Fender 400 vs Modern Pedal Steels

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 29 Oct 2006 1:00 pm

Twayn: it's not a progression - it's a system. Most common chord transitions are found in that chart (tranposed to the appropriate key, of course). If you want to slide from one chord to another, chances are that you can find both of the chords on that continuum. The E9th system with 3 knee levers supports all 3 positions of the common triads, plus the scale tones that support those positions on the chromatic strings.

Ian: I hate to burst your bubble, but Speedy played pedal steel. Joaquin also took up pedal steel late in life. Neither of them played E9th, though.

Moving lines within chords are a stylistic preference of the country E9th style, but the tuning doesn't require you to play in that fashion. Listen to Randy Beavers or Lloyd Green playing in a swing context. What you hear is similar to what other players do on C6th. Buddy Emmons has recorded swing tunes on E9th, basically viewing it as an enhancement of the E13th tunings of yesteryear.

But I agree that if your goal is to limit your playing to a specific style, the Fender 400 might help you accomplish that goal.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">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 
<div style="display:none">[This message was edited by Bobby Lee on 29 October 2006 at 01:01 PM.][This message was edited by Bobby Lee on 29 October 2006 at 01:01 PM.][This message was edited by Bobby Lee on 29 October 2006 at 01:03 PM.][This message was edited by Bobby Lee on 29 October 2006 at 02:18 PM.]

John McGann · Post by **John McGann** » 29 Oct 2006 1:50 pm

To me, swing played on E9 with modern style changes and moving lines within chords sounds horrible.

Randy Beavers makes it sound pretty good.

------------------
http://www.johnmcgann.com
Info for musicians, transcribers, technique tips and fun stuff. Joaquin Murphey transcription book, Rhythm Tuneup DVD and more...

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 29 Oct 2006 2:35 pm

I was playing a Fender 1000 40 years ago, I started my pedal experience on that steel. It's not a perfect steel, by any means, but it still can make good music. Jim and Bob seem to want to argue this one into the ground, and that's rather pointless. They're coming from two different mindsets, each of which is valid in a certain context.

I think both of you should realize that what's a good "beginner" pedal steel is totally dependent on the beginner in question! Until you know him, and get into his head and figure what he likes and where he wants to go, musically, you can't really make a prudent recommendation.

Ian Finlay · Post by **Ian Finlay** » 29 Oct 2006 2:40 pm

Of course I'm aware that Speedy, Joaquin and many of their peers used pedals, and later on used them for "moving voicings" or whatever term we want to use. That's not the point. The point is that they developed their unique styles by changing and adapting their equipment and setups as they went, and didn't "have" to use any given setup. I guess I'm moving off-topic here, so I'll stop lest this turn into a disposition on my own preferences. Suffice to say that IMHO a Fender is as good or better than a modern E9 or E9/C6 "standard" setup steel for my kind of music. Not to mention the fact that if I turned up to a gig with a modern steel I'd probably not keep the gig long, just as much as if I used a Parker Fly instead of my Gibson 295 on a Rockabilly gig.

One note: I am VERY grateful that we have the SGF to discuss this. I wouldn't have got anywhere without the great help and advice I have received here. I hope we can celebrate our differences as well as we find support in our common cause of the Steel Guitar!

Ian[This message was edited by Ian Finlay on 29 October 2006 at 02:43 PM.]

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 29 Oct 2006 2:57 pm

swing played on E9 with modern style changes and moving lines within chords sounds horrible.

The thing is, moving lines within chords is only one sound or style of playing. Granted it's the predominant popular style, but it's still just one style. It's not the only sound and style that can be played on the tuning.

To say the E9 tuning can only produce country licks is like saying a Strat can only play Jimi Hendrix licks. The tuning is capable of playing many different sounds and styles, including swing, rock, classical, and blues.

------------------
Warning: I have a Telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site

[This message was edited by Mike Perlowin on 29 October 2006 at 03:05 PM.]

