Flatting the 3rd (or, Just Intonation)

Bill Llewellyn · Post by **Bill Llewellyn** » 4 Mar 2004 8:34 am

There has been lots of discussion on the Forum over just intonation versus even tempered tuning. JI does sound more natural, while ET matches keyboards and other ET instruments without beat conflicts. I use ET because I play with keys and its easier to tune the guitar (no special pedal or level compensations needed for assorted pulls and chords).

However, I just did a demo of Teach Your Children (see link at bottom for a listen), a song that has the classic country ending tag where a 2nd note (combined with a 5th) is pulled to a 3rd. When working up the demo, I found that the 3rd, played in ET, and sustained over the closing chord from the rhythm section, sounded awful. Believe it or not, this rank amateur found himself doing a bar slant on that last pull to flat the 3rd from ET to something closer to JI to make it sound better (just for that closing lick).

That made me think (a rare event). We all have to play by ear to get the bar in the right place in band or session work. Occasionally, a 3rd note will need to be played on its own, and I'm wondering if we subconsciously push the lone 3rd down into JI (even if the guitar is tuned in ET) because it "sounds right". For ET people like me, if I then pick other notes in the same chord, they're flat.

That may be one of the battles I face (and maybe other ET tuning folks do as well) in keeping good intonation.

Any thoughts?

Here's that TYC demo:

http://www.rahul.net/thinker/audio/mp3/Teach_demo.mp3

------------------
Bill, steelin' since '99 | Steel page | My music | Steelers' birthdays | Over 50?

Franklin · Post by **Franklin** » 4 Mar 2004 8:50 am

Bill,

Actually neither method comes any closer to being in tune with the piano. The piano sharpens with each octave past middle A and flattens with each octave past middle A at(440). There is only one note tuned to 440 on the piano and the rest drift flat and sharp according to the piano tuners preference.....It all comes down to a personal preference.......Paul

Gene Jones · Post by **Gene Jones** » 4 Mar 2004 9:01 am

.....There is only one note tuned to 440 on the piano and the rest drift flat and sharp according to the piano tuners preference.....It all comes down to a personal preference.......Paul.....

.....just like steel guitar players!

www.genejones.com

Bill Llewellyn · Post by **Bill Llewellyn** » 4 Mar 2004 9:09 am

Thanks, Paul. I'd heard of that technique of piano tuning, but didn't know how prevalent it was. In contrast, electronic keyboards don't incorporate that (at least I'm not aware of it--though maybe they do on piano samples).

I'd never heard how "off" the (almost) lone 3rd could sound until I played that trailing lick on TYC. Startling.

Rhino · Post by **Rhino** » 4 Mar 2004 9:26 am

Hi Bill….

I have experienced the same type of problem as you. What I did was to record a Band in a Box background rhythm and supply the melody via my steel while being tuned to JI. When I played back the recording I was shocked by how horrible and out of tune I sounded. What stood out the most on the E9th neck was the E pull to F note and B pull to C# note. So to keep the beats somewhat under control with JI and still bring the flatted notes up to correct pitch with the rhythm track I experimented with a hybrid tuning.

What I did was to re-tune my E to F note from 434 hertz up to 438. Then I retuned all the strings two hertz sharp. What a difference this made, it put me in tune and I was still able to enjoy the beat-less combinations JI provides. My change using the A pedal and E to F lever even sounds acceptable. My new F even sounds good with G#.

I also recorded my C6th tuned to JI and after tuning up all the strings two hertz sharp it was brought right in with the band.

My hybrid tuning idea was based on the fact that if a note is flat it really shines but if a note is sharp it is easily hid. So even though I have strings that are tuned to 438 JI after pulling all the strings two hertz sharp I bring them into 440 ET plus the strings that are tuned to 440 being pulled to 442 are not noticed. So there it is -- in tune and beat-less.

I’m happy -- it works -- and I get to reap the benefits of both tunings.

Rob...

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 4 Mar 2004 9:33 am

Paul is absolutely correct in HOW most pianos are tuned. However, not in HOW they sound. The ONLY reason pianos are stretch tuned above and below middle C octaves has to do with the length of the strings causing the tuned note (IF it was not stretched) to sound OFF from 440.

The net result is IF a piano is stretch tuned across all octaves, it WILL sound straight 440 across all octaves. Even though on the meter each octave below and avove middle C has been shifted slightly away from 440.

Note: when we or a tuner says 440, it does NOT apply to the frequency. It applies to the relative pitch where the note A is used as a reference tuned to exactly 440HZ.

As to the author's observations, what you discovered is the beginning of the dilemma; ever since our 12 note semitone system came into being. The battle both physical and aural over ET versus JI will never end.

