Am I the only one who has a pet peeve about dropped tuning(s) ?

[DVaz]

Oh and my main 3 guitars are in drop B or C#.

Dont like it?





































PLAY YOUR OWN {censored}ING GUITARS!

[BigRoy]

I too, am old and set in my ways. Not only am I anal about dropped tuning, I still don't see the need for 7 string guitars.

OTOH, I certainly don't look down on anyone who enjoys either or both.

[Le Blur]

I drop D when i'm feeling it


way easy to tune it, the harmonic on the 12th fret of the 5th string will match the harmonic at the 7th fret of the 6th string when the tuning is DADGBE

[tlbonehead]

I don't see the problem or any reason to get wacked out of shape. I'm 48 and use 1/2 step down, full step down, and dropped D(C#actually) a lot.

[thecornman]

Truth be told, if there is a second guitar I usually try to avoid his voicings. You see all these post about how do I get my guitar to sound different than the other guitar and not wash out in the mix? It's simple, don't play the same thing the other guitar is playing.

I would have to agree with this more then anything else I have read on this post. The great thing about having more then one guitar player there is you can really fill up the space and make a song or a jam sound more complete. Most of the jams I have at my place friday nights has at least 2 other guitar players show up and myself and the best jams we have are when everybody finds their own space and plays their own thing. Isn't that why we all spend so much time learning our way around the neck?

[DaveAronow]

I'm another old fart that has all my guitars at standard tuning. I have tried to drop 1/2 and even down to D. The tuning seems to be more difficult (getting and staying), and the overall tone of clean full/open chords seems less rhythmic and flat. I guess deth metal doesn't really matter. Then again, what do I know. I suck.

 

All of my guitars are tuned to standard.

 

Throughout all of my hard rock/metal giiging days, we ALWAYS tuned down 1/2 step.

 

I will have to admit that this was mainly a gimmick that didnt serve much of a purpose other than humouring our somewhat ill informed belief that we "sounded heavier" OOOOHHHH RRRAAAAWWWWKKKK!!!!!

 

Tune to whatever you feel like, as long as everyone is playing in the same key, tuned to the same pitch, who really cares. Hell, play the stings above the nut on the headstock for all I care. Just be in tune with each other.

 

The whole tuning down 1/2 step just seems a little silly. Its like some unwritten little "secret" that musicians think will make them stand out amongst the crowd. Seriously, playing better tghan the next guy will make you stand out.

 

Alternate tuning is a whole other topic. There are many great reasons to do this. One of the best reasons is that it coaxwes you intop playing new sounding chords from your normal bag o tricks by making different sounding chords even with your normal chord shapes. This can be v ery inspiring, creatively speaking. You just simply hear new things that you may never have heard without the alternate tuning.

 

So, yeah, I will drop tune 1/2 step to accomadate a WHOLE band that insists on it, but I probably would rebel at tuning below that.

Most often though, I am the guy that decides how we will tune. I am just too old and crotchety and burnt out to be as accomodating as I used too.

Maybe thats a bad thing.

Maybe I really don't care any more.

[sylvesterlowery]

I use a lot of low tuned guitars, just sound good to me.

I use:E standard, E flat, drop D, D standard, C# standard, C standard, B standard, A standard. It's why I love having so many guitars. Need a different tuning? Grab a different guitar.

[littlemilo]

My only problem with lowered tunings came from SRV's Texas Flood album. I was trying to play along with the vinyl when it first came out, but nothing sounded right. I kept trying to figure out how he could make it sound so heavy and full in E flat.

 

When I finally did, it was quite the Homer Simpson moment.

 

 

D'oh!

[ej]

i heard bands plauy drop G with a baritone, it sounds pretty cool

im a drop d fiend myself

[HKSblade1]

I used to have to take more guitars. We replaced a singer and Eb was his range or lower. Songs in standard were all dropped which made it easier to go a step down on low Eb for other songs. Another is tuned step down to D. Two guitars can handle the show instead of what we had before with 3 or 4 guitar changes. We always did outdoor shows that really f'd with tunings.

