The Steel Guitar Forum

I recently saw a product called 'Fat Finger' advertised in a guitar magazine. It's basically a metal clamp that you attach to the headstock of your guitar. They claim that it increases the sustain of your strings. I figured that it was the same as attaching a small 'C' clamp to your guitar.

I got the smallest metal 'C' clamp and gently attached it to the headstock of my lap steel.
I placed some padding so no damage would occur. Well what do you know! It did increase the sustain of the strings and added some nice overtones.

Why does this work? Why don't more manufacturers use this trick when designing headstocks (add more weight, not attach 'C' clamp)?

I wonder what size C clamp you'd need to make your guitar sound like a 1937 Ric bakelite?

-Bill

Gerald:
Besides adding mass to the area immediately past the nut, perhaps it reduces lateral vibrations. Does one side of the clamp end up the "bass" side and the other on the "treble" side of the headstock? Clamping in such a way may reduce those "left to right" - lateral - vibrations. Example - Leo Fender used such an idea on his G&L guitars - a set screw that went through the bridge housing to push the individual bridge saddles into ONE unit, eliminating lateral vibe and thereby increasing sustain. Not quite the same thing as you're talking about, but maybe the same phenomenon anyway. BTW - many players can't appreciate Leo's later design, prefering the sound of the Telecaster over the ASAT. I like both, myself.

Take care, and thanks for the E-mail over our Christmas "break"

Rob

I have seen those things too, but never tried one. I am not sure of why they work, but my educated guess is that they add mass in just the right place ont the guitar as Robert says.

The body of the guitar, together with the neck, act as a structural support for the strings. When the string vibrates, the tendency is for the body and neck to vibrate in an equal and opposite manner as the string. This dissipates the energy of the vibrating string.

When you add mass to the neck and body, it makes it harder for the neck and body to vibrate, and thus makes it harder to dissipate the energy of the vibrating string. Since the vibrations of the string do not dissipate as quickly, the string vibrates longer, leading to more sustain.

Gerald--I'm glad you posted this. Not because I have an answer (I don't), but because I was curious about those things. I've been thinking about ordering one to try it out. Now that I hear that applying the concept makes a difference I'll definitely give it a shot, on my standard guitar anyway.

I think this may be one reason why the new Sierras sound so good- there's a solid piece of aluminum sandwiched into the body that the tuning head and string ball ends both connect to. Besides anchoring the strings to the body, I think the added mass at the thinnest (structurally weakest) part of the headstock makes a big difference. There is also a product on the market that is shaped like the back of a Fender guitar peghead and mounts to the peghead underneath the tuning pegs...somebody might think about machining a plate like that to fit the underside of a flat peghead on a lap steel...

------------------
Mark van Allen-"Blueground Undergrass" Pedal, Non-Pedal, Lap, and Dobro

The way I believed to understand this device was, that as it is like a "clamp", it can be moved around and placed individually somewhere on a guitars keyhead. It seems to be the manufacturers argument that it can/could/may help correct "dead spots" that appear more or less strongly on most any guitar.
In my opinion, we should however keep in mind that this may/could very well be effective on a standard (fingered) guitar and that it's effectiveness may/can/could have to do with the fact that on a standard guitar the strings are being pushed down to the neck (frets). Thus some of the resonance is fed back and forth between the keyhead and the particular frets played... and as the player moves along the neck, this picture constantly changes.
On the steel guitar (that have "dead spots" too), it's a bit a different story as there is no changing contact points along the neck, while the player moves the bar up and down the neck. The only thing that changes, is the ratios of string length left and right of the bar and their ratio against the fixed length of string behind the nut (keyhead [if any present]). But that happens on a standard guitar too.
But anyway, try this: Unplug your guitar and strum across it and, while it rings, place your bar (bullet nose down) at different spots along the instruments body. You might be amazed how much the guitar's resonance <u>seems</u> to change.... Pressure is of essence, so you might not want to try too hard on a lacquered finish... Sadly most of these changes seem not at all that audible through an amp...
Sound is all about Mass. What kind of mass and where you have it will greatly determine how your instrument sounds.

