| Author |
Topic: C6th Modal Tangent ? |
Wayne Cox
From:
Chatham, Louisiana, USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 21 Jun 2003 9:30 am |
|
If any of you guys want to get into deep theory on this thread,go ahead,but my proposition and question is really pretty simple, I think.
I love what DENNY has started and accomplished with his website and with the C6 modal thread,but I couldn't help but wonder...wouldn't an 8-string "diatonic" tuning illustrate the modal concept even better? Maybe not for strum type chords but certainly for scales. Jerry Byrd was getting "todays sounds" 25-30 years ago using Diatonic tunings. I well remember many hours of practice and frustration,trying to duplicate his magnificent phrasing (with orchestral accompanyment)on "Satin Strings of Steel",only to later find out he wasn't using C6th but was using a diatonic tuning, instead,to get those beautiful chromatic sounding scales. Since a basic CMaj diatonic tuning constitutes a basic CMaj scale,why not use that instead of C6 ??? Just my thoughts!
~~W.C.~~ |
|
|
 |
Jesse Pearson
From:
San Diego , CA
|
Posted 21 Jun 2003 9:48 am
|
|
| I think more people play C6 tuning than any any other tuning. It's easy to get good sounding grips right off the bat. I like the way the theory is starting to lay out on the C6 neck and therefore easy to apply. |
|
|
|
Denny Turner
From:
Oahu, Hawaii USA
|
Posted 21 Jun 2003 6:35 pm
|
|
Wayne,
I have often thought that a tuning of C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C,(D,E) might afford allot of utility as it still has the 6th tuning intact, and with the extensions on the same fret, and allot of additional voicings on the "extensions" frets, and also when templated into modal boxes. The major problem as I see it though, is it would take about a year to "master" and chart it well enough to know if it really does provide allot of additional benefit and the full scope of what those benefits might be.
Aloha,
DT~[This message was edited by Denny Turner on 21 June 2003 at 07:37 PM.] |
|
|
|
John Kavanagh
From:
Kentville, Nova Scotia, Canada * R.I.P.
|
Posted 23 Jun 2003 12:29 pm
|
|
I agree that the diatonic seems to have a lot of potential - I have my D8's back neck strung so I can go between D13 and D diatonic, major or dorian. Jerry Byrd kept the 3rd on top in his - it's efgabc'e',(only 7 strings, even on an 8-string guitar) according to Carl Dixon and others who should know.
Bobby Lee, our genial moderator b0b, wrote an article on diatonic tuning on the pedal steel and there's a link to it from the Forum. He's not using it now, though, and you can go to this thread to see what he has to say about it:
http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/004992.html
This is part of what he said in answer to a question of mine on that thread:
"Well, John, there were a few surprises in the diatonic adventure...8<...I will probably put the F diatonic on another guitar at some point, but I'm going to shelve it for a while.
"The diatonic is wonderful for sight reading, but it's limited in range, and in the ability to create the kinds of steel parts we're all used to hearing. For that reason, I was unable to use the guitar on gigs. ...8<...
"One oddity of the diatonic occurs when you use fingerpicks. Most of us are unaware of the small sounds that happen when the back of the pick touches the string above the one we are playing. That sound is usually a harmony note on the E9th or C6th tuning. On the diatonic, the next higher string is often just a half step away, so it was very easy for unintentional dissonance to creep into the music. I solved this by playing without fingerpicks, another technique that is hard to pull off in live performace.
"I discovered that the diatonic could be tuned to meantone temperment for most music, but when I tried to play jazz chords it had to be retuned to equal temperament. This was acceptable in my home studio, but again it wasn't something I could do in live performance.
"The bottom line is that the diatonic tuning is a wonderful specialty tuning, but it's ill-suited for general stage performance where a wide variety of music is played...8<...."
me again: My experience, too, is that it's naturally easier to get a classic steel guitar sound with a classic steel guitar tuning, but that for trying new things the diatonic is an open playing field. I'm interested in anyone else's opinion or experience with diatonic tunings.
[This message was edited by John Kavanagh on 23 June 2003 at 01:32 PM.] |
|
|
|
C Dixon
From:
Duluth, GA USA
|
Posted 23 Jun 2003 1:38 pm
|
|
If you want to hear a diatonic tuning that is incredibly awesome.
Go to the following link. When you get there, go to "Real Country page 11". When you get there, scroll down 'til you find "Next to Jimmy", by Ferlin Huskey.
Then listen to Jerry Bryd's unbelievable tone and phrasing using his 7 string diatonic tuning.
http://recordlady.webgcs.com/
There are no words I can use to describe how beautiful Jerry's opening and break is to my ears on this all-time classic.
As one poster said, the diatonic tuning is:
E
C
B
A
G
F
E
May Jesus richly bless Jerry and all of you,
carl
|
|
|
|
Jesse Pearson
From:
San Diego , CA
|
Posted 23 Jun 2003 3:02 pm
|
|
Wow Carl, that diatonic tuning is E phrygian scale minus the the b7 (D) note? Is there some kinda connection between playing in phrygian and country steel? Nice audio example, Jerry has the touch.  |
|
|
|
C Dixon
From:
Duluth, GA USA
|
Posted 23 Jun 2003 3:33 pm
|
|
I have never heard JB say "why" he left the D note out of his Diatonic tuning. But I think I may know the answer.
As many of you are aware, Jerry is the worlds master at "split slants"; IE, two strings straight and one slanted. He is so good at this as to almost defy logic at times. Putting the D note in there would seriously limit one of his most used "split slants".
E
C
F#
(to get his famous 9th chord".
The other reason is, Jerry tunes mostly JI. The D note would be impossible to tune JI with the B note AND the A note.
Again, these are ONLY my opinions,
carl |
|
|
|
