| Author |
Topic: Jody Cameron tuning MA9 is great! |
John Sluszny
From:
Brussels, Belgium
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 11:56 am |
|
| John Norris wrote: |
| John Sluszny wrote: |
I’d love to get the MA9 tuning but I’m afraid of this !
See photo here under. See note.
Help please.
Thanks !
 |
Hi John,
You never lose your factory Sweeteners, the factory settings cannot be erased no matter what you do.
They just "live" in a different area of the tuner's memory when you load a custom Sweetener into the StroboPLUS.
The tuner stores custom Sweeteners in the user configuration section, and factory Sweeteners in the Factory section.
If there are only a few custom Sweeteners in the User configuration section, that's all you will see, initially.
However:
You can swap over and back between the user and the factory configuration pretty easily on the tuner itself (see below).
But it's much more convenient to populate the tuner's User configuration with *all* the Sweeteners you need (factory or custom or a mix of both), omitting the ones you don't need.
That way everything is on one Sweetener list and more convenient, we call this a custom configuration as opposed to the factory configuration.
This user configuration is also stored on the Peterson server, should you ever acquire another Peterson, you can load an identical configuration onto that tuner too, so you can never lose anything, even custom settings.
How to swap configurations:
The StroboPLUS HD has two modes, FDR (factory default settings) and USR (custom user settings + selected factory settings if desired).
While the unit is powered on, hold down the power button and then the mode button together momentarily (power button slightly ahead of mode)
You'll see a screen with a large C and 3 characters in the upper right corner. Press in on the dial. 3 characters will flash.
The characters will either show USR or FDR.
When either is flashing, rotate the dial to select the other.
I would advise you to configure your tuner, selecting all the Sweeteners and settings you want to be able to quickly and conveniently recall and load that into the tuner.
The configuration page is here:
https://www.petersontuners.com/configure/ |
JOHN NORRIS, SORRY HERE I GO AGAIN.
As you can see it’s loaded but I can’t find it ! Where is it ? Please some more help. Thank you...again 
Last edited by John Sluszny on 30 Nov 2020 12:57 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
|
|
Greg Forsyth
From:
Colorado, USA
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 12:02 pm
|
|
| Whats the deal then? I'm sure Mickey is a stand up guy who has shared his knowlege and wisdom, but several folks have asked for this info without having this question answered properly, and I felt like him saying that he didn't have it written down he was blowing us off. |
|
|
|
Tommy Mc
From:
Middlesex VT
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 2:22 pm
|
|
| Mickey Adams wrote: |
I do not have them written anywhere that I can find..
however, the data should be clearly visible in the app, if you can get into the editing mode |
Mickey, I used the tone generator in my StroboPlusHD to play each note while checking it against ET using the PitchlabPro phone app. (The app has a easy-to-read display showing Hz and + or - cents) These are the values I came up with for your MA9 tuning. Does this sound about right?
F#...(-0.5)
D#... (-13.5)
G#...(-13.5)
E...0
B...0
G#...(-13.5)
F#...(+2)
E ...0
D... (-5)
B... 0
A...(-5)
Bb...(-9)
C#... (-16)
F...(-31)
G...0
(Edited to reflect F#3 error which Ian caught)
Last edited by Tommy Mc on 30 Nov 2020 4:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Ian Worley
From:
Sacramento, CA
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 2:36 pm
|
|
I just did the same thing as Tommy with tone generator software in my 'puter, got exactly the same values with the exception of the low F#3 (string 7), which was +2. F#4 was -0.5. There didn't seem to be anything for the compensated F#s that Mickey mentioned.
The Peterson tuners are cool gadgets for what they do (I own 3), but they are not necessarily very intuitive. The programming interface in both the physical unit and on the Connect website is fairly cumbersome IMO, and also fairly limited in many respects.
There does not appear to be any way to read or extract what the actual offsets are from a shared preset within the unit or the online software. When you create a new preset you're allowed to use your own previously created custom presets as a template, why not provide the option to view and edit the offsets in an existing preset to build a new one? It's not like they are classified government secrets.
_________________
All lies and jest, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest - Paul Simon |
|
|
|
Ian Worley
From:
Sacramento, CA
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 3:01 pm
|
|
| John Sluszny wrote: |
JOHN NORRIS, SORRY HERE I GO AGAIN.
