Tuning a Pull /Release 2 different approaches

[Tim Toberer]

I have been setting up my guitars with what seems like the most common traditional way of tuning, with the raises tuned at the headstock and the lowers tuned with screw stops, leaving the open tuning tuned with nylon tuners. This has always just seemed wrong, but it does work. I recently learned of the Maverick tuning system which just seems way more logical, tuning the open tuning at the headstock and the raises with the nylon tuners. Lowers are still tuned with a stop on older versions, but it seems they switched to tuning the lowers with nylon tuners on more recent models. I am planning on setting up my next guitar with this approach.

Anyone have any thoughts on the benefits downfalls of either way? I also am experimenting with the Blanton approach of tuning at the bellcrank. I love the pull /release system and I think it has some key advantages over all pull guitars, but the setup and maintenance is a bit wonky and a turn off to some players. I want to improve it.

Here are a couple videos that explain the Maverick system. I am not sure if any other guitars have used this way, but it seems better for several reasons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V52h4BVeuU0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aQf_agIme0

[Brett Lanier]

Most of the newer pull release guitars have a different design than an old permanent, Marlen, Miller… Those old guitars were designed so the finger hits the cabinet for a raise, and hits the final lower screw for a lower. With that design, it’s impossible for the fingers to all line up perfectly in a row.

In some ways a push pull has more in common with a Permanent than a new Maverick or Stage One because the stops all happen at the changer, and any contraction or expansion that may happen in the aluminum pull rods won’t affect the tuning so long as it’s pulling, pushing or releasing enough to hit the stop at the changer.

[John Larson]

I tune my Jackson Maverick as follows.
Tune the open strings at the headstock to the E9 Sweetened with a Peterson StroboStomp
Then I switch the StroboStomp in the E9 pedals mode.
I tune A and B pedals at the nylon tuners while holding both A+B pedals down and tuning each respective change.
Then I tune B+C the same as above (tuning only the C pedal but holding the B down)
Then I tune the F raise while holding the A pedal down
Then The D# lower with the B pedal held down
Then the F# to G# knee lever.
Finally the lowers on the D and D# string.
I've found this yields the sweetest tuning and minimizes any cabinet drop.

[Ian Rae]

My first steel was a copy of a Permanent (by an unknown maker) and it tuned the old-fashioned way.

This involved tuning the raises at the keyhead with the pedals down, then the open notes using the stop screws on the changer.

This seems to be too counterintuitive nowadays, hence the nylon tuners on modern instruments which didn't exist on the old machines.

I think it's a mistake, as what gave the old pull-release instruments their superior tone and sustain was having the fingers hard up against the case when raised. Surely that's gone now.

[Ian Worley]

Most of the newer pull release guitars have a different design than an old permanent, Marlen, Miller…

What Brett said. The more modern approach requires additional pull rods to accommodate strings with both raises and lowers, but it does simplify the tuning procedure once set up properly.

[Tim Toberer]

I think it's a mistake, as what gave the old pull-release instruments their superior tone and sustain was having the fingers hard up against the case when raised. Surely that's gone now.

I'm not saying this doesn't have an effect on tone, but the superior tone of older instruments is completely subjective. I happen to agree, but I think it had a lot to do with the players, pickups, amps, recording techniques etc. I think the newer Mavericks sound amazing.

The most intuitive part of the new method is tuning the open notes at the keyhead. This leaves the raises and lowers to be tuned independently and makes the whole tuning process easier, more consistent. I always find it really annoying when I would tune my raises knowing it was messing up the other related notes. The other aspect of keeping the fingers lined up is smart because it will tell you when things are getting out of wack. On the guitar I am building now I replaced the nylon tuners with adjustable bellcranks so the tuning and setup process will always be integrated. I am still putting it together but I will share my results in the builders forum.

[Brett Lanier]

I always find it really annoying when I would tune my raises knowing it was messing up the other related notes.

With a pull-release, as long as it’s set up really well and you’re using good strings that are consistent, it’s better to not tune at the keyhead with pedals engaged before a gig or with everyday playing. Only do that if you know a pedal adjustment is needed.

