| Author |
Topic: Going Bufferless |
Mitch Adelman
From:
Pennsylvania, USA
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 6:56 am |
|
| Recently I decided to forgo the use of an impedance matching buffer unit with my Carter. I've used the matchbox, the Hilton, and the Blackbox whether by themselves or in combination. The other night I just used an old Pot pedal(with a Dunlap HotPot) and DD3 with no matching device and I really liked the tone I was getting. My steel with the SS George L has alot of highs (with a 200 watt LA 400 amp, which is very bright) and the buffers seemed to only increase them to the point of harshness. Now I have a more natural tone which changes with the volume and allows me to control the tone better throughout a tune. I know there have been posts about this before. I know most of the players out there use impedance matching buffer devices to keep from losing any highs throughout the taper. Is there any one that doesn't use a buffer device and just a pot pedal or am I just keeping things too simple? Thanks! |
|
|
 |
James Morehead
From:
Prague, Oklahoma, USA - R.I.P.
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 7:16 am
|
|
| I go from my shobud with original pickups to my shobud pot pedal(allen bradley 500K pot) to my fender vibrosonic or twin reverb. JBL K130's for speakers. I'm totally happy with my tone, and get plenty of compliments. I've played the same setup with my LTD 400 and several session 400's as well, with great results. Keep it simple. |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 7:20 am
|
|
I generally like to lose a little high-end as the volume pedal comes down. For me, I think that works better when padding behind a singer at lower volume. Ahem - to my knowledge, no singer I've worked with thinks pedal steel is not bright enough. 
This issue occurs on guitars also - turn a typical volume control down and lose some treble end. In the mid-60s, Fender started putting a 1000pF capacitor across the volume pot of Telecasters to let more high-end bleed through as the volume pot is backed off. Good for some things, not for others, so I have some wired both ways.
This must be a country music thing - most non-country musicians I know can't imagine anybody thinking a pedal steel or Telecaster lead pickup doesn't have enough treble. Yeah, I know that's a stereotype and Telecasters are for more than country. But they really were designed for country music and have been heavily marketed and used that way. |
|
|
|
Ben Jones
From:
Seattle, Washington, USA
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 7:22 am
|
|
Actually the Boss DD3 is a "buffered bypass" pedal, so you are using a buffer and it is conditioning your signal. Im not sure what this actually means in regards to impedance matching, maybe someone could tell us?
I dont own an impedance matchuing device, I do use a boss buffered bypass pedal in my chain tho. For the first couple years I juts pljugged straight into the VP and then the amp. I didnt really notice a much difference with the Boss pedal added to that setup.
maybe it depends on the pickups too? George L E-66 here.
edit: what dave said also. Ive never heard such ungodly amounts of ear slicing treble before I started listening to and seeing country music performed live. Youch. |
|
|
|
Scott Swartz
From:
St. Louis, MO
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 7:44 am
|
|
With the DD3 after the VP, its buffer is eliminating the loading effect of the capacitance of the cord connecting the DD3 to the amp. With this hookup, there are still loading effects (capacitance) between the pickup/VP/cord steel to VP and cord VP to DD3, therefore you will get the tonal change through the sweep. It will be less typically since you are removing the capacitance of the longest cable from the system.
_________________
Scott Swartz
Steeltronics - Steel Guitar Pickups
www.steeltronics.com |
|
|
|
Jerry Overstreet
From:
Louisville Ky
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 7:45 am
|
|
Depends on the guitar in my experience. Some guitar and pickup combinations benefit greatly from the buffer. It is less noticeable in others.
Buffers can be hugely effective in gear chains without true bypass units or otherwise signal degrading situations that cause a guitar to sound dull and lose clarity. Match Boxes, et al, seem to eliminate that condtion in most instances. |
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 8:15 am Re: Going Bufferless
|
|
| Mitch Adelman wrote: |
| ... The other night I just used an old Pot pedal(with a Dunlap HotPot) and DD3 with no matching device and I really liked the tone I was getting. My steel with the SS George L has alot of highs (with a 200 watt LA 400 amp, which is very bright) and the buffers seemed to only increase them to the point of harshness... |
Mitch, you mentioned you have tried a Hilton active pedal, which matches impedance and prevents loss of highs. I assume it was too "harsh" for you, the same as your problem with adding a matching device in front of a pot pedal. I will repeat a comment I made, and the response to it at the end of this recent thread:click here.
