quote:

---

Uh, guys - those are two polar opposites. this is why I am completely baffled by this subject - there are continually two completely different stories about why they are needed, and specicially WHAT THEY DO!

---

Please read the posts more carefully and you might finally understand that the conversation is about 2 different types of compensators that solve 2 distinct issues. Paul and I are not disseminating "polar opposite" information. This ain't rocket science.

quote:

---

John,s post is about interval compensation, not return compensation know as hysteresis. These are two completely different scenarios.

---

Paul is talking about return compensators and I have been talking about tuning compensators (or interval compensators as Paul refered to them). "Polar opposites" would require the he and I take differing positions on the same issue. That's not what is happening here. We are discusssing 2 distinct issues.

Again, if you are willing to take your time reading and considering from a fresh viewpoint the information in the posts, you might be able to become informed instead of confused.

Compensators are a personal choice if you want them or think they are necessary, go for it. If you don't find them necessary, fine. Don't use them.

Paul

[This message was edited by Franklin on 18 May 2006 at 07:28 AM.]

quote:

---

Hysteresis is when a string is raised and tuned, it returns to pitch everytime. But when it's lowered it returns anywhere from 1 to 10 percent sharp, or worse, depending on the strings variances. When an E string reads 4 cents sharp, change it and most likely it will read a different percentage. If the design of the guitar is at fault, be it keyhead, or gearless as some suggest, than it should always read the same. A player can also have the rare string that returns perfectly. I have experienced this many times, only to discover upon the next weeks string change, it goes right back to returning sharp. If the design mechanics are at fault that should never happen. I believe anyone who concludes this as purely a mechanical problem is wrong.

---

If string variances are indeed occurring, it seems logical that the string(s) in question would return flat. Not sharp, if it is because of a string weakness. What is causing the string to return sharp is the resistance of the roller nut. Especially on the longer keyed models. Hysteresis is almost always the fault of the keyhead and roller nut. Notice I said "almost". The very few other causes are at the changer. Sticking, obstuction, etc.
Those who want to justify "TUNING COMPENSATORS" can do so. But there is NO excusing sharp returned strings. They are the result of a long keyheaded guitar.
No amount of lubrication can remedy this problem. If one tries to make an almost level keyhead, then you will have the buzzing associated with less tension on the roller nut. To make the strings stay down on the rollers to prevent such buzz, one creates the resistance that hysteresis is born of.
Return Compensators by definition correct a design problem in keyed guitars. Compensating for the resisance in the roller nut on the longer keyhead guitars.
This should be apparent to anyone who thinks this through.
ONCE AGAIN, I AM TALKING ABOUT RETURN COMPENSATORS.

------------------
I'd rather be opinionated, than apathetic!

Here is a simple little experiment for the keyhead people re the F# (or any other)pitch change things:

1.Tune the strings of choice.
2. press on the string in the overhang area to raise it a halftone, or a tone.
3. Release the string back to normal.
4. Did it return true?
5. Was any noticed change the same amount and direction that obtained via pedal/lever activation/deactivation?
6. How much do other strings change when you press on them?
7. How much do the non pressed strings change?

Be careful to pick the string(s) about the same in location and hardness, and read the tuner at about the same point in the strings decay. The string will read sharper at large vibrations than after it has decayed a bit.

If your instrument had the string lock instead of a roller nut, do you think that the hysteresis would go away?

Do you find hysteresis greater on wound or plain strings?

Thanks, Paul!

------------------
Bobby Lee
-b0b- quasar@b0b.com
System Administrator
My Blog

[This message was edited by b0b on 18 May 2006 at 08:03 AM.]

If you can't hear it, then it doesn't exist in your reality. You may be able to measure it but if no one can hear it then it won't make any difference musically.

My thanks to Paul also for being here.

[This message was edited by John Fabian on 18 May 2006 at 08:15 AM.]

quote:

---

If your instrument had the string lock instead of a roller nut, do you think that the hysteresis would go away?

---

If the hysteresis is caused by a long key head, then the answer is definately YES. The string lock would prevent any string from being pulled past the point of contact on the string lock. This is the reason for the locking string device on the Floyd Rose equipped floating tremolo six string guitar.
If there were no string lock, when the tremolo "dumps" the strings, they would be allowed to slip down in the headstock. Then when the tremolo is allowed to return they would be sharp.

[This message was edited by Curt Langston on 18 May 2006 at 09:41 AM.]

Curt...exactly the point! IF the string lock were used on the PSG, the hangover part of any hysteresis would be eliminated and roller nuts would not be needed even in the eyes/mind of the folk that do not think that overhang contributes to hysteresis.

quote:

---

To the extent that the string terminates close to the nut, the roller is not required anyway.

---

That's where a lot of the confusion comes in, I think - it's very easy to interpret two completely different things as being called the SAME thing...i.e "compensators", especially for those of us new to the steel world.

OK - now that we have cleared that issue up, it *still* looks like a mechanical defect is ANY compensator is required. If you pull or slacken a string, and it returns to a different note than it started with, something isn't working right. If you pull or slacken a string to a particular note, and that note isn't in tune with the other strings - huh? An E to an F# is going to be the same F# as on the other strings if they are in tune. How could it NOT be in tune, if it was in tune anbd so were the other strings? That makes no sense at all.

So the guitar is either in tune - or it's not. If you need an add-on whirligig because it's not, again - it's a bad design or the darned thing is broken.

