The Steel Guitar Forum

Why do some players/teachers (like Jeff Newman) use "D" to refer to the lever which lowers E to Eb, and others use the "E" designation? It's a little bit confusing to try to read tab to learn a new song when you are accustomed to thinking the other way around.

I'm just a beginner, but it seems like it makes SO much more sense to use names for the levers which actually relate to the notes which they produce. I've found that most people agree that the "F" lever raises E to F, and the "G" level raises Gb to G, but there seem to be two diverging schools of thought regarding what to call the levers which lower the E to Eb and the Eb to D/Db.

I think I read somewhere that the levers were named the way they were because of the order that they evolved, but Scotty/Mel Bay refers to the E to Eb lower as "E", NOT "D".

Anyone have any comments on this issue?

------------------
Mike Harmon
Fulawka S10 3 & 5
Nashville 400

Mike,

That is a very good question. It has been asked before on this forum. And I suspect it will be asked again. And you are 100% correct about the D and the E levers. There is confusion especially for new players. The following IS the scoop as to why that happened.

When the PSG first became prominent, there were no knee levers at all. When the day came that a knee lever became prominent (there were home made knee levers before), that knee lever lowered the 2nd string from a D# to a D and lowered the 8th string from an E to a Eb. NOTE: The 2nd string was NOT lowered to a C# back then. BE did that later; on a hit song of Ray Price called "Those Healing Hands of Time", which drove 30,000 steel players crazy trying to figure out how in this world Buddy did it .

Now when this lone knee lever was added the standard E9th pedals had already been called A B and C. So many simply called this knee lever the D lever. Note it was NOT called the D lever because it lowered the 2nd string to a D; rather because it was simply the next letter in the alphabet!!

Sometime after this knee lever was invented, someone (probably BE, not sure) decided to split this knee lever into two knee levers. That is, leave the D# to D change on one of the levers and have the 2nd lever lower BOTH E's to Eb. As such, some called the "new" knee lever the E lever. Again, NOT because of what it did, but because it simply was the next letter in the alphabet.

However NOT all players referred to it the same. Some called the "new" knee lever D and the old knee lever E. Jeff is one of these players. There are many others who do the same. But NOT all of us do. I am one who followed the progression, and I feel Jeff an others are incorrct IMO.

So the confusion has lasted until this day. It will never change. And it has not stopped there. The lever that lowers the B's to Bb has been called "the H lever" and the "X lever". I have even heard it called the Bb lever also. "A rose by any other name......"

The F lever is almost an absolute, in that 99% of all players (IMO) use this lever to raise the E's to and F. As is the case of the A B C pedals.

Most call the G lever the one that raises the F#'s to a G. NOTE again, not because of what it did, but simply because that was the next knee lever that was created (after the F lever) and G was simply the next letter in the Alphabet. It is interesting to note that this "G" lever is fast doing other things than raising 1 and 7 to a G. IE, raising 1 a whole tone, raising 2 a half tone and lowering 6 a whole tone.

I hope this will clear up the confusion that should have never been. But as long as their is decisions based on "man", confusion is going to be.

God bless you in your quests,

carl

You not gonna change things, Mike, so you have to learn to adapt.

Know the FUNCTIONS of the Levers and when you look at a Tab, think, "What letter does this guy use to indicate 'Lower the Es'?".

There are many different styles of Tab. By learning the FUNCTIONS and how they relate to different TABS you actually learn more.

When I see Jeff's Tabs, I think of D as meaning "Down", since it lowers the 4th and 8th.

And then there are those, like myself, playing the "Day" setup with C,B, A.... Arrrggg...

<SMALL>"The lever that lowers the B's to Bb has been called "the H lever" and the "X lever". I have even heard it called the Bb lever also." - Carl</SMALL>

I call it V as in Vertical.

I think Jeff was one of the first to actually try to formally teach this Instrument and he choose to use the A,B,C, D,E,etc...nomenclature. Here we are 30 years later , with another 5 or 6 knee levers added to the equation ..so we pretty much changed the rules.

It is apparent that each player must know which of his own levers or Pedals relate to
the printed TAB..otherwise ..it will be all JAZZ..all the time...in very strange modes.

I think it was Jimmy Crawford who came up with the tab system which describes the pitch change on each string rather than which knee lever...makes sense to me..

tp

It confuses me to see an "E" lever on the 2nd string, because a lever that raises D# to E is commonplace these days.

