.

.

What is the basis of the 'Sweetened' tunings?

Does it move the pythagorean comma dependent on the octave you are playing in?

Or something like that?

A lot of the schemes I've seen around the internet a claimed to be sent from the heavens yet make neither harmonic or mathematical sense.  Anything that makes harmonic sense simply doesn't work on a fretted instrument as it needs to be even tempered. (the known inaccuracy averaged through the scale)

Sure you can sweeten some frequency relations but at the expense of making the majority of chords worse than they already are from a harmonic perspective.

The expectation bias introduced from being exposed several centuries worth of chromatically tuned instruments also makes it very difficult to asess the harmonic value of a truly sweetened harmonic series.  The 7th harmonic for example has all but been eradicated from most forms of western music because it don't sound pretty enough, even to the point where the piano's hammer hits is design to eliminated as much 7th harmonic resonance as possible.  If we ever could hear a truly 'sweetened' tuning it would likely sound horrible to most of us.

I limit my experimentation on this stuff to microtonal keyboards and listening to exponents of classical microtonal instruments such as the voice and viol based strings mostly.  Those guys are really using their ears!

There have been many experts in this field since and including Pythagoras and nobody seems to have come up with anything conclusive yet.  I'm figuring from that it is a pretty tricky subject defining a truly sweetened tuning and an impossibility on a previously fretted instrument.

The only thing that makes any sense at all within our current system is to change A=440 to.....think of a number.

 I've had the Peterson Strobosoft tuner for several years.  Compared to the other software tuners I have like the ones included in GR4 or Amplatube, or even any hardware , stomp box type,  it is much more sensitive then any I have tried. I don't really understand that strobing graphic thingy that much but the +/- scale is much more sensitive. Hands down, the best tuner I've ever had.
 
 Sweetened tunings? Never heard of them. Is there an advantage over standard A 440 ?

ohgrant


 I've had the Peterson Strobosoft tuner for several years.  Compared to the other software tuners I have like the ones included in GR4 or Amplatube, or even any hardware , stomp box type,  it is much more sensitive then any I have tried. I don't really understand that strobing graphic thingy that much but the +/- scale is much more sensitive. Hands down, the best tuner I've ever had.
 
 Sweetened tunings? Never heard of them. Is there an advantage over standard A 440 ?

A "sweetened" tuning is one that is different from The "equal temperament" intonation such as used on piano and guitar. In that tuning all half steps are equal. The  equal temperament tuning also differs from the natural harmonic relationship between notes in scales. To hear a good example of a "sweetened" tuning (also known as Just Temperament in this case), listen to a good solo violinist, or other stringed instrument with no frets. Not that those are the only instruments that can play in other than equal temperament intonation, but they are good examples.

Let's say a keyboard player wanted to play with a violinist, and wanted to use the exact notes the violinist did. He/she would have to "sweeten" his/her tuning to do that. Not that it would be 100% successful since the tuning would have to match the key they were playing in and a note in one chord might not be the same frequency as the same note in a different chord.

Me, I'm happy with equal temperament tuning.

Chappel

ohgrant


I've had the Peterson Strobosoft tuner for several years.  Compared to the other software tuners I have like the ones included in GR4 or Amplatube, or even any hardware , stomp box type,  it is much more sensitive then any I have tried. I don't really understand that strobing graphic thingy that much but the +/- scale is much more sensitive. Hands down, the best tuner I've ever had.

Sweetened tunings? Never heard of them. Is there an advantage over standard A 440 ?

A "sweetened" tuning is one that is different from The "equal temperament" intonation such as used on piano and guitar. In that tuning all half steps are equal. The  equal temperament tuning also differs from the natural harmonic relationship between notes in scales. To hear a good example of a "sweetened" tuning (also known as Just Temperament in this case), listen to a good solo violinist, or other stringed instrument with no frets. Not that those are the only instruments that can play in other than equal temperament intonation, but they are good examples.

Let's say a keyboard player wanted to play with a violinist, and wanted to use the exact notes the violinist did. He/she would have to "sweeten" his/her tuning to do that. Not that it would be 100% successful since the tuning would have to match the key they were playing in and a note in one chord might not be the same frequency as the same note in a different chord.

Me, I'm happy with equal temperament tuning.

 
Thanks for that, yea I enjoy the sound of all fretless instruments I've ever heard. I've often wondered how they can be so precise. If I understand correctly, "sweetened" tuning is used out of necessity then? Only experience I've had with playing with someone that was playing fretless was when my last keyboard player had a gut bass and we did "Stray cay Strut" there was some tuning issues and I finally gave up and tuned to him for that. I thought at the time his strings were just old, his intonation off, or he was just not that precise. I guess that was a situation where "sweetened" tuning would have helped. Still came out OK when we finally got in tune. Was a real pain though. 
 
 I plan to avoid situations like that, but curious if there is an absolute quantifiable "sweetened" tuning or a case of fine tuning until it just sounds right?
 

ohgrant
 
      ....I plan to avoid situations like that, but curious if there is an absolute quantifiable "sweetened" tuning or a case of fine tuning until it just sounds right?
 

I'd say it's just a matter of taste but since I don't use them I'm hardly an expert. All I can is that when you start changing the tuning of the strings, things are going to sound different. Scales are going to sound different. Chords are going to sound different. You aren't going to be in tune with other instruments unless they are using the same tuning. Try some different tunings and see if they work for you. There is probably plenty of info about that sort of thing online. The people who would know best are the people actually using sweetened tunings.

I plan to avoid situations like that, but curious if there is an absolute quantifiable "sweetened" tuning or a case of fine tuning until it just sounds right?

Grant

There is no doubt that this a really good tuner, packed with useful features.

The 'sweetners' would be a thing of taste as there is no preset 'sweetner' for a fretted instrument.

The octave will always occur at the mid-point of a sting, there iis no getting around that simple fact.  As you know you have to adjust the bridge to get that mid-point to occur exactly at the 12th fret.

Of course that position will slightly alter using different gauge strings, prefer a higher action and to some extent because of the arching of the neck so you have to adjust the intonation after changing one of those types of setups.

Although guitars are built to very fine tolerances there will be differences introduced by slight variances in the fret spacings, fret wear which will cause the string to make contact with the fret in a slightly different position for example.  Again the choice of action you prefer will also make slight differences as there is a certain amount of tension added by fingering against a fret vs an open string.

You already know all of this.

No sweetner is going to take all these tiny variances into account in a meaningful and repeatable way on a per instrument basis.

Sweetning could work if say there was a way of a guitar that has already been adjusted for intonation well and tuned, if it then measured the discrepancy between 5 and 17th, 7 and 19th, 3rd and 15th frets It could then caculate an average offset for the entire string length down the fingerboard giving you the best compromise to get perfect pitch all the way down (error diffusion).  That's not what is happening here, you choose a preset for GTR  which likely takes a best guess at that idea from a 'standard' guitar as if there is such a thing.

IMO, sweetning is best done when you choose a guitar and it 'sings' to you when you play it.

As I said it's a fantastic tuner with great features even if you take the 'sweetning' thing as a novelty sideshow which IMO and for the reasons given on this thread, it is.  Of course there are some that will swear by this feature and on the odd 'typical' guitar (if there is such a thing!), it will nail it.

Conclusion: A great tuner even without the marketing magik of the sweetening idea.

mike_mccue


FWIW,
I don't think the sweeteners are so much a "buzz-feature" as much as a cataloged collection of the minor adjustments that people who work in the business and are very effective at making great sounding harmonies are already using as standard practice.

I think it has been the players that have demonstrated to Peterson that a highly accurate tuner can be used to facilitate this sort of sweetening approach.

I've heard rumors of sweetened tunings coming out of Nashville for most of my life. The chance to get to experience or tune to them with some sort of preset function seems very attractive.

It's not anything all that special... If you work on guitar intonation enough you'll realize that there are always compromises on the fret board.

The part that is special is that someone has figured out that there is a best compromise, for example, for playing in "G" and another small shift for playing in "E". That info used to be rarefied to the extent that it seemed like secret recipes, but now it seems like you can get access to that info with Strobosoft.

It has always fascinated me... and I was wondering if the Strobosoft stuff really does give you access to the info and insights the session players have been using quietly as part of their day job expertise.

I guess I'll get it and check it out for myself.


Thanks everyone.


Very best regards,
mike

That's just a different view on exactly what I just said.

'cept I stuck with the basic facts rather than any romantic notions.

Blimey, who'd have thought the 'science' man could be seduced by fairy dust after all...

It's not the preserve of Nashville 'legends' to be able to hear and play the sweetness in, if you listened to any provicial symphony orchestra you'll hear rookie players using their ears to get at the sweetness in the most natural way.  It's putting frets in that makes it all a compromise.

mike_mccue


:-)

It is science... that is the part that fascinates me. The old timers quantified what they were doing with the highly accurate mechanical strobe tuners and now that info can be stored in a data base instead of a players' or producers' personal notebook.

