The Steel Guitar Forum

I got my steel in what I think was in tune. I then played one string at a time and dumped it on a cd. Restringing is no problem now. Works for me.

Ronny Line wrote:I got my steel in what I think was in tune. I then played one string at a time and dumped it on a cd. Restringing is no problem now. Works for me.

That's kinda clever....

My problem seems to be getting my raises and lowers in tune "mechanically" without getting everything "out of whack".....

Dennis

Peterson VS II tempered then by ear adjusting.

I was fiddling today and tried to get a tuning as beatless as I could without going crazy.
A=440
1 0
2 -3
3 -3
4 0
5 0
6 -4
7 0
8 -4
9 -4
10 -3
11 0
12 -3

I got this after months of tuning as a piano tuner would, starting with A's, checking adjacent intervals starting in the treble and going down to the bass, then rectifying the raises and lowers. It was a continuing sweetening process.

There are an infinite number of solutions between ET and JI.

Charlie, is that a 12-string universal or extended E9? And are those cents or Herz? If your 8th string is an E root, it seems very odd that it is not straight up, the same as the 4th string an octave higher.

My tuning method is a compromise between Just Intonation and Equal Temperament.

I still call it "tampered" tuning.

David, It's ext. E9 with a C# on str. 9. It's Hz. I can't get it in cents because my trusty old Korg isn't working.
I too was surprised at the values. I'll have to go back and verify the E's. It's somewhat critical if one is claiming to have found 'beatless.'

The 4ths and 5ths all checked out, altho I normally leave 5ths a hair narrow and the 4ths a hair wide.

I kind of miss all the activity of various strings beating slightly in a triad, but I can see the attraction. I'll have to play it.

Lee, I still like to tamper. I really prefer somewhere in between.
I think one's tuning is an expression of his/her personality.
But this would be a good place to start (unless I have the numbers wrong).

Here is what the Korg says:
1 F# +8 c.
2 D# -7
3 G# -7
4 E +7*
5 B +8
6 G# -10*
7 F# +8
8 E +8
9 C# -5
10 B +9*
11 A ?
12 C ?

Does this look more reasonable? It's very abstract to me, not the way I'd tune.
__________________________
*There is clearly some fudging going on for cabinet drop and stuff by the time it gets this low. The Korg wouldn't pick up a clear signal below this as the strings are old.
Clearly, this wouldn't work on any other guitar.

Where one doesn't tune rigidly to a chart, or tampers based on ET, any 5th contains a maj 3 and a min 3; the pitch of the middle note of that triad would render the two thirds the same beat rate. Tuners don't really count beats, they compare them (to each other or another standard). Thus following a meantone kind of thing seems to produce the best results for that given meantone (If I understand it correctly).

The main thing about 5ths and 4ths--I make sure the 5ths are slightly wide; I'm repeating myself because things like inharmonicity make it hard to have a dead-on interval. If a 5th is ever so wide or a 4th narrow from beatless, I don't think one can come close enough to JT to make it pretty pure.

Thus, for me, it would be easier to start from ET and tamper from there. You're already on the right side of things with the 4ths and 5ths and only need approach beatless, as their beats are slow. The thirds can take care of themselves. (That's how I tuned pianos. Some tuners get really strong 5ths; some get the thirds perfect and let the rest of it go to hell.)

Yep, Charlie, that looks very close to pure JI. The E roots are +8 c., which to me indicates that when you tuned the A with pedals down to 440, the Es had dropped 8 c. (2 Hz), and so when you let off the pedals and checked the Es, they had risen back up that 8 c. and so open they are +8c. or 442 Hz. Then I guess you tuned all the other open strings to those Es. Pure beatless JI has the 3rds 14 c. (3.5 Hz) below the root, and sure enough, your 3rd string G# is 15 c. below the E. Your 6th string G# is -18 c. relative to the E root, which is a little low for some reason. Your D# on string 2 is the 3rd of the B chord, and that is -15 c. relative to the B root on string 5. The 5ths of each chord are straight up with the roots. Technically a JI 5th is +2 c. (0.5 Hz) relative to the root. So you may call a straight up 5th "narrow." But for me it is so close, I don't worry about deviations that small - I just tune 5ths straight up to the root. There are no 4ths. Technically they are -2 c. relative to the root. But again, I would just tune them straight up to the root and not worry about something that small. Technically a 6th (C# on string 9) should be -16 c. (4 Hz) relative to the root. Yours is -13, pretty close.

So if I have interpreted right, your cabinet drop is about 8 c. (2 Hz). This is very typical for a 12-string. I think 12-strings drop a little more, because of the extra pulls on the low strings. My three 12-strings of different brands all drop about that same amount. What I do is split the difference. I tune the Es to 441 (+4 c.), and with the pedals down the As end up at 439 (-4 c.). I prefer that to having one of those right on, and the other 8 c. (2 Hz) out of tune. That just seems to make playing open at the nut work better for me.