Twayn Williams · Post by **Twayn Williams** » 29 Oct 2006 3:06 pm

Bobby, without getting too terribly involved in theory, the ability to play the same voicing structure through the scale degree chords is musically unnecessary, though it certainly doesn't hurt anything if you can.

How this ties into the subject at hand is that while I agree with you and I agree with Jim, I beleive if you really want to learn to play the pedal steel guitar, you're better off starting with a 6-string lap steel in C6

Jim Dempsey · Post by **Jim Dempsey** » 29 Oct 2006 4:02 pm

Sneaky Pete's great sounding Fender!!.....cool video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BITiY8M_oDo

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 29 Oct 2006 6:50 pm

Lordy, you STILL have it upside down:

"Jim, I think that promoting the E9th as a "country only" copedent does a huge disservice to all of us who play other types of music on it. To me, the question ultimately boils down to, can you transition from one chord position position to the next? "

That wasn't the point. I guess I must be communicating this wrong...except about 50 people seem to understand fine.

WHAT I am saying is that when YOU get an email from a newbie, and he's a country guy, recommending E9 3+3 (or 4) makes perfect sense. But in other cases, it MAY NOT. I'm NOT saying it's a country-only copedent...but I am saying that it is used 99% of the time FOR country. If people play other styles on it, wonderful. No quibbles about that. but they don't HAVE to have that setup to play all other styles. You've got the cart in front of the horse again.

And if a player wants to do alt-country, country-rock, blues, etc, there's NO reason - if he has some basic musical knowledge - that the Fenders won't work great for him ***If he is aware of all the up-and-downsides***.

ALL YOU GIVE IS THE NEGATIVE. You don't KNOW the positives because you don't play the friggin' instrument, b0b! And if you DID, you would be analyzing it from technical angles that most players dialed-in to the 8-strings totally ignore...because they are not essential.

And your whole "triad" example is completely irrelevant except in the context of your own playing, as the typical rock/country-rock guitar player does not think in those terms. Most also don't play in terms of scales - we play in terms of "pockets".

What I am trying to get through to you is that you do not grasp what non-theorist, non-technical, basic rockers, blues guys, and jamband folks think. I've read your posts over and over, and you think in music-as-engineering terms. To understand the whole 400 concept, you need to get it on a more visceral level, and you're not there, my friend.

Neither is my friend Mike. I really appreciate what you both say - but you are *overthinking* the entire thing. You are assuming all players practice scales and progressions based on theoretical concepts. Uh - no. Most of the people who would gravitate to the 400 would simply "play". I played guitar for 40 years, made pretty damned good money, did thousands of gigs - and have never played that triad -thing in my life. I've played a maj7 chord probably 6 or 7 times, by accident. When I solo, I NEVER think of a scale, I think of a "box". I likely could not tell you what note I was on if you stopped me, and neither could most 6-stringers, because we play by feel.

And guitarists coming to steel, for the most part, see the thing that way. I've talked to many of them, and the whole "need for a zillion levers" and "moving triads" goes "whooosh" right over their heads. They (we) think differently - and we can play, but we don't need the same gadgets, and we use a different frame of reference.

It's a different approach to the instrument, and I doubt you'll ever understand what I'm talking about - because it's based on the heart, not the analysis.

Which is why I again suggest you just step back and let others handle those questions. You can't answer something you know nothing about. I would not attempt to answer a technical question about chord structures on an E9 tuning, or whether the 3+3 setup will play some (fill in the name of a country star here) song, because I don't have that frame of reference.

You're telling people NOT to take up an instrument based on what you DON'T know - that makes NO sense.

Kyle Everson · Post by **Kyle Everson** » 29 Oct 2006 8:15 pm

When I started playing, all I wanted was a Maverick because I didn't think I could play like all those "country guys on the Grand Ole Opry." I am SO glad that I didn't make that decision. After about a month, I could already play the stuff I originally wanted to learn, and just kept moving. Had I not bought a D-10, I would not be playing melodies with the E-F lever and G#-F# lower, etc.

