The Steel Guitar Forum

I know the theories regarding sustain, tone, etc. I also understand tone is a totally subjective quantity, while sustain is objective; something that can actually be measured. Theoretically, my Emmons double wide formica p/p with aluminum necks should have the most sustain of any guitar I own. It does indeed ring for a very, very long time. However, my single neck wood body wood neck all pull Sho-Bud way outrings my Emmons, anywhere in the scale. Yes, it has been Coop-ed, my Emmons has been Cass-ed. Both are mechanically at the top of their game.

Thoughts?

Hey Mike. I can relate to what you're saying here. There's something about that very hard wood birdseye maple that really brings out the string sustain in these bodys. I've noticed more and more guys who are now playing the old Sho-Bud guitars to be discovering (or rediscovering) this today, and contrary to what the aluminum necks were actually developed for, it seems that wood necks are even better in these regards. Of course, this is not to imply that aluminum necks are not a good thing.

In any event, just my observation on this.

I have been told (by a very respected builder) that birds-eye is essentially a "diseased" wood; the marks are there from this "affliction."

Not that I'm going to be, but wish I looked that good when I was sick!

Mikey, I don't want to stir up a hornet's nest here,and probably don't know what I'm talking about.
I am new to this world of Steel, but ever since I became a member I've heard so much about tone and sustain.Having your steel Cooped, Modded ect. I always look at things through the eye's of common sense. So with that said. I know sustain is important, but when is it enough. You can only use so much, right? As for tone, How many of us play a steel without an amp, I thought that was where tone came from.I have people tell me they like the sound of my steel and I'm glad because its my sound.I don't worry alot about sustain. I know my steel was built to have it and it does, as does every steel.
I know you could build a steel just like mine and it would sound different. Thats just the way it is.
By the way Mikey you need to right a book. The guide to logic. I respect the way you look at things. Common Sense?

Some guitars sustain better than others, but that's a very poor way of judging a guitar, IMHO. It's sorta like judging the value of a car by how long it will drift after you take your foot off the gas on a level road.

"My car will drift 2200 feet, and yours will drift only 1500 feet!"

So what? I mean like, "Who really cares"?

I'm of the opinion that most of the people who complain about "sustain" either have a lousy amp, or they don't know how to work a volume pedal. In over 45 years of playing, I've yet to play or hear a guitar that didn't have enough "sustain" to get the job done. However, I can't say the same about all the players I've heard.

Donny, perhaps I wasn't clear. I thought I was, but...

I was not trying to use this as a judge of guitar quality. I was inquiring as to the thoughts of others about why the typically accepted norm regarding the qualities that contribute to sustain seem to be in reverse here with the two specimens I own.

Donny, I agree with you. Learning how to use a volume pedal is where its at. That being said, Mike, I noticed the same thing you did. Which is why I only play and build all wood guitars. I have a suspicion that mica dampens sustain, but I may be wrong. I've always noticed this about mica guitars vs. wood body guitars.

Well, Michael, the guitars would seem to be fine. Maybe it's YOU who has some loose screws? (just kidding...couldn't resist)

I will agree that, for me, sustain time is less important than tonality in the upper registers. I have heard steels that were just dead...very "thunky" sounding. They were cheap guitars and it was probably due to the cheap materials used in the construction. At the same time, I've never heard a pro level guitar that didn't have enough sustain...some just have more than others.

Why? Don't know exactly. But then, I've never thought sustain was much of an issue on any of my guitars. I do think the wood has a lot to do with it, though.

Don't you wish the PSG was one of those big issues facing the countries top physicists? Maybe we could get answers to questions like this.

I've always been sorta puzzled why anybody thinks there is some single or even small set of factors that determine sustain of a vibrating string attached to some physical mechanism or body. The issue is the manner of energy exchange with the rest of the guitar, and there are a whole lot of variables on a PSG. At each point in this system, energy can be absorbed, transferred somewhere else, or reflected back. The things that are in direct contact with the strings are the changer fingers and nut - in this case, rollers. At these locations, energy can be absorbed, transferred, or reflected back to the strings. Those direct points of contact would be the first places I would look. But these, in turn, are also mechanically linked to other components which each may absorb, transfer, or reflect back energy, and so on throughout the entire system. In fact, these other mechanical linkages may well affect the energy exchange at the direct contact points.

The other complicating factor is that the wavelength of at least some of these vibrations are comparable to the dimensions of the components, so it's not necessarily possible to treat everything as a purely lumped system, where energy exchange can be considered uniform along the body. This kind of thing can get immensely complex. Geometry may play a strong role at certain frequencies. String materials and construction, scale length, and other things can all play a role also.

