Tuning: "in"...or "out"???

My own playing I can tell right away. I used to check it every time, but I got in the habit of playing a bit first to see what I thought and how far I was off. Turns out I can tell by playing a G-D-Am chord progrssion if I'm off.

See??? Simple!!! There's no need to make a Federal Case about it...(Thank you Mr Parker!)

It seems to me that although everyone seems to be willing to say that "everyone should play in tune"...and that newbies have the most trouble with it...not many do.

Consider the beginner's logic:

Learn one chord. Then another...then a third...then practise changing from one to the other...etcetera.

Why not learn your first chord...then learn how it sounds in tune? And DON'T go beyond that step until you can tune!

A newbie just does not REALISE that if you don't tune up properly you won't hear the chord extensions that are floating/lurking/WAITING right there in front of yer face!

Case in point: Listen to some stuff by YES. A precious few really SIMPLE acoustic chordings (but that's ALL they play "simple"!!!) played slow as molasses...introducing some of their covers...with each and every tonal left standing there begging the musical soul that's in every GN member to chase after 'em!!!

It's not WHAT you play...or even HOW you play. It's WHY you play, folks! EVERYONE I've come across on the GN site shares the same passion for this marvelous instrument...newbies...intermediates...and even Old Farts like me.

Cat

PS: Please read the caption...below!

When I'm too lazy to dig out my tuner I tune kinda how Cat suggests. If I wanna check my tuning what I do is crank up the distortion then start playing power chords. If they sound crisp, the guitar is in tune. If is sounds like mud or has the familiar wah wah wah sound of clashing notes, it's out of tune.

On a side note, some guitarists are known for playing their guitars out of tune. Like Kurt Cobain.

Consider the beginner's logic:

Learn one chord. Then another...then a third...then practise changing from one to the other...etcetera.

Why not learn your first chord...then learn how it sounds in tune? And DON'T go beyond that step until you can tune!

I think that the honest and accurate answer is that beginners mostly CAN'T hear what you CAN now hear. Perhaps it's because you've had decades of work at it, perhaps you always did have a better than average ear, but most beginners don't have a good ear. Some people can't even feel the beat properly, let alone tell whether something is still properly in tune or not.

When I began I read good advice that suggested that we should aim for error free learning, because mistakes take a long time to 'unlearn'. Absolutely true, but also completely impossible to follow. To play even the most basic run of half a dozen notes that sound 'right' I needed a whole swag of skills including:

Very accurate fretting finger placement, appropriate finger pressure, a good sense of timing and tempo, some expressive skills in my strumming/picking hand, an ear not just for tuning but for the whole palette of sound shaping and balance, and so on.

I had NONE of these skills. NONE.

I could sit there all day fiddling with a pitch pipe and twiddling the tuning pegs and never hear what you can. I could pluck away all week and never once sound like BB KIng. My fingers were so stiff and inept that I literally had to use my right hand to place the fingers of my left hand in position. It took months before I tried standing up with guitar, and so on..... We tend to forget all that when we get good. :)

Now I can look out the windows and day-dream and my hands keep playing. Now I can keep better time and stick more closely to tempo. Now I can hear more accurately if I'm in tune or not. But I couldn't back then, and my ear will almost certainly never be as good as yours. Beginner "in tune" and expert "in tune" are not the same thing and never will be. Ditto for every other aspect of music that pros can do brilliantly and beginners can't. If I waited on my first chord until I could hear what you hear I'd still be there. Well, actually I wouldn't, I would have given up in disgust. :shock:

At one level it's great advice, for sure, but you could replace it with suggesting that we don't move forward until we can play exactly in time and that would be equally out of reach at that stage.
Feel what you play...play what you feel!

Eaxctly! The difference is though, what an experienced professional feels and hears what an amateur feels and hears are totally different animals. I spend a big percentage of my learning time just improvising - moving around the fretboard, keyboard or whatever, expanding my horizons in not just in how and where I can play it, but also in how I feel and respond to it. I can't match a pro in any aspect.... yet.... :mrgreen:

But I will pay more attention to tuning in future. Honestly. It just won't mean as much to me as it does to you until a few other aspects move forward too.

Cheers,

Chris

Okay...the Braille Method.