This makes it very easy to share or sell the info.

:-)


Anyways... I was just wondering if anyone had been using it to do the sweetened tunings and had any comments.



best regards,
mike

Yes they could quantify those settings based on their own specific beloved and often 'quirky' instruments.

Hopefully what I have written will put some of the comments those using it will have into some kind of 'real' perspective.

I wasn't out to shatter your dreams.

Go listen to your nearest symphony orchestra you'll get the idea that the average player knows in a few years pretty much everything that 'Boney Back Bailey' learned in a mis-spent lifetime.

mike_mccue


Yeah but Boney has more soul in his fret pinky then most of them cats in penguin suits have in boff hands.

You'd be surprised.

Do I need to warn you that you're a veering in to the territory of myths and legends.  Or is that an indulgence you keep solely for your guitars?

What I like about that thing is you can quickly set-up an entire ensemble to some uncommon tuning and variation of Concert pitch in a matter of moments and all be up and jamming in some weird and wonderful areas together.  No longer will your lead dulcimer and zither section have to 'sit this one out'.

It's a must have in any studio setting for that reason alone.

I note Mike that you've since removed the reference to the 'sweetening' aspect of this device in the OP.

It kind of alters the relevance of the responses that followed I think.

Just to be clear.

mike_mccue

Jonbouy


I note Mike that you've since removed the reference to the 'sweetening' aspect of this device in the OP.

It kind of alters the relevance of the responses that followed I think.

Just to be clear.

I made a single alteration to my OP this morning...

I changed the topic line from:

"Is anyone using Strobosoft and sweentened tunings?"

the current one on the OP:

"Is anyone using Strobosoft and sweetened tunings?"



That was the only change made in that edit.

I did it on this post as well.


best regards,
mike

It no longer mentions 'and sweetened tunings'  in any form of spelling.

That's a big difference.  You've removed the reference to the 'buzz' feature which was the one aspect raising eyebrows.

mike_mccue


I'm thinking the next time I have some time to learn a few things I'm going to get a license for Strobosoft and see what I can learn.

Does anyone have any experience with this and have any info they want to share?


best regards,
mike

Maybe I'm experiencing some kind of visual harmonic anomoly that is preventing me from seeing it anymore here.  But as you say it is in the title anyway and maybe I am mistaken for thinking it appeared in the body of the post.  I apologise if that is the case.

Anyway to re-iterate.  There is no GTR preset you can use to tune the six open strings in any meaningful way on a range of guitars that have different fret spacing anomolies, different fret heights, different action, different gauge strings and different neck stresses.  Not to mention players who naturally differ in tendencies in things like pressure on the finger board in relation to fret height, pull on the neck to some degree and will naturally tend to pull or push the strings when fingering the fret board.  Those are just the factors I can think of, there are likely others too.

You don't need science to tell you that all you can do is arrive at some average fit all that takes into account some of the commonality of all that.  A little common sense should be enough.

Grant knows the secret science you were alluding too with your heroes and legends argument, he's already mentioned how it's done here.  I quoted him in a previous post.  You learn how to adjust from your reference tuning to suit the particular quirks of the instrument you are using, on the odd occassion though that preset may have you covered.

If this thing was sampling the 3rd, 5th, 7th, and the octaves on a well tuned guitar with the intonation set right and was calculating based on the guitar you were playing and how you were playing it I'd say they were onto something.  But even then it would just be a case of lowering the average error factor down the entire length of the fretboard and it still may sound 'worse' than tuning it to a good reference tone.

Those are simply the facts of the matter.

Good tuner though, I think everyone agrees with that.

I was writing here asking if anyone else had specifically used the Strobosoft software for this purpose.

I was hoping to compare some of the literature at Peterson's site with some folks real life experience using the product.

Some people ask about ARC as a room eq and court experience from other users.

They tend to get more info than they imagined they'd get too.

I built an Harmonigraph once, it clearly shows you why being slighty out can be prettier than on the button.

Try it yourself, it's illuminating and you get some pretty pictures for the wall.

mike_mccue


"you were alluding too with your heroes and legends argument,"



I think you are acting a bit full of your self this morning and making some sort of Strawman "argument" about an "argument" I never made.

regards,
mike

I felt you were trying to pass off the collective experience of a nashville studio hack as having some insight over and above the facts.  I agree argument was the wrong word.

Excuse me but I was always brought up with the idea that what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

Anyway I've left enough information for you to consider the facts, if you want to find some 'me too' affirmation from elsewhere then I can't say anymore.

Regards.

;-)