This was my only resource when I was trying to decide whether or not to play. I read these posts and tried my best to make the right decision. When I read all the comments in this thread, I just hoped that no beginners were lurking and reading them and saying "well if these guys can't come to a conclusion, how am I ever gonna be able to understand this?"

My point is, a beginner doesn't always know what he wants, so it is up to the more experienced players to help him make the right decision.

------------------
Kyle Everson
Sho-Bud Pro-II
Fender Twin Reverb
Goodrich 120

Fred Bova · Post by **Fred Bova** » 29 Oct 2006 9:08 pm

OK, I've been sitting on the sidelines but, here I go.

Someone wrote;
"You know, Keith Richards doesn't have the 6th string on his guitar. He plays with just 5 strings. Would you recommend that every aspiring rock guitarist remove their 6th string, so that they can rock like Keith?"

Well, on the guitars that Keith does use only 5 strings on, he is tuned to open G. And, it totally works. So, yes, if that is what you are going for, I say go for it.

My first PSG was a Wright Custom; D8, cable pull, no knee levers. I had no lessons or info at all. I was happy that it was still in tune when I got it home so I could notate what notes the strings were tuned to so that I could retune it when it sipped out of tune. I dug in on my own and learned a few songs by ear, and created a PSG part for a few other songs from scratch. From about 2 weeks after I first bought it I played two songs a night on that steel, for about 6 months. I then went to see Poco perform and talked to Rusty Young for a quite a bit. I went home, sold my Wright, ordered a new Emmons, set up like Rustys, Jimmy Day pedal layout and full copedent with the KLVRs that Rusty suggested. When I received my Emmonds I had to relearn all those songs to be able to play them again with my band. I did not play them any better, and I know the Wrigth sounded better. I only played the chromatic strings and the associated knee levers, when someone asked me what they did. I used strings 3-8 and the A,B, and C pedals. I was better off with the Wright, that did not have the chromatic strings, knee levers, or bass strings that I did not play.

I recently decided I wanted to buy another PSG and learn to play. Since it had only been 35 years since I sold or played my Emmons, I thought doing a little research would not hurt. I did my homework. I checked out a few PSG's, and all of the threads said I should check out the Carter Starter. I went and played a Carter Starter 3 different times. I was not impressed at all. It was thin sounding, unstable, Flimsy, minimal mech were included on the undercariage. It had no pedal stops, and .... a FIXED WELDED copedent. Did anyone learn anything from the Sho-Bud Permanent or Maverick ? At least the Sho-Bud was built well, looked good, and sounded good, even if the copedent was "permanent". I did not play PSG that long, way, way, back in my teen years, maybe 18 months or so, but I played Day, and some of those motor memories are still there.

I would have gladly bought a Fender 400, or another Wright if I could have found and afforded one. They were my FIRST choices. The Carter Starter was my last choice. Actually, I had decided to buy a nice quality used PSG or no PSG. I could not see buying a Carter Starter, I would be too dissatisfied with it, and I would be forced to learn Emmons or Welding. I checked the Forum from time to time, and eBay 3 times a day for a few weeks until I did a "Buy it now" within 45 mins of the item I wanted being listed. I bought a Fender/Sho-Bud with 3+1. It is more than I need for now, maybe forever. I do wish I had a changer that let me raise and lower the same string, but I will work with what I have. It is a lot more than Jimmy Day and many others had. I am setting it up for what works for me. I am set up Day, I do not have the chromatic strings, I start with my 1st string being a G# and my only Knee Lever is set up to do the solo E to F# Mooney pull. If I had 4 pedals I may have put it on the 4th pedal. I have spent many hours reading interviews and comparing copedents as I am looking for what will work for ME. I often find myself intuitivelly pushing pedals that do not change the string(s) I am playing on, just to find that those changes do not exist in my copedent, or the standard E9 copedent even with the chromatic strings and all the knee levers.

