T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
2713.1 | Good for certain things | LUNER::KELLYJ | submit to Barney | Tue Apr 27 1993 12:44 | 14 |
| 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.
|
2713.2 | | TECRUS::ROST | Don't fry bacon in the nude | Tue Apr 27 1993 14:11 | 7 |
| 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
|
2713.3 | | SASE::MULLER | | Tue Apr 27 1993 14:11 | 8 |
| 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
|
2713.4 | Try a capo? | ICS::CONROY | Havewe learned NOTHING from Footloose? | Tue Apr 27 1993 14:58 | 6 |
| 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
|
2713.5 | | QRYCHE::STARR | in somebody else's sky.... | Wed Apr 28 1993 09:00 | 5 |
| 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
|
2713.6 | synonyms? | FRETZ::HEISER | debt free | Wed Apr 28 1993 09:21 | 4 |
| Is Nashville-strung the same as Nashville-tuned?
I know Nashville tuning is where the bottom 4 strings are tuned up an
octave higher.
|
2713.7 | Can you say "broken string"? | TAMDNO::LAURENT | Hal Laurent @ MEL | Wed Apr 28 1993 09:27 | 15 |
| 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
|
2713.8 | | FRETZ::HEISER | debt free | Wed Apr 28 1993 09:57 | 7 |
| >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?
|
2713.9 | | GANTRY::ALLBERY | Jim | Wed Apr 28 1993 11:01 | 6 |
| >> 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...
|
2713.10 | | LUNER::KELLYJ | submit to Barney | Wed Apr 28 1993 12:34 | 3 |
| ...but he could if'n wanted to!
I restrung three, but I don't think it's illegal to do four...
|
2713.11 | | TAMRC::LAURENT | Hal Laurent @ COP | Tue May 17 1994 08:51 | 21 |
| 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
|
2713.12 | | ZYDECO::MCABEE | I fought the lawn | Wed May 18 1994 11:46 | 5 |
| re: Nashville stranging
Is it the bottom four or the bottom three?
Bob
|
2713.13 | | TAMRC::LAURENT | Hal Laurent @ COP | Wed May 18 1994 12:13 | 7 |
| 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
|