this thread. I'm pretty sure what he'll say is the main ingredient, the HANDS!

Leonard, you have described the part of tone that is due to the instrument. There is another experiment you can do that is the opposite of what you described. Take 5 different steelers and have them each play the same one steel, with the same amp settings and volume pedal. You are likely to hear 5 slightly different tones. That would be the part of tone that is in the hands. Outside of experiments, when we hear people play we are hearing the whole tone, the part that comes from the instrument and electronics, and the part that comes from the hands. Jim Sliff is calling the part of tone from the hands "style." Some people call the part of tone that comes from the instrument "timbre." "Tone" is really a general term that applies to all of it. This is what is called a semantic argument. We all know about the different elements of tone we are talking about, but we are calling them different things. I suggest we all agree on a set of terms for the sake of this discussion (no guarantee others will accept them for other discussions) and move on.

David, I agree completely with your post. Perhaps we should be talking about the components of "sound" instead of "tone". That way, we focus on what we hear which is, after all, the bottom line.

Yours truly,
The Master of Acceptable... um, 'Sound'?

Leonard B....Concerning your recent observation, may I respectfully ask if in your opinion each guitar could have been played while your back was turned, and you could have distinguished one from the other when different players were playing them?

It is my experience that most players after playing a guitar for an extended period of time sound better, no matter what guitar it is. This is an indication to me that a varying tone spectrum emerges as the hands adjust and search for the desired tone.

I appreciate your participation in this discussion and your comments.

go over to jeff newmans web site and read tone be or not tone be. he is absolutely correct.

Dave D. and Jimbeaux...."Components of Sound", excellent suggestions by each of you for reasons of definition and clearity.

Now we're getting somewhere. Thank each of you for your suggestion.

My interpretation of tone is the sound generated. Highs, lows, mids, thin, muddiness, etc. I'm not talking about expression, style, the amount of sustain you create on a note because of your playing experience, whether you can play in tune or not, vibrato or no vibrato in bar hand, moving your hand closer to the pickup, on and on. Why do different players have different tones on different steels? They still have the same hands.
Tone has alot more to do with type of alloy used in the axle, fingers, roller nuts, end plates, pickup windings, type of poles in pickups, aluminum or wood necks, types of bars, picks, volume pedals, type of pot(10K, 50K, 100K, 250K, 500K), type J resistance, potless pedals, power amps, preamps, active vs. passive, parametric eq, guitar cables, strings, 4, 8, 16 ohm speakers, type of voice coil (paper or aluminum), watts, tube vs. solid state amps, with or without mods, and whatever else you can possibly think of. Everyone of these factors change your tone. I've never witnessed hands effecting tone like any one of the above factors.
Mr. Reece Anderson: I totally admire you and have the upmost highest respect for your playing ability and everything you've contributed to the "steel guitar" throughout your lifetime. I remember listening to your rendition of I'm So Lonesome I Could Cry, back when I was 18 (1974). I don't want to come across as not respecting you, whatsoever. I always thought it would be a great honor to meet you. I consider you one of the "icons".
Everything I mention in my post, I can back it up because I've spent thousands of dollars and alot of time, experimenting, personally, with all of the above. I would record it and every factor listed above has contributed to the change of the sound. I personally tore apart an old Emmons p/p and put different alloys of axle's in the steel, which made a big difference in the tone. I'm not going out on some limb. Yes I could definitely tell the difference of the sounds of the different steels with my back turned. Plug your steel straight into your amp, no volume pedal, adjust it to where you think it sounds good, and then go through your volume pedal. You'll see a big difference in your tone. My 2 cents worth. <font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by Leonard Bick on 20 November 2006 at 02:00 PM.]</p></FONT><font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by Leonard Bick on 20 November 2006 at 02:26 PM.]</p></FONT>

<SMALL>Different? Sure, but still they sound like a steel guitar. Get over the equipment issue. That will never improve your technique.</SMALL>

Let's see...where have I heard that before?

Randy, I appreciate you saying that. Sadly though, it seems a lot of players will never get over the "equipment issue". They keep thinking some magic will spring from a certain guitar, and their playing will really improve.

For the vast majority, though, that's just not the case.

Reece

I just reread you Right & Left hand list of what ifs !
The only thing I didn't see there was ! Bar surface
density . Years ago ! When the Bakelite bars first come out !
& Without changing approach
There was a big difference in tone between bars on my old Rick !
maybe its the density of the surface of the bar ! That will add / subtract
the tone . I have used That plastic bar the bobbie sent with
the BoBro unit and it gives a different tone on the StringMaster .

