Tuning in all thirds
Patricia Selman
members ot this newsgroup. I have also been looking a major thirds tuning
layout a la Ralph Patt, but he does it on special eight string guitars. If
I am not mistaken the tuning would require lowering strings by 1/2 steps
starting at the low A, so by the time you reach the high E you have to tune
is down 2-1/2 semi tones! That low string tension would may be a problem on
an ordinary guitar? The note closeness of the grips is certainly appealing.
Gerry
<gij...@telus.net> wrote:
True. Get appropriate gauge strings and suit up on a adjunct guitar to
get a feel for it.
--
First they gerrymander us into one-party fiefs. Then they tell us they only
care about the swing districts. Then they complain about voter apathy.
-- Gail Collins
Ralph Patt
"Patricia Selman" wrote:
<< I have also been looking a major thirds tuning
layout a la Ralph Patt, but he does it on special eight string guitars. If
I am not mistaken the tuning would require lowering strings by 1/2 steps
starting at the low A, so by the time you reach the high E you have to tune
is down 2-1/2 semi tones! That low string tension would may be a problem on
an ordinary guitar? The note closeness of the grips is certainly appealing.>>
Here are the string guages I use on my 8 string guitars tuned in thirds.
1st Ab .008 D'Addario (.007 on one guitar)
2nd E .010 D'Addario
3rd C .013 D'Addario
4th Ab w.022 Elixer Nanweb
5th E w.026 Elixer Nanweb
6th C w.032 Elixer Nanweb
7th Ab w.042 Elixer Nanweb
8th E w.052 Elixer Nanweb
Ralph
www.ralphpatt.com
Ugly
Dallas Selman
guitars, which is all I have and need to try this tuning on before commiting
to a 7 string, would I start with low E or C???
If low E was the lowest note that would leave me with a 13 gauge on the high
string - that could be tough for me. Low C, 32 gauge through 08 gauge might
not drive the top of the guitar body, right? What about Ab, 42 gauge
through E, 10 gauge, does that muck up the symmetry of the voicing?
"Ralph Patt" <ralp...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040404164742...@mb-m24.aol.com...
jazzychris
Użytkownik "Patricia Selman" <gij...@telus.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:oaYbc.10726$J56.2583@edtnps89...
> I have come to the conclusion that fourths tuning sucks
Yeah, but looking at what can be done with it... I mean whole world of
guitar styles (from Paco de Lucia throuhg Pat martiono to Steve Vai) i don't
think it's any major disadventage. It's MUSIC that can SUCK, not tuning.
Aren't you looking just for a shortcut?
--
Krzysztof =[jazzychris]= Inglik
http://guitar.pac.pl
GG #7101960
jazzychris
Użytkownik "jazzychris" <WYTNIJ_TO_...@op.pl> napisał w wiadomości
news:l%5cc.362578$Or1.2...@news.chello.at...
> Pat martiono
Martino :)
(I'm coming to conclusion that morning fingers sucks :-P )
kuy...@yahoo.com
> I have come to the conclusion that fourths tuning sucks, as advised by
> members ot this newsgroup. I have also been looking a major thirds tuning
> layout a la Ralph Patt, but he does it on special eight string guitars.
I started using a tuning in fourths a couple of months ago,
after 10+ years of normal tuning, and I love it.
You know, it's quite useless to discuss which is "best" tuning in general.
Every tuning has its strong and weak points. You have to decide the
weight of these points.
For example I still keep the standard tuning on my classical guitar,
and playing flamenco on such a "non standard" tuning would be almost
impossible, since you use open strings very often.
As far as I can see it tuning in a non standard way has the following
"social" problems:
1) you will not be able to use your friends guitars without retuning them
2) Other will people will not be able to use your guitar
3) It you want to be a teacher, your studends will have to use your tuning
or won't be able to copy your fingerings.
4) You want be able to use existing tablature.
I personally don't care about playing other people guitars, and I don't want
to be a teacher. But these are personal considerations.
Number four can be a problem for some people, but I think that if you
want to play jazz you should learn to read standard notation and
to find the notes on your instrument anyways.
In addition to "social" problems there are is a simple fact:
if you change the tuning some things will become harder, others will
become easier.
With 4ths tuning, cowboy chords become harder, I can still play them
but they're tricky.
So, if just want to play folk songs don't bother at all with tuning in
fourths. It's not worth it.