Tune as best you can...then strum a REALLY slow and deliberate E chord. Each note can "swim" a little...that's good color. But NO beats between them.

Hey! Picture five clones of Michael Phelps swimming in five lanes...with ME in, say, the third lane!

Get it??? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Cat

Cat: I think you're a typical case of being so far you've forgotten how it is to just start. It takes considerable time to hear how well an instrument is tunes, and electronic tunes only fix that partly. While it allows everyone to play on a (reasonably) tuned guitar it doesn't fix the hearing problem. Most 'out-of-tuneness' I hear is due to fretting with too much pressure, bending notes up when forming chords, not knowing how far to bend notes in a melody etc. What for you might sound of out tune is exactly the same as a perfectly played note, the difference just isn't audible yet. With time the ears learn to differentiate more and more and tuning will automatically get better. I don't think anyone ever knowingly plays out of tune without a reason. People just play out of tune because they don't know any better. Same as not hearing when you're playing perfectly on the beat or slightly off, or not hearing the importance of accenting key notes etc. It's all part of the learning progress.

However: for some reason guitarist don't seem to appreciate the importance of getting a strong ear as much. My violin teacher is very, very strict about playing the exact pitch. Guitar teachers have a tendency to have a 'if I can get the student to play the right frets at the right time we've done the biggest part, tuning can be learned later' mentality.

And finally: as you said there are different ways to tune an instrument. My piano parts are recorded in concert-tuning, which theoretically adds some dissonances. But to my ears it sounds slightly more dreamy, espescially the reverb tail. Someone else might not like it and claim the piano isn't tuned well. That's true, there are two kinds of tuning: well-tuned as in 'tuned the way I want it to be tuned' and well-tuned as in 'mathematically correctly tuned'. The second one is to some extent objective, the first one is strictly subjective.

FWIW, most -- if not all -- of the tuning systems can be described mathematically -- just depends on what's being optimized: perfect 5ths in a particular key, errors spread across certain strings in a particular key, errors spread over the entire fretboard for playing in any key (equi-temp) ... One reason for describing them mathematically, is it helps some of us who use that language understand and extrapolate where that system may work well and not. Each has its +/- for different chord progressions, key progression, chord types, playing styles ... But on the practical side, assuming the player can hear what's going on AFA intonation/tuning errors, it's pretty much up to that player to decide what method of tuning suits the piece(s) at hand. Those of use who've played for a while know that particular song which requires a tweak on a string or two to sound better -- from our PoV. Not everyone else may agree. And that tweak may absolutely suck for next song played.

Among those who can discern tuning errors (removing those who can't here), there is not universal agreement about what sounds best. Some these prefer a bit of dissonance -- and again, they can hear it. Others are bothered by any departure from their particular perception of "tuned." While I've known this for a long time, a "recent,"concrete example I recall was Arjen ("Ingar") telling me my bends were out on a recording of mine. My reaction was something like "yeah, I hear it, but I like the effect of overbending." Different strokes...

For a past company, I managed subjective audio tests of the audio compression systems (similar to MP3, WMA, AAC) we used for our music and talk. We had three types of listening pools: general population or some favor thereof, trained listeners and expert listeners. The first is obvious, and was our marketing target. The trained listeners were persons out of the general population that were given specific examples of audio artifacts or distortions, trained on receognizing those and then used to identify and rate them in test material. No surprise: Turns out people train at different rates, even when given good examples of impaired audio. Some, though trained, never learn to perceive some types of issues obvious to others ... including frequency wobble and special frequency distortions similar to tuning errors.

The expert listeners were another interesting group. Despite being "expert," they did not all hear the same issues with the audio samples. Some were extremely sensitive to spatial imaging and frequency stability and "musicallity," but could not perceive or did not care about dynamic compression. Others could hear the slightest intermodulation (an a-musical distortion), but could barely tell the difference between mono and stereo, or anything related to depth of field. Each was a very keen "tool" in some specialized area of audio nastiness, but no better than general population in others.

Short story: Some will learn to hear tuning issues; some won't. All they can do is try to learn and see how far they get. Among those with keen perceptions of tuning and intonation related problems there is some level of taste that decides what is or not acceptable.

