Author |
Topic: Reinventing the wheel: Tunings |
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 2 Aug 2012 6:34 am
|
|
I have been working on expanding the C6 tuning to suit my own needs for quite a while now, while also trying to invent a new tuning that I would find more suitable for playing Jazz.
You know what? My conclusion at this time is that C6 is the perfect tuning to expand upon--I have not been able to come up with anything better. Let me explain:
In order to play jazz (with a more modern slant than, say, swing) there are certain features that I need built into the tuning, beginning with triads. I need:
Major and minor triads in all inversions (ie, I need C E G, E G C, G C E, etc.).
Intervals of Maj 2nd, min and maj 3rds, 4ths, 5ths, min and maj 6ths, maj and min 7ths.
Tritone interval (for dom 7th chords).
A partial 13th chord (b7 3 13). This partial substitutes as many different chords, such as min6, 7#9, Maj7#11. Invaluable--without it, I am nothing.
Quartal chords.
C13 is the tuning that gives me all of that. Well, almost of it:
E
C
A
G
E
C
Bb
G
OK, so a while back I said that I was ordering a D-10 and that I was going to use a C6/A7 extended on one neck and the Tom Morrell E13 on the other. I have changed my mind, as I have decided to go with tunings that will work for me for what I want to do. I'm not playing any western swing or anything like that.
With regards to trying to come up with a new tuning, I have essentially sketched out hundreds of tunings and variations on existing tunings and have come to the conclusion that C6 (in altered form) contains everything I need.
The strange thing is, my D-10 will have 2 C6-based tunings. I have had the one extended C6/A7 on my mind for a long time, but it is the second tuning--an extended C13--that is really interesting, for me anyway, and gives me a lot of choices without muddying the familiar waters.
Front neck (audience side)
C13
F (.012)
E
C
A
G
E
D
C
Bb
G
Back neck
C6/A7
E (.015)
C
A
G
E
C#
A
F (.054)
D (.060)
B (.065)
The C6/A7 extension is one that I have worked on for a long time. I need those notes in bass range for my chordal work.
Needless, to say, I am really looking forward to exploring this. It may seem crazy to have 2 necks so similarly tuned, but to me they are different animals. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
Laurence Pangaro
From: Brooklyn, NY
|
Posted 2 Aug 2012 7:53 am
|
|
Cool stuff, Mike!
I don't really see your two tunings as being all that similar. Yes, they're both C-based, but after that....
I could hazard some guesses, but I think I'd rather just ask you to describe how you envision the differing functions of these tunings.
ciao,
Laurence |
|
|
|
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 2 Aug 2012 8:04 am
|
|
One of the things that is important to me is that I am able to do many of the same things on both necks, so I am not really sacrificing my melodic ideas and my own little pockets because of a different tuning. The similarities actually benefit me.
On the front neck, I have a lot more pianistic voicings available. On the C6/A7 neck, the range is far wider so it is a different chordal palette. I like to play a lot of chordal stuff in the lower range, too.
That's basically it. The combination of both necks is really just tailored for my needs, and I think it will suit them well. A few years ago, I started using 2 C6 tunings on my triple neck, but the difference was that one had a high G first string, which I just could never get into. Ultimately, that became my experimental neck. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
Jerome Hawkes
From: Fayetteville, North Carolina, USA
|
Posted 2 Aug 2012 12:27 pm
|
|
when i sold my S-8 Clinesmith to finance my T-8, the guy who purchased it was taking lessons from the legendary Bobby Black. we chatted a lot and he said that after Bobby tried just about every tuning over his career, he realized C6 was the most versatile.
everyone seriously interested in the steel has to do what you are doing - find what you need, what you dont, and expand on that. there is nothing better to force you to do this than having a steel custom made - i struggled for a year flip-flopping back and forth until i felt i had been playing long enough to not make a critical error that i couldnt live with (which i would have done earlier). of course, a year from now i could be saying duh, i should have gone with a 10 string neck, but as of now, i'm content. i had the back neck of my sho-bud perm non-pedal and i found myself stumbling more with the 10 string whereas i felt easier on the 8.
i always wondered why you never took to the diatonic / Levitt tunings Mike. _________________ '65 Sho-Bud D-10 Permanent • '54 Fender Dual-8 • Clinesmith T-8 • '38 Ric Bakelite • '92 Emmons D-10 Legrande II |
|
|
|
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 2 Aug 2012 7:49 pm
|
|
Jerome Hawkes wrote: |
i always wondered why you never took to the diatonic / Levitt tunings Mike. |
Jerome, I tried them both, but in the end I feel comfortable with the choice I made. I've learned to find and take advantage of every little thing I can in the structure of C6 and I'm still always finding more. The Leavitt tuning just lacks in some respects for me. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
Nate Hofer
From: Overland Park, Kansas
|
Posted 3 Aug 2012 5:04 am
|
|
Mike, just to play Devil's advocate:
If you have two kinda-sorta similar C necks with 10 strings, then why not find a solution with a single neck with pedals?
