Today's chewing is over the actual string tuning options. How can I get the most flexibility out of the simplest system? With a theoretical detuner for each string at both the bridge and nut end, yielding three possible "open" notes per string, permutations get daunting. But hell, let's take a stab, right?
I set an arbitrary box: could I get a tuning that would allow me to use both open fifths and open fourths? How about an additional option of the Guitar Craft intervals?
I pretty quickly came up with two possible options--there may be others, but the current exercise is: what might be possible with these?
Option 1:
String | Low note | Middle | High note |
#4 | G1 | A1 | B1 |
#3 | C2 | D2 | E2 |
#2 | A2 | B2 | D3 |
#1 | D3 | E3 | G3 |
Option 2:
String | Low note | Middle | High note |
#4 | G1 | A1 | B1 |
#3 | D2 | E2 | F2 |
#2 | A2 | B2 | C3 |
#1 | D3 | E3 | G3 |
Well now, these two options present quite a few obvious possibles. They both permit open 5ths (GDAE), open 4ths (BEAD), Guitar Craft intervals (AEBD), multiple power chord voicings (interestingly, rooted on G, D, A, and E), multiple major triad voicings, even more minor triad voicings, multiple sus4 voicings, at least one major seventh voicing, and a couple of minor seventh/major sixth voicings. Option #2 also has an obvious available dominant 7th voicing which does not seem available in #1. (I haven't ventured past seventh forms yet, but there's obviously other things there too.) Melodically, something might be significant about the first option's consistency; within each string's tuning profile, the only "intervals" that are not major seconds are the upper intervals on the top two strings, which are minor thirds. On the other hand, the second option has the two interior strings featuring a whole and a half-step. I'm thinking about the possibilities of chasing harmonics around, melodically, and it seems to me that a variety of possible intervals just might be too fun to pass up.
So, at least initially, it seems that either of these options would keep me busy for quite a while, and the latter option may prove to be slightly more flexible than the first. Now that it's documented, I can mull on it for a while, and see if it might be worth the effort of trying to get a detuner on both ends of each string.
I suppose it would be much simpler if I didn't keep trying to take every fixed point I can see and cast off its moorings. I can hear ya: isn't fretless enough? Well, sure it is. Hell, just listen to the available corpus of great music: twelve-tone, standard tuning is enough.
But it's not the point. Face it, I'm just a pain in the ass. :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment