| Author |
Topic: What's different about Peterson Strobe tuner? |
Nicholas Dedring
From:
Beacon, New York, USA
|
Posted 9 Jun 2005 6:57 am |
|
Not having used one (getting by with a TU12H), I can't quite understand what the difference is between a regular electronic tuner, and a "strobe" tuner... it's not using a timing check light or anything  , so how does it work, and what advantages does it really offer???
Awfully stupid question, I guess, but I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind paying an extra $200 for a tuner... |
|
|
 |
Earnest Bovine
From:
Los Angeles CA USA
|
Posted 9 Jun 2005 7:11 am
|
|
It emulates in software what a real strobe tuner does. That is: it creates a display that looks like a light flashed by your signal shining on a wheel. The wheel has bars that go by at the frequency you want to tune to, and 2,3,4,5 etc times that frequency.
| Quote: |
| what advantages does it really offer??? |
It allows you to see each of the lowest 4 or 5 (6?) harmonics simultaneously compared to exact multiples of the fundamental. Is this an advantage? I don't know. After all, you can't tune each harmonic independently. BTW the fact that some harmonics may be in tune while others are not is called "inharmonicity".
A disadvantage of these tuners is that they don't tell you the pitch of your string. They only let you compare to a pitch that you have programmed into them. If want to tune your G# at -4 on Tuesday and -8 on Wednesday, you would have to re-program the machine, or make a guess by estimating how fast it appears to spin. That's why I don't use one. |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 9 Jun 2005 9:13 am
|
|
The tuner's accuracy is much better than any needle or LED type tuner. I don't remember what the published tolderance is, but it's extremely accurate.
I don't use the pre-programmed Steel Guitar tunings, but it does have two memories where you can program your own.
Whether it's worth the price???, over a less expensive (and less accurate) tuner??
I have a VS-II and several others including a TU-12H and it's no contest between the VS-II and the other tuners. |
|
|
|
Lawrence Lupkin
From:
Brooklyn, New York, USA
|
Posted 9 Jun 2005 11:23 am
|
|
If you want to test drive one before making the decision, you can borrow mine. Feel free to shoot me an e-mail.
I like it alot for the presets and large accurate display. |
|
|
|
Billy Murdoch
From:
Glasgow, Scotland, U.K.
|
Posted 9 Jun 2005 12:15 pm
|
|
I am one of those unlucky people with cloth ears which have had a lifetime in industry and I envy all the guys who can tune their E's with a tuner and then do the rest by ear.
I tuned for many years with a Boss TU12 and memorised the spot where the needle had to be for each string and I thought I sounded ok.
One of my steel playing friends always commented on me being a little out of tune and we had several (sometimes heated)discussions on this.
I invested in a Peterson tuner when I was in Dallas this year and when I used the programmed settings the difference was astounding,I really did feel that I was playing with better tone and expression and I would recommend this tuner to anyone.
I think the Peterson cost about30% more than a TU12 but you get a very useable leg clamp and a really cool carry bag.
Best regards
Billy |
|
|
|
Dick Wood
From:
Springtown Texas, USA
|
Posted 9 Jun 2005 1:05 pm
|
|
Nick, For what it's worth,I've been using a Korg tuner for years and recently decided to buy the Peterson VS-II
If you play in clubs where the DJ typically plays 5X louder than the band then you will love this tuner in that respect.After tuning my steel to the E9th presets in the quite of my bedroom, I was amazed at what I heard.I really don't think I have ever been in better tune.Same thing at the club that weekend. My band played a song that was in A and as I slid from the 5th fret A to pedals down A open, it was dead in tune with the band which I never noted using any other tuner.
I also found I was in tune no matter what pedal/knee lever combo I used so I am very pleased with this tuner.
While I believe every steel guitarist should learn to properly tune their guitar by ear and not become dependant on tuners for obvious reasons, this is a great aid also.
------------------
Cops aren't paid much so I steel at night. |
|
|
|
Billy Carr
From:
Seminary, Mississippi, USA (deceased)
|
Posted 10 Jun 2005 12:46 am
|
|
| I've got the Peterson tuner with the built in presets. Only problem I've had is with me not the tuner. I sometimes forget to press the switch button when I go from E9th to C6th. Then after a moment of shock I realize I didn't switch it when the C6th starts doing the wrong thing on the strobe screen. I've alao got a TU-12 tuner I take on the road with me when I'm going from place to place playing. My Peterson stays at the Legion Hall where I play on Saturdays. In case your wondering, I've got two complete steel guitar set ups. Two of everything. One complete outfit at the club and one complete outfit at home in my office. In my opinion, I say the Peterson is the better tuner. When I tune my D-10 Carter to it on Saturday nights it's always in tune. I believe the Peterson has the Jeff Newman presets in it if I'm not mistaken. They work for me. Of course, with the TU-12 it works fine if you know where the needle is supposed to be for the string to be in tune. Matter of fact, I'm planning on buying another Peterson tuner after I get me a black box. |
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 10 Jun 2005 7:48 am
|
|
| Can anyone confirm that the Peterson presets for E9 and C6 are the Newman recommendations? And if not, can someone post the Peterson presets? I'm collecting all the tuning suggestions I can find, for comparison purposes. |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 10 Jun 2005 1:25 pm
|
|
Someone posted the Peterson presets here on this forum section. I don't remember how long ago but do a search for Peterson or VS-II and one of the threads should have it.
They are basically the Newman settings with the E strings at +10Hz.
I don't use the factory programmed settings - you need to develop the settings that are right for each guitar. The guitar must be in tune with "itself" and the same numbers will not work for ALL guitars. I use a modified Newman chart but with the E's referenced at "0". But, for example, my G# strings on the E9th are tuned to the Newman settings for the "open" (-3.5Hz or -14 cents) but the B pedal raise is tuned to -.5hz (-2 cents) instead of the -1.5Hz (-6 cents) that the Newman chart lists. |
|
|
|
Stephen Gambrell
From:
Over there
|
Posted 10 Jun 2005 4:06 pm
|
|
I got to wondering on the way home from work today---the old Conn, Peterson, and whoever, strobe tuners, had a moving disc, being turned by a synchronous motor--that is, a motor whose speed was DIRECTLY related to line frequency, which is, of course, 60 Hz. NO margin for error, after the things got warmed up. So I wonder if my VSII is dead on A/440???
Hey, it was a rough day at work. |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 11 Jun 2005 2:06 am
|
|
The new Peterson's are more accurate than the old ones.
The 60Hz (it was called "cycles" back then) is only as accurate as what the power company is providing. Although the AC power frequency is fairly stable, the crystal oscillator provided reference in the VS-II and V-Sam models are more accurate than any "mechanical" device.
One interesting note that the Peterson rep stated when I was talking to him in St Louis two years ago. He said that there are other tuner companies that use Peterson products as their "standard" to calibrate their tuners. |
|
|
|
Earnest Bovine
From:
Los Angeles CA USA
|
Posted 11 Jun 2005 7:56 am
|
|
| When the Hertz (Hz) unit was introduced 40 or 50 years ago, to replace cycles per second, it caused a lot of confusion. I remember that a ham radio magazine helped out with a graph (on semi-log paper!) and a handy algorithm to do the conversion mathematically. Now someone has put this useful information online for us: http://www.brainerdham.org/Tips/CPS_to_Hz_conversion.html |
|
|
|
William Steward
From:
Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands
|
Posted 11 Jun 2005 8:17 am
|
|
| See another thread about Peterson tuners http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum11/HTML/005691.html I have been experimenting with the settings on the Strobo Stomp which has the limitation of only being programmable plus or minus 15 cents.....otherwise it is great and can sit on the floor with bypass and D.I. box functionality. I wish it had a 'meter' mode so it would function like a Korg tuner as well as a stobe. |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 11 Jun 2005 8:22 am
|
|
There's no conversion factor. 1Hz = 1CPS. 60 Hz - 60 CPS, etc.
I was one of those that they had to "pull teeth" to get "converted" to Hz. I go back to 1955 in communications and electronics (and also had a General Class Ham License and a 2nd Class FCC Radiotelephone license). |
|
|
|
Earnest Bovine
From:
Los Angeles CA USA
|
Posted 11 Jun 2005 8:54 am
|
|
| Jack, are you saying that it is wrong to multiply the frequency in cycles per second by cycles per second and then take the square root of the result to get Hertz? |
|
|
|
Stephen Gambrell
From:
Over there
|
Posted 11 Jun 2005 5:15 pm
|
|
I got an email from John Norris, of Peterson tuners! That means, first of all, that the good folks at Peterson are watching the steel guitar community, and that's a good thing. John told me that ALL Petersons were dead-on, within a cent or two. He also told me that the Petersons, even the old strobes, have a proprietary circuit, that was not frequency dependent, so I stand corrected.
Hey, is this a great place, or what?? A nobody like me gets emails from Peterson, any of us can call Mike Brown at Peavey, Sam Marshall at Fender is close by---All because of this here Steel git-tar forum! |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 12 Jun 2005 2:09 am
|
|
Doug, you can do it that way if you want. I prefer the "old fashion" way.  |
|
|
|
Bob Baringer
From:
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, USA
|
Posted 12 Jun 2005 8:21 am
|
|
| Hey! not only that,these ole'eyes had a bit of trouble seeing that small needle especially on a dim lit stage, I sure can see the Peterson... |
|
|
|
Michael Garnett
From:
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
|
Mike Wheeler
From:
Delaware, Ohio, USA
|
Posted 12 Jun 2005 12:20 pm
|
|
On the CPS-versus-Hertz issue, Jack is correct. Hertz=Cycles Per Second.
Am I missing something???...4cps x 4cps=16...sqr. root of 16 is 4...??? What's the formula for again?? Don't know who thought up the formula, but I'm an electronics engineer for 35 years and I never even heard of it....then again, maybe I wasn't listening that good in class!! ha, ha!! |
|
|
|
Earnest Bovine
From:
Los Angeles CA USA
|
Posted 12 Jun 2005 3:18 pm
|
|
| You see, I told you it was confusing! |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 13 Jun 2005 2:49 am
|
|
Conversion charts and large math formula's are confusing for me.
I need someone to 'splain it to me in the more simplistic terms, like Edsel Murphy. Murphy's law says 1 plus 1 hardly ever equals two - I can understand that.
|
|
|
|