The Hilton has a tone control. People who like the pot tone, might simply like the highs rolled off a little. If you experiment a little with the Hilton tone control, you might be able to get the pot tone you like. Hilton recommends leaving the tone control the way it comes, which is with the highs full on. Not being one to take recommendations blindly, I experimented on my own. I set my amp controls flat (all three EQ controls to their midpoint). Then I dialed the Hilton tone control until it sounded best to me, which was with the highs rolled off about 1/4 to 1/3. I've never touched it since, and do all my minor EQ adjustments with the amp tone controls. With the Hilton dialed in like that, it sounds to me about like a pot pedal in the top half of its range. So I suspect the tone difference people hear between the Hilton and their favorite pot pedal might simply be failure to take advantage of the Hilton tone control to set it up the way they personally like best.
The above comment was followed by the below quote from James Martin, who had also said he preferred the tone of a pot pedal to a Hilton.
| James Martin wrote: |
| Thanks Dave , I reset my tone control on my Hilton as you suggested and am now completely happy with the sound - just perfect - like my pot pedal. Thanks once again for your expert advice. |
|
|
|
|
Ben Jones
From:
Seattle, Washington, USA
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 3:17 pm
|
|
| Scott Swartz wrote: |
| With the DD3 after the VP, its buffer is eliminating the loading effect of the capacitance of the cord connecting the DD3 to the amp. With this hookup, there are still loading effects (capacitance) between the pickup/VP/cord steel to VP and cord VP to DD3, therefore you will get the tonal change through the sweep. It will be less typically since you are removing the capacitance of the longest cable from the system. |
thanks Scott. |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 3:45 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| I know there have been posts about this before. I know most of the players out there use impedance matching buffer devices to keep from losing any highs throughout the taper. Is there any one that doesn't use a buffer device and just a pot pedal or am I just keeping things too simple? |
I'd have to disagree with the phrase "most players out there use impedance-matching buffer devices". At least in my neck of the woods, most players use neither a powered pedal nor any "impedance matching" device. I choose to use neither, and I, too, am eminently satisfied with my sound and tone. Please don't get me wrong, I have no problem with other players using them. But when they start making statements like "they're necessary to get a good tone", or "they restore the highs a pot pedal steals", you'll find me speaking (very vocally) to the contrary.  |
|
|
|
Mitch Adelman
From:
Pennsylvania, USA
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 4:11 pm
|
|
| That was just an assumption on my part with the "most players" statement. I've read and agreed with your interesting posts on high frequency loss via pots. I guess I'm guilty of being lured by reading posts over the years that the path for good tone was an impedance matching buffer. Thanks for the insight! |
|
|
|
Kevin Hatton
From:
Buffalo, N.Y.
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 5:39 pm
|
|
| Jerry, I highly agree. Not only depends on the guitar but the amp/guitar combination also. I do not like warm. |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 5:48 pm
|
|
The thing I didn't mention earlier is that the input impedance of the amp (or an effects unit in-line) can affect this significantly. If the amp (or in-line effects unit) has a high input impedance like the 1 MegOhm on an old Twin Reverb, I don't see why one really needs to worry too much about a buffer. My sense is that part of the reason buffers became prevalent was the lower input impedance of the solid-state amps like Peavey and others have made.
Of course, this ignores the fact that Peavey very intelligently included the so-called "3-cable hookup", which is basically an effects loop that allows one to run from a low-output-impedance preamp out, into the volume pedal (which now looks like a very high input impedance in comparison), and now back into the amp without most of that treble cut. It works fine, even with a passive pedal, and without having to add additional noise-generating active stages.
On this business of rolling off the treble on an active buffer or volume pedal:
| Quote: |
| So I suspect the tone difference people hear between the Hilton and their favorite pot pedal might simply be failure to take advantage of the Hilton tone control to set it up the way they personally like best. |
Of course one can do this. But please let me understand this fully - I should prefer to buy an active buffer or an active pedal, which cost (sometimes significant) money, add noise to the signal (please don't tell me they don't, I'm an EE - it may not be a huge amount, but all active devices add some noise), and add time and annoyance to my setup and teardown to run a wall-wart power supply (another thing to potentially fail) under my guitar - so that I can now lower the treble on it to make it sound like my passive pot pedal? Say what?