[darkone15]

I'm with the OP, not that i think there is anything wrong with it, i just dont like it, mostly because i often play very high on the neck and if i tune down i would have to streach further.

[R0B0]

I'm an old fart. I used to always use 11-52 strings just cuz they have more power. One day I tuned down a half step, then again. After 25 years I still keep that guitar tuned a whole step down. I also use dropped D sometimes, or double drop D, or DADGAD, or Open D, or C, or G or Vestapol. My 12 string acoustic is tuned to Open Bb. I have one guitar that stays in Open D. Most of my guitars are in standard though.

[curseoftruth]

I'm old (early 40s) and have played in everything but standard tuning for almost 10 years now. My current band plays one step down (D to D). I've been in bands where we played half step down, full step down and in drop C. Sounds right to my ears now, standard tuning is kind of strange to me these days. I think depends on the type of music you play though, in heavier rock bands like we are, the drop tunings sound right.

[seven58]

I don't mind drop tunings or alternate tunings. I set up different guitars for different tunings. I also bought a Variax 300 to help with also. New tunings make the guitar seem fresh again.

[Choop]

I really like standard tuning in E, but I also like playing one step down, as in DGCFAD. It doesn't get muddy, but it lets you have a little more chugga chugga and deeper tones as well. I like both though. Drop tunings just make me feel confined...

[aenemated]

every guitar i own is tuned 1/2 a step down.

 

why? i prefer the sound and feel and pretty much all my very favorite players tuned down, too.

[bikehorn]

Anything more than a step-ish down and I'm not interested. Drop D is okay, but when you get into tuning low for "heavy" sounds, the sound and feel that I like are gone and I don't want to make heavy chugga chugga sounds. That stuff just doesn't interest me much because it feels like you're just pulling out a bunch of standard tricks. zzzzzz. I could see tuning the whole thing down a half step or full step to match a vocalist's range, but again the feel is gone for me and I would have to go up a few gauges in strings to be able to play it like I like it. This would require a separate dedicated guitar and if I had the money, I probably would keep a guitar specifically dedicated to that. I already am sort of dedicating one to slide(see next paragraph).

 

Now, open tunings and the like, I don't mind changing the tunings for those because you can make some pretty cool sounds with open tunings that otherwise would be hard if not impossible to duplicate. Also, I know some people can play slide in standard tuning, but I feel MUCH better playing slide in an open tuning, usually open G or open C. I find to really dig in with slide I like to have high action and heavy strings, which make playing without a slide a little hard - therefore a dedicated guitar is unavoidable if you prefer the kind of slide setup I do. At this point my Strat copy is wearing 10-52's and sitting on the fence between conventional fretted playability(I still need the sounds it makes) and all-out high action and with 12s for slide.

 

Come on, dedicated tunings and setups are a great excuse for GAS acquisitions. Not like I myself am answerable to a wife/girlfriend when I bring home a new guitar related item though

[Jkater]

I don't mind 1/2 step, on the odd song. What bugs me is songs that are recorded 1/4 step down. WTF is that?

 

 

There is no such thing. Indian music has "in between notes" but not in the way of everything being 1/4 step down (unless you are rehearsing with an old piano that's way down and everybody must adjust to it).

[The Fury]

While standard is great and all, I swear by drop tunings. Mainly to make it sound "heavier". My Jackson is in drop D (DADGBE), my bass gets tuned anywhere from standard to drop C (CGCFAD).

My acoustic is in drop C

Most of the bands that I like all tune down so one reason I do it is to (try) play covers. But haveing tried it, I like it, and only go back to standard when I'm doing a cover or something.

That being said, some heavy {censored} was written in standard; early metallica and other 80's thrash, newer trivium some modern day thrash, etc.