So how about time keeping and phrasing?

concrete example I recall was Arjen ("Ingar") telling me my bends were out on a recording of mine. My reaction was something like "yeah, I hear it, but I like the effect of overbending." Different strokes...

Good example. Something I learned from that was that after you told me it was intentional I listened to it again to 'figure' it out. For some reason it seems that I (and I assume the same goes for others) don't bother giving something proper thought, or allow myself to appreciate it, if I feel it's 'a mistake' instead of a conscious descicion to do somehting 'out of the norm'. Or in other words: I tend to like 'out of the norm' things better if people tell me in advance it's going to be strange. I'd appreciate Picasso's abstract work much better hanging in a modern museum like Centre Pompidou then in a 'classical' museum like the Loevre. Walking through a door that wanrs me things will be modern, abstract or downright strange 'enable' parts of my brain that seem disabled when faced with unexpected weirdness.

Short story: Some will learn to hear tuning issues; some won't. All they can do is try to learn and see how far they get. Among those with keen perceptions of tuning and intonation related problems there is some level of taste that decides what is or not acceptable.

So how about time keeping and phrasing?

+1

Great post, and very interesting info about the audio tests. :)

Right now 'time keeping and phrasing', as you say, are the holy grails for me. When I started out I soon discovered that even the so called 'easy songs' for a beginner still sounded dead when I tried them. I could play the three chords (or whatever) but they still sounded like rubbish (even if I had tuned the guitar with an electronic tuner and it was OK to my ear at the time). When I looked at why I was flappping enthusiastically up and down the runway but never taking off, it seemed that what was missing was timing, phrasing, intonation and so on - all that stuff relating to subtlety of touch and expressiveness. And it didn't matter how much I read about it, or what a book or teacher said, the only way to find it was to go and look for myself. I've been looking ever since and, as you said, I'm slowly training myself to be able to understand a range of things that were out of reach initially. It's not just my physical abilities that are moving forward, but there's also improvement in what I can now hear, feel and appreciate.

It's an endlessly fascinating journey, and one that keeps opening up new and intriguing possibilities as various aspects develop. What was one of the most daunting aspects of music when I began - the huge amount of 'stuff' that it seemed you had to understand and master before you were 'good' - has slowly turned into its most appealing aspect. I now know that it will never be finished. I'll never be able to say "OK, music's done - now what do I do next?"

Chris

From reading all these tuning-related posts I come up with: "Why do people go OUT OF THEIR WAY to find all sorts of reasons WHY they should be left to play OUT of tune???"

The brutal fact is that you won't sound even halfway good. (Actually, not even quarter way good...)

And the IRONY of it is that it's EASY as anything to learn to play in tune. It might take...what???...all of one happy afternoon to figure it out? :?

Sheesh! C'mon, folks!!!! Don't hide yer lamp under a bushel!

Why would you GO OUT OF YOUR WAY to bury GOOD music under BAD tuning!

Cat

Noone is going out of their way to find reasons not to play in tune. Nobody denies that playing in tune sounds better. Everyone already told you it does not take just one afternoon to develop one's ear to play in tune.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wM58YXp2x0

EDIT______
---------------
I added nothing to the discussion
my apologies
please edit as needed

Okay...maybe I should “lead by example”. Ignar...you are 100% correct about me forgetting that it's tough for beginners. Parker? Was it you that said something like (in essence) “I just do it and don't think about it”. Yeah, me too. It's pretty much a no-brainer...FOR US!

So now...right this moment...as a public service...I've just restrung an Epiphone acoustic with .009's. (I play light, hence the 9's.) It's right here on my lap. There is no fancy/schmancy bridge on it. It's simple. But two aspects do jump out at me now that I think more introspectively about it:

First...I notice is that there are little pegs (they look exactly like small clothespins) that slide in at the back of the bridge to hold the ball-ends of the strings in there. You gotta keep the scooped-side facing the bridge...AND...these things certainly DO WEAR OUT...so every couple of months you'll need to get new ones! Once you get the string in there...PRESS HARDER than you think you'll need. (Hey, Superman! DON'T crack yer freakin' guitar!!!!)

