Maybe this picture I found will help:

Janet


Phrasing?  Voice?  Harmonics?

I'm just trying to find middle C!  :-)

You'll find in more than one place on a guitar and then timbre and string length at the note pressed will influence the harmonics induced.

One thing at time is not an option with the guitar. When you get to playing it. I don't want to go overboard and plunge into the whole spacial palette but, the guitar rests against your body and your body is a resonator also.

I agree David.

Mike standard tuning evolved. I don't know that I've ever
read or even heard that somebody tuned it that way on some date.

Exceptance by the masses as the "best" standard tuning is
due to it being the best tuning for being able to play extended
chords and just more chords in general.
You may consider the 6-string lap steel as a comparison. Very
easy to play a few chords and a few patterns but then one is faced
with impossibilities. ( 6-string alternate tuning being the key...more strings,
more possibilities)

Although a purist jazz player may perfer an all fourth's tuning
which would change the second and first string to C and F.

If you play a chromatic scale on the guitar in standard tuning
and special attention to the interval change moving from the
3rd to 2nd string ( the position shift) it may help you
understand and agree that it is a very reasonable tuning.

Tuff question and a tuff "transpose" instrument to learn I think.

Well I tried my friend

Thanks for continuing everyone,

My interest in this subject was refreshed recently as I was discussing open tunings with a parent of a young guitar player. The kid plays a virtuoso solo style in various open tunings yet is inexperienced with standard tuning and playing in ensembles.

His father didn't understand the notion of standard tuning and I was struggling to explain why it is clearly a standard.

I think I have read in the past that standard tuning evolved over time and was exemplified by the guitar revolution led by Segovia whereby the guitar became a "serious" instrument.

I have also read that Mel Bay leveraged the public consciousness of Segovia's accomplishments and popularized "standard" tuning through his network of teachers, salons, and books.

I asked here without mentioning those trivia tidbits in the hopes that someone else might have some specifics that complimented those impressions.



It seems like a fascinating subject.


I agree that the form itself speaks for itself. It is really easy to see how thoughtful the layout is when you advance as a player.


I think I'll continue to struggle at finding a way to explain why "standard" tuning is standard.


best regards,
mike

 

Standard tuning is "standard" because most people use it.
Why "standard" tuning should be EADGBE is a different question and is down to evolution. Millions of guitar players over the centuries have agreed that EADGBE is the best tuning to use for ease of playing both chords and single note sequences.

Janet, have you ever asked yourself why they call that particular key "middle C"?  I know it's roughly in the middle, but why call it C?  The notes of a piano are layed out to match the intervals of a western major scale, but why start that sequence from 'C'? Surely calling the start 'A' would have been more logical? and likewise for music notation, why have the central note between the staves called 'C'? Wouldn't 'A' be more logical for the same reasons as above?

mike_mccue


What I am wondering is; WHY do (if it's true that...) most people use standard tuning?

The biggest 2 reasons I can think of are:

1. Because that's what they were "taught" (either formally or informally).
2. Because if you want to recreate existing guitar music, using (roughly) the same tuning is often almost a necessity. Alternate tunings lend themselves to alternate chord voicings and melodic patterns - if you tune in different intervals it will likely both influence what you choose to play and make some chords/patterns easier than others.

Of course neither of these reasons imply that standard tuning is any any way superior to other tunings. In reality, each tuning will have it's own strengths and weaknesses. And other plucked string instruments (such as banjo or mandolin) use completely different tunings.

I have lately noticed a trend in trying to not play in standard tuning. I now see this trend is encouraged by guitar teachers turning kids a few bag of trick riffs using open tunings where they can recreate parts of a popular tune easily.

I pretty much play in standard tuning, know my scales and the fret board etc.

I love playing simple music with other people.

I've noticed a lot of the open tuning wonder kids don't seem to be prepared to play with other people.

I've been curious to under stand why the guitar teachers are teaching young kids to memorize licks in open tunings... and not teaching the fret board and using standard tuning as a reference.

It made me wonder how standard standard tuning is or if it is a legacy of certain period of time.

Mel Bay, for example was a institution but also a moment in time. The publishing company  and teaching network revolutionized the idea of standardized instruction and I wonder if history will show that to be a periodic rather than constant influence.

So I've been wondering what the precedents for standard tuning are.

