For Paul Franklin...Compensators....

Dickie Whitley · Post by **Dickie Whitley** » 17 May 2006 5:43 pm

Yes, and I respect every opinion that I have read on this forum. But it appears to me we are headed for a rehash of Keyless vs Keyed again which is why I started this separate thread. I have duly noted all the pro's and con's of the debate, and do not see a reason to restart it here. I simply wanted to ask Paul the strings he used compensators on, in other words I was seeking facts, not opinion.

One thing I did not see as part of the debate was price. For a lot less than the price of a D-10 GFI or Sierra (with their standard setups), I can get a Carter with all the "bells and whistles" I need/want (compensators and all).

With that said, I'm not saying the Carter is better than any other guitar, it just fits my budget better. From what I've read in the debate, most seem to agree that for the most part the Keyed and Keyless just sound a little different. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages depending on whom you're talking with.

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 17 May 2006 5:49 pm

Whatever you do Dickie, just be sure to play a few guitars to see and hear them. That way you won't be disappointed. Listen and watch for detuning issues, or hysteresis. As you know, there are a lot of guitars out there. Find the special one for you! Keyed OR keyless.

George Redmon · Post by **George Redmon** » 17 May 2006 9:21 pm

I agree with Curt here...don't be swayed Dickie because so & so can't play without comps..or someone says i build with comps because it's the only way to play in tune. Oscar meyer...get out there test drive several models, find what fits good, sounds good, and is right for you. Ask questions! I think this whole compensator thing with you is a lot of worry about nothing. If you play a steel, and it don't return true..that instrument has big problems, comps or not. So if i were looking to buy a new instrument, and had it narrowed down to a short list. I would be on the builder everyday untill all my questions were answered, and i was satisfied i did the best i could with what i had to judge by. Ask other players about several makes. Go out if possible and listen, and maybe sit in on that type of steel. It will all fall into place. It's nice to know, who has this and who uses that on which strings and what brand of strings etc..but in the end..it's what works for you..and when you come across the right steel..you will know it..IMHO...i would wait a little longer...untill i could afford the right steel for me...it may just be a Carter..but it may just not be...good luck my friend in your search....[This message was edited by George Redmon on 17 May 2006 at 10:32 PM.]

Ed Gerl · Post by **Ed Gerl** » 17 May 2006 9:31 pm

Paul, which Knee-Lever or Pedal do you use on this two new changes?
Thank you for your input

Ed

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 17 May 2006 10:50 pm

I have to say I agree with George. this statement:

"Tuning compensators have nothing to do with improper mechanical operation or design of steel guitars"

Sounds completely false. If the guitar doesn't stay in tune, there's something wrong with it - if mashing a pedal causes it to shift to some other note when the pedal is released, the design is just wrong, to me.

The more descriptions I read of "compensators" the more I firmly believe they are a "chewing gum and wire" fix for a defect.

A note goes up...and it comes back down. If it comes back down to the wrong place, somebody messed up.

A note goes up (or down) and can't be adjusted in tune with other strings. Another defect.

Sorry, but this poor old rookie steeler with 40 years of guitar playing and setup under his belt ain't buying the need for these gadgets...if the guitar is designed/built right to start with.

John Fabian · Post by **John Fabian** » 18 May 2006 2:31 am

Jim,

I realize you may find this topic confusing but try to read the next sentences very, very carefully.

Note, what follows only relates to tuning compensators.

Tuning compenstors do NOT affect the strings normally being raised or lowered with the pedals or knee levers. They operate on the strings NOT normally being moved by those pedals or knee levers.

No steel guitar "NEEDS" tuning compensators to operate properly. If you tune everything to 440 (ET), it makes tuning compensators irrelevant and unnecessary. Most steelers use JT or a form of tempered tuning. Some steelers find the use of tuning compensators sounds more pleasing to their ears. Jeff Newman was the first person I ever saw using these.

So tuning compensators are not a "defect". They are a result of a player's tuning choices and preferences. The choice of tuning method is left to the player. I'm not voting on which method of tuning is best, I'm just trying to observe and report what I see.

Know that there is more than one way to tune a steel guitar and I'm sure the members here can stake their favorite positions out and "lobby" for the "best method" 'til the cows come home. I recommend people try different methods and see what works best for them. That's why Peterson VSII tuners come with a wide variety of presets for different types of tuning.

You and others, however, are certainly welcome to continue considering thinking of the use tuning compensators as a band aid for a defect. That is your conclusion, not mine.

[This message was edited by John Fabian on 18 May 2006 at 04:06 AM.]

Franklin · Post by **Franklin** » 18 May 2006 4:02 am

Jim,

This applies to EVERY steel guitar made since its conception including your Fender. I started out on a Fender.