Players should absolutely use what they want to use, I would never argue against that. Whatever one does to get a good sound is good. But I like Occam's Razor - the simplest solution that does the job. To my tastes, unless one really wants to eliminate that bit of treble loss as the pedal is backed off, it seems to me that the only reason I can see wanting to use an active pedal is to avoid having to change pots periodically on a passive one. Not enough reason for me - I'll change pots every couple of years if need be to avoid having to deal with all this other stuff.
YMMV and all that. But I'm with Donny - I like my old Sho Bud and Goodrich pedals just fine. I bought enough good pots from Mr. Franklin to keep me going for a while, they seem to work just fine.
Afterthought - I was down in Nashville studying with Mike Sweeney earlier this summer. Mike plays a Zum into a pot pedal straight into an old Session 400. It sounds like a million bucks and those single-coil pickups were surprisingly quiet - but IMO I should not have been surprised. Let me assure you, if you start putting all kinds of gizmos between you and that amp, they're gonna raise the noise floor. My humbucker-equipped rig with a bunch of stuff in front of the amp made as much noise as his simplified single-coil-equipped rig. [Let me assure you, I'm still figuring things out from that visit with Mike.  ] |
|
|
|
Jerry Overstreet
From:
Louisville Ky
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 6:38 pm
|
|
If I may repeat, it depends on the guitar and pickup and the amp as Kevin reminded me. Also whatever else is in your signal chain. Most folks like the clarity, perceived brightness, when the match box is added to the chain. Some don't. The only way to tell if they work for you is an A/B test with your guitar and the gear you use.
My Mullen sounded a bit dull straight into a N400, the Matchbox helped that condition considerably. I couldn't tell that it made much difference on the Derby.
When I started using the elaborate Mosvalve/Boss rack system with my Mullen, I couldn't tell that the MB changed anything at all, so I'm guessing that there are devices somewhere in the Mos rig that either make the signal stronger or clean up the input signal.
Right now, I'm using a Goodrich active pedal. It's one of those old dual action jobs. 6PV or something. Dual pots with a battery. I like it for switching between instruments or for just blending wet/dry effects. The high frequencies are not attenuated at all, and even appear to be enhanced...a lot..so much so that I have to use the tone control on my Zum to attenuate some of the highs. I have a Truetone 17.5 on there, so it naturally favors high frequencies, but I never have to use the tone control with the passive pedal.
The differences between this one and my passive volume pedal are quite audible and clearly evident.
There is no doubt that these devices make the sound cleaner and brighter. It will vary according to your equipment and the quality of your pickup, cables etc.
Borrow one from a friend for a weekend and try it for yourself. That's the only way to tell if you like the results or not. Maybe even A/B into a recorder. |
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 12 Aug 2009 8:30 pm
|
|
| Dave Mudgett wrote: |
| ...But please let me understand this fully - I should prefer to buy an active buffer or an active pedal,...so that I can now lower the treble on it to make it sound like my passive pot pedal? Say what? |
Well, yeah, if you are happy with the low-fi sound of an unmatched pot pedal, then that's all you need. Hilton makes a hi-fi pedal, and being proud of that, he sends them from the factory with the tone control (a treble cut control) wide open with maximum treble. That is certainly the best way to hear the most difference between the Hilton and a pot pedal.
Maybe my guitars and pickups are brighter than I need; or maybe I just don't care for the brightest possible sound. For whatever reason, I discovered I could center my preferred tone with the amp's controls neutral by rolling back the treble a little on the VP. I could have gotten the same effect by rolling back the treble on the amp. But by adjusting the VP tone with the amps controls neutral, I in effect matched my guitar, pickup and VP to the amp, so that my normal operating range for the amp EQ is near neutral and symmetrical, rather than skewed toward the bass.
But the point is, there are extra highs there that you can choose to use or not - that's flexibility, versatility, and personal choice. An analogy would be cheap cables that attenuate highs versus better quality cables that don't. You might find you get more highs than you need with the better cables, and have to roll back some highs with the amp EQ. So maybe some people really don't need the better cables or the hi-fi VP. But the point is all the highs are there if you want them. You can roll them back if you don't need them; but you can't add them if they are not there.
I was baffled reading the comments from some players who said they preferred the tone of their old pot pedal. Then I realized I myself had rolled back the highs on my Hilton, and maybe that's all some people needed to do to get the tone they prefer - and apparently I was right.
