-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
Brad
-
06-25-2010 08:53 AM
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
Being a bassist primarily, I learned the guitar in this tuning. I called it "open F" tuning and have many solo guitar pieces in this tuning. Its a great system for jazz or if you are a theory-head who is learning the guitar. However, after I began teaching the guitar, I stopped playing that way completely and really haven't done it for years. but yes, for jazz it's great, or if you play bass, it's also great.
for me, the big advantage was the open F, Bb, Eb, Ab, and Db major 6/9/and 7ths that you can get with the two top strings being C and F. It's way better for flat keys. given that I had never taken a guitar lesson, I could take all of my Bass chord voicings and arpeggios right to the new instrument. however, because I learned that way, I can play pretty much anything on the bottom 4 strings, and struggle on the top 4 when I tune regular, which is all of the time now, so really, I view my first few years practicing the guitar as just extended bass practice.
I also got rejected from projects because I couldn't play open or bar chords. In fact, as an earlier poster stated, it is extremely difficult to play a triad on more than 4 strings on a 4th tuned instrument, pretty much impossible.Last edited by timscarey; 06-25-2010 at 06:02 PM.
-
I can't see the advantage of this - what is the advantage? Playing guitar is hard enough - why change the way it's supposed to be done?
/R
-
Don't understand that approach. As a musician you have to be able to master any key in any position anytime. I just had a look today at this famous CAGED system. How weird is that?
Why not put in that little extra effort into and learn ALL notes on your fretboard, learn all scales by heart (just like all the wind instrument players do BTW) KNOW of which notes a Dbm7b5 cord (or scale) consists and be able to play it up and down the fretboard. That's it.
There might be instruments with different learning curves, but the guitar is the guitar. So changing the tuning won't help a bit, because, sure as hell, other problems will occur.
Again, just my 2 ¢
-
Originally Posted by timscarey
As for bass guitar:
4-string tuning: E A D G
5-string tuning: B E A D G
6-string tuning: B E A D G C!
Maybe the OP should be playing the 6-string bass
-
Originally Posted by GuitaRoland
Tuning the guitar in this way would only be advantageous if the student was already proficient in theory. The benifit to this tuning is that all intervals are the same "shape" no matter where you play them. For example, an octave would ALWAYS be up/down two frets and two strings, making chord and scale shapes much easier to memorize.
IMO the reason the guitar is so hard to learn and at the same time an AMAZING instrument is that it is NOT tuned in perfect intervals and therefore not symmetrical, making it way more functional for triadic harmony, and way harder to memorize.
also, alternate tunings are used very commonly in popular music, everyone from Joni Mitchel and Jimmy Page, to Tool and Taylor Swift.Last edited by timscarey; 06-26-2010 at 05:38 AM.
-
So, it's good for single notes and bad for chords. After 22 years I'm not gonna change my guitar tuning, but over the years I heard a lot about tuning in other ways, awaited and always have seen none of them succeeded.
I believe that when the standard tuning was set up this way (centuries ago) that wasn't as a caprice. Everything has a reason why. Maybe it's not the easiest way for soloing but it is to make the player able to play what s/he has or wants to play.
Of course, you can tune it as you prefer!
-
Greetings, I'm new to the forum. I discovered this forum and topic searching the web for articles and discussions relevant to 4ths tuning. Sorry to come in so late to the discussion.
I don't believe that 4ths tuning is bad for chords, in fact it's the opposite. One of my goals has been to improvise a piece unaccompanied like Joe Pass. This tuning system has been helpful towards that end. Below is a solo improvisation over "Embraceable You" changes using 4ths tuning.
There's even a key shift down a fourth midway through the piece which the symmetrical system makes much easier. As one can see, I'm no great shakes but I don't think I would have been able to do this without a symmetrical layout on the fretboard. Maybe this will help dispel some of the objections to the tuning system.
BTW, there's a marginally active 4ths tuning group on facebook that has some information on scalar and chordal patterns.
-
Well aboard 4thstuning! Would you care to comment on this?
One challenge to standard tuning is that you have to know more shapes. For example:
FMaj7: xx3555
CMaj7: x3545x
GMaj7: 3544xx
those would have the same shape in a perfect 4ths tuning. The flip side of this is that on different strings, different chords are reachable. For example, maybe you can't comfortably reach:
CMaj7: x7958x
but you can reach
CMaj7: xx2413
In a perfect 4ths tuning, the fact that the shape stays the same works against you from this viewpoint.
My conclusion: I'd rather pay the price of learning extra shapes to have the options that arise with the standard tuning. But it's cool for you to try something different.