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.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying its all in the string, just partially. The flaw in their theory is when they assume the string is perfect therefor it must be somewhere in the guitars design. Maybe a return spring, a roller nut, the keyhead, etc. What I am saying is for the past 42 years of my playing life, builders like the ones George mentioned along with my father, Lashley, Crawford, Marrs, Carter, Bruce, Jackson, etc. have been "speculating" at what could be the cause of the hysteresis problem. If George knows the definitive answer he'd be the first.

Just like with the cabinet drop the only solution is to remedy the problem with a return compensator which after the string returns to pitch on the raise, it kicks in on the lowering mechanics of the string by allowing the lowered puller to have a seperate definite stop. It is again cancelled at the touch of the raise. A compensator allows players who can hear hysteresis, no matter how minute, to completely solve that problem within ANY brand of guitar. Compensators have existed for over 36 years now.

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

George,

Any builder should try to satisfy the players. Its the players complaints about tuning, tonal, and mechanical problems that prompts them to fix their designs. Most great builders listen to players who experience their guitars problems because of the way their ears have had to develop.

Paul

[This message was edited by Franklin on 18 May 2006 at 05:14 AM.][This message was edited by Franklin on 18 May 2006 at 05:17 AM.][This message was edited by Franklin on 18 May 2006 at 05:24 AM.][This message was edited by Franklin on 18 May 2006 at 05:26 AM.][This message was edited by Franklin on 18 May 2006 at 05:28 AM.][This message was edited by Franklin on 18 May 2006 at 06:30 AM.]

Frank Parish · Post by **Frank Parish** » 18 May 2006 4:08 am

I'm with Ed. I'd like to know just what knee lever Paul is using for that change. Something new!

Jon Jaffe · Post by **Jon Jaffe** » 18 May 2006 4:11 am

Jim, tuning compensators have nothing to do with the quality of the mechanics of the guitar or changer. It is a musical relationship that causes the need. Also, some players ears have the need for more compensation than others.

Let me first start with an analogy you might have noted on your electric guitar. If you pluck a 12th fret harmonic and then fret it, if the note is different you would adjust the bridge. Doing this with all of the strings makes for a staggard looking bridge with parallel frets. But as we fret the guitar things are in tune better. The musical notes to sound right are staggard and not linear.

On your steel tune the following strings and pedals. F#, G#, B, and F# (Chromatic). Also make sure that the G# is in tune when your B pedal raises it to A and similarly the A pedal raises B to C#. Now make sure that the F# strings sound nice with that B note.

Now when you press those pedals or even the A pedal alone, does the resulting C# sound in tune with the F#? If you tune the way most of us tune it should sound sour. Now flat that F# and it should sound better. Thats what a compensator does.

I only use one on my lower F# the 7th string, and tune my chromatic F# twixt and tween. Some compensate both, and some none. It it a matter of taste and fastidiousness of the ear, not the make or quality of theguitar.

Franklin · Post by **Franklin** » 18 May 2006 4:36 am

Sorry, I missed the question.

I lower the 1st string F# a 1/2 tone on the LVK. It also rasies the 6th G# to B. It also lowers the 6th to E. I use the lower or raise according to the licks I want to play that day. Ofcourse it goes without saying that it will not do both at the same time.

Paul

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 18 May 2006 4:41 am

In a "perfect world" there would be no need for any type of compensation - be it mechanical or the fact you compensate with your bar. But, we are not in a perfect world. The Pedal Steel Guitar is a very complex mechanical device with many points in the mechanical chain for potential tuning errors or changes.

EVERY pedal steel guitar that I've played has the drop return tuning issue and I've played Emmons PP's, Emmons all pulls, GFI, Mullen, Sho-Bud, Excel (keyless), Zum, Carter. How much is also a variable even between two of the same make. It's not "bad engineering", just something that happens, to some degree. For some, they don't hear it or even realize it's there, to others it is a concern. Along with Franklin's, I've seen the drop return compensators on a Zum and Emmons Legrande's. Other's may use or have used them too???

One thing I know for sure, after "fighting" it for 10 years with a 71 PP Emmons I was in "hog heaven" when I got the new Franklin in late 81 with the drop return compensators.

Lee Baucum · Post by **Lee Baucum** » 18 May 2006 5:09 am

Just to clarify things (I hope), this discussion is about two different types of compensators, is it not?

There is the compensator used to tweak the F#'s so they will be in tune with both the B's and the C#'s.

There is also the compensator used to nudge the E's back to their proper tuning due to the effects of "hysteresis".

Is this correct, or am I way off base?

Lee

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 18 May 2006 5:15 am

John Fabian

Note, what follows only relates to tuning compensators.

Lets talk about return compensators. How would you descibe their usage/need?

Thanks

Jim Sliff · Post by **Jim Sliff** » 18 May 2006 5:38 am

Now, look - I really respect these two guys (I'd sell my dog for a chance to learn some of the C6 rock stuff Paul does, which is what I WANT to be able to do.), and I don't want to say anyone is wrong.