I've played B and G benders for decades on Teles, Strats, Les Pauls and more guitars than you can shake a stick at, plus slide and dobro. Oddly, bent strings were in tune and returned to pitch and other strings didn't have to be adjusted to keep a chord in tune (neither did other players on sessions have to "compensate" their notes to stay in tune with me - nor did I to stay in tune with them). Bridges are "compensated", you say - but they are static. You don't adjust intonation during a song.

The idea that this phenomenon would be inherent only in pedal steel guitars is wild. This isn't experienced with 6 string guitars with mechanical benders or finger-bent strings....so why an 8, 10, 12, 14 or 50 string guitar played with a metal bar would experience it sound like more marketing than common sense - i.e. if you are an established outfit and make it, someone will buy it.

It sort of reminds me of guitarist Eric Johnson's insistence that effects pedals and their batteries be placed at precise angles in relation to each other - that it makes a difference in tone (insert huge eyeroll here).

Look, a guitar of ANY kind is in tune during the playing process and stays that way...or it isn't and/or doesn't. If it doesn't, it needs repair or setup, not gadgetry.

I haven't read threads regarding tuning debates, having been through the whole Buzz Feiten smoke-and-mirrors debate in that "other" guitar universe. 99.9% of all tuners are sold set to A-440, and not adjusted for each string. Almost all guitars are sold set to play tuned that way. The ones that aren't are set *wrong*....a not uncommon thing with mass-market instruments.

Sheesh - it seems that a whole bunch of folks like the Beatles, Stones, Lawrence Welk, Benny Goodman were somehow able to make recording without tuners or "compensators". Big band is an interesting example - a whole pile of different instruments with only minor (or NO) tuning adjustments possible, and wow...they actually sound in tune.

Nowdays you tune it up with the needle pointing at the sky, and as my old friend/banjo player Patrick Cloud says, then "grab the handle and mash 'em down".

Somebody is selling tuners set to wrong notes? Seriously, I was not aware of it. P.T. Barnum was right.

And there's no Santa Claus - sorry.

[This message was edited by Jim Sliff on 18 May 2006 at 11:04 AM.]

quote:

---

The F# problem is not caused by a defect in the instrument - it's caused by the nature of the music we play.

---

quote:

---

An E to an F# is going to be the same F# as on the other strings if they are in tune. How could it NOT be in tune, if it was in tune anbd so were the other strings? That makes no sense at all.

---

------------------
Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog

[This message was edited by Bobby Lee on 18 May 2006 at 11:49 AM.]

Laws of Physics could have easily called Ideas of Physics, but they weren't.

I'm gathering from the preceding muddle that "Hysteresis" only works when stretching a string more than it was, and then destretching it, and not destretching it and then resretching it?

So "Hysteresis" only works half the time?

I know myself that there are guitars that only work correctly that way. That there are complete brands of them wouldn't surprise me..

I'm interested to see Ed Packard's results on this one and hope they are forthcoming.

This is one of those "missing Mr Hankey" moments, and I sorely do.

Also I guess for the record I ascribe totally to Mr Emmons' comments on the subject.

Sometimes I think asking an artist about pyhisics is like asking an actor about politics...

I think some people take themselves entirely too seriously.

Gotta run.

I'm playing mine tonite.

Thanks again Duane and Jeff.

EJL

[This message was edited by Eric West on 18 May 2006 at 06:53 PM.]

Then the "right" one is going to be out of tune with any instrument with fixed tuning. because your "right" tone isn't anyone else's.

If you need a compensator to tune to a piano, then your original note or your new one was not in tune with it. There's not compensation on a piano..or a trumpet, or Hammond B3. Ever seen a compensator on a set of vibes?

Back to two issues - the compensator that adjust the non-pedaled (or levered) strings is there to adjust for out-of-tune notes on the instrument - or to make them match newly out-of-tune notes. If so, something is wrong with the instrument.

The compensator used to return a note to the place it started from is making up for an obvious, serious defect in an instrument. Again, I've bent strings for 30 years and NEVER has this problem been apparent except in the steel guitar world.

Either some folks are overthinking uneccessary mechanics, or they're making instruments that don't work right to start with. MMan, I must have been awfully lucky with every brand of sring I've ver used, because they all seem to return to pitch just fine - whether bent by Parsons-hite, Higgins, Hipshot, Glaser (going up) or Keith/Scruggs, Hipshot, Sperzel or Schaller (going down).

As I said, I have not been involved with the whole tuning debate here, having been through it on guitar forums before. But from a practical standpoint, "needles up" seems to work for 99.9% of the players on the planet. If some steel people think differently, somebody started that issue somewhere and sucked some others right into the maelstrom with them.

The only way the other system works is to make an instrument in tune with only itself. It will be out-of-tune with all the other maladjusted instruments on the planet, none of which use this gadgetry.

I don't know what the "hornet's nest" thought is. If you tune to other instruments, you aren't going to need to play with "compensators"...they don't. you WILL be out of tune, unless you're REALLY good at manual adjustments of bar positions, slants, and partial pedal/lever movements.

So I return to the PT Barnum statement. And I'm still sorry 'bout Santa.

;-)

PS - missed John Jaffe's note. If you look at b0b's list of tunings, I use the updated (recently) version of Sneaky Pete's B6...except I tune string 9 to a D# instead of F#, as it fits some particular rock licks I used to play on guitar better. Left the pedal changes on that string alone, as I don't really use them, and I never play that string in chords. I'm pretty much a theory idiot and complete ear player (another reason tuning...especially in close proximity with other instruments...is so critical for me), so those changes lost me anyway.

[This message was edited by Jim Sliff on 18 May 2006 at 07:22 PM.]