As you can see it’s loaded but I can’t find it ! Where is it ? Please some more help. Thank you...again |
John, once your device is connected, scroll to the bottom of the middle column "On-Board Sweeteners" and and you should see the MA9 preset, select it and click the (>) icon and will appear in the right hand "Presets" column. There should then be an option in the column to the right of the presets to update the device.
Also, make sure the device is connected, if you click on the circular arrows icon in the upper right it will show a drop down for the device if it is connected. It only works with Chrome and requires a plugin
_________________
All lies and jest, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest - Paul Simon |
|
|
|
Greg Forsyth
From:
Colorado, USA
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 3:05 pm
|
|
Thanks Tommy and Ian for posting your findings about the MA9 tuning. I'm sure that several of us will use your info and retune to see if this tuning
is for us. |
|
|
|
Tommy Mc
From:
Middlesex VT
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 4:25 pm
|
|
| Ian Worley wrote: |
I just did the same thing as Tommy with tone generator software in my 'puter, got exactly the same values with the exception of the low F#3 (string 7), which was +2. F#4 was -0.5. There didn't seem to be anything for the compensated F#s that Mickey mentioned.
|
Ian, you're right and I don't know how I missed that. I've corrected the list above accordingly, thanks |
|
|
|
Steve Mueller
From:
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
|
Posted 30 Nov 2020 7:58 pm
|
|
With the exception of the high F#, the open tuning is close to JI with the 3rds one cent high and the 5ths 2 cents flat. It seems to be assuming a 3 cent cabinet drop on the E's with AB pedals. If it's more or less than that you'll have to adjust. Those F#'s will be painful if you don't have temperment comps on one and seven.
_________________
2016 Williams D12 8 x 8, 2015 Williams D12 8 x 8, 2023 Williams S12 4 x 5, Milkman Amps, 1974 Gibson Byrdland |
|
|
|
Greg Milton
From:
Benalla, Australia
|
Posted 2 Dec 2020 7:36 pm
|
|
| Thanks Tommy! |
|
|
|
Mark McCornack
From:
California, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 10:46 am
|
|
If you are associated with, or have any influence with PETERSON tuners, please read on...
Having the quantized offset information readily available with shared sweeteners would be very valuable information to us all. This information CAN be reverse-engineered (as demonstrated by others above), however it's cumbersome and time consuming. In any case, if this info is intended to be Top Secret, the code has already been cracked.
Why not have this available in a similar format available to us in the custom tuning we generate ourselves? It just shouldn't be like your trying to protect Aunt Bea's Bean Pie recipe. The cat is out of the bag. The information is out there, just a pain in the butt to retrieve. Why?   |
|
|
|
Fred Treece
From:
California, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 11:38 am
|
|
| Questions from the peanut gallery. Why the difference in the 2 F# strings? If you raise E’s to F#, which F# do you try to match? Are these questions nullified by compensators? |
|
|
|
Patrick Thornhill
From:
Austin Texas, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 12:40 pm
|
|
| Mark McCornack wrote: |
If you are associated with, or have any influence with PETERSON tuners, please read on...
Having the quantized offset information readily available with shared sweeteners would be very valuable information to us all. This information CAN be reverse-engineered (as demonstrated by others above), however it's cumbersome and time consuming. In any case, if this info is intended to be Top Secret, the code has already been cracked.
Why not have this available in a similar format available to us in the custom tuning we generate ourselves? It just shouldn't be like your trying to protect Aunt Bea's Bean Pie recipe. The cat is out of the bag. The information is out there, just a pain in the butt to retrieve. Why? |
Because they’re a business. They exist to sell you their hardware, not help you use someone else’s more effectively, na mean?
Same reason Apple doesn’t want people using OSX on home built PCs.... |
|
|
|
John Norris
From:
Peterson Strobe Tuners, Illinois, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 12:58 pm
|
|
| Mark McCornack wrote: |
If you are associated with, or have any influence with PETERSON tuners, please read on...
Having the quantized offset information readily available with shared sweeteners would be very valuable information to us all. This information CAN be reverse-engineered (as demonstrated by others above), however it's cumbersome and time consuming. In any case, if this info is intended to be Top Secret, the code has already been cracked.
Why not have this available in a similar format available to us in the custom tuning we generate ourselves? It just shouldn't be like your trying to protect Aunt Bea's Bean Pie recipe. The cat is out of the bag. The information is out there, just a pain in the butt to retrieve. Why? |
Hi Mark,
This has nothing to do with Peterson tuners hiding offsets or Aunt Bea's recipe  .