Volumes and volumes have been written about it. The problem is NOT in the music or the arithimetic behind it. It is simply that many ears do NOT want to hear beats between certain intervals. YET, even here, certain intervals WILL sound good to those of us who tune JI, if we tune them to ET. An example is strings 5, 6 and 9 when we play a 7th chord.

The enterval between 5 and 6 sounds better to us JI'rs if they are beatless. But IF you tune 5 and 9 beatless, the 7th chord does NOT have the "tension" that give a dominant its flavor. So on our E9th tuning MOST players who tune JI tune the 9th string very close to ET.

One more example is on the C neck and pedal 5. IF you tune the 5th string (F#) to JI with the 4th string, the resulting 9th chord (2, 3 and 5) does not have that flavor. So again most JI'rs tune the 5th string change very close to ET if not dead on ET.

The same goes for the Eb on string 6 with pedal 6. If you tune it beatless for that rich C minor chord, the resultant F7th (3, 4 and 6) chord will not sound right to most ears. EVEN for JI'rs.

So the battle marches on and it will never change. I believe with all my heart and soul we JI'rs are dead wrong and we are simply trying to prove a square peg WILL fit perfectly into a round hole.

But JI sounds better to my ears, so me "gwinah" tune JI. Cus me don' care what momma don' louw, I'll tune my Git' tar ANY how!!

carl[This message was edited by C Dixon on 04 March 2004 at 09:38 AM.]

Nicholas Dedring · Post by **Nicholas Dedring** » 4 Mar 2004 10:42 am

I may be wrong... but I don't think the question of the theory of tuning has anything to do with not having to compensate for different combinations of pulls.

If I tune my 3rd string in tune with the tuner, and the b pedal pull is in tune with the tuner, the A+F combination will leave the 3rd string flat. So, I just kind of split the difference, and leave it so that the AF 3rd string tone is less flat, but the no pedals 3rd string tone is a hair sharp. I sort of go through the list of compromises for all the pull combinations I actually use.

This is not a question of JI or ET or whatever. I use a tuner, because I'm LAZY when I set up to rehearse, and can't always get time in the room to go through working out beats. I remember the first lesson I took, after reading stuff on the forum for a while, and when we got to tuning I grinningly asked "So, is this about Just Intonation versus Equal Temperament?" "I got a slightly withering look and the answer: "No. This is about playing in tune. Don't pay too much attention to that stuff." Truer words were never spoken

Long story short: sour intervals in a tuning come from the physical characteristics of the instrument (flex of cabinet, flex of changer axle), regardless of how you tune theoretically... you still have to fit in to your instruments qualities and limitations. Sorry to run on like this.

If you're playing the third by itself, couldn't you just shade the bar a little sharp??[This message was edited by Nicholas Dedring on 04 March 2004 at 10:45 AM.]

Jerry Hayes · Post by **Jerry Hayes** » 4 Mar 2004 11:05 am

After years of ear tuning, the Jeff Newman chart, straight up 440, I tried it all, I've settled on tuning everything to 440 except the G#, D#, C#, F#, A# or any other sharp. They're all tuned to 438 whether they're a basic tuning note or a pedal change. It works great for me and less to remember. Have a good 'un....JH

------------------
Livin' in the Past and the Future with a 12 string Mooney Universal tuning.

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 4 Mar 2004 11:08 am

"If I tune my 3rd string in tune with the tuner, and the b pedal pull is in tune with the tuner, the A+F combination will leave the 3rd string flat."

Unless your tuner is calibrated away from ET (for personal preference), your third string and your B pedal pull to C# will be very sharp of JI, IF you tune them to the meter.

You are correct about cabinet drop causing problems. IE, on MOST PSG's, if one simply engages the A pedal and notices the meter while picking the 6th string, it will drop in pitch. In some cases, like on a LeGrande II, it will drop about 5-7 cents or so. The same thing happens on the 4th string (lessor drop) when one engages either the A or B pedal; or both.

However, EVEN if there was NO cabinet drop or any flexing, there would still be some serious problems, IF one wished to tune beatless (JI) across the board.

The most classic and proovable scenario is strings 1 and 7 when a player wishes to have NO beats between any intervals.

In a word, it cannot be done; UNLESS some form of "compensation" is used such as lowering of the F#'s when the pedals are down versus up. Or slanting the bar. But bar slants will not work in many multiple noted chords.

This phenomena IS due to the "between a rock and a hard place" situation when any player wishes to tune straight JI (beatless). Whereas IF a player tunes straight up (440 ref) All intervals regardless of pedals used (assuming no cabinet drop etc.) are "IN" tune with the meter.