But since this is a jazz newsgroup I would say that cowbody chords
are not important.
Some people say you'll have problems to play closed voicings with
(minor) seconds in them. It's not true. I play them without problem
and if you can't cover 4 frets you'll have problems with many chords
in normal tuning too. Go play Tuck Andress or Allan Holdsworth chords.
Now, arguing about the value of the things that become easier/harder
is a little like comparing two different instruments.
Is the sax better than the trumpet? What about piano vs guitar?
To me it's nonsense.
My point of view is that good players and composers will work around
the weak points and use the strong ones at their full advantage.
I'd like to hear from people who know about some "very important"
(whatever that means) chord/arpeggio/whatever that becomes unplayable
in this tuning.
I still haven't found any.
I mapped out a lot of chords, voicings, inversions, scales, etc, etc
in normal/4ths/3rds tunings.
You can find them at
http://137.138.142.240/%63%68%69%65%72%69%63%6f/Music/Guitar/
about the things easier to play on 4ths I found that arpeggios of
seventh chord (m7, 7+, 7, half dim, ...) never require you to play
two consecutive notes on the same fret, since you never have a forth
interval. I always found that very awkward on stardard tuning,
when you have to play a major third over the G and B strings.
This might be a serious fingering problem for a maj3rd tuning.
But the most important thing is:
with any symmetric tuning the number of "shapes" that you have to learn
is greatly reduced. Check out the above link for that.
On normal tuning you have 12 shapes to learn to play the drop2s of a
given chord (4 inversions * 3 shifted version for the EADG, ADGB, DGBe strigs).
With 4ths tuning you just have 4. That's three time less shapes for
chords and arpeggios. The scales will be much easier too.
That means less brain power and time used to struggle with the fretboard,
and more to learn tunes and create music.
This alone is enough to offset all the abote quoted problems, for me.
I haven't tried the major3rd tuning, it was too much of a change, but
it might be very good.
Moving to fourths was quite easy because you already know all the scales
(same shapes used on the EADG strings in normal tuning, just "extend" them),
and many chords.
I'm not trying to force anybody to change their tuning. I think
I've been honest about the drawbacks, and I'd like to hear from
some people who disagree with me.
jazzychris
Uzytkownik <kuy...@yahoo.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:2958e3b.04040...@posting.google.com...
<cut>
Yes indeed, I agree with your point of view. A LOT of things (especially in
jazz) would be easier in "3rd tuning". It's morte logical and so on... I
found Ralph's WWW about 2 years ago. I tried this concept, but gave up .
1. I have strong fundaments and knowledge of fretboard and musical theory in
standard tuning, and I had a lot of problems with re-learning.
2. I'm a teacher and I have to let my students SEE certain things.
3. I don't play only jazz music, but also blues, rock, bluegrass etc. I
agree, jazz chromatic stuff is a lot easier in "3rd tuning" as well as close
voiced chords, but for example - pentatonic scale is more difficult, because
normally tuned guitar strings form minor pentatonic scale. Some classical
pieces became hardcore in "3rd tuning". Fourth interval is not a problem for
me, because I use so called "rolling fingers technique".
I think it would be better for me to use "3rd tuning" from start, but I
can't bring back the Past. Now "4th" tuning is an integral part of my life.
Dallas Selman
something like this and only found Patt's excellent site with some paterns
for thirds. Thanks so much for that, and I hope it stays up long enough
for me to study this stuff. I have trained myself to think intervaically,
so symetriacal tuning may help.
Yes! I am looking for a short cut. Don't need tab, I am a double bass
player. Don't teach, don't need to play other people's guitars, etc. Just
need to learn to comp jazz for recording at home, and a few chord/melody
piecs for my own enjoyment. Stringing a 6 string guitar for all major
thirds may be a problem, especially with respect to tension on the top, I
am hoping someone will reply to this.
<kuy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2958e3b.04040...@posting.google.com...
Steven Rosenberg
topic -- on six-string, tuning the guitar E Ab C E Ab C. Yes, you do
lose some range on the guitar, but it's just a major third (the tuning
is perfect for 7-string). You can play a chromatic scale VERY quickly
with this tuning -- everything falls within four frets. That's true
for EVERY scale, and that's the tuning's best feature.