So, yeah, if tone is the only reason you want to switch to an active pedal, and you don't care for the hi-fi tone you get, maybe you don't need the active pedal. I like knowing those extra highs are there, even if I don't need them most of the time.
But I mainly switched to an active pedal to avoid using a battery operated matching device (I hate batteries), or a three cord hookup (which is not even available on the amps I use), and mainly to avoid having to research and locate the rare pots that are reliable, special order them, and install them myself. Also, the string system on my pot pedal was not as smooth as my Hilton. Also, you can adjust the off-point volume on the Hilton by simply turning a control, rather than trial and error retieing of the string. Having to plug in one more cord to my power strip was easily worth avoiding all the above hassles. I haven't had to worry about any of that stuff for over 5 years, and good riddance. |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 13 Aug 2009 6:47 am
|
|
Hey, I'm not arguing against any piece of equipment at all. I am a firm believer in doing whatever it takes to get the sound I want - everyone should do that. Some of my pedals have the effect of buffering the signal, and sometimes that's fine.
But I will argue that a single-coil pickup into a passive 500K pot pedal straight into an amp doesn't have to be "lo-fi". It depends entirely on the particulars of the rig. In this situation, everything matters - pickup, cables, hookup method, pot pedal, and amp+settings.
Anybody going to Nashville - go down to listen to Mike Sweeney on Broadway (The Wheel or Roberts, for example - you'll be doing yourself a favor anyway, they kick butt) and then tell me his sound is "lo-fi". I'm dead serious. His rig was exactly as I described - no bells and whistles, but tone for days.
As always, there are a lot of ways to get good results. I think open-minded experimentation is the best teacher, which I think is the very concept that started this thread. |
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 13 Aug 2009 8:33 am
|
|
When I listen to a good player, the last thing I think about is their equipment. The good ones know how to get great sound out of any decent equipment. 
The extent to which I do pay attention to top players' equipment is because I know they have long experience with lots of different equipment, they talk with other top players about equipment, they can afford the best, and they have chosen their equipment carefully. The fact that top players use such a wide variety of equipment shows there is a lot of good stuff out there to choose from. When you see various top players using different things, such as pot pedals and active pedals, you know either choice will work fine, and you might as well choose based on whatever minor advantages or conveniences you perceive for yourself. |
|
|
|
Earnest Bovine
From:
Los Angeles CA USA
|
Posted 13 Aug 2009 1:41 pm
|
|
| The only way I can get a sound that I like without using a buffer is to use the Fender Steel King as a pre-amp; i.e. record direct from the FSK pre-amp. |
|
|
|
Mike Archer
From:
church hill tn
|
Posted 15 Aug 2009 3:12 pm buffers
|
|
I use george-l cables and
I run my pp emmons to an emmons vol pedal
then to my delay and on to my nash 112
has killer tone
I dont follow the rule that you must have a
powered vol pedal to get great tone..hogwash!!
I also record with the same set up
again the tone is great
so to each his own I guess   |
|
|
|
Jim Peters
From:
St. Louis, Missouri, USA, R.I.P.
|
Posted 15 Aug 2009 4:21 pm
|
|
I use the 3 cord method with my Carter and NV112. I bought a siamesed cord at GC for $11, makes hookup very easy. I also run my steel straight into either my Ibanez delay, or tube scramer,then to the amp, eliminating the need for expensive cords.
I run my tone controls much like other people here have suggested, nothing out of the ordinary.
Using the 3 cord method also seems to stop much of the static associated with passive pots.
I do use the treble rolloff constantly on regular guitar, I like the warmth it gives my tele, and my Bill Lawrence loaded Godin. JP
_________________
Carter,PV,Fender |
|
|
|
Chris LeDrew
From:
Canada
|
Posted 15 Aug 2009 8:00 pm
|
|
I use a Goodrich 7A, but only because I have gain and tone controls at my fingertips. If it had no controls, I wouldn't bother with it. I use a Sho~Bud VP at home with no buffer, and the steel sounds great through either my Twin or Session. Live, I use a Goodrich L120 with the 7A. I actually prefer the buffer-less tone I get at home, but I need the control the 7A provides during a show for tonal variations from song to song.
It does help that my 7A belonged to John Hughey.
_________________
Jackson Steel Guitars
Web: www.chrisledrew.com |
|
|
|