I think I know why but I'm sure you have a thoughtful answer. |
|
|
|
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 3 Aug 2012 6:16 am
|
|
That's a good question, Nate, and I've thought about it a lot myself. I'm not opposed to pedals at all. I've talked about this stuff with Tony Locke and others, trying to gauge whether or not it would be viable for me. I've ultimately come to the conclusion that it isn't.
First, it's too much for me to wrap my head around with all the changes--I like things to be black and white. I don't like anything getting in the way of my being able to play spontaneously, because it is such a struggle for me. I know most of the pedal use on a C6 neck is for chord work, but I find that simple choices work for me. Raised and lowered strings just throw me off so much--it's taken long enough just to get used to playing in these tunings, especially C6.
Second, I have 2 left feet. Even a volume pedal is a challenge for me.
Third, I like the freedom of being able to sit or stand. I've always felt constrained behind a pedal steel.
It's always been one of my regrets that I couldn't get acclimated to playing a pedal steel, but rather than dwell on that, the one thing that keeps me happy is the challenge of playing the music I love on steel. Sometimes I wonder why I don't just go back to playing the guitar, where the language has already been developed, but I love the steel. I'm trying to combine everything I know about music, the steel guitar, and guitar into this one instrument. Non-pedal steel is just a better fit for me.
I reserve the right to change my mind at any time, but I don't think that's going to happen. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
Jerome Hawkes
From: Fayetteville, North Carolina, USA
|
Posted 3 Aug 2012 8:36 am
|
|
i agree line by line with you on that Mike
i am such an ADHD type that i cant sit still on a pack-a-seat for more than 20 mins - that was my main issue with pedals, sitting completely still for hours.
i do like the approach that Basil Henriques uses with pedals on his Fender 1000 - if i go pedals, thats the direction i will go. he still keeps the flavor of the non-pedal and doesnt let the pedals dictate the music, this is really the way the first adapters to pedals approached it also.
its a shame that right when the non-pedal steel was reaching its golden age, pedals came along and sent it in a different direction - i dont feel the potential of the instrument even scratched the surface. _________________ '65 Sho-Bud D-10 Permanent • '54 Fender Dual-8 • Clinesmith T-8 • '38 Ric Bakelite • '92 Emmons D-10 Legrande II |
|
|
|
Nate Hofer
From: Overland Park, Kansas
|
Posted 3 Aug 2012 8:48 am
|
|
Right, I feel like you, Mike, are sorta extending that mid-century era of lap steel exploration - before the pedals zeitgeist took over. Cool! |
|
|
|
HowardR
From: N.Y.C.-Fire Island-Asheville
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 4:39 am
|
|
Herb Remington also plays pedal steel that way.....using the pedals for chord changes & tunings as opposed to sliding tones...... |
|
|
|
David Mason
From: Cambridge, MD, USA
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 10:21 am
|
|
The Nashville Speedpicking Derby has never been very interesting to me. Especially as it trickles down to the intermediate/barely-pro-level, where a player moves a 1/3 lb. bar from position to position, blasting and stomping away... leaving some paying customers (me) scratching noggins & rightfully saying "Where'd the frikkin' melody go?" Duane Allman hit me too hard, it won't transfer. Or this guy, he might be a minor footnote to steel but when asked if he listened to Eddie Van Halen and the rise of shred:
Quote: |
“Not seriously, no. Because I can hear what’s happening in there. There isn’t much there that interests me. It isn’t played with enough deliberateness, and it lacks a certain kind of rhythmic elegance that I like music to have, that I like notes to have. There’s a lot of notes and stuff, but the notes aren’t saying much – they’re like little clusters. It’s a certain kind of music which I understand on one level, but it isn’t attractive to me.” - J. Garcia |
I have actually bugged guitar students to distraction because every lesson, I ask them to play one note. Play it well... It takes a special kind of person to sit down with an instrument as beautiful-sounding as steel guitar and make it sound annoying & unimportant. |
|
|
|
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 2:22 pm
|
|
Trying to follow your train of thought, David. Not really sure how it ties in with previous posts. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
Jack Aldrich
From: Washington, USA
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 3:17 pm
|
|
Mike - my C6 tuning is like yours but with a G rather than an F on top. A lot of Hawaiian steelers use this tuning, too.