The chromatic strings were, and still are awkward to me, and many others. They are a "kludge", a fix , a bandaid to try and add these notes to the existing accepted tuning at the time. They were put where they are so that they could be "backward compatible" with the existing well known copedent of the time. No one wanted to throw everyone off by adding a string, or pedal or two in between what was the norm.

Look, Once upon a time, everyone used hand signals to let another driver know they were turning. Then someone invented the Electric Turn Signals using the existing wiring to your Brake Lights. Then they were offered as an option in cars, and also as an aftermarket add-on. Then they became mandatory, it became the Law. Car designers have to add bulbs and wiring, and include Turn Signals on all cars for sale. Fine, they are a great help.

But,... what if,.... they decided to install the Turn Signal SWITCH ... OUTSIDE the drivers side window,.... just because everyone was used to putting their left arm out the window when they were making a turn. It could have happened, but lucky for us putting the Turn Signal Switch on the Steering Columb did not impeade using the Steering Wheel, Gear Shifter, or Gas or Brake pedals.

A Fender 400, 800, 1000, 2000, all all fine, IF you KNOW what you want to do, and what that will take.

If I am wrong, and you decide that the Fenders I listed above, or a Wright Custom, etc. is not worth it's Salt, then please, email me and I will gladly pay you the little some believe these are worth and I will give them a good home.

[This message was edited by Fred Bova on 29 October 2006 at 09:22 PM.]

Paul Redmond · Post by **Paul Redmond** » 29 Oct 2006 10:02 pm

The 10-string 3 x 4 setup referred to earlier in this thread that Ed Bierly sent to Jim Sliff (and Jim sent it to me) is brilliant. He showed it in the common E vernacular, but it could be dropped to D or B. Front to back ---
G#,E,C#,B,G#,F#,E,C#,B,G#
FP1 4 and 9 to C#
FP2 1, 5, and 10 to A
FP3 4 to A#
LKL 3 and 8 to D
LKR 2 (and 7) to D#
RKL 2 to F#
RKR 1 and 5 to F#
I would personally move the KL's around a bit, but you have the benefits of the Sneeky changes along with the usual E9 changes. All the 6th stuff is in there also!!
Nice job ED!!
Re: the 8 string vs. 10 debate, I would certainly miss my first two strings badly on the my E9 necks if they were gone. . .for at least 2 or 3 minutes. I learned long ago that there's a whole lot more stuff on that 'rear 8' that never gets discovered because far too much time is wasted/spent finding ways to use the 'front 2' on everything from soup to nuts. I also discovered even more stuff when I relieved my E9 tunings of that dastardly 9th D string, moved the B up into that spot, and added a low G# in the #10 spot. I use a dedicated KL to pull #9 from B to D so it's there when I need it. But i don't have to keep stumbling over the stupid thing when I'm playing 6th stuff pedals down.
I've set up 2 Carter Starters for 2 guys in my area recently. With only 3 and 4 and my D-omitted tuning on them, you could lob off the first 2 strings and still play anything all night long.
PRR

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 29 Oct 2006 10:05 pm

"I think both of you should realize that what's a good "beginner" pedal steel is totally dependent on the beginner in question! "

Donny, if you read my posts you'd know that's EXACTLY what I've been saying all along, and which b0b absolutely refuses to accept.

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 29 Oct 2006 11:18 pm

On second thought, I'll just stay out of this except to say, I wish I'd kept my first PSG, a Fender 1000, and if I had, I'd play it.[This message was edited by Jim Phelps on 29 October 2006 at 11:41 PM.]

Duane Reese · Post by **Duane Reese** » 30 Oct 2006 12:10 am

Lloyd Green has proven that the 4th string lower is unnecessary for a complete system, but few players are willing to give it up. I believe that this is a symptom of the reluctance to make full and proper use of the chromatic strings.

If you want to go to a chord uses that lowered note just by re-gripping, yes; however if you want to morph into it without picking and with portamento, you need the lower. Same reason I don't just play an S-10 with four picks only - I can get all the basic chords but I can't morph from one chord to another the same way I can on a C6. Defeats the point of it being a steel guitar, but I agree that the chromatic strings aren't used enough.

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 30 Oct 2006 4:46 am

The chromatic strings... are a "kludge", a fix, a bandaid to try and add these notes to the existing accepted tuning at the time. They were put where they are so that they could be "backward compatible" with the existing well known copedent of the time.

This is a really good point. You could look at Angelina Jolie and say, "My, what a perfect specimen!" And yet - she'll probably have lower back pain at some point, because the human spine was "designed" for a creature on all fours; she'll probably get a stuffy nose now and then, because the human nose was "designed" to drain downwards, not forwards. A dog has a better-designed nose than Angelina Jolie.

Of course people think that what they already have is the best possible thing that could ever be - that's part of the design, too. Progress is driven by an intricate weaving of malcontentment and acceptance, innovation and consolidation. It takes both the 1,000 people happily whanging away on the "standard" E9th tuning to find out how to make 'er rip, AND it takes the deranged madman with a screwdriver and a welding torch dicking around with things to make them "better." Hopefully "better"....

It's obvious that the E9th tuning, the repertoire, and the technique have co-evolved so incestuously that they can't be separated; it's equally obvious that there are several ways to arrange things to play b0b's diatonic chord series, which I agree is a good minimal starting point. I suspect that if you asked ten scientists to consider the needed notes, the size of the human hand, and cost and efficiency, they would come up with ten different tunings. I also suspect that two of them would be really close to the modern E9th and C6th tunings - that's sort of how evolution works, back pain, stuffy nose or not. I play a S-10 C6th with 5+4, and I can play b0b's chords OK enough.

So, it really does come down to musical needs - how eager are you to jump into the "classic" E9th orgy of technique, songs & cliches, how tied are you to what you already know on a six-string or piano, what do you WANT? I came at it from the perspective of wanting to make Duane Allman and Isaac Stern noises, only in chords; other people want to make the E9th noises they hear on the radio; to a large extent, anyone's "progress" will be incestuously intertwined with their choice of tuning, of course. I'm pretty sure there is no "wrong" here?

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 30 Oct 2006 6:19 am

"I'm pretty sure there is no "wrong" here?"

There is when b0b steers every beginner to "his" idea of what's needed, regardelss of that player's experience or style. that's why I say if a guy asks b0b what to buy as a beginning country player, sure, answer the question. If a guy is wanting to play popular country and is considering a 400, sure, tell him it might not be right - but ALSO steer him to one of us. And if a player just asks if a 400 is appropriate for a beginner with no other info - forward that to one of us.

Respectfully...and I mean this in the kindest terms, really...b0b is not qualified to answer any questions regarding the "appropriate" use of these guitars and should defer to people who are.

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 30 Oct 2006 6:53 am

It's obvious that the E9th tuning, the repertoire, and the technique have co-evolved so incestuously that they can't be separated;

I disagree. This http://www.perlowinmusic.com/DebussyAfternoonofaFaun.mp3
was done on a standard E9 tuning, with no altertion.

The tuning can handle just about anything. It's potential has only begun to be explored. The typical Nashville style of playing is only the beginning if the tunings capabilities.

------------------
Warning: I have a Telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site

Aaron Harms · Post by **Aaron Harms** » 30 Oct 2006 8:22 am

*sigh* Got in a little late on this one, sorry. The Master's thesis somehow tripped me up on my way to the steel this month.

I can only say, from a little over a year's experience with a Fender 400, that if I had learned on something else, I'd be missing an awful lot. Those of you who claim otherwise, will claim otherwise, and I'll go off to write with a peaceful "Fender 400induced smile" on my face.