The main thing is that major 3rds tuning eliminates almost all
stretches and many position shifts in single-note playing. If you
primarily think of the fretboard horizontally (i.e. in position),
don't shift around a lot and are uncomfortable with the Berklee-style
"six fret" method in which the first finger reaches down one fret and
the fourth finger reaches up one to cover six frets in a position,
then this tuning is worth checking out.
I'm so used to the standard guitar tuning that I just can't commit to
this new tuning, and I'm not as wedded to a horizontal approach. Also,
I haven't exactly determined how this tuning works out for common jazz
chords (though Ralph does have many of these on his Web site). I'd
love to see more material on this tuning and hear/see some players
using it.
Since the guitar is a chordal, fretted instrument, I don't see much
advantage in fourths or fifths tuning (yes, there are people who tune
in fifths ...). For bowed instruments, the approach along the neck is
extremely vertical, and that's where fifths tuning should remain, I
think.
The main problem I see with major thirds tuning at this point is the
lack of instructional material on it. With everything geared toward
standard tuning, you'd have to reinvent the wheel, as it were. That
may be a good thing, but it's a hard thing.
ralp...@aol.com (Ralph Patt) wrote in message news:<20040404164742...@mb-m24.aol.com>...
Ralph Patt
From: ste...@usa.com (Steven Rosenberg)
>I've tried Ralph's tuning -- check out his excellent Web site on the topic --
on six-string, tuning the guitar E Ab C E Ab C. Yes, you do lose some range on
the guitar, but it's just a major third (the tuning
is perfect for 7-string). You can play a chromatic scale VERY quickly with this
tuning -- everything falls within four frets. That's true
for EVERY scale, and that's the tuning's best feature.
The main thing is that major 3rds tuning eliminates almost all stretches and
many position shifts in single-note playing. If you primarily think of the
fretboard horizontally (i.e. in position),
don't shift around a lot and are uncomfortable with the Berklee-style "six
fret" method in which the first finger reaches down one fret and the fourth
finger reaches up one to cover six frets in a position,
then this tuning is worth checking out....>>
Steven,
I couldn't have explained it better. It is hard to change and certainly is not
for everone. Jim Hall, Tal and Joe Pass have done reasonbly well with the
standard tuning.
Ralph
ts duke
"jazzychris" <WYTNIJ_TO_...@op.pl> wrote in message
news:l%5cc.362578$Or1.2...@news.chello.at...
>
> Użytkownik "Patricia Selman" <gij...@telus.net> napisał w wiadomości
> news:oaYbc.10726$J56.2583@edtnps89...
>
> > I have come to the conclusion that fourths tuning sucks
>
> Yeah, but looking at what can be done with it... I mean whole world of
> guitar styles (from Paco de Lucia throuhg Pat martiono to Steve Vai) i
don't
> think it's any major disadventage. It's MUSIC that can SUCK, not tuning.
>
> Aren't you looking just for a shortcut?
>
As far as I know all of these people use standard tuning, not all fourths.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
ts
Stan Gosnell
news:jnfcc.11270$J56.260@edtnps89:
> Stringing a 6 string guitar for all major
> thirds may be a problem, especially with respect to tension
> on the top, I am hoping someone will reply to this.
The problem isn't tension, it's the lack of range. If you plan
to tune in thirds, you need at least 7 strings, and 8 is better.
I bought a DeArmond 7 string just to work on thirds tuning,
because it was cheap. Turns out it's the best-playing guitar I
own, and one of the best-sounding. I gave up on thirds, and now
I'm playing it as a standard 7-string. It worked fine tuned in
thirds, though, I just didn't take to the thirds, since I
already play a couple of instruments tuned in fifths, and yet
another tuning was just too much to deal with.
--
Regards,
Stan
jazzychris
Użytkownik "ts duke" <tsduke...@hotmail.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:c4spof$2m1k2j$1...@ID-98355.news.uni-berlin.de...
> As far as I know all of these people use standard tuning, not all fourths.
> Correct me if I'm wrong.
You're absolutely right, dude :)
Dallas Selman
"Stan Gosnell" <me@work> wrote in message
news:Xns94C2D5E7FB...@204.52.135.40...
Stan Gosnell
> does that mean you configure your 7th string as the high E
> string?
Right now I have the 7th string tuned to a low A, which is
standard jazz tuning AFAIK. I hear that rockers tend to tune it
to B.
When I was tuning in thirds, I used pretty much the gauges and
tuning that Ralph Patt does.
--
Regards,
Stan