[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference napalm::guitar

Title:GUITARnotes - Where Every Note has Emotion
Notice:Discussion of the finer stringed instruments
Moderator:KDX200::COOPER
Created:Thu Aug 14 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:3280
Total number of notes:61432

2713.0. "Nashville-strung Guitar" by SASE::MULLER () Tue Apr 27 1993 12:06

I've been reading articles about session players
who replace the three low strings (E A D) with light
strings.  Also, since I picked up my Blade a few 
weeks ago, I've been trying to rationalize - I mean -
figure out what to do with my old guitar that would
make me pick it up from time to time....

Has anyone played with this?  What strings did you
use - a 12-string set?

I'd be interested in hearing any experiences!

Geoff
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
2713.1Good for certain thingsLUNER::KELLYJsubmit to BarneyTue Apr 27 1993 12:4414
    Yeah, I did it for some recordings I did about six years ago.  I used
    an old Epiphone Texan and took the octave strings for E, A, and D from
    a 12 string set.
    
    I'm not sure if it make you '...pick it up from time to time' because
    it's got practically no mid or bottom to it, none of that acoustic
    guitar warmth.  The sound is mostly 'ching ching'.  It does work
    superbly in an ensemble where the bass player, the keys guy, and the
    *other* rhythm guitar are all competing for the same couple of octaves,
    'cause it sits on top of all that mudrange.
    
    I always felt that a guitar specifically designed for that kind of
    tuning would sound much better.  Lighter construction could lead to a
    livelier(sp?) sound, IMHO.
2713.2TECRUS::ROSTDon't fry bacon in the nudeTue Apr 27 1993 14:117
    As .1 stated, the "high-strung" tuning lets the acoustic rhythm cut
    through a mix.  Listen to most Nashville records since the mid-fifties
    and you'll hear this sound, it's almost subliminal.  I don't think
    anyone uses this for live playing, it's strictly a special tuning for
    recording. 
    
    							Brian
2713.3SASE::MULLERTue Apr 27 1993 14:118
Thanks for the informative replys!   Since I'm currently playing with
three other guitarists, we're probably producing all of the 
"chink chink" sound we need.  Now if I could only get one of THEM to
start playing bass.... ;') 

Maybe I should use the Falcon for some alternate tuning experiments....

Geoff
2713.4Try a capo?ICS::CONROYHavewe learned NOTHING from Footloose?Tue Apr 27 1993 14:586
    Not related to "nashville tuning" but, an easy way to fill out the
    sound for live playing with acoustic guitars is to play one with
    a capo on so you get nice full chord voicings. Sounds a lot
    better than just doubling parts.
    
    Bob
2713.5QRYCHE::STARRin somebody else's sky....Wed Apr 28 1993 09:005
I remember reading that the Stones/Keith Richards used Nashville tuning on 
one of their big hits, but I'll be damned if I can remember which one now.... 
it was one of the bigger hits, maybe a ballad (maybe "Angie"???).

alan
2713.6synonyms?FRETZ::HEISERdebt freeWed Apr 28 1993 09:214
    Is Nashville-strung the same as Nashville-tuned?
    
    I know Nashville tuning is where the bottom 4 strings are tuned up an
    octave higher.
2713.7Can you say "broken string"?TAMDNO::LAURENTHal Laurent @ MELWed Apr 28 1993 09:2715
re: .6

>    Is Nashville-strung the same as Nashville-tuned?
>    
>    I know Nashville tuning is where the bottom 4 strings are tuned up an
>    octave higher.

Well, I doubt you'll succeed at tuning up an octave without also
restringing! :-)

All seriousness aside, I believe they're the same thing.
Are you sure it's the bottom *4* strings, though?  I kind of thought
it was just the bottom 3.

-Hal
2713.8FRETZ::HEISERdebt freeWed Apr 28 1993 09:577
>Are you sure it's the bottom *4* strings, though?  I kind of thought
>it was just the bottom 3.
    
    My only support comes from the Satriani tab books (Surfin... &
    Flyin...) where he uses this tuning in some songs.  The transcriber
    states that it's the bottom 4 strings.  Maybe this only applies to
    Joe's implementation of it?
2713.9GANTRY::ALLBERYJimWed Apr 28 1993 11:016
 >>   states that it's the bottom 4 strings.  Maybe this only applies to
 >>   Joe's implementation of it?
    
    Joe probably doesn't spend a lot of time in Nashville...
    
    
2713.10LUNER::KELLYJsubmit to BarneyWed Apr 28 1993 12:343
    ...but he could if'n wanted to!
    
    I restrung three, but I don't think it's illegal to do four...
2713.11TAMRC::LAURENTHal Laurent @ COPTue May 17 1994 08:5121
Well I finally got an extra acoustic guitar (I bought an old junker for
$50) so I could give Nashville tuning a try.  I strung the bottom 4 strings
an octave higher.  I must say, I was surprised at the sound.  It didn't
really sound like the preconceived idea I had in my head.  The small range
(an octave and a minor third) between the lowest and highest string
produces very close-voiced chords, giving it kind of "shimmery" sound.
It sort of reminded me of the sound of an auto-harp, except in a lower
register.  Maybe a "baritone auto-harp". :-)

A favorite album of mine (and a rather obscure one) from back in 1972
is by one of Ian Matthews' old groups, Plainsong, called "In Search of 
Amelia Earhardt".  I'd often wondered how they got some of the sounds
on that album.  After hearing a high-strung guitar, I now understand!

Another thing that this experience has reminded me of is just how much
the voicing can affect the sound of a chord.  If you strum all 6 open
strings of a normally tuned guitar it really doesn't sound like anything
particularly musical.  If you do the same on the high-string guitar, it
sounds like an Em7sus4.

-Hal
2713.12ZYDECO::MCABEEI fought the lawnWed May 18 1994 11:465
re: Nashville stranging

Is it the bottom four or the bottom three?

Bob
2713.13TAMRC::LAURENTHal Laurent @ COPWed May 18 1994 12:137
re: .12

>Is it the bottom four or the bottom three?

I did bottom four.  Others in here think it should be bottom three.

-Hal