But John Fabian says the compensators have NOTHING to do with the string being raised or lowered; they are used on the OTHER strings.

But then Paul Franklin says that compensators are used to "kick" a ***raised or lowered** string back to where it's supposed to be. Nothing to do with the "static" strings.

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!

It again makes me think it's an "I think I need this" situation rather than something "real". Nobody apparently even agrees on what the darned things do!

PS - Jon Jaffe, your example wouldn't work for me with my 8 string B6 tuning.

George Redmon · Post by **George Redmon** » 18 May 2006 5:42 am

Sorry, but this poor old rookie steeler with 40 years of guitar playing and setup under his belt ain't buying the need for these gadgets...if the guitar is designed/built right to start with.

Mr Sliff, with 40 years under your belt sir, you have as much experience with what makes a good steel guitar, as anyone else on this forum. And Sir, MORE then most. And Sir...you hit the nail right on the head.

If George knows the definitive answer he'd be the first.

Nowhere did i say i knew the answers Mr Franklin, and if you know the answers to the compensator issues i'm sure you would share them with us as well....

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>George,

A great builder should try to satisfy the players. Its the players complaining about tuning, tonal, and mechanical problems that prompts them to fix their designs. Most great builders listen to players who experience their guitars problems because of the way their ears have had to develop.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But....

a "chewing gum and wire" fix for a defect

is no fix at all...i stand by my statement. We work so madly to stride for a perfect tuned guitar, just to have a slightly out of tuned fellow musician make us sound even worse, and the heartbreak of wonderful steel guitar players like Jimmy Sliff, who after all these years..come to find out apparently, they have been playing out of tune for 40 years because of some presets someone put into a fancy gadget that sells for a couple hundred bucks, and everyone says i have to have. I'm gonna keep playing, and doing the best i can. I have not heard anyone in the 37 years i've been playing, be it electric guitar, or steel, that i, or any of my steel playing friends have a issue with tuning because we don't use comps, and some don't even use a tuner period. But they sound mighty fine to me, and the folks that come out to hear them apparently....."and that's.....the rest of the story"

[This message was edited by George Redmon on 18 May 2006 at 06:44 AM.]

John Fabian · Post by **John Fabian** » 18 May 2006 6:09 am

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!

by Jim Sliff

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.

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

Paul Franklin

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.

Franklin · Post by **Franklin** » 18 May 2006 6:23 am

Bob's next post says it all for me.

Paul

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

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 18 May 2006 6:25 am

The need for tuning compensators on the F# strings is well known. I thought I was going crazy trying to tune my first pedal steel until someone explained them to me. The F# problem is not caused by a defect in the instrument - it's caused by the nature of the music we play.

Return compensators are a different issue. They offer a solution to the "hysteresis" effect. A theoretically perfect guitar wouldn't need them. Many people can't even hear hysteresis, but some can and it is measureable on most pedal steel guitars.

------------------
<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

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 18 May 2006 6:43 am

John, Paul said:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>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.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

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!

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 18 May 2006 6:47 am

Handwaving arguments are great for starting barroom brawls...experiments point the way, if the results are repeatable, so lets run some experiments and report and discuss the results.

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?

Do you find hysteresis greater on long overhang, or shorter overhang strings (keyhead question).

Jon Jaffe · Post by **Jon Jaffe** » 18 May 2006 6:48 am

Jim, Share your tuning with us, and and I am sure someone can point out where compensation might be helpful.

b0b · Post by **b0b** » 18 May 2006 7:03 am

I just want to thank Paul Franklin Jr. for putting up with this unruly gang of know-it-alls. It isn't often that we get a world class player to hang out and patiently respond to our technical questions.
<h2 align="center">Thanks, Paul!</h2>

------------------
<img align=left src="http://b0b.com/b0bxicon.gif" border="0"> Bobby Lee
-b0b- quasar@b0b.com 
System Administrator 
My Blog[This message was edited by b0b on 18 May 2006 at 08:03 AM.]

John Fabian · Post by **John Fabian** » 18 May 2006 7:11 am

Hysteresis can easily be checked by tuning the 2nd string (Eb or D#) to E in unison with string 4(E). Activate the "C" pedal and see if the string returns to unison (no audible beats). Lower the E's to Eb and see if the string returns to unison. Raise the E's to F and see if the string returns to unison. It either does or it doesn't.

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.]

ed packard · Post by **ed packard** » 18 May 2006 7:50 am

Good for openers John...results in magnitude information in beats...probably different on different instruments...does not give direction(b or #) return.

John Fabian · Post by **John Fabian** » 18 May 2006 8:02 am

It does give direction when you retune string 4 back to unison with static string 2. You can use a meter to check magnitude.[This message was edited by John Fabian on 18 May 2006 at 09:03 AM.]