If pedal adjustments are regularly needed, chances are there’s something else going on that’s causing the pulls to drift. Timing of the pulls is very important. To get the best results (let’s use the A pedal as an example), you want the 5th and 10th string fingers to not only start and end at the same time, but also exert the same amount of pressure as they hit and pull against the cabinet - then set the pedal stop to absorb any additional pressure that your foot may cause. The lighter the fingers are (cheaper, lighter, stamped aluminum) the more they are prone to flexing. If one is pulling harder against the cabinet stop, that flex in the finger can translate into that string pulling sharp.

Same principle applies to push pulls. Not setting the pedal stops correctly, or having pulls out of time with each other can cause the pull hooks to wear away at the hole in the raise finger. I’ve seen a couple where that extra pressure caused that hook to nearly pull straight through the finger. If the fingers look like crooked teeth, that’s probably what caused it.

[Tim Toberer]

I always find it really annoying when I would tune my raises knowing it was messing up the other related notes.

With a pull-release, as long as it’s set up really well and you’re using good strings that are consistent, it’s better to not tune at the keyhead with pedals engaged before a gig or with everyday playing. Only do that if you know a pedal adjustment is needed.

If pedal adjustments are regularly needed, chances are there’s something else going on that’s causing the pulls to drift. Timing of the pulls is very important. To get the best results (let’s use the A pedal as an example), you want the 5th and 10th string fingers to not only start and end at the same time, but also exert the same amount of pressure as they hit and pull against the cabinet - then set the pedal stop to absorb any additional pressure that your foot may cause. The lighter the fingers are (cheaper, lighter, stamped aluminum) the more they are prone to flexing. If one is pulling harder against the cabinet stop, that flex in the finger can translate into that string pulling sharp.

Same principle applies to push pulls. Not setting the pedal stops correctly, or having pulls out of time with each other can cause the pull hooks to wear away at the hole in the raise finger. I’ve seen a couple where that extra pressure caused that hook to nearly pull straight through the finger. If the fingers look like crooked teeth, that’s probably what caused it.

I am a bit confused by all this. I was only referring to the fact that with the old system when you tune a raise at the keyhead your open note and any lowers on that string are also effected. It puts the whole tuning out of whack. With the new system when you tune your open tuning you are usually fixing any raises or lowers on that string because the the string has likely gone sharp or flat, effecting all the notes related to that string. I am sure all this makes good sense in regards to a typical 10 string guitar in E9 tuning, but that's not how my guitar is set up. I would say if the old system works for you stick with it. As a builder- experimenter I find the set up and maintenance of this way a little bass ackward. I am trying to reimagine it a bit.

The old system works perfectly well if set up properly. The guitar I play now is set up like that, and I really only need to touch up the tuning every once in a while. It goes a little flat in the winter and sharp in the summer. The entire guitar body is made of wood so it changes with the seasons just like my other acoustic guitars.

[Brett Lanier]

With the new system when you tune your open tuning you are usually fixing any raises or lowers on that string because the string has likely gone sharp or flat, effecting all the notes related to that string.

I was trying to point out that this is also true with a pull-release. Yes, if you adjust a raise, the lower for that string will need re-adjustment too. But I’d call that a minor inconvenience rather than a mechanical insufficiency.

I wouldn’t want a beginner with a pull-release to think that they need to first tune with the pedal down, then re-tune the open string, then adjust the lower stop screw every time they hear a string out of tune. If the guitar sounded good the day before, once you get that open string back in tune at the keyhead, the pedals will also be in tune.

[Ian Worley]

...If the guitar sounded good the day before, once you get that open string back in tune at the keyhead, the pedals will also be in tune.

This to me is the real beauty of the traditional pull-release approach, which is effectively the same as a push-pull. The firm stops at the high and low end of a string's range (the body and the lower tuning screw) make the tuning inherently much more stable than the more modern approach, where tuning stability is dependent on multiple free floating pull rods and nylon nuts.

[Tim Toberer]

...If the guitar sounded good the day before, once you get that open string back in tune at the keyhead, the pedals will also be in tune.

This to me is the real beauty of the traditional pull-release approach, which is effectively the same as a push-pull. The firm stops at the high and low end of a string's range (the body and the lower tuning screw) make the tuning inherently much more stable than the more modern approach, where tuning stability is dependent on multiple free floating pull rods and nylon nuts.

