RE: Tuning by ear

Costs are rising and times are tough.
Please consider a donation to keep this
place going.

Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.

This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.

We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.

RE: Tuning by ear

You are logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >>Discussions >>General >>

Page: << < 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Newer Topic Older Topic >>

Ricardo

Posts: 14848
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Dudnote)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dudnote

quote:

ORIGINAL: xirdneH_imiJ

I admit I haven't been following this thread very closely - but while there is an important discussion about how to tune (and make it sound like rocket science), there is an equally important aspect to it, as to what will get your guitar in tune the quickest while you're on stage and only have a few seconds to do it (without looking like a fool).
My experience is that a combination of things works best (for me).

---------------------------------------0----3------------------
--------------------------------------------------1-------------
------------------------------------------0---------------------
-----------------------------7------2--------------------------
---0---7------------------0-------------------3---------------
-5---0---followed by--5--------checking some octaves--

then making sure the most important chords (most often of course A and E) are sounding right. As Ricardo says it's always going to be a compromise, you will most often have to tune the G string slightly flatter than recommended by a tuner, and the high F# in the open D chord will sound funny as well if you don't leave the high E string just a hair lower. It doesn't really matter that much when you play an electric guitar with all kinds of effects, but I find it incredibly annoying when I hear a guitar out of tune...

Thanks for the alternative. All this talk of beats is a bit lost on me because I miss beats all the time

As another alternatve, if you focus on getting octaves of E and B lined up, ie tune to this chord
0
0
9
9
7
0
Followed by some other octave checks.
Sounds OK to me. Anything with it sound bad to anyone else?

It is contingent on how you fret up high...for example, I might think of "spreading" on this chord just a hair, between 7 and 9 frets ... vs other chords I might "pinch" to intonate them properly and relatively. Your method, is a bit better than say the one above yours...but still inferior to what I described as the best, for the reason of execution I just mentioned. It is not possible to spread or pinch so precisely as to not delude oneself into thinking you actually DID do that precisely enough to have OPEN strings in tune no matter what else you play. (IN other words, this works for string 6,2,1 only, and you might be seriously f ing up strings 5,4,3 unintentionally and to varying degrees every time you do it.) So keep the fingers off the dang fingerboard when tuning and you will be just fine with this or any other chord.

Ricardo

_____________________________

CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 4:05:43

Ruphus

Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ricardo)

Hi Ricardo,

Yes, Peterson´s sweetened tuning can only be as much valuable for default like the 4th/5th fret method. Agreed.

Where we have to agree to disagree however is with the advice that you gave above, and I am in good company.

Here for instance Paul Guy´s ranking of the different tuning methods:
http://www.guyguitars.com/eng/handbook/Tuning/tuning.html

And I think there is good reason why folks who master the method suggested by the Guild of American Luthiers and recommended by me in this thread is being preferred over the others.

Fundamentals and (even more noticable) overtones just come together much better when individual proportions of the guitar are taken into consideration with the method used.

Ruphus

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 9:50:12

Dudnote

Posts: 1805
Joined: Nov. 13 2007

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ruphus)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ruphus

Hi Ricardo,

Yes, Peterson´s sweetened tuning can only be as much valuable for default like the 4th/5th fret method. Agreed.

Where we have to agree to disagree however is with the advice that you gave above, and I am in good company.

Here for instance Paul Guy´s ranking of the different tuning methods:
http://www.guyguitars.com/eng/handbook/Tuning/tuning.html

And I think there is good reason why folks who master the method suggested by the Guild of American Luthiers and recommended by me in this thread is being preferred over the others.

Fundamentals and (even more noticable) overtones just come together much better when individual proportions of the guitar are taken into consideration with the method used.

Ruphus

Nice article Ruphus! I like what he calls "my favourite method" because it minimises error propagation.

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 10:58:48

Sr. Martins

Posts: 3079
Joined: Apr. 4 2011

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Dudnote)

It's funny when someone says that you're wrong and then that same person posts a link with everything you said since the beginning.

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 14:44:54

Ricardo

Posts: 14848
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Dudnote)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dudnote

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ruphus

Hi Ricardo,

Yes, Peterson´s sweetened tuning can only be as much valuable for default like the 4th/5th fret method. Agreed.

Where we have to agree to disagree however is with the advice that you gave above, and I am in good company.

Here for instance Paul Guy´s ranking of the different tuning methods:
http://www.guyguitars.com/eng/handbook/Tuning/tuning.html

And I think there is good reason why folks who master the method suggested by the Guild of American Luthiers and recommended by me in this thread is being preferred over the others.

Fundamentals and (even more noticable) overtones just come together much better when individual proportions of the guitar are taken into consideration with the method used.

Ruphus

Nice article Ruphus! I like what he calls "my favourite method" because it minimises error propagation.

Only because he is actually doing TWO methods, defeating the purpose of finding "the best way" to tune quick by ear...and I would say it's ironic in one paragraph he talks about compensation issues (fretting up high on uncompensated guitars results in sharper notes) and even admits in another topic about finger pressure causes variation (implying only the PLAYER tune his own guitar

), proceeds to describe a method using the 14th fret of the D string!!!!

I would say this guy is always double checking and adjusting with his second method, negating the first part all together. And, at the end of day, probably plays out of tune anyway.

He criticizes the open string harmonics method severly, and proposes that pro players cling to this method from hanging on to their beginner days.

The only thing I agree with here was yes, it's no good to do the 4th fret harmonic on the G string...but I don't advocate that and most pros don't do that...we do what I said before 7th fret low E string for B string open, and 7th of A (or 5th of E string, it's abritrary at that point) for open E. It's super fast and acurate and far superior.

Unless you use a tuner to get your 2 cents here and there just right.

Ricardo

_____________________________

CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 16:44:33

Sr. Martins

Posts: 3079
Joined: Apr. 4 2011

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ricardo)

That's the reason why I don't agree with "one method vs another" as being better, too many variables end up defeating any attempt at a "one size fits all" solution.

The 12TET system IS out of tune by nature and the guitar can't even tune to that accurately. Just accept that you'll always be out of tune and learn how to minimize it in each musical context.

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 16:54:35

Ruphus

Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ricardo)

Ricardo,

What he says actually is not contradictory, and as I said on page one: "... a guitar better harmonizing across the neck is what it is, whereas fretting deviation remains parameter between the two basically different tuning methods / won´t take away from a better harmonizing guitar."

Also the method for tempered tuning that I mentioned in my first post is being recommended by the Guild of American luthiers who can´t be all deaf or dumb.
And the pros that you relate to would not understand that tuning with merely harmonics and open strings will exclusively relate to the strings, leaving out the indiviual properties of the guitar. Which again is why I don´t believe at all any considerable share of professional guitarists to be engaging such a method. (With the exception of John Williams maybe who might have used an indifferent method for one of his orchestral gigs where his Smallman was badly out of tune.)

What the randomly thrown in obejctions are concerned:

The TO did not ask for:

# Tuning methods in a noisy environment at a gig

nor for

# Tuning methods in respect of matching with other player´s instrument.

What he asked for is tuning by ear.
I assume this to allow for a quiet environment and the aim to tune an individual guitar best as possible.

The method I posted is respected for exactly that.
I was convinced that anyone who would actually try it out and able to would end up without doubt (just like everyone to whom I showed how to do, including old hands who had been using indifferent methods for decades).
- And besides: Once got used to it, it will be no more large scaled than the conventional 5th/4th fret method roundly engaged.

That has been it for me in this thread.
I hope it has been enriching for as many players as possible who like to get the best out of their instrument.

Cheers,

Ruphus

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 17:46:52

Sr. Martins

Posts: 3079
Joined: Apr. 4 2011

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ricardo)

Go play alone in the desert.

Will the guitar be in tune? No.

Why? Because it wasn't designed for that.

This thread is absolutely hilarious. Tuning and all that stuff is about physics and maths, NOT faith.

Edit: Just buy a midi keyboard controller and be done with it. You'll have access to all possible temperaments and all of them will feature accurate frequencies to each note (scale degree).

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 17:56:43

Ruphus

Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ricardo)

Here is my last post.

Sir Martin,

you are severally overestimating your comprehensive abilities.
( Your cognitive swayings and inconsitency lets it appear as if your were constantly stoned.)

Now go and tell luthiers that they had no clue about tuning.

Ruphus

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 18:00:38

Sr. Martins

Posts: 3079
Joined: Apr. 4 2011

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ruphus)

quote:

you are severally overestimating your comprehensive abilities.

Now go and tell luthiers that they had no clue about tuning.

There are luthiers who know about tuning and there are also luthiers who don't.

Then there's people like you who mess up all the info and can't even notice the amount of contradictions in his own arguments.

You've already posted a link validating everything I've said.. Did you read it?

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 18:07:22

Sr. Martins

Posts: 3079
Joined: Apr. 4 2011

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ruphus)

quote:

( Your cognitive swayings and inconsitency lets it appear as if your were constantly stoned.)

No man but Iam not so sure about you... drinking maybe?

How come you didn't read this from that same site you showed us? Not only it states everything I've said but it also shows one of the 12TET fretboards that I presented earlier on.

http://www.guyguitars.com/truetemperament/eng/tt_12-tet.html

I don't know who are those luthiers who can prove that Iam wrong (maybe they are the ones who smoke stuff) but this guy surely agrees with what I say.... and you agree with him too.... but wait, how can I be wrong then?

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 17 2015 18:32:56

Ricardo

Posts: 14848
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ruphus)

quote:

Also the method for tempered tuning that I mentioned in my first post is being recommended by the Guild of American luthiers who can´t be all deaf or dumb.

Well, I can't believe ALL MEMBERS advocate that but if it is true that they do, then ok, I must admit they either only know how to play in key of D, or they are deaf. Are these guys the same ones that advocate altering old vintage guitars with bridge compensation or new fingerboards? Again, they never heard of vibrato technique I guess.

_____________________________

CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 18 2015 17:47:09

Richard Jernigan

Posts: 3433
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ricardo)

I have played guitars from very famous makers which went to so sharp when played at the 12th or 14th fret that no amount of vibrato or pushing could bring them anywhere near in tune.

Miguel Rodriguez guitars in the 1960s, both classical and flamenco, were notorious for bridges misplaced by 2 or 3 mm. Even muscular pros like the Romeros had them overhauled for intonation, putting on new fingerboards to correct for the misplaced bridges.

RNJ

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 18 2015 19:37:22

Ricardo

Posts: 14848
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Richard Jernigan)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Richard Jernigan

I have played guitars from very famous makers which went to so sharp when played at the 12th or 14th fret that no amount of vibrato or pushing could bring them anywhere near in tune.

Miguel Rodriguez guitars in the 1960s, both classical and flamenco, were notorious for bridges misplaced by 2 or 3 mm. Even muscular pros like the Romeros had them overhauled for intonation, putting on new fingerboards to correct for the misplaced bridges.

RNJ

Fair enough...but I distinguish defective guitars from "un compensated" guitars...since, depending on the luthier's methods, there can be varying degress of deliberate "compensation". A defective guitar is a mistake of course.

_____________________________

CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 18 2015 20:05:51

Sr. Martins

Posts: 3079
Joined: Apr. 4 2011

RE: Tuning by ear (in reply to Ricardo)

Gross geometry mistakes concerning nut and bridge will undoubtedly screw everything from the beginning.

Considering "regular fretted" guitars with a proper placed bridge, you'll still be dealing with slight deviations from the strings (width/materials/height/length/tension). It would only get near perfect all over the place if you had 6 equal strings tuned to the exactly same note.

Don't fret about it

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 18 2015 20:24:16