Bar Material could be another item on your what ifs !

Hick

I think that tone comes from the tubes. At least mine does!

Leonard B....Thank you for your participation, and I welcome and appreciate your comments.

As I stated earlier, the more I learn the more I realize I don't know, which is why I have posed so many question within this thread.

May I also say how much I appreciate your very kind words about me. Being remembered favorably after these many years, is a very meaningful comment to me.

May I ask the question concerning your comment.....are you implying that after you obtain what you consider to be your perfect guitar configuration and you sit down to play it for the first time, that you accept the sound as being is as good as it's going to get, or do you believe it will improve as you become used to playing it?

I have always found a guitar sounds better after I become used to playing it and could never envision the difference in sound "across the board" as being attriubuted to anything other than the hands adjusting to the sound I want to hear?

Bob H....You're right, I failed to address bar surface alloy, thank you for mentioning it. I do however believe most players use a bar which is a solid alloy.

BTW, you will find I listed "bar alloy" on number 4 under the Left Hand.

Fred - Sorry, I missed this:

"Then Jim, wouldn't the converse be true; If that be the case then any amateur player playing the instrument Buddy Emmons or any professional was playing, he/she would have the same tone as the Professional. I don't think so."

Yes, it would be true, at least as far as the inherent tone goes. Please note the difference between the tone of the instrumment and the "sound" generated by the hands - pressure, speed, attack as Reece says all affect the sound...but in Fred's example, even a non-player can pick a note on a Push-Pull and it will have THAT guitar's tone.

David Donald - OK, I see what you mean. IMO "total string length" will affect sustain and overtones to such a minor degree...assuming the basic platform is stable...as to be a non-factor. And the harmonics don't move if the nut/bridge doesn't. Not that there isn't some effect...but very little, unless, as I mentioned, it's a "loose" platform. If you're getting that much difference in sound when you manipulate the strings behind the nut or changer of your Shobud, I'd be looking for ways of stabilizing it.

Reece, as far as putting words in my mouth, I only said what I said..not what you seemed to think. But we're moving ahead with the discussion and let's have it not be an issue.

"I don't think some players have the hearing ability to distinguish it."

Kevin nailed it.

The comment "they all sound like steel guitars to me" shows either how unimportant really good tone is or simply reinforces what Kevin said. If "they all sound like steel guitars" is the guiding factor, then tone has become irrelevant. Which it has not, of course.

I (and Kevin) maintain the the basic platform will have a specific tone. Some better than others (always a matter of opinion), some close to each other, some dramaticlally different. But you can't, no matter HOW good you are, manipulate two guitars with dramatically different tone into sounding identical. But, as Kevin so perfectlynoted, some can't hear it. I think, furthermore, that some don't care. They play a guitar based on the mechanics, or their favorite player, or because it's black...but rarely do you see a steel player mention that he bought a certain guitar because of its tone.

You DO see quite a few trying to "chase tone" via pickups and sometimes strings later...but tone rarely seems to be an issue discussed when players are looking for a new axe.

BTW, I'm not going back to look but I seem to recall someone posting "tambor" and I was totally baffled what he meant...until I realized he must have meant "timbre". Not a criticism, just a clarification in case anyone else read that word and wasn't sure what it meant. I hope I interpreted that correctly...<font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by Jim Sliff on 20 November 2006 at 05:20 PM.]</p></FONT>

IF anyone can incorporate all the variables that affect tone, then you are truely a MENSA member. Physics 101 identifies so many factore: Friction, pressure, density, resonance, equipment, etc. IF we really got down to it and were truethful, we realize that every player has unique tone. You can mimic, but you can't duplicate. Isn't that a good thing? WE can not control every variable; it's most difficult to control one. SO, can't we accept that we each have unique tone? Thecnique can improve which will affect the tone. BUT, we each have our unique physical properties. I hope to one day develop my own technique that expresses my individual tone better than the time before.

We can do one of BE's licks, but we'll never sound like the Big E. Problem solved.

Reece, you da man!

Edited to say, this is what many musicians refer to as "having the touch". Some have it, alot of us don't. There are different degrees of accomplishment; none bad, some just sound better. I hope I live long enough to develop the technique and touch. <font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by Tim Bridges on 20 November 2006 at 05:26 PM.]</p></FONT>

My two cents (in agreement with Reece):

The brand of guitar does not generally determine the musical content. The player does. I believe that's the forest here. The brand of instrument is the trees, if you know what I mean.