Second...although I've seen more ways to wind a string around the tuning post/peg...so long as you DO NOT wrap over a coil of string you'll be fine!

There will be a telltale “ping!” if you have either not pressed in that clothespin thing hard enough or you've wrapped a string over itself. CHECK after hearing this noise!

Bear in mind that these are new strings. (In fact, who the ^%#* puts OLD strings on, anyway????) So even if you are replacing a whole set...or a busted string...the string(s) need to be “set”. There's a certain amount of “give” when you add up looseness in the wrap, the stay peg and the nature of nickle-steel...especially the wound ones.

So? Whaddya do? I bend to a more than usual extent each string midway up the fret board. (No need to bend...pinch the string between thumb and forefinger...and tug at it...that'll do just fine.) I use a Korg tuner...get the needle SHARP from where I tune...and let the “bend” bring it back down to flatland...closer and closer to “dead on” as I go. I do this a few times. In fact, I ALWAYS prefer bring the exact tune DOWN to the right place rather than twiddling the peg. This means it's more likely to stay there. This will take a bit of getting used to. (So get used to it!)

Next...I tune the low E. There's a pickup in the sound hole of this Epiphone so I plug the guitar into the Korg. The needle will “get real close”. Do this with all your strings. Long ago, I found an anomaly in my G strings. So I tune on the first fretspace...on the G#.

After tuning them all...GO OVER THEM AGAIN! They will be flat! You've increased the loading dynamic on the whole of the instrument. It'll flatten out on you. BUT...if they actually get sharp...it's your finger pressure! You are “trampolining” them sharp with too much pressure on the note. Ease up.

What should you hear once you think you are done? Strum a slow E chord. Each note can (I need an appropriate adjective here, folks) “swim”...”smimmer”...wobble a little like a bowl of jello??? Heck. You'll know it when you hear it...it'll be PLEASING and have a certain richness to it. DO NOT, however, be happy with an actual “beat” between notes!

If you play on only the first few frets...okay...don't sweat the rest of the fretboard. But in time...as you find the need to wander up there through Scale Land...you'll need to come up with your own ways of keeping the machine tuned wherever it is you want to play.

Me? I'll tune my open low E with the E that's on the 7th fret of the next (A) string. At this moment it “swims” a tad more than in conjunction with the strummed E chord. Why? (Ask Gnease! Not me!) So I reset my tuning MINUTELY to split the difference in “swim”. I go string after string...bearing in mind that once you get to the G you'll need to go up one fret on the B to find the right note.

Now I glide through some sweeping harmonics across the 5th 7th and 12th frets. Any beats will be bloody obvious. Yes...before we get an argument going...each string WILL still have a nice harmonic chime no matter HOW you tune it in the open position. However...relating to the chime next to it...it'll sound sick!

Am I finished? No. I hit another open E chord...then...what I see is an E sus 2nd: X 2 4 4 X X (Other people use other chordings...get chummy wherever you want! If you keep the same “check-chord”...and let it's sound become second nature.

Now I'm tuned.

Hope this helps.

Cat

PS:
Hey! STILL won't tune? Read the manufacturer's label. Does it say "Made by Moe, Larry and Curley"??? :?

Alvin Lee...Going Home.....drives me nuts.

EDIT______
---------------
I added nothing to the discussion
my apologies
please edit as needed

I don't do it because it's right or wrong, per se. I do it cuz that's what I prefer. If Cobain liked his guitars out of tunings for whatever effects he desired, by all means, he has every right to do so.

I can't tune by ear, but I know when a chord sounds off. Odd combo, I'm sure. If I hit a G chord, I want it to sound like a G chord. That's just my preference though. I use tuners and have four of them. Why don't I learn how to tune by ear? Because I never got around to it, my ear is ever changing (lonnnnnggggggg story) and being technical, I like the peceived accuracy of the tuners. It's my preference and the way I do things.

Until OWA/GS said Cobain played out of tune, I had no idea. I like his music, so I'm glad he played out of tune I guess.

As I said, I hardly ever hear if someone else is out of tune. Just me. Way out of tune, sure, but not slightly. I'm glad it's that way. I could not imagine being that anal (chosen or subconciously). Life would suck.

Still, I hates it when I pull a damned A chord.......