-
Your point is correct. Standard tuning does allow one more voicings. One can't easily play a 7, 3, 1, 5 structure in 4ths tuning.
The important question to ME is what offers the most benefit, i.e. which compromise allows ME to express myself best? This may not work for YOU but that's what makes the world go around.
In practice I haven't once run across a form where there wasn't a perfectly acceptable substitute in 4ths tuning. For example, if there was a requirement for your structure above I would simplify it to what's important, perhaps the minor second interval with the fifth on top....or maybe move one of the voices down an octave or something.
Everyone points out the perceived deficiencies of the system because there are forms that are in their toolkit they believe they would miss. This is reasonable. What's not being asked is what are the available alternatives that may be just as good to yield an equivalent toolkit.
If the world consisted of only 4ths tuners and someone came up with std tuning, the guitar orthodoxy would ask "can you play Donna Lee in all 12 keys and all string sets?", "can you transpose your library of chord forms to all 12 keys and across all string groups?" "can you comp on the lower strings as well as you do the upper?", "why do we have to learn so many forms?", "why is it so difficult to transpose?", etc. etc. Yes it can be done in std tuning but it's exponentially harder to do so and therefore most people don't.
We all like what we're familiar with and it's hard to imagine the potential of something different, particularly when we're already invested in a system.
Anyway what prompted me to join this thread were the assertions that 4ths tuning is inadequate for chordal work so I linked to my weak playing on youtube to show that yes, it can be done. Not a single 3, 7, 1, 5 form was harmed, or needed, in that performance.
-
So you need this tuning for a certain tune, or for few certain tunes, right? Then you need 2 guitars on stage...or you just simply tune it again and again during your performances in case you perform?
-
@Claudi: Don't understand your question or if it was directed at me. I use only 4ths tuning for all tunes all the time. Didn't intend to suggest anything else.
@BDLH: I can grip a 3, 7, 1, 5 after all.
-
Neat thread - I missed this the 1st time around.
I tuned in perfect 4ths for about 9 months. It was (is) great. I didn't miss any particular chord voicings. In fact, I found it was fairly easy to find voicings (providing one knows how to construct chords), and that many of my "traditional" voicings were easily adaptable.
The fretboard also made a lot more sense too. Now before tuning this way I already knew the entire freboard (notes and all). But because 4ths is so consistent, it resonated with me more.
And here's one more benefit: the scale fingerings were easier (for me). I don't just mean they were more predictable/logical - I mean that technically my fingers had to do less complicated motions because of the consistency with which the fretboard is laid out in perfect 4ths. At the time this was nice because I was trying to do fast rock stuff as well.
At the moment I'm using an kind of Open G tuning on my first four strings (D-G-B-D) because I'm learning banjo and wanted to simplify moving between the instruments (and much to my dismay, I've not yet been able to get the banjo to sounds its best, tonally, using a P4 tuning - I have to tune down a whole step, and then the string tension isn't right...). But if I could use P4 there I would.
One thing that might be surprising to those not accustomed to alternate tunings: learning an alternate tuning doesn't _replace_ your old knowledge. I know for me it's like a different schema getting setup in the mind - if I use a particular tuning I just see the instrument differently. I don't go, "Ooops, I thought I was in standard tuning" and clam notes. So there's room for tuning-knowledge-overlap. It won't necessarily make you confused when/if you move between tunings.
-
Thought I'd add a caveat, I play in two settings:
1) a big band
2) a medium sized combo
In both settings it's usually entirely inappropriate to use more than 4 string voicings. Bossa voicings translate nicely to P4 (i.e., 6-4-3-2 voicings), all the Freddie Green stuff works (of course), and modern triad substitution is nice, compact, and works nicely.
But the giant Mickey Baker chords (to take an example), although many DO work in P4, aren't my cup of tea when playing in these settings.
-
I've started my guitar live with Open-E tuning E B E G B E becouse my first guitar idol played so. Then I've started to go for jazz and realize that it can't be played becouse the stretches.. but it's no my main point.. the thing is I found out that a different guitar tunning is like a different instrument creating different type off music different SOUL e.g the blues invented by Robert Johnson i think only becouse by simply nudling you could play real blues (much harder to play on EBGDAE), not only that difference ..when You played a chord in Open E and the same chord with the same order of notes in Standard tunning ,the sound was different beceouse the guitar fizycs and the fact the bars are possitioned for all strings and not for each string.. ergo You can not get the same sound even with the same notes from a different tuned guitar.. And the guitar are build for standard tunning
Try for egzample tune the guitar like this E B Gg E B E and nuddle some time.. you will quick get that charakteristic russion guitar sound (some spanish 2) ergo different soul
P.S. the R less books for different tunings and thats probably main reasonLast edited by drobniuch; 08-31-2010 at 10:49 AM.
-
I assembled 2 books related to fourt tuning (E A D G C F), they're available from my site and Lulu:
- Fourth Tuning (E A D G C F) - Chord and Scale Booklet
- Fourth Tuning (E A D G C F) - The Complete Arpeggio Book
I consider this a complete approach to this tuning.
If you're interested in some particular aspect of this tuning,let me know and I'll prepare something for you.
RegardsLast edited by ubiguitar; 02-08-2011 at 01:42 PM.
-
The symmetry and logic of tuning in major 3rds or P4ths intrigues me, but I have *so* much time invested in "standard" tuning! I worry that I would no longer be able to read notation or chord charts on-the-fly.
At some point, I'd still like to play around with it, perhaps.
And, for the guys that do it, why aren't you tuning Eb Ab Db Gb B E, as I might have guessed? Seems like the additional low note would be more advantageous than tuning the top two strings up a half-step.
-
Originally Posted by M-ster
Now to your 2nd question - here's my reasoning: I thought I'd only need to learn new notes on 2 strings as opposed to 4 by tuning the 1st and 2nd string up a 1/2 step. Tuning down a 1/2 step on strings 6-3 would require much more learning (for me at least). It's totally doable, but I thought I'd try and leverage what I knew when trying the tuning out at first. Then it stuck, so here I am.
A 2nd reason is that I actually find myself wanting more higher notes rather than lower notes. I almost always play with a piano and bass player, so unless I'm doing big band stuff, I try and stay on strings 1-4. If I had a 7 string guitar, I'd want an extra high string, not a low string.
This would probably all change if I found myself doing more chord melody stuff, or sans piano.
-
Interesting discussion.
I know from my own past experience that when I've tried some of the common open tunings (for rock stuff, for example), I suddenly become mentally impaired and can no longer play anything without hunt-and-pecking. I hate that feeling of impairment!
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
Brad
-
Originally Posted by timscarey
Also, even in jazz: I find that Ed Bickert-style comping on the top few strings works MUCH better with the guitar's standard tuning. And let's face it, if you're going to play jazz in the current scene, you HAVE to have studied Ed Bickert.
-
Originally Posted by max_power
I can't comment on playing in the jazz scene because when I was competitive in college I used standard tuning, and that was some time ago. Now I'm just a hobbyist. But I don't find the voicings radically different on the top four strings, and I personally find comping with them easier. But hey, different things are gonna jive with different folks and different hands.
-
The top 4 strings on a guitar are my favorite, actually!! That 3rd saves me from terrible stretches many times... These two jazzy voicings are my some of my favs... I cannon reach them nearly as easily on the middle or low string sets...
----1----1-------------------------------------
----1----1-------------------------------------
----3----2-------------------------------------
----4----4-------------------------------------
----x----x-------------------------------------
----x----x-------------------------------------
The basic min pent blues lick where you partial barre the first two strings while bending the 3rd sting a full step wouldn't exist! What would SRV, Clapton, and Dave Gilmore do??
-
Originally Posted by max_power
I don't buy that at all. IMO 4ths tuning allows one to do more, it's not a handicap but an advantage.
-
All 4ths might make playing Wes-style octaves a little easier. They would all be 2 frets apart.
I've used a bunch of different tunings at different times for different reasons without mastering any of them. Standard is still standard for me. Always will be.
There was a time, when I played bass, that synthesizer bass and 5-string basses had come to be standard on pop records. There were a lot of parts I couldn't cover with 4 strings. During 2 weeks off I decided to change my tuning to the 5ths of a cello. Low C on the 4th string up to A on the 1st. C-G-D-A it goes. I practiced all day for two weeks. My neighbor in the next apartment was also a bass player. After a couple of days I turned my speaker cabinet toward the wall adjoining his and cranked it up. Interesting conversations followed. I was learning tunes, all the scales, transposing the positions of all the stock and trade thumps and pops, and pumping out bone-shaking low Cs. Then an audition came up. What do I do? I throw the bass in the case and go. I got the gig. Only the guitar player noticed the difference. He said he had no idea what I was doing but it sounded great.
There is a story about George Van Eps that he would challenge fellow players to tune any one of his seven strings down a half-step, then he would continue playing without any problems. No benefit to it. Just a game to him. That's mastery.Last edited by kenbennett; 02-04-2011 at 11:10 AM. Reason: Added Van Eps story
Julian Lage Trio - Sat 27th April - Marciac,...
Today, 03:57 PM in The Players