It also confuses me that the "A" pedal raises the B string, and the "B" pedal raises the G# string to A. And just when you think that none of it makes musical sense, they come along with the "F" lever that actually tunes to an F note.

I've been playing long enough that I know these things, but I really believe that the steel community would be better off if we could agree to use flats and sharps on tab, instead of assigning confusing letter names to the pedals and levers. Musymtab is a great idea.

------------------
<small><img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b.gif" width="64" height="64">Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (F Diatonic), Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6), Roland Handsonic

I could not agree with Tony more. It is too bad that we didn't start out using the "+" and "-" symbols to represent changes. If so, it would have been soooo much more logical IMO.

Incidently, Al Petty* was the first I know of to use this terminology. Those of you that have ever seen the Fender 400 and 1000 PSG manuals, will clearly see how Al used the +'s and -'s to indicate what each pedal did.

IE, E- means the string is lowered a half tone. B++ means the string is raised a whole tone. And so on. So it does not matter whether we are talking about notes; or when looking at tab, everyone would instantly KNOW what it meant and KNOW what pedal or knee lever to use on THEIR guitar; after just a little bit of study.

God help Al Petty, I am soo saddened about the whole mess he is in, I loved him dearly then AND now.

carl

* Al told us one time in a "tuning seminar" at the ISGC, that He was the one who wrote the original Fender PSG owner's manual. Since that time I have heard another story. Until it is authenticated otherwise, I shall hold that it was Al who did it.

Since musical literature already has a flat (b) and sharp (#) and even a double sharp (X), I find it much easier to use those symbols. I see little reason to reinvent something that's perfectly adequate. Jimmie Crawford was using this idea 25 years ago. I picked it up from him and have been using it ever since -- ASSUMING we're talking about denoting pulls in tablature. On a copedent listing, I agree with Carl, the +, ++, -, -- works well in that context.

Now, another issue:
When you say, 'hit your D lever' you need to know
* which physical lever (LKL RKR, etc) it is
* what it does (lowers 2nd string 1/2 tone)
When you say, 'lower your 2nd string 1/2 tone' you only need to know which lever does this. The added benefit is that you begin thinking intervals rather than some arbitrary naming convention. Just my opinion. You learn your guitar much more thoroughly when you are fully aware when you press a pedal or a lever, WHICH STRINGS ARE CHANGING, and how much and which direction.

------------------
<small>Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2000 Fessenden S-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Larry Bell on 14 January 2003 at 06:24 AM.]</p></FONT>

I wholeheartedly agree. Use flats and sharps, everybody knows how their own guitar set up works.

<SMALL>everybody knows how their own guitar set up works.</SMALL>

A lot of beginners don't, which is why they get confused with letters for pedals and knee levers. If they don't know their own setup, even flats and sharps won't help. Thus, learning your own setup is essential to learning tab of any kind.

Because I started playing steel by muical theory instead of tab or by ear, I always felt that the "Nashville number" system was like putting training wheels on a child's bicycle.

I NO longer feel that way. And for a number of reasons. Even though I will ALWAYS believe the system was spawned because the players in "Nashville" did not read music, it does have some real advantages over the "time proven" sheet music type of notation.

I believe this also applies to most steel players when it comes to what a given change does. After thinking about it for a long time, I believe (Like the Nashville system), the best approach is the + and - way. The reason is simple.

Many steel players would NOT recognize that a # "raised" a string as easily as they would recognize that a + symbol raised it. The same goes for the b versus the - symbol.

Here is an example of built in confusion to the "non-theory" mind:

In the key of E, our 2nd string on our E9th neck is called D# (correctly) on many charts. But on some charts it is called Eb.

Yet when we lower it to a D, NO body says D#b. Or worse yet, when we lower it even further to a C#, the average non theorist student would immediately be confused.

In a word just about ANY one can relate to a + or -, meaning raise or lower, but NOT everyone can relate to a # or b when seen on a chart. As most any one CAN relate to I IV V; as oppossed to C#, F# and G#7--or is it Ab7? .

As the late and beloved Shot Jackson used to say when asked why he called the 3rd string "Ab" even though the 6th string was called G#,

"Cuz that's what it is!!!!"

