Okay, I’m still working on the other videos. But, I had to peek at this one!
That 1/4 Tone 3rd. sounds kind of congested to me, when compared to the JI Minor 3rd.
And when you said there should be 4 Scale Steps, but you played the 5 Scale Steps/Pitches, the second Pitch seemed almost like it had the Reciprocal type of effects. Like taking a Breath, and adding a little Motion.
Anyway, I’ll go back to my corner now. I still need to work more with the first videos……..
I will say this though, that many of the Pitches you’re hitting, sound like my old Blues Records I grew up hearing around the house. And I think that these Pitches are ones I’ve gravitated towards over the years. Those “out of tune” Bends, etc. that seem to work.
Very re-affirming.
Very nice Steve, Albert King, Jeff Beck, Frisell,
Johnny Winter,,,they play with this pitch sensitivity (in their own way) bend, whammy, bending the neck, it all comes out different and for their own purpose.
But the names are still new and confusing (sub minor)
Thank you for the Regal series, I’m diggin my dobro.
“Sub-Minor Third” is pretty