We are pretty much the only tuner company which publishes any such offsets in our manuals (and supports steel guitar for that matter).
The only tuner-to-tuner sharing system for tunings is Peterson Connect after all.
If a user creates a Sweetener on a Peterson tuner, it is his or her business, not ours, whether they want to share it with others or not.
If so, he/she hits a button and it ends up on our shared page.
If they are open to others contacting them for further info, they can also choose to have an email link added to the listing.
This is the case with Mickey's MA9 Sweetener, he shared it and people are using it on their Peterson tuners.
As for the offsets, again they're Mickey's business, not ours, he alone decides whether or not he wants to share them or even has the time to go back in and dig them out for you.
I hope that clarifies things  .
_________________
John Norris
Peterson Strobe Tuners
- Celebrating over 75 Years of Tuning Products in 2024! |
|
|
|
Tommy Mc
From:
Middlesex VT
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 1:16 pm
|
|
| Mark McCornack wrote: |
| It just shouldn't be like your trying to protect Aunt Bea's Bean Pie recipe. The cat is out of the bag. The information is out there, just a pain in the butt to retrieve. Why? |
So Peterson does provide a way (or work-around) to decode the notes. You would have to tune a string to the sweetened note, then set the tuner to EQU and follow the process outlined in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtIeS9XPVjU&feature=youtu.be
Very awkward, and I don't see why it's so hard to just display the data like free phone apps do. PitchLabPro displays the note name, actual Hz being played, and how many cents you're off from the target frequency. For all the fancy stuff a Peterson Tuner can do, the lack of Hz and cents information on the main display seems like a glaring deficiency. |
|
|
|
Tucker Jackson
From:
Portland, Oregon, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 2:25 pm
|
|
| Fred Treece wrote: |
| Questions from the peanut gallery. Why the difference in the 2 F# strings? If you raise E’s to F#, which F# do you try to match? Are these questions nullified by compensators? |
A good question. And the answer is a mouthful. There are at least three F# notes on a typical E9 copedent, and it's common for them to be tuned differently (at least in any tuning system other than ET, which not many steelers use). This is based on usage: each is tuned to work well with the most common other strings they are played against... because they aren't all used the same way. For example, when is the last time you hit, say, the 1st string and sustained it against the 7th string? They can be tuned differently, and that's not only OK, it can help get you more in tune using the 'real world' positions we play in (versus the theoretical world where it would be clean and easy on paper if they were all tuned the same).
Complicated issue? A little.
1) The C-pedal's F# is the easiest one to deal with. It needs to most work with the other note raised by that pedal (the C# note on string 5). The standard in the tuning system discussed in this thread is that roots and fifths match. So, in this system, the F# you get on the C-pedal should be -16 to match the C#.
Yes, this will put it 'out' if played against the other F#'s, but you have to prioritize, and those others are less-used in real-world playing, at least when 4C is ringing. One exception to note is that the 'out' unison lick you might get on 4C against 1 still works OK when the F#s are tuned differently... a little outage there isn't usually a problem and lets you really hear there are 2 strings in play. As always, compromises can usually be fixed with a small bar slant if you don't like what you hear.
2) The 7th string is the most finicky one to deal with. It's the trickiest because 1) it's often sustained in chords, where tuning 'outages' can be heard and 2) it's incorporated in three important chord positions, one of which requires something really different for the 7th string:
* F# minor (where it's the root note. Ideally: -16, at least in the system under discussion here)
* D Major (where it's the third. Ideally -13.5... but can still work as sharp as +0)
* B Major (where it's the fifth). Ideally +0)
Compensators exist so that that string can be +0 when that's what's needed... and then -16 when that's needed when you go to the pedals-down world. Since most guitars don't have compensators -- even though they are cheap and easy to install and fix a lot-- you have to make a compromise setting on string 7. Looking at the three chords above, the range you're dealing with is from +0, down to -16. No matter what you choose, some position is thrown under the bus.
My recommendation for string 7 (and only in this particular tuning system): set it to +0.
The logic: this works very well with two of those three chord positions. And the third chord is fixable with a slant:
* B Major - +0 is ideal
* D Major - it's Equal Temperament. Not ideal (not sweetened), but same as the guitar player is putting out, and even better than that if you have a few cents cabinet drop. Totally useable. Meanwhile, the +2 listed in this system may not work as well with this chord if there's little cabinet drop on the guitar - and you can't 'slant your way out of it' since it's the middle one out of three strings in the basic triad. That's why I recommend +0 as a slightly better choice.