My opinions of course,

carl

That's a very good argument for plus and minus symbols, Carl. I never thought of it that way. Thanks.

------------------
<small><img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b.gif" width="64" height="64">Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (F Diatonic), Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6), Roland Handsonic

Carl,
What I was referring to was how to denote a raise or lower in TABLATURE (is that what you're addressing?). The fret number, not the note name, is encoded in the tablature. I see no conflict with tab like
<font face="monospace" size="3"><pre>
1---------------
2---------------
3--3~~~3#
4--3~~~~
5--3~~~3X
6---------------</pre></font>

I would find <font face="monospace" size="3"><pre>
1------------
2------------
3--3~~~3+
4--3~~~~
5--3~~~3++
6------------</pre></font>
more confusing -- partly because the way many people write tab on a computer includes minus signs along the lines.

Just my opinion.

------------------
<small>Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2000 Fessenden S-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Larry Bell on 15 January 2003 at 10:25 AM.]</p></FONT>

Yes Larry,

Even on tab where NO notes are actually written, it has been my experience that many an untrained mind (those with no musical theory background) look on #'s and b's as a huge mystery. And the real examples I gave earlier are justified cause for this mystery.

Thus, the reason why a person like Shot saw NOTHING wrong with calling the 3rd string an Ab while still calling the 6th string a G#. And if you ever knew Shot, he was dead serious about it.

Because of this confusion and the confusion of "is it F# or is it Gb"), it rolls over into tab; with my experience in teaching PSG.

I understand fully about the dashes and minus symbols confusing some. But this is easily gotten around with just ONE explanation, rather than having to continue to explain away questions of "why?" Also, with modern computers; having an almost unlimited choice of fonts, that is easily solved by using one font for a dash and having a descretely different font for the minus sign.

There is further imputus to this when we consider the many things in every day life that uses + and - signs to indicate up versus down. Examples:

1. Thermometer

2. Simple arithmetic

3. Hand held calculators

4. the 'oft used phrase + or -

If one contrasts that to the # and b signs, these are almost exclusively used in musical theory and that takes us back to the SJ thingy. One exception is the lower right hand key on a touch tone telephone representing pound which in no way have I ever seen any logic of why that symbol was used to represent a measure of weight.

Oh well

My thoughts anyway. Thanks for your input. God bless you dear friend,

carl <FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by C Dixon on 15 January 2003 at 11:05 AM.]</p></FONT>

I agree that tab should have the movement on each string denoted, be it b and # or - and +.

However, you still need a shorthand way of referring to a pedal or lever change.

Too bad we didn't start calling them lever 1, 2, 3 or lever alpha, beta, gamma...

It is just an unhappy accident that SOMETIMES the common lever letters correspond to notes. This just muddies the waters. Oh well...

And Carl, I always appreciate your lucid explanations of things. But I still wish that our music system could refer to the 12 tones as a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l rather using the crazy sharps and flats.

It seems to me that music notation only really works cleanly in the key of C. Every other key is a kludge. Also, I guess that it all comes from basing everything off of a major scale. This always seemed arbitrary to me. We seem to be stuck with a screwy artifact of history.

Clearly, I don't know what I'm talking about...but I've never really gotten the hang of notation. Maybe if I grew up with a piano instead of a guitar, I'd be better off.

Bless you Lynn. And the frustration we will live with forever. Just like steel players favoring JI tuning over ET (in most cases), such is the case with sharps and flats in musical theory. The sad part is, there simply is NO good way to represent music on paper. ANY method other than the 7 note, sharps and flats system creates more problems than it cures.

The only change I know of in the evolution of muical notation that was a better system is the removal of the 11 line staff in favor of the Treble and Bass Cleff staffs used almost universally now.

Along that line, IF we try ANY other method of noting music on paper, it is even worse than what seems to be the standard for eternity.

It would be nice if it were like the Imperial versus metric standard. Then we could say without any hesitation that the metrice system has it hands down over the other. But such is not the case in music.

I venture to say, that if a better system EVER emerges, it will be invented by the same dude that resolves the age old debate over JI versus ET.

Ah the joys of man's toys; not even considering the cost.

carl

"# and b"s , "+ and -"s, let's not forget
"R and L"s . I've seen all of them in different tabs. All denoting the same thing.

BTW, R and L indicates Raise and Lower, not left and right.

There's no standard, I just accept that fact.