G
E
C
A
G
E
Bb
G
Bobby Ingano has a 7 string Rick bakelite without the low G, Alan Akaka doesn't have the high G or the low Bb, but replaces it with a low C:
E
C
A
G
E
C
G
C
- Jack |
|
|
|
Jack Aldrich
From: Washington, USA
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 3:21 pm
|
|
Oh - my lower neck is C13, and my upper neck is B11:
E
C#
A
G#
D#
B
F#
B
which is great for swing tunes. The upper 5 strings are an A6, and the lower 5 are a B7. Lots of great fat chords, and the II9 is on the same fret as the I. - Jack |
|
|
|
David Mason
From: Cambridge, MD, USA
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 6:31 pm
|
|
Well, it seems to me that if you're still (somewhat?) engaged in the search for the secret magic tuning, and saying things like:
Quote: |
there are certain features that I need built into the tuning, beginning with triads. I need: |
You're already engaging with the instrument in a different way than someone who simply wants to match licks made on classic albums. It might even make for an interesting poll piece, if it could be phrased well. "If you were marooned on a desert island and awarded one choice - you could either play every lick ever played by somebody else OR: you were left with she ability to figure out songs." There's large amounts of crossover, of course. |
|
|
|
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 6:52 pm
|
|
David Mason wrote: |
Well, it seems to me that if you're still (somewhat?) engaged in the search for the secret magic tuning, and saying things like:
Quote: |
there are certain features that I need built into the tuning, beginning with triads. I need: |
You're already engaging with the instrument in a different way than someone who simply wants to match licks made on classic albums. It might even make for an interesting poll piece, if it could be phrased well. "If you were marooned on a desert island and awarded one choice - you could either play every lick ever played by somebody else OR: you were left with she ability to figure out songs." There's large amounts of crossover, of course. |
I'm not looking for a magic tuning, just tunings that enable me to do my thing. It's taken a while to figure out what that "thing" is, though.
As far as matching licks, I've gotten all I needed from doing it, which was a lot. It's time to move on now. I put a good solid 8 or 9 years of soaking in as much Hawaiian and Western Swing and Country as I could. I have no intention of really playing that music again other than for fun or teaching--it's just not in my blood.
But getting back to my original premise, the C6 tuning really is a thing of beauty. Yes, in its most basic form it is a little simplistic for those looking for dominant chords, but the variations of C6/A7 and C13, with a few added twists, go a long, long way across stylistic borders. I was determined to come up with something better, and I couldn't. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 7:32 pm
|
|
John Aldrich wrote: |
Oh - my lower neck is C13, and my upper neck is B11:
E
C#
A
G#
D#
B
F#
B
which is great for swing tunes. The upper 5 strings are an A6, and the lower 5 are a B7. Lots of great fat chords, and the II9 is on the same fret as the I. - Jack |
I think you mis-typed and your 4th string is actually F#.
I've gotten to know B11 fairly well, but could never use the tuning as my go to. I would miss the major 2nd intervals too much. For single note playing, that would be a detriment for me. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From: Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 4 Aug 2012 8:55 pm
|
|
I'm sure you know this, but your Extended C13 intervals are very closely related to the E9 pedal steel intervals:
Code: |
St C13 Function E9 Function
1 F 4 F# 2
2 E 3 D# 7
3 C 1 G# 3
4 A 6 E 1
5 G 5 B 5
6 E 3 G# 3
7 D 2 F# 2
8 C 1 E 1
9 Bb b7 D b7
10 G 5 B 5 |
Without pedals, inserting that A/6 is essential and gives you a critical component of what the A pedal gives on pedal steel. People keep asking how they might 'improve' E9, but I really think that general interval structure is pretty close to perfection as-is, if you want to play a wide variety of styles. I was surprised to see your F/4 on String 1, instead of, let's say, B/7 or D/2 there, but maybe without a B-pedal to give you the 4 in-position (melodically or for chords), it makes sense.
I have to say that this is making my D8 feel a bit inadequate. In fact, I'd almost like to have a 12-string - that would open up everything you have here plus the usual E9 top 2 string intervals for additional in-position melodic possibilities. I already use a 12-string universal pedal steel, so the wide grips don't bother me. I'd probably go G, A, C, E, B, D, F for the top 7 strings to facilitate alternate-finger picking on scale-fragments up and down the C major scale.