So I'm not really surprised at such a "paradox". 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, IMO.

If I could afford an all wood Steel I would have one. The older the wood the better it sounds. The harder the wood the better it sounds. I would like to have a Steel made of curly maple that had beened boned. Talk about sound.

Here's a hypothesis; given that both guitars are the same age, from 1975. Perhaps the mica has a consistent hardness that has not changed in the 32 years that have lapsed. The birds-eye maple, however, has undoubtedly hardened somewhat. (My house has an oak frame, 100+ years old. Try to drive a nail or saw through that sucker!) The sustain in the wood body, now aged, has perhaps increased substantially. That, and the fact that all contact points have minimal slack because of the "Coop effect," may be the main contributing factors.

(side note: did you know that Coop has to build individual parts for guitars as they come in and get measured? The lack of consistency in the old Sho-Bud manufacturing process requires this. No two bodies are exactly alike, and he has to custom make the parts to fit the individual instrument.)

If I'm not mistaken, there's hard rock maple under the mica in every guitar I know of.

Michael.... I agree that the older the wood gets, the harder it gets, thereby increasing sustain somewhat. IMO, the older guitars sound better also because, hard wood will vibrate better than a softer wood, thereby backfeeding the pickup better, so IMHO the tone also improves with the age of the guitar. this is just my take on the issue.

I was not trying to use this as a judge of guitar quality.

I know, Mike. But, you'd be surprised how many players do! Many players revere the old Bigsby sound, but they have rather poor sustain compared to most modern steels, likewise the old Fenders. In all honesty, we really don't need tons and tons of endless sustain, since we so rarely use a guitar that way. Guitars are just different, like players, and they all bring something different to the table. The unfortunate thing is how some players get so hung up on a single sound or tone.

Erv Niehaus wrote:If I'm not mistaken, there's hard rock maple under the mica in every guitar I know of.

Erv, is right there is maple under that mica.
Gary Rittenberry Told me he buys seasoned Maple to build his Steels.

Mike, I have no idea why you got the results you did. But I will remember it the next time someone says a D10 or SD10 sounds better than an S10 or S12.

Thinking about your results, I think a better test would be your Coop/Sho-Bud, S10 compared to a Coop/Sho-Bud D10 or SD10 of the same age.

Paul Franklin, Sr. told me the Franklin's have the most sustain.......

I've never measured my Franklin D-10. It plays and sounds great and everyone that hears me says they would like to have my tone.

The Franklin replaced a 71 PP Emmons D-10 (Black Formica ).

In response to the argument that proper volume pedal use makes sustain an unimportant issue:

It seems to me that sustain does matter when the pickup is single coil. If high-pitched notes have too short a sustain physically, the amount of volume pedal needed to sustain them electronically raises the hum level so much, making the signal-to-hum ratio so bad, that it's musically useless. Especially since, if you're trying to sustain high-pitched notes, you're probably trying to play pretty.

Mikey i don't stay in one place long enough to worry about ''sustain'' ! I have never had any problem with that but if i did i would rely on my volume pedal to get-r-done ! We do all have our own way of playing i suppose huh ?

Maybe it is attitude towards the instrument?

Some guitars have aluminum necks but the rest of the guitar is Birds eye or curly maple..I know my Williams 600 series is..I chose the curly maple..sounds great.

Hey Gary, you figured out how to beat the sustain issue...you just play songs that have all 16th or 32nd notes and you never have to worry about sustain...just keep away from stuff like "Sleepwalk"...also have your baseman and drummer play real loud....LOL

Hey MD, I think you are making a great case for rebuilding wood steels...if the wood gets better with age, have your wood guitar rebuilt rather than buying new...PUPS and undercarriage can be replaced by qualified rebuilders plus anything else that needs replacing but keep the wood...these rebuilts should than be worth much more than the new ones...who do you suggest to rebuild my wood Mullen?

My 2cents worth. I agree that tonality in the upper registers is more important than just sustain and is in fact what a lot of players are actually referring to. I once built a guitar with stainless steel
fingers and bridge. Lots of sustain, but not great
tone. Also the reason older wood guitars improve in tone as well as sustain is that the glue, paint and
the wood itself dries out over time.

I have 3 guitars, Jch has mica on maple and aluminum neck, Sho-Bud all wood and a CeeB (local built) has mica on ash and wood neck. The CeeB has good tone but the sustain up the neck goes away faster than the other guitars but, plays great. With todays music you don't have any room for very much sustain.

Tony