------------------
The future belongs to culture. jaydee@bellsouth.net<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by J D Sauser on 03 January 2001 at 08:38 AM.]</p></FONT>

What a great topic!
I think that the technical term for what we're talking about here is "polar moment of inertia". In the automotive world, you want as low a polar moment as possible to facilitate a quick transition from one turn to another. You want to put all of the mass in the middle. That's why F1 racecars are mid-engine. It seems that for a stringed instrument it is just the opposite- put it as close to the outside as possible so that the tail doesn't wag the dog. Putting that clamp on the headstock gives you a higher polar moment of inertia.
I agree that mass alone is not the key to good tone. It is all in the placement.

I'm pretty sure I saw the 'Fat Finger' advertised in the Feb 2001 issue of Guitar Player, the issue with Lenny Kravitz on the cover.

Interesting interview with Lenny Kravitz. He tells how he turned his music completely around after hearing both a Sol Hoopii and Homer & Jethro (w/Jerry Byrd) record at a chic Hollywood MTV type party recently. Everyone in attendance was very very into the tunes that were playing. Lenny's new CD will be a tribute to Dick McIntire and King Benny Nawahi. He tells the interviewer "Although Dick played primarily in C#m and only used a six string lap, I feel that he achieved a very full sound and was a pivot point in the development from acoustic to the more modern electric style. Benny on the other hand was a mad man!"

Expect much traditional steel at this year's MTV Music Awards.

Lame attempt at sarcasm. See previous paragraphs.<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Gerald Ross on 05 January 2001 at 05:53 AM.]</p></FONT>

Here's a link to the Fat Finger site: http://www.groovetubes.com/Pages/index.html
It's under "Fathead".<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Don Sutley on 04 January 2001 at 09:02 PM.]</p></FONT>

<SMALL>Sound is all about Mass. What kind of mass and where you have it will greatly determine how your instrument sounds.</SMALL>

JD -- you are so correct! Except for a Requiem Mass. Don't use that one. It makes your intrument sound completely dead!

Sorry... I couldn't resist!
TJW :0


------------------
Todd James Weger/RD/RTD
www.franchise-yourself.com
1960 Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6)

I had to scramble to replace three of the Kluson keys (5th,4th,3rd) on the E9th neck of my Emmons D-10 once after the drummers cymbal stand took a dive and cut off the stems of the "butterfly" buttons flush with the top of the keys.
All I could get my hands on was two sets of schaller keys for std guitar. I had to drill out the holes in the key head to get them to fit and since the thickness of the Emmons keyhead is a lot thinner that a std guitar that they were designed to fit, I had to fill up the space with zinc washers from the hardware store so I could get them to tighten up and hold position before the threaded collars hit bottom. It worked and I got through the rest of the tour just fine.
I had planned on re-doing the install after I got off the road, but the increased sustain and mid-range tone were so much improved with the added mass of the washers, that I decided that no matter how ugly it looks, it sounds great and I've left it just that way I fixed it up in that motel room in Montana!
JE:-)>

With some skepticism I purchased a FatFinger about a year ago for use with acoustic guitar. Even to my relatively unsophisticated ear the increase in sustain was immediately apparent. I don't know about the "dead spot" thing, but I have noticed that it seems to make the high-low tone spectrum more balanced. Some guitars can be bass heavy with thin treble or bright with kind of weak bass. This gadget seems to even it out. My "couch" guitar is a bottom-of-the-line Martin (oo-15) and the improvement in sound was pretty dramatic. So, if your guitar sounds kind of deficient, you might (as they say) try giving it the finger. BTW, just got the latest Musicians Friend in the mail and the price of the FatFinger is down to 22.49 from 29.99 Might just get another one.

