| Author |
Topic: Standardization...... |
C Dixon
From:
Duluth, GA USA
|
Posted 20 Oct 2003 6:11 am |
|
Will the PSG ever be "standard" like many other instruments? Some say no. And this may be true, but I believe it will.
Some of the things that make me believe this are some facts that are with us today as oppossed to yesteryear.
IE, in the 40's, there was a myriad of tunings and more being tried all the time as players tried to come up with that "perfect" tuning; that NO body else had achieved. It is said that there are over a hundred known tunings that came into being, albeit some never got past the surface stage.
But as time has passed, many will agree that 3 of those tunings; A6th, E13th and C6th emerged as kings and queens of the steel guitar world.
I said all that to call one's attention to these facts. A modern D-10 HAS those 3 tunings. Also most steels being shipped have the same setup. The one big variable is the BE or JD setup. But even there, most are now being shipped with the BE setup.
If this trend should continue (and I believe it will) with premier builders like the Carter folks, I see a standard PSG emerging that will in many ways break the "taboo" of the steel guitar amongst music dealers and prospective players to wit.
The following statement I believe appropo here:
"I will start teaching steel guitar when YOU guys settle on a tuning!!"
Words of wisdom IMO 
carl |
|
|
 |
Larry Bell
From:
Englewood, Florida
|
Posted 20 Oct 2003 6:59 am
|
|
I think this can be taken to extremes. To begin with, most of us play instruments with two different tunings. Can't they just decide on one and standardize on it? I think the standard should be my S-12 universal tuning, but can't get many others to agree with me. 
I really do believe that a player should strive to play the music, not the instrument. I don't see much advantage, MUSICALLY, in having everyone play guitars with pedals and levers configured alike -- beyond the learning phase. Once a student learns WHY you lower the E's, rather than the fact that you lower them to play the second measure of the song you're learning, the physical location of that change is personal preference.
I mention lowering the E's. There are many who follow the Emmons lead, BUT there are also many who don't. Neither Jimmie Crawford nor Paul Franklin (nor ME, for that matter ) believe that lowering E's on LKR is best for their playing style. This is only one issue but there are many other reasons why, at least for players who feel that expressing themselves on the instrument is more important than adhering to some standard.
I believe the practice of setting up most new steels with a relatively standard configuration is fine, but I feel that as they progress and understand the music behind the changes, they should feel totally free to rearrange the changes to suit their musical expression. I would do that myself whether or not any explicit standards exist. (but then maybe that's just me)
Vive le difference!
------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps
|
|
|
|
Bobby Lee
From:
Cloverdale, California, USA
|
Posted 20 Oct 2003 9:13 am
|
|
I believe that optimal copedents exist for both E9 and C6, and that these will eventually be considered "the standard". But...
I also believe that, once you understand how to play the instrument, the desire to experiment with new changes is irresistable to some people (myself included). Just as some guitarists will drop their E's to D or play an open tuning for some songs, some steel guitarists will always want to try something a little bit different.
The pedal steel mindset is one of constantly shifting tunings. Once you "get it", no pedal or knee lever change is really alien. This is why I think that the idea of reassignable pedals and knee levers will eventually come to pass. It's not really very far-fetched from the player's standpoint, but it's been a tough nut to crack for instrument designers.
------------------
 Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9),
Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax |
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 20 Oct 2003 11:13 am
|
|
I think pedal steel tunings will always change as music trends change. The standard E9 and C6 tunings were optimized for the styles of country music and western swing in the '50s-'70s. But the Sacred Steelers felt they needed a third tuning for blues/gospel. Other types of music in the future might need new tunings.
The reason the tunings need to change with the music is because the steel guitar is not a chromatic scale based instrument like keyboards and horns, but instead is an open chord-based instrument. It is basically a chord machine. You want the chords you need to be easy to get. That makes other chords harder to get. Change the chords in the music, and you want to change the tuning.
No instrument is really neutral to keys and chords. That's why horns like Bb and Eb, keyboards like C, F and G, and guitars like E, A an G, etc. The steel guitar is a little different, because it really is pretty much neutral to all keys. The bar is like a movable capo. But the steel guitar is not neutral to chords and the scales they are based on. You want straight major and minor chords - you're on the E9 neck. You want swing and jazz chords - you're on the C6 neck. You want an easy pentatonic scale and strummable blues and rock chords - now you're on a Sacred Steeler neck. Somehow I don't think those three categories cover every kind of music there will be in the future. Whenever the predominant chords and scales change, I think the tuning will change. |
|
|
|
Susan Alcorn (deceased)
From:
Baltimore, MD, USA
|
Posted 20 Oct 2003 1:01 pm
|
|
This is an interesting (and in someways time-old) question. If there were more standardization of tunings, I think that the steel guitar would be easier to teach and would be a little more popular in commercial music -- perhaps.
However, one of the things I think is so beautiful about the steel guitar is hearing different musicians who play so well using different tunings -- each one of them sound so different, and there is something so unique to each -- it's like each tuning is a person, or perhaps like a family (actually the way I look at it is each note is also a person). How unfortunate to lose that. Things are changing at a rate unprecedented in our world. Perhaps the tendency towards standardization will soon lose its usefulness. People will find new ways to express beauty, depth, compassion and sadness that will use the steel guitar in ways that we have only begun to imagine. Perhaps this will come sooner than later.
|
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 21 Oct 2003 6:33 am
|
|
| Judging from the copedents in Pedal Steel US magazine, there is not now and never will be standardization among the pros we are all chasing. If you believe in the motto "if the pros are doing it, the rest of us should too," then we should all have a completely unique copedent that we are constantly changing. [This message was edited by David Doggett on 21 October 2003 at 07:34 AM.] |
|
|
|
Larry Bell
From:
Englewood, Florida
|
Posted 21 Oct 2003 9:59 am
|
|
Dave,
Don't assume that they are constantly changing. Take John Hughey for an (excellent) example. I've followed his career and admired his playing since I first started playing many years ago. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. John, but I don't believe his setup has changed in the almost 30 years I've been playing. And he uses all those changes -- I've watched!
That's what I love about this instrument. Like artists, some are minimalists and some are maximalists.
There's plenty of room for both -- AND everything in between.
------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps
|
|
|
|
Wayne Cox
From:
Chatham, Louisiana, USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 21 Oct 2003 9:05 pm
|
|
Well, you can just call me "MAXIMALIAN". I am currently working on a new CD. On it I used a non-pedal S-10 tuned to a B minor Diatonic tuning. Why? Because it has a hauntingly beautiful/different sound that cannot be captured with a standard C6 or E9 pedal setup. For me, using non-standard ideas seems to enhance my creativity and allows me to solidify ideas and sounds I hear in my head but can't seem to express through conventional methods. Maybe that means my brain is turning to concrete! 
~~W.C.~~[This message was edited by Wayne Cox on 21 October 2003 at 10:07 PM.] [This message was edited by Wayne Cox on 21 October 2003 at 10:09 PM.] |
|
|
|