The problem here is; there WILL be beats between ANY interval IF one tunes ET (straight 440), and because of the unique "overtones" of the PSG, MOST steel players cannot stand those beats

carl

Nicholas Dedring · Post by **Nicholas Dedring** » 4 Mar 2004 11:23 am

Carl, I understand what you mean... all I was trying to get at just now was that you will have problems, and they can potentially have nothing to do with anything about ET or JI or PDQ or whatnot

I try to make myself as happy with compromises as possible, then I note where everything falls on the meter so that I can find it quickly in a noisy space, especially in a rush. It stinks switching to new string gauges, as I just did, and going that day to rehearse, I finally just told the guys there what the issue was, and that it wasn't worth fixing in the limited time we had. Next time, I figure I'll be happy with it... I find that if I tune pulls just on their own, it's next to useless... but that some pulls have to be compromised to keep them halfway reasonable in conjunction with others... i.e.: A pedal has to balance out between use alone, with A&B, and with A&F. The other strings also need to be able to ably withstand those different situations... B&D have to also get along with each other, the surrounding strings, but also in each of their other uses. I just try to find something manageable, satisfying to my ear, and easy to find to my lazy self come the times where it matters.

Not to argue with my betters... of course.

John McGann · Post by **John McGann** » 4 Mar 2004 12:03 pm

After all these years and all this music, it's amazing to discover "nothing works", tuning wise- JI is ridiculous if you want to play in all the keys- if you tune a note 17.8 cents (close to a quarter tone) flat because it functions as a major 3rd, watch what happens when that note becomes a root when you modulate-yikes!!!!

But different strokes, obviously this works for MANY steel players, so who do I think I am anyway

It's easier for me to live with ET as I attempt to play in all keys.

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 4 Mar 2004 12:32 pm

JI is ridiculous if you want to play in all the keys...

I have no desire to play in the key of B or C# at the 8th fret. If C# is the root, I play at the 9th fret. If B is the root, I play at the 7th fret.

My point is this: If you can play in tune in 3 keys at any given fret in JI, you can move the bar a fret or two in either direction to get the other 9 keys. A steel guitar doesn't have to be tuned at the nut to play in all keys. The bar itself is an instant modulation device!

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/Hotb0b.gif" width="96 height="96">Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9),
Sierra Laptop 8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax

John McGann · Post by **John McGann** » 4 Mar 2004 2:38 pm

Well, if your F (or E#) note on the E9 is tuned way flat for JI and you happen to use that note on a lever rather than using the bar a step higher- say as F in a Bb voicing with 5th string and 2nd string lowered- a weird grip, I know, but now you've got a 5th that is wayyyy out. The E# on the C# sounds bitchin, though...maybe just another case of compromise (ain't it always something?)

And it's even worse on the C6 neck when you start playing fatter voicings with that 4th pick![This message was edited by John McGann on 04 March 2004 at 02:39 PM.]

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 4 Mar 2004 3:13 pm

I tune my B lower (A#) almost as flat as the F lever. That combination sounds in tune to me - I use it all the time!

A# is the 3rd of F#, so I guess it depends on how you tune your F#. A real can'o'worms!!

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 4 Mar 2004 5:31 pm

..Or you can just tune to where the dot is in between the little arrows and play in tune.

Really.

EJL

Dave Horch · Post by **Dave Horch** » 4 Mar 2004 8:50 pm

I think Dr. Franklin summed it all up. Nothing's perfect and "It all comes down to a personal preference."

End of topic, again and again and again![This message was edited by Dave Horch on 04 March 2004 at 08:56 PM.]

Allan Thompson · Post by **Allan Thompson** » 5 Mar 2004 3:11 am

Personal Preference that`s the key words here. As long as the tuning you are using alows you to play in tune that`s all that matters.

Franklin · Post by **Franklin** » 5 Mar 2004 5:56 am

John,
JI is used on all of the records coming out of Nashville. Whether anyone likes the music or not, todays records are the most perfectly tuned sessions Nashville has ever produced. In my opinion they have taken tuning way too far. Regardless of that critique, Hughey, White, Dugmore, Johnson, Sanders, Bouton, Garrish, and myself pretty much sums up the players heard on the radio and all use JI.

Personally, It sure would make things alot easier for me if I could tune everything straight up 440 in this critical working condition.

I am sure I am not the only one of the above mentioned players who has tried tuning straight up and abandoned that concept.

A couple of years ago when all of this tuning debate started, trying to keep an open mind, I decided, once again, to experiment by tuning straight up 440 on all of my overdubs. I did this for a couple of weeks. It never failed, every producer after playing along with the track, asked me to check my tuning. After I retuned to JI and played along with it I got the thumbs up. Sure, I could have compensated using the bar to make it work. But if compensation has to be used as it does from time to time with JI then I prefer having the guitar tuned to where it is pleasant sounding to the ear which is why Carl can not go there as well, even though he truly believes it is the right way to tune. I do not share that belief.....which is why how we tune comes down to preference because NO single way is closer to sounding in tune with the piano. Only the day when steels are made with adjustable bridges will this become possible. Until then, tuning will always be a debate over preferences, not fact.