Ok I get what you guys are saying. Ian you are also saying the old way is "much more stable". I could see why this may be true, but have you played a guitar tuned the "new" way for a long period of time? Not trying to put you on the spot, but I am just curious what you are basing this statement on. I don't see any reason why it would be any less stable than a modern guitar. I can't find any guitars except the newer Mavericks that use it, and I can't find that many people commenting about them. I would be interested in hearing from more Maverick owners (or anyone else using a guitar setup in this way) about how their tuning stability is. I think the idea with the new way is, the open tuning is the focus and if your pedals go out, your guitar is still playable in the open position. This would seem to be a bigger benefit in C6.

I get why you guys may be correct and I may end up sticking with the old way, but I have to see for myself. Thanks for the insight. In my mind the new way just makes more sense. This whole thing is a detour I didn't expect and I am combining it with my new bellcrank design. It is kind of a big experiment. I am in the middle of trying to set up a prototype guitar with my new Blanton style bellcranks and I am having to figure it out. The firms stops are on the pedals and the bellcranks do the tuning for anyone who doesn't know about this system. So there aren't free floating nylon tuners.

[Ian Worley]

...I could see why this may be true, but have you played a guitar tuned the "new" way for a long period of time? ...I don't see any reason why it would be any less stable than a modern guitar...

I'm not trying to infer that a modern pull-release guitar's tuning is inherently unstable, just that tuning a traditional pull-release design is inherently very stable because of the specific mechanical design features that differentiate it from the more modern approach used on the Jackson Maverick, Stage One and others. The solid fingers contact the upper and lower stops directly, with no dependence on other intermediary parts (pull rods, nylon nuts, bell cranks, cross shafts) to maintain a constant stable position for tuning. A properly set up modern pull-release guitar should not be any less stable than any other modern all-pull guitar, but they both share a common trait in their reliance on the relative stability of a system of linkages and cranks for the stability of their tuning. With a properly adjusted modern all-pull guitar, the typical changer provides a firm and relatively stable and consistent open note, but there are even more parts and points to rely upon for tuning stability on raises and lowers within the mechanism, the linkages, finger scissors, return springs, etc. And yes, traditional pull-release guitars do share this same reliance for the open note on strings that both raise and lower.

I'm not trying to talk into or out of anything Tim, just sharing my observations. Both approaches have merit, the traditional approach is mechanically simpler, but the modern approach is much more intuitive and definitely makes a lot more sense for the novice player those guitars are targeted for. As I said above, I'm not inferring the system is unstable, just that the potential for instability is greater vs. a traditional setup. I don't own a modern pull-release guitar so I can't comment directly on the long-term stability but I have worked on a couple of Stage Ones. One did have an issue where one of the A pedal pull rods was shifting/slipping in the bell crank nylon bushing, causing tuning problems. It was easy to fix and from my limited experience with those guitars, they are solidly built and when set up properly seem very stable.

[Sam Weisenberg]

My pull/release experience is limited to the Paul Redmond On-Trak. This instrument is set up in the new way you describe, with the changer fingers aligned when no changes are engaged ('neutral' in Paul's terminology), all changes tuned at the changer, and separate rods for multiple changes on a string.

Stability: It is (once acclimated to a reasonable environment) stable to the point where when I think it requires adjustment, I have learned I need to change the strings which, having gone west, are usually the sole culprit. This was confusing when I started with stainless strings, as their tone outlasts their tuning stability. Once new strings of the same make/model are installed, no adjustments to the instrument are necessary.

Sound: I do not notice a difference in tone, feel, or sustain when playing a 'neutral' on a string with no lower installed(stop screw contact), raise (nylon nut contact), an intermediate lower (nylon nut), or a final lower (stop screw).

[Tim Toberer]

Stability: It is (once acclimated to a reasonable environment) stable to the point where when I think it requires adjustment, I have learned I need to change the strings which, having gone west, are usually the sole culprit. This was confusing when I started with stainless strings, as their tone outlasts their tuning stability. Once new strings of the same make/model are installed, no adjustments to the instrument are necessary.

Cool, thanks! That lines up with what I was thinking. Interesting thing about the stainless strings. I have never tried them, I think I will stick with my nickel power wounds.

I'm not trying to talk into or out of anything Tim, just sharing my observations.

I really appreciate your comments, they have been super helpful over the past few years.

It seems the newer way of tuning is kind of a trade off. You sacrifice a little bit of stability and possibly a little sustain for an overall tuning system that is more familiar and logical, especially to people who aren't familiar with all the mechanisms making this thing work. Time will tell if I think it is worth it.