I saw on Wiki that lute is traditionally tuned similarly to standard guitar tuning. Perhaps it is that simple. :-)

best regards,
mike

Regarding why C and not A is the "first" note, in traditional notation the names of the notes are DO, RE, MI, FA, SOL, LA, SI. DO (C) is the first one. British style changed that notation to single letters, and I don't know why they assigned A to LA instead of DO. Most probably it was simply because they were british XD.
Regarding guitar tuning, i never tried a non standard one yet, it is difficult enough to learn well the fretboard pattern, and i would be lost handling more than one. But maybe i'll try Fripp's NST tuning sometime, for me he's a great master and if he says it's better overall there must be some truth in it.

57Gregy


I didn't even know there were alternate tunings until I got a Led Zeppelin song book in 1972, songs from their first 4 albums.
Got to "That's The Way" and there were these notes showing the tuning for the guitar.
Heretics! I thought, but what did I know? I was 15.
I still play that song.

But it sounds like cr@p in std tuning, no?

Janet

Actually, no, I've never thought of it.  lol  But for this discussion I could have just as easily said 'F is to the left of the 3 black keys, B is to the right of them, etc.'  My only point being every A looks the same, etc.  :-) 

On the one hand you're right Janet. But, OTOH, on guitar/bass if you want to transpose something, you just slide the fingering up or down the neck, and everything is exactly the same (if you aren't using open strings, of course).

From a musical perspective, when improvising, I suppose on keyboard I'd be inclined to think more in terms of "key signature", whereas on guitar/bass I'd be more inclined to think of "scale/mode". 

But the short answer is, you just learn where the notes are and "C=A string, 3rd fret/G string, 5th fret/B string 1st fret/..." quickly becomes 2nd nature. And chords are either open and committed to memory, or movable shapes with the root on one string or a another.

mike_mccue
I have lately noticed a trend in trying to not play in standard tuning. I now see this trend is encouraged by guitar teachers turning kids a few bag of trick riffs using open tunings where they can recreate parts of a popular tune easily.

I've noticed a lot of the open tuning wonder kids don't seem to be prepared to play with other people.

I've been curious to under stand why the guitar teachers are teaching young kids to memorize licks in open tunings... and not teaching the fret board and using standard tuning as a reference.

best regards,
mike

Mike I'm sure not in touch with young students or the teachers.
I sure don't agree with the teachers teaching that way.
 
I couldn't even guess why they would teach by "memorizing licks"
in any tuning. That makes me think they're just teaching for
the coins. Jukebox teachers...put a coin in and they'll teach
you to play a tune.
 
 
 
 
 

Thanks Michael,
 I guess I've been feeling a little bit weird while speaking with my friends and family about their kids' music teachers. It's cool that their kids get lessons... but I feel an urge to think critically about what they are learning.

 It seems to be related to fast gratification. It may just be a symptom of suburban folks sending kids to lessons as a routine... sort of like soccer practice. The parents seem to enjoy watching their kids learn a recognizable tune so quickly.

 It's an eye opener to listen to a young person who plays 1-3 songs really well... and then realize that they do not know how to play the simplest camp fire songs with another person.

 I grew up playing one or two notes on the sidelines of an ensemble... and learning how to listen and play along.


Fireberd, Yes, We have some antique musicians up here that use older A references.


best regards,
mike

I hear you Mike. It's a catch 22. A very good thing for kids to
have interest in the arts. Sometimes the teaching method is
questionable.
"Programmed" teaching, as in many schools (see that dot play this)
is something I've never agreed to. I understand how the
teachers may have a course they have to follow but that
doesn't make it right. (hurry up so this is ready for the game)
Maybe there are public schools that offer music as a course
not geared around performing for the sport of it. I don't know.
It does sound like kids you're referring to are being programmed.

The good thing is the students that truly want to learn the
instrument will probably seek information from many sources.
It helps when the parents our guardians understand the
variables for a well rounded choice of direction.

Practice time is limited for most, I'm guessing, so it pays to
make the most of it. I can't see programmed teaching or
jumping around from this tuning to that being very efficient.

For students of an instrument to have peers to jam with is
a major plus. Having the chance to apply what they've
been learning is great but they get to learn about the
"magic" that happens when musician's interact. Invaluable.

I'm pretty sure I'm in the section for antique musicians
so I realize my opinions may be dated too.
So if the new way isn't cutting it...."we don't need no thought control" -PF