Also I have been told that electronic pianos and synths are tuned the same way as the acoustic piano. They come pretuned from the factory this way. Otherwise, they would sound out of tuned to the acoustic piano.

....Paul[This message was edited by Franklin on 05 March 2004 at 06:26 AM.][This message was edited by Franklin on 05 March 2004 at 06:32 AM.]

John McGann · Post by **John McGann** » 5 Mar 2004 6:38 am

Paul, thanks for your reply. I'm a little confused about a few things-

1) when tuning to JI in one key, do you retune strings and pulls for another tune in another key- that is, if you happen to be using open strings in combination with the bar in each tune? In other words, wouldn't the JI tuning vary from key to key?

2) I've read there are a bunch of approaches for piano tuning, depending on the style of music. Is there a standard method used in the Nashville studios, so that you know in advance what to shoot for in terms of JI?

3) should I just get a realtor's license?

Thanks, your input is invaluable!

Bill Llewellyn · Post by **Bill Llewellyn** » 5 Mar 2004 7:29 am

Also I have been told that electronic pianos and synths are tuned the same way as the acoustic piano. They come pretuned from the factory this way. Otherwise, they would sound out of tuned to the acoustic piano.

Hmmmm, now you've got me going, Paul. I'll need to check my electronic keyboards for that this weekend. I'd never noticed the octaves spreading around middle C.

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 5 Mar 2004 8:11 am

Bill,

I too would have to question this. I have all the love and admiration for Paul in the world. But I believe his source may be mistaken. As I stated earlier, acoustic pianos are stretched tuned of course, but NOT so they approach any where near JI.

There is a mechanical situation involved with pianos that most stringed instruments do not have and that is; the length of the strings are NOT constant. Because of this anaomoly, IF they tune each octave above and below middle C to straight 440 ref, each octave notes below middle C will sound ever more sharp and each octave notes above middle C will sound ever more flat.

NOTE: not because their pitch is sharp or flat of 440, rather in human sound perception. Again, this is due to the length of the strings being ever longer (or shorter).

An electronic piano does not have this mechanical problem. Therefore I am almost positive, electronic pianos are tuned dead on ET (440 ref) across all octaves from the factory.

If I am incorrect, as always I respectfully stand corrected.

carl

Bill Llewellyn · Post by **Bill Llewellyn** » 5 Mar 2004 8:24 am

Oh, I'm not really questioning Paul's comment, I'm more questioning my own perception (or lack of it) that such tuning is in my own keyboards. I've missed more obvious things before.

I have a Roland RD-600 keyboard that is principally a sampled piano. It's very possible that its tuning follows Paul's observations--that would make sense. I've just never noticed. The RD-600 also has assorted Rhodes patches, and I'm curious about their tuning as well. As for synth sounds and organ patches, I just dunno. I do know the old Hammond C3 I own is dead on (no spreading) over the whole keyboard....

------------------
Bill, steelin' since '99 | Steel page | My music | Steelers' birthdays | Over 50?

David Deratany · Post by **David Deratany** » 5 Mar 2004 8:30 am

Some years ago when I was building a guitar from scratch, I asked Eddie Murray, the late master repairman at E.U Wurlitzer Music in Boston, how accurately frets had to be placed. He said: "If you want to play in tune you've got no business playing the guitar".

It seems to me that pretty much sums it up for the pedal steel, too

William Peters · Post by **William Peters** » 5 Mar 2004 8:50 am

Carl,

I just put the meter on my Roland Synth, and it is definitely stretched tuned. The bottom C on the keyboard reads 10 cents flat, and the top C on the keyboard reads 20 cents sharp. Middle C reads 5 cents sharp.

Not only is the piano voice stretch tuned, but most of the other voices are also.

But back to the JI/ET thing. I have a friend who has a LeGrande III (Lucky devil!) and he tunes 440 ET and it sounds great. I do that with my Cougar and its awful. The difference I think is the 'cabinet drop'. Its not possible to actually tune ET if there is any substantial amount of cabinet drop. Although the individual strings are tuned ET, as soon as you do any pedal pulls, the other strings are no longer ET. So I tune JI, and compensate each pedal combination or chord form by shifting my bar away from the fret marker... usually above.

Bill

Cougar SD-10
Peavey TNT-115
Studio S-100

Rick Aiello · Post by **Rick Aiello** » 5 Mar 2004 8:50 am

Here is a nice paper on Stretching ...

------------------

www.horseshoemagnets.com