* The position thrown under the bus is the F#m. For this, you do a slight forward bar slant when using that position. It's ridiculously easy to nail it 'in tune' after 10 minutes of practice.
3) The 1st string is the least problematic string since it's so often used in single-note runs, which are more forgiving to wherever you tune it. As far as problematic intervals with other strings, in the open position, we're most interested in how it works with string 2 and string 5. In this example, a setting of +0 would work... but in the pedals-down world, you would want it to match string 5A at -16 (for those times you sustain string 5a against 1).
So, as with string 7, you have a range of +0 to -16 where you can tune the 1st string. Most people 'split the difference' on this one. I like -5 for this, as listed in the tuning being discussed here. You're dealing with a slight forward bar slant with B Major, and a back-slant when playing 5A against 1. |
|
|
|
Mark S. Miller
From:
Depew, NY, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 4:11 pm
|
|
Numbers Numbers Numbers You guys are making to much out of numbers Numbers will not put you in tune. My org, post touch on that I had a very experience player telling me where i needed to be number wise I fought with it for years.
Jody took the time to create this tuning He use a Peterson turner to come up with this turning. And all you guys want are the numbers because you do not have the turner he use isn't this counter productive after all we are just splitting hairs on this whole turning thing anyway. If you really want to try his turning decide good bad and or comment on it you should at least use the device he use. Jody Asked Mickey to get it out there for everyone which I am sure that is the only task Mickey was asked for. He probably did not put the numbers in a safe place I am thinking not a big deal you either like it or not. Andy your comment on the turner costing to much really took me back I feel you put a negative out there and will only comment on that. I think I paid $139 for mine and here is what I got. I can call anytime and someone will pick up. I have all the turnings that have been done for the last 20 years with the touch of a button. and I can download all the new turning( That's how I got Ma-9) that will come out for the next ten years and cost me nothing. I think the Peterson turner is a bargain for what they sell it for. Peterson Jody Mickey Thank you for all you do for this Steel guitar world This guy is better for it.
PS For all the other guys reading this When I downloaded the Ma9 turning I never gave the numbers a thought in till this post started. Still have no desire to look and or compare them If you are struggling with your turning get a Peterson Hd turner with the MA9 on it and you will be on your way to being more in tune than you ever have. I know nothing is perfect but there is not a better place to start. |
|
|
|
Fred Treece
From:
California, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 4:23 pm
|
|
| Thanks, Tucker. That response gets a “sticky†rating from me! Just one more question, then I’ll get back to tuning...I also raise string 8 to F# with pedal C. Using your logic, maybe this should be my F#m and Dmaj(maj7) chord string, and 7 should be tuned for the B chord. Does that make sense? |
|
|
|
Tucker Jackson
From:
Portland, Oregon, USA
|
Posted 3 Dec 2020 5:23 pm
|
|
Yes, I would use that 8th string on the C-pedal for those two chords that need the 'flat' version of F# and tune it to -16.
And then use string 7 (tuned to +0) for the B Major grip.
On your setup, where the C-pedal also raises 8, there's no need for a compensator on 7 to get every position tuned right where you want it. Cool!
Thanks to Jody, Mickey, and Peterson for making this tuning available! |
|
|
|
Mark McCornack
From:
California, USA
|
Posted 4 Dec 2020 10:21 pm
|
|
| Tucker - That was a very lucid, well written coverage on the dreaded F#. Thanks for posting. I'll also second your thanks to Jody, Micky, and Peterson for the custom tuning template. |
|
|
|
Steve Mueller
From:
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
|
Posted 5 Dec 2020 7:10 am
|
|
I second that. I might add that temperment comps on 1 and 7 still help even if you have the 8th string raise to F#. You get that nice minor 7th with AB on strings 4, 5, 6, and 7 as well as the in tune 6th tone on string 1 with AB. It all depends on what string combinations you want to use simultaneously.
_________________
2016 Williams D12 8 x 8, 2015 Williams D12 8 x 8, 2023 Williams S12 4 x 5, Milkman Amps, 1974 Gibson Byrdland |
|
|
|
Dale Rottacker
From:
Walla Walla Washington, USA
|
|
|
|