But drop tuning is teh BrOOtalz

[Mind Riot]

Crotchety old man here, but for a reason different than you've stated. Down-tuning a guitar places that guitar in a different place in the frequency spectrum that the bass already occupies. If the bassist is playing a 5-string tuned BEADG, that low B fundamental is at about 31 Hz. The lower limit of human hearing is about 20 Hz. Below that, people perceive the vibration, but can't identify the pitch. Even at the lowest reaches of human hearing, the fundamental is lost by many listeners; most of what is heard in the bass are overtones generated from those low fundamentals. I play bass in addition to guitar. The bass rigs of today have high-frequency horns to provide overtone information lacking in the days of classic rock. Back then, bass was poorly recorded, too, because on vinyl, you needed to cut the bass fundamental to keep the needle in the groove, then add it back (the "RIAA EQ curve") at playback. Bass recorded today sounds deeper than ever. And, since modern bass rigs are designed to provide that deep fundamental with its overtones, bass played live today sounds more clear and distinct. Since bassists today occupy a lot of sonic space (think John Entwistle's live sound , for example), dropping the guitar into the frequencies the bass is occupying makes it either LESS heavy due to phase cancellation, or muddy and indistinct from having the bass' overtone content interfered with. The guitar is intended to occupy a sonic space an octave above the bass, and reinforce the bass' overtones with the guitar's fundamental notes while providing its own overtone content. When there is too much overlap, the tone that each instrument -- and its player -- wants to hear is changed. How many people have to use extreme EQ settings on their amps and pedals to get a sound that cuts through the mix? And how does that change your tone when that happens? Usually for the worse, right? Part of getting a mix to sound right is to give each instrument, and the voices, their own sonic space in the frequency spectrum. A lot of the muddy sounding live mixes I hear are the result of that concept being abandoned. For those who have recorded, the usual ideas are to 1) use less gain than you think you need, and 2) use more mids than you think you need. This puts the guitar in its proper position in the spectrum, by minimizing excessive overtones (the "less gain" part) and providing the right emphasis on the guitar's place in the mix (the "more mids" part). Doing that makes it easier to have a good live mix, and it minimizes excessive EQ use at the mastering stage when recording.

You make some plausible sounding points, but I feel a lot of it is oversimplification. I would venture to say that the timbre of most instruments are determined more by harmonics than the fundamental, including electric guitar.

While it's true that too much frequency overlap inhibits clarity, it's not true that tuning a guitar down drastically changes the EQ curve of the sound. Particularly with electric guitar, the amp settings and frequency response of the speaker will be more of a factor in determining that. Even in standard tuning, most amps do not put out a great deal of sound at the low E fundamental (about 82 hz), and that doesn't change much if you drop it to D or C or lower. The vast majority of what we know as the sound of the electric guitar is contained higher in the spectrum. The timbral qualities we recognize in electric guitar are much more focused in the mids than the mid bass or bass region, regardless of tuning. In fact, the very uniqueness of the sound of electric guitar is largely a result of the limited frequency range a guitar amp produces. Guitars aren't amplified or recorded through full range systems.

As you accurately pointed out, even with bass most of the timbre we hear is harmonics; the fundamental frequencies of the bass guitar, while in closer reach than in past years, are still hard to amplify and hard to mix (even if direct digital recording has made them easier to record). Very few systems, either amps or sound systems, can adequately reproduce much below 40 hz which would seem to gut the bass out of the sound, but the timbre isn't dependent on that. It's more about the harmonics, either with bass or guitar.

So while it might be easier to look at the hard numbers and say that since tuning a guitar down to A drops it too far into the bass range because the fundamental is at 55 hz that doesn't really hold water when in the real world the amp isn't putting out anything more below 80 hz than it was in standard tuning. The timbral qualities of the new tuning come through in the mids like everything else with guitar without drastically changing the overall frequency response. And as someone who records guitars and basses all the time in standard, dropped, and open tunings I can personally attest that there is very little if any difference in the frequency response of a guitar signal tuned to standard or dropped to A when run through a spectrum analyzer. Both have very little happening below 100 hz.

None of this is to say that there aren't guys out there trying to get ridiculous mega bassy guitar sounds tuned down to C or B or whatever, but there are guys doing that in standard too.

What I'm saying is that the idea that down tuning a guitar makes recording or mixing with clarity more difficult based on straight fundamental frequency numbers doesn't hold water. By that same logic, it wouldn't make any sense to record any bass guitar notes with a fundamental below 40 or 50 hz, because most consumer level stereos can't reproduce it. So no more bass notes from about G# on down, and forget about kick drums and floor toms too. But in the real world, instrument timbre is much more complex and much less reliant on super strong fundamental notes, and electric downtuned guitar is no exception.

As an example (though if people are mad at me I suppose this gives them an opportunity to rip me to shreds for sharing) here's a little riff a friend of mine and I were working on a little while back. It's not a complete song, only a couple riffs thrown together. This is in Drop A. I didn't mix this any different than I would have any other little project in progress, and I used the same sound on my guitar that I use in standard. The lower tuning doesn't really change the overall frequency response of the amp much, if at all. Granted, the bass on this is pretty rumbly (once the main riff kicks in at 15 seconds in or so), but that was on purpose to add impact. Again, I used the same sound setup that I would in standard, and while bass has more fundamental to it than guitar, the majority of the timbre of the bass sound is not the fundamental (which is about 27 hz) but the harmonics. The impact of the note carries through, even though there isn't much more going on below 40 hz than any of my standard tuned projects.

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=721437&content=songinfo&songID=5518408

[clay sails]

I guess I'm old and set in my ways, but when I show up to a jam with a new "group" prospect, and they inform me they all drop tune 1/2 step, etc to accommodate the singer's range (not to mention many new songs as well), I politely play through the jam but don't come back.

 

I didn't care about dropped tunings one way or the other until recently I started playing bass with a guy who insisted on drop tuning for half of his songs. I'd practiced the songs in standard tuning and had to adjust when we played live, trying to remember which songs were dropped and which weren't...

 

Long story short: After buying a 5 string bass to avoid the whole problem, the guy replaced me anyway. Then he asked if I'd play guitar for him! lol

 

I politely declined.

 

I don't think he had any reason to drop his tunings other than it is a hip thing to do that supposedly shows virtuosity. Still, he was definitely an awesome musician (& much better than I) but I've got enough to learn already without adding an added, gratuitous, layer of non-standard tunings overtop.

[Burgess]

oh my god what a surprise that you play jazz i never would have guessed it's just so obvious when you start talking so much sense...you've gotta play some jazz

Don't get me wrong, I can't actually play any jazz other than some half assed attempt. Being taught by a jazzer though, he was pretty big on technique and really taught me to not be dependent on open strings in my voicings. I was taught the open string chords but I was also taught alternate fingers that I could play in any position.

He was also big on one finger per fret on single note runs so consequently I learned to use my pinky from the very start.

[peavey_impact]

Technically, you are correct, but these idiots sit there chugging away on the low (whatever) string like it's the only thing they've got to say. They assume low = heavy, but really, it just ends up sounding like mud. If you dig it, cool, go dig it, but I prefer music to noise.

I'm guilty

[VanR]

Personally I don't mind tuning down a half step as long as the whole band tunes down and stays there. In other words the half step down becomes the "standard" tuning for the band. I'm not gonna have guitars tuned at standard and then have to have another guitar tuned down a half step for one or 2 songs like the last guys I played with. My biggest pet peeve though is bands who want to play cover songs in a key the song wasn't written in. I mean if the song was written in Bmajor then play it in Bmajor not Bbmajor. If the singer can't sing the song in B then forget that song and move on to something else.

[Ronzo II]