I started with 8 strings and 4 pedals, (F, A, B, E-Eb) and I thought that was all I'd need. Ever. The particular model came ready for 6 pedals, though, and it seemed a shame to have those empty holes, so I put the others under it(G#-G, B-Bb), changed the copedent to suit my liking, (dropped the F#) and, with the help of an older brother,

added a funky knee lever.(E-F#) (again, there were holes already, may as well fill them).

From a beginner's standpoint though: If you learn with less, you'll BE a better player. Finding out how to do more with less is something that SHOULD be valued instead of shyed away from, IMO. I'd swear this up and down both covers of any holy text you present me with.

Further, though, I know it was mentioned earlier that the "beginner's setup" needs particular "minimum" requirements...gotta go with "no" on that one as well. The Fender (and any other gear I buy) forces me into a particular "box"...it's up to me (and everyone) as PLAYERS to play our way out around and through said "box"

One example: Having(getting) to use two feet has made my hands better players--not being able to spend the night on my volume pedal, "clamping" down on the bum notes (something I think beginners can relate to for sure) means you can't hit as many. If I had an assload of knees under there, to facilitate 1 footing it, I WOULD spend more time with that other foot "resting".

I'm not sure if I added anything to the discussion, but I hope so. I pretty much can disagree with both "sides" presented here, in that, frankly, if you're devoted enough to an instrument, or a song, or a lick, you'll figure out a way to make it work for you. If that means you end up playing ukelele instead of pedal steel, because someone told you to start on the wrong model, then we get a new uke player instead. I'm ok with that.

....and I'm spent.

A

Russ Tkac · Post by **Russ Tkac** » 30 Oct 2006 8:37 am

Thanks Aaron.

That sums it up for me.

Russ

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 30 Oct 2006 8:45 am

I think I'll just sit back and watch this train wreck of entrenched opinions happen. I'll just take some breaks to play my S12U. It occurs to me that, just like a piano, you don't have to decide which kind of music you are going to get in a rut with before you buy it. Sure it has alot of strings, pedals and levers for a beginner. Well a piano has 88 keys (and 3 pedals) - and I started playing one when I was 5 years old. When I was 10 I moved to organ and added 8 pedals. You don't have to play all of the keys and pedals at once. But it is nice to have them there as you need them.

[This message was edited by David Doggett on 30 October 2006 at 08:50 AM.]

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 30 Oct 2006 9:18 am

I think that asking a beginner what kind of music he wants to play, and then guiding him to either the standard 10 string pedal steel or an old system that isn't even being manufactured anymore, is entirely the wrong approach.

For example, take this solo from my first CD, which is pure E9th: http://soundhost.net/b0b/Downtown.wav

Nothing fancy, just a fair amount of adrenelin over a blues shuffle beat. If people listened to Jim Sliff, they'd think that they need a Fender 400 to play that kind of music.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">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 
<div style="display:none">[This message was edited by b0b on 30 October 2006 at 10:31 AM.]

Bob Hoffnar · Post by **Bob Hoffnar** » 30 Oct 2006 10:50 am

Buying a limited instrument that doesn't work very well seems like a foolish thing to do if you want to be a pedal steel player.

------------------
Bob
upcoming gigs
My Website

Eric Jaeger · Post by **Eric Jaeger** » 30 Oct 2006 11:02 am

I think one of the entertaining things about our instrument is that there ISN'T one way to play it, tune it, set it up.... A sign that we're too new, perhaps.

But we haven't had our Isaac Newton, yet. Whatever genius devised the tuning for the 6-string (fourths with a single third) deserves a Nobel.

-eric

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 30 Oct 2006 11:05 am

Move over RR, b0b's comin' through.

Billy Carr · Post by **Billy Carr** » 30 Oct 2006 1:02 pm

I don't take sides on debates but I do tend to remember what guys like Chalker, Emmons, Day and Mooney, to name a few, done on the old Fenders, Buds, etc. They played things back then that some of us, me included are still trying to figure out today. A good player can sound good on most anything he/she sits behind.