I use the Newman chart when the guitar sounds out o' tune, but in between times I tune by ear.

Tune E's pedals down. Chime beats out the rest of the way.

Yep, I'm a pedals-down tuner now.
I made one error: 5th's should be slightly narrow if not perfect.

I didn't really follow your method; E's were tuned to A's, splitting the difference between pedals up and down, a suggestion you had made earlier that I liked. But from there, I regarded the A->A octave as the temperament octave, tuning every note as part of two adjacent intervals until JI was achieved.
It's a little sweet for my taste, like sweetened tea.

Str. 6 is plain and has inharmonicity; a wound string there tunes up more nicely but won't do a full-tone drop. I use a compensator on 6.
An interesting experiment, but I doubt I'll save the chart to replicate.

Interesting. So if you split the cabinet drop between the pedals-down A and the pedals-up E, if the E was +8 c. (442), does that mean the A was -8 (438), and the total cabinet drop was 16 c. (4 Hz)?

If you used the A as the reference for everything else, how did you tune the G# on the same string? And how did you tune the Es to that A? Don't mean to beat a dead horse - just curious.

I use the Peterson VS II programed-in temper tunings. I rely on it totally. I don't know what I ever did without it.

bUd

DD: Since the object was JI, I probably would have tuned the E to A and the G# to E. From there, B tuned to E and G# would have produced the one desired result. It's pretty much the method a piano tuner would have gone about it, whether ET or JI. The reference is always changing until you've tuned all the notes in the temperament octave.

I can't swear to the numbers anymore; I've just finished re-assigning two pedals and will return to a more normal tuning for me. A was 440, that's for sure.
It was just an experiment for my own porpoises. But interesting, yes.

Here is tuning idea I experimented with at my gig last night, you never know until you try it with the band.

I programmed my VS-II for a not quite JI temperment, pretending JI was 12 cents instead of 13.8 cents, for example Es at +8 and G# at -4. It doesn't sound quite as pure as JI with the steel only, but I thought it sounded more uniformly in tune against the other instruments at the different positions (pedals up/down, A+F pedals, etc). It seemed easier to play in tune all across the neck, essentially moving the errors a couple cents sharper so that a little flat with the bar or pedals is not flat of the JI pitch for a given note.

I have tried ET with the band and i couldn't get that to sound in tune anywhere, but a little sharp of JI still sounds very beatless and the averaging out errors aspect was a pleasant surprise.

No big news I guess and others do the same concept with 8 or 10 cents.

I just did a search on the old Forum and found this great thread on tuning from May 2002: http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/003912.html (if clicking on this link doesn't work, the thread is "Tuning to 440" 02 May 2002 in the Pedal Steel section).

I was struck by the civil tone and very useful discussion in the old 2002 thread - it is well worth reading. This present one seems to be going well also. But some of the intervening threads on the JI/ET problem have veered into sound bites, sarcasm, hero worship and personal attacks that really hendered the discussion and seem to have turned some people off to the whole problem. Hopefully we are past that and are back on track.

I figured that this subject has been discussed enough. My purpose in starting this topic was to generate some statistics from the poll, not to go into an in-depth discussion.

It appears that about 1 in 5 pedal steel players tune to equal temperament ("straight up" or "all strings 440"). The other 80% prefer sweeter tunings of one sort or another, be it by ear or by electronic tuner.

Long before there were electronic tuners, and some of us did not have the money (or opportunity) to obtain a tuning fork, there were the pitch pipes AND something else that some of you may remember.

When I got my first lap steel in the early fifties, we were avid radio listeners at home, and managed to find the WWV time standard on the short wave dial. It was either every minute or once and hour that the time tone was an exact A=440 tone which musiciains could use. Also, when I progressed to the C6th tuning in the Jerry Byrd book, I used the NBC chimes to check my C chord ( G E C ). So, I guess I did use a form of an electronic tuner after-all!

Just a bit of trivia.

Thanx,
Jim

The polling buttons only allow one choice.

I'm using 3 different methods:

E9th - adjusted Newman settings
C6th PSG - 1/6 meantone
C6th lap steel - JI

I use the tuner for reference, then adjust by ear. Luckily I haven't had much trouble.

b0b wrote:I figured that this subject has been discussed enough. My purpose in starting this topic was to generate some statistics from the poll, not to go into an in-depth discussion.

Sorry if my first answer was too convoluted !!
It was

ET

I'll try to be more concise in future !!, although I DID make up for it with my second answer ..
Baz

Most guitars can not be tuned straight 440 unless they are equiped with compensators due to cabinet drop. I,m sure I read somewhere Buddy Emmons uses compensators on his guitars. Maybe the selection on the poll should have read as close as your guitar will allow.

Bob Kagy wrote:The polling buttons only allow one choice.

I'm using 3 different methods:

E9th - adjusted Newman settings
C6th PSG - 1/6 meantone
C6th lap steel - JI

Me too. I think I use everything but ET.