I think I understand where Dave M. is coming from, but I also think the people that developed and pioneered E9 were emphatically thinking 'making music' in a very general way, and not copying anybody at all. b0b had a thread over there about 'lick changes' constraining musical tuning/changes design, but I don't think the basic E9 tuning intervals or changes are remotely about 'licks'. Any tuning is going to have favored licks, in the sense that certain things are gonna be easier to play. Even a standard 6-string guitar tuning favors certain kinds of licks. To me, the question is how open is a tuning to various approaches to melodic and chordal playing. Your approach here makes sense to me. |
|
|
|
Mike Neer
From: NJ
|
Posted 5 Aug 2012 5:51 pm
|
|
Dave Mudgett wrote: |
.... I was surprised to see your F/4 on String 1, instead of, let's say, B/7 or D/2 there, but maybe without a B-pedal to give you the 4 in-position (melodically or for chords), it makes sense.
.... |
Dave, the first time I ever thought about a first string F was when I was transcribing Almost To Tulsa. Without the ability to raise the E to an F, it seemed the most logical thing to do was to permanently lower the G to an F--I also noticed Junior Brown doing this.
I have found myself in a lot of situations wishing I had that F. To have it adjacent to the E string has opened up so many interesting possibilities from Holdsworth-ian chord voicings to single note chromaticism to moving harmonies with note retention and more. _________________ Links to streaming music, websites, YouTube: Links |
|
|
|
David Mason
From: Cambridge, MD, USA
|
Posted 6 Aug 2012 6:15 am
|
|
If I understand the history of it, to a large extent, the E9 tuning did evolve lick-by-lick. It started with the "Slowly" lick by Bud Isaacs.
just Google this- "the "Slowly" lick by Bud Isaacs"
At one point, somebody here had built up that history, and a certain points the pedals were even nicknamed after their inventor, as is the Franklin pedal still.
Herb Remington at the time had one neck in "E13":
1 - E
2 - C#
3 - G#
4 - E
5 - Bb
6 - F#
7 - D# HIGH
8 - F# HIGH
And Buddy Emmons put those two strings on top. I don't know exactly which pedal then knees were added by who, but the modern somewhat-settled E9 tuning did build up pedal by pedal, song by song. And the road and local players needed those to duplicate the records. And as it turned out, the tuning that was built turned out to be very versatile and capable of handling creative urges (especially if you like a wholetone-pull-to-unison ), but it wasn't designed by some great musicologist or master of music theory looking at a blank page and then filling it in. And the tuning then folded back to make more music. Regarding the 12-string, the stock tuning that Reece employs is:
D
B
G
E
C
A
G
E
C
A
F
D
So he's going to the high G of the older C6 pedal style but using the top two sting for the "chromatic" strings. |
|
|
|
Edward Meisse
From: Santa Rosa, California, USA
|
Posted 11 Aug 2012 9:50 pm
|
|
I tried C6 with pedals. And I found that what I got was a great deal of extra effort of all kinds and very little additional music making ability given my approach to the instrument. It was the mechanics of the thing that really threw me. But 54 pounds of instrument to haul around was a drawback too. I think that unless you're a tinkerer, pedal guitars are not for you. _________________ Amor vincit omnia |
|
|
|
David Mason
From: Cambridge, MD, USA
|
Posted 12 Aug 2012 9:56 am
|
|
I spent some time trying out different "organized" sets of intervals, like
2nd+4th+2nd+4th etc:
C#
B
F#
E
B
A
E
D
A
G
D
C
Lots of 4ths and 5ths, a few M7ths, no 3rds, m3rds or 6ths close enough to each other to hear...
Root-m3rd, R-4th, then start over with a m3rd and 4th above each successive 4th etc:
Ab
F
Eb
C
Bb
G
F
D
C
A
you get 6ths back, but the only M3rds are inverted....
I ran through a bunch of these, just scribble down a "rule", write it out and figure it out later, and to get a tuning that supplies the basic needs, I still end up with: the major scale minus the B's and F's, or a major scale minus the B's, F's and D's.
AKA "C6th".... with a sprinkling of D's as needed. |
|
|
|
Edward Meisse
From: Santa Rosa, California, USA
|
Posted 12 Aug 2012 11:58 am
|
|
Now if you are a tinkerer, you could get a guitar with, for starters, one knee lever that changes the tuning. As you figure out what changes you need, you could add levers and/or pedals. _________________ Amor vincit omnia |
|
|
|
Bob Stone
From: Gainesville, FL, USA
|
Posted 14 Aug 2012 6:29 am
|
|
Hi Mike,
I like your extended C13. The F on top and the D in the 7th string make a lot of sense to me.
I also believe the intervals and inversions available in C6, in combination with string gauges that feel "right" to me, are very versatile.
I look forward to seeing and hearing what you come up with as you explore your new D10.
All the best,
Bob |
|
|
|