You make some plausible sounding points, but I feel a lot of it is oversimplification. I would venture to say that the timbre of most instruments are determined more by harmonics than the fundamental, including electric guitar. While it's true that too much frequency overlap inhibits clarity, it's not true that tuning a guitar down drastically changes the EQ curve of the sound. Particularly with electric guitar, the amp settings and frequency response of the speaker will be more of a factor in determining that. Even in standard tuning, most amps do not put out a great deal of sound at the low E fundamental (about 82 hz), and that doesn't change much if you drop it to D or C or lower. The vast majority of what we know as the sound of the electric guitar is contained higher in the spectrum. The timbral qualities we recognize in electric guitar are much more focused in the mids than the mid bass or bass region, regardless of tuning. In fact, the very uniqueness of the sound of electric guitar is largely a result of the limited frequency range a guitar amp produces. Guitars aren't amplified or recorded through full range systems. As you accurately pointed out, even with bass most of the timbre we hear is harmonics; the fundamental frequencies of the bass guitar, while in closer reach than in past years, are still hard to amplify and hard to mix (even if direct digital recording has made them easier to record). Very few systems, either amps or sound systems, can adequately reproduce much below 40 hz which would seem to gut the bass out of the sound, but the timbre isn't dependent on that. It's more about the harmonics, either with bass or guitar. So while it might be easier to look at the hard numbers and say that since tuning a guitar down to A drops it too far into the bass range because the fundamental is at 55 hz that doesn't really hold water when in the real world the amp isn't putting out anything more below 80 hz than it was in standard tuning. The timbral qualities of the new tuning come through in the mids like everything else with guitar without drastically changing the overall frequency response. And as someone who records guitars and basses all the time in standard, dropped, and open tunings I can personally attest that there is very little if any difference in the frequency response of a guitar signal tuned to standard or dropped to A when run through a spectrum analyzer. Both have very little happening below 100 hz. None of this is to say that there aren't guys out there trying to get ridiculous mega bassy guitar sounds tuned down to C or B or whatever, but there are guys doing that in standard too. What I'm saying is that the idea that down tuning a guitar makes recording or mixing with clarity more difficult based on straight fundamental frequency numbers doesn't hold water. By that same logic, it wouldn't make any sense to record any bass guitar notes with a fundamental below 40 or 50 hz, because most consumer level stereos can't reproduce it. So no more bass notes from about G# on down, and forget about kick drums and floor toms too. But in the real world, instrument timbre is much more complex and much less reliant on super strong fundamental notes, and electric downtuned guitar is no exception. As an example (though if people are mad at me I suppose this gives them an opportunity to rip me to shreds for sharing) here's a little riff a friend of mine and I were working on a little while back. It's not a complete song, only a couple riffs thrown together. This is in Drop A. I didn't mix this any different than I would have any other little project in progress, and I used the same sound on my guitar that I use in standard. The lower tuning doesn't really change the overall frequency response of the amp much, if at all. Granted, the bass on this is pretty rumbly (once the main riff kicks in at 15 seconds in or so), but that was on purpose to add impact. Again, I used the same sound setup that I would in standard, and while bass has more fundamental to it than guitar, the majority of the timbre of the bass sound is not the fundamental (which is about 27 hz) but the harmonics. The impact of the note carries through, even though there isn't much more going on below 40 hz than any of my standard tuned projects. http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=721437&content=songinfo&songID=5518408

Hi, MindRiot. Thanks for giving my screed a solid read. Yes, it WAS an oversimplification; it's hard to know what to leave out with an audience with mixed experiences -- plus, I kill enough threads by not knowing when to STFU.

What you said very well in your post was that there isn't a lot of sound information at fundamental frequencies whether the tuning is in standard or a drop tuning, and that most information was in the overtones. Entirely correct, and that was one of the things I was trying to state. What I guess I didn't make clear was that my beef is with the bands who try to get so "heavy" that all they do is produce muddy stuff, and it's usually bands -- and bandmates, current and potential -- that say that they MUST tune down, otherwise it "won't be heavy enough".

Tuning down to better fit a vocalist's range and still be able to find chord inversions to make the song either sound more like the original (with covers) or be more true to the composer's vision (with originals) is necessary sometimes. But to tune down to cram more information into an already-occupied frequency spectrum makes little sense to me, for precisely the reasons you describe in your post. It's about the stuff contained in the overtones. And, as Burgess stated, why play the same stuff the other guy is playing? It just makes it that much harder to identify who's playing what in the mix. Also, when that happens, I find that in an attempt to be heard, everyone turns up. That's not the Loudness Wars that you mention in your sig, but it sure is a loudness war within the band.

I'm yammering away too much, as usual. I'll sum up by saying that the bands I hear that try too hard to be heavy by downtuning often -- not always -- produce a muddy mix live. And often -- not always -- when I hear things they've recorded, there's a big hole in the upper midrange.

Excellent and informative post, BTW. Not unexpected, coming from you. Le respeto mucho, as they say down here.