What is going on is that the neck is acting like a lever and when you put just a little extra weight way out on the end of a lever,it makes a big difference - extra resonance,in this case.The neck is vibrating more and sustaining that motion longer.BTW,the guys who stash their Keyser capos out on the end of their headstock are getting the same effect.I'm not too sure this effect will work as well on a steel guitar because of it's slab-like design and the way it's held in your lap or even on 3 or 4 legs would damp out any extra sustain you might achieve.a Dobro maybe...cause it has a guitar-like neck hangin out there. -MJ-

I think that anything past the nut ends up being unwanted leverage. I doubt it would make as much difference placed way out on the very end of the keyhead- perhaps someone with a finger could try it and let me know. I see the finger mounted as close to the nut as possible. This probably helps reflect the string energy back through the neck most efficiently, with the result being the keyhead vibrating less. The vibration you want is in the neck/body. The extra distance past the vibrating end of the string must make for a murky and inefficient turnaround of string energy.

Yesterday I was in the burbs of Detroit and stopped at Guitar Center. I picked up an official 'Fat Finger' for $15. I put it on my Gibson EH-150 and the tone is a bit better. The balance between the strings is more even and there is a bit more sustain. My 16 year old Stratocaster twanging son even noticed the difference.

I agree with Sage. It's sounds best when mounted near the nut.

For $15 give it a shot. What the hell.
<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Gerald Ross on 09 January 2001 at 08:11 PM.]</p></FONT>

Polar moment of inertia? No not really! You see, the PMI only comes into play in situations where rotation, or axial movement exists. But, you're right Sage...in a race car, a low PMI means it's easier to initiate, or to stop vehicle turning, which simply means the car responds faster.

Several posters did get the real reason, though...the added mass reduces neck vibrations, which counteract the string vibration. The headstock of a guitar, like the ends of a tuning fork, is farthest from its support, and therefore this is where the most movement (vibration) takes place.

For those of you wishing to learn more about the Fatfinger:
http://www.groovetubes.com/Pages/fatfinger.html

------------------
Brad's Page of Steel:
www.well.com/~wellvis/steel.html
A web site devoted to acoustic & electric lap steel guitars

That might have been a silly guess, but I'm going to attempt to defend it anyway!
The guitar vibrates, like the strings, in all degrees of freedom. Vibration beyond the nut seems to me to be simply waving string energy away into space. Inertia at the ends is important, IM increasingly HO. It is the inertia at the end that can reflect the string energy back down the string, right? so the analogy of the racecar doesn't seem completely wrong to me. I would welcome your correction as to what'cha call what's going on here.
I still don't believe that mass by itself is the predominant key. Mass and inertia are forever related, so I can't say it makes no difference- that would be really silly.
I have made a 9 string lapsteel that weighs 2 1/2 pounds. It is a carbon fiber, maple and bamboo structural spaceframe based on Bucky Fuller's octet truss. The "body" framework weighs 9 ounces. 3/4 of the mass of the instrument is within 1/2" of the ends of the instrument. I really like the tone. It has been described by others as etherial, but not fat. I'll definitely add some mass back in on my next instruments by way of aluminum and brass on different instruments to see how that changes the tone. They still won't be heavy, though!
BTW- Dennis Atkins of the MN Steel Guitar Association will be posting pictures of it on the MN SGA website within a few weeks.<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Sage on 14 January 2001 at 02:16 PM.]</p></FONT>

I thought of an example last night to defend "polar moment of inertia".
Take a couple of big barbell weights and an 8' pvc pipe as the bar. Slide the weights into the midpoint of the bar and tie a decent size rope onto the end of the pipe. Stand back and pretend you're a nut (some of us don't have to pretend ). Wiggle the rope into a standing wave of different frequencies. At some frequencies, the pipe will move back and forth, making it hard to keep the wave going (a dead spot). At others, it will stay put and help the wave (a hot spot).
Now move the weights out to the end and do the same thing. It is easy to set up a standing wave of many frequencies, and keep it going.
The mass hasn't changed at all- only the polar moment of inertia.
Instruments are so complex that trying to figure out what is going on is like the story of the 3 blind men trying to describe an elephant. If only the guitar could talk-
say, maybe we should dig out Pete Drake's old contraption and ask the guitar a few technical questions!