I have met many weak players who hide behind a concept (bordering on worship) of "TONE "(which often involves chasing down vintage instruments and amps and obsessing over minute details like cap values, did Lloyd Loar sign it, etc.) when they have weak musicianship (time/rhythmic concept and feel; TOUCH as in 'it's in the hands''; articulation and improvisational concept) that they refuse to address. I've found this to be true among classical musicians and all kinds of electric and acoustic players. It's a lot easier to chase after equipment (and if you have it, throw money at the problem) than to develop "talent" and do the hard work required to maximize it. Eavesdrop on any conversation in a guitar store...

A skilled musician ( as opposed to an instrument operator) is going to get the instrument to sound the best it can sound, and the best he (or she) can sound...whether playing an optimum fine tuned setup or a middle of the road rig.

I will concede that if you want to play strictly vintage music, the right vintage instruments/amps are going to give you a better chance for an 'authentic' sound. If you need a Fender sound, Gibson isn't going to provide it, etc. But if you don't know how to get tone and sound with your hands, and play the content appropriate for the setting, you might as well be playing anything -although it might not LOOK as cool.

PS- I'm an infant on steel guitar, but can play 20 different brands of mandolin and sound exactly like myself, for better or worse. I've swapped instruments with David Grisman, Sam Bush, Andy Statman etc. and sounded just like me on them- no matter how I tried to sound like them! It's In The Hands in the end.

Apologies to Randy and Donny for rehashing their thoughts!
------------------
http://www.johnmcgann.com
Info for musicians, transcribers, technique tips and fun stuff. Joaquin Murphey transcription book, Rhythm Tuneup DVD and more...

<font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by John McGann on 20 November 2006 at 06:42 PM.]</p></FONT>

Jim,i was not arguing with you i just don't see it the way you do,i think HANDS can bring out the best a pg has to offer..hows that? best i can do..c ya..Charlie...

Mr. Anderson:
Do you keep the same settings on your amp, preamp, or whatever means you use to get your tone or sound, the same from the time you get a different steel until you've had that steel for a while? I've had this steel that I have now for approximately 6 years. It's a Sierra and I always considered it a "dog". I don't have a perfect sound, but I'm getting closer to the sound I want. I always change my settings, wanting that better sound. I feel the steel I play now hasn't sounded better to me because of my hands, it's because I'm learning to set my amp better according to my guitar's tonal characteristics. Once I plugged the steel straight into my amp, I then realized that the main tonal loss was involved in the volume pedal, not the steel, itself. The steel isn't the dog, it's the volume pedal. The potless volume pedals is one of the best innovations that's came along, in a long while. Someone needs to come up with a volume pedal that doesn't change the sound of your steel. By that I mean, when you plug your steel straight into your amp and adjust your amp accordingly, to me that's the best sound. Once the volume pedal is introduced into the chain, everything changes, because you're inducing some form of resistance into the signal path. That's why you have the Matchbox and the other products available to try and compensate for the tonal loss. The reason the potentiometers, or pot volume pedals sound muddy when the pedal is depressed all the way is because at that point the pot is at zero and the full 500K is fully generated into the line. So, really we don't have a tonal loss when your volume pedal is fully depressed because the pot is sending the full resistance it's capable of, at that moment. The pot pedals aren't generating the full resistance throughout the travel of the pot, until it's all the way open. We're heading in the right direction with the potless pedals but they are generating unwanted frequencies in line. I checked my ohmage in line with and without my pedal. My pickup ohmage is 17,300 and once I introduced the potless pedal into the line, the ohmage was 45,000. That's way too much variance. There's no tonal change throughout the pedal travel but the frequencies these potless pedals introduce are changing the guitar's tone. I ran my pedal into a dbx, tube, preamp, out of pedal into preamp in, preamp out into pedal in, and plug the steel straight into effects and into amp and it makes a big difference. The Session 500 has this feature but the circuit takes away your headroom. It's just food for thought. I'm enjoying this thread. We all have different views on this topic, which is great, and everyone respects the other person's views, which is the way it should be.
Bob you have a very valid point about tubes and their relationship to the tonal factor.<font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by Leonard Bick on 20 November 2006 at 06:29 PM.]</p></FONT>

How about this, tone begins with the hands, (technique and touch), manipulating the equipment,(bar, picks, strings, guitar, pickups, amp, speakers), and so on. The equipment's tone is what it is but the manipulating of the equipment is what makes everyone sound unique.

Jim said: "manipulate two guitars with dramatically different tone into sounding identical"

Jim, if you're going to quote me, have the courtesy to include what was before and after the statement if it made the point. At least include the whole sentence. I know what you meant was entirely different from the part I extracted.

By the way, do you not think any of those instruments I named sound like a steel guitar? I did not say all steel guitars sound the same. But I guess you can extract what you want.

Randy,

I just tried playing with my picks on backwards and I still suck!

I think we are confusing tone and talent. I've heard some average players have a nice sound and some great players with a limited sound. But great players always get my attention!

I wonder why Buddy gave Bruce the regular Zumsteel back and took the Hybrid? Sound or playability?

Russ<font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by Russ Tkac on 20 November 2006 at 06:56 PM.]</p></FONT>

Tim B....You are right, each of us are unique in our own way.

Leonard B....Thank you for the question. I have approximate settings for my amps which vary somewhat depending on the acoustical environment, humidity, tempeature and etc.

OK Randy:

"Well guys... from a Silvertone to a Ric and on to the most modern pedal guitar, they all sound like a steel guitar to me! Different? Sure, but still they sound like a steel guitar."

That implies that you don't see a lot of difference, and that the tone of the equipment isn't very important...or that you can't hear it.

Don't you think there MIGHT be players who are looking for a particular tone? That might NOT be satisfied with the tone of the instrument they have - or have heard something and said - THAT's the tone I'm looking for. Not the "hands" - but the inherent tone of the instrument.

I agree with a lot of what John McGann said - I've watched far too many player "chase tone" with ridiculous amounts of money, when what they needed to do was practice. But I also think there's a balance - in the hands of a good player, a collection of vintage and/or several modern high-quality instruments can allow the player a much wider range of sounds for different purposes, live and in the studio. I probably have 25 or 30 amps - and every single one has been used live or in the studio for a particular purpose, whether for a whole gig or a single song. Same with instruments - I had half a dozen Teles, and every one had a different inherent tone AND feel.

So my point is (and I thank John for his post, because it helps me clarify my thoughts) is that a *balanced* use of both "hands" and the tone of each instrument is what coaxes out the best possible sound for as player. An instrument alone will not do it - but neither will just "hands".

I cease to understand why Reece's discussion about hand technique,
must be over run by amp and instrument discussions....

You guys are swamping the thread originator's intentions, and it's Off Topic.
Regardless if there is some periferal relevance.
Please start your own thread for this....

I can, by using different techniques,
get different sounds from my old Bud.

Yes it mostly sounds like a Bud,
BUT not all Bud's always sound the same
in different hands.

The disccusion as I see it is,
<B>How can you get the greatest variety
and control of sounds
from the instrument you are playing
by analysis of your hand techniques.</B>

Nothing more nothing else.

Everything your instrument put's into the over all sounds
is AFTER your technique,

You and the strings.

I have spent many decades as a recording engineer,
listening intently to individual instruments,
and in groups, trying to analyize the recorded tones,
and the amp / room / mic characteristics needed to
create the final tonal soundscape.

And then the balance of tonal registers needed to fit in a mix to best advantage.

Tonal registers is part of Components of Sound.

I know how much I can tweak
amps, eq, effects, and mic choices and positionings
to get a wide variety of sounds from the pickers hands.

I also now from 45 years of recording
how many great pickers can sound better
on my own instruments. (a lot)
With my stock settings,
and the ONLY difference being
Their Hand Technique.

Talk about the amps, and steels inherant tone,
all you want, in another thread please...

But ignore Reece's actual topic here
at your own peril... Only YOU lose.

Randy B, D. Dog, Jim C. John McG. all great input.
Yeah Johnny Cox is a magician.
I would love to hear his input about 'hands' here too.<font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 20 November 2006 at 10:05 PM.]</p></FONT>

Edited for content.<font size="1" color="#8e236b"><p align="center">[This message was edited by Kevin Hatton on 20 November 2006 at 09:52 PM.]</p></FONT>

David - respectfully, this: "Most will agree tone begins with the hands,"
...cleared the way to a discussion of all facets of "sound". When one makes an assumption like that and uses the qualifier "most.." the door is open. Especially since many do not agree that the "hands" are part of "tone", but are something that manipulates the inherent tone's "sound".

It's a perfectly intelligent discussion. I think most of us are including Reece's list of items in the discussion and agee with the fact they influence things - we may not, however, agree with the assumption of fact or the use of the term "tone".

Since apparently it's unavoidable to get a discussion on "tone is in the hands vs. tone is in the guitar", my believe is that 90% is in the hands, 10% in the guitar.

I welcome different opinions

------------------
Steelin' Greetings
Marco Schouten
Sho-Bud Baldwin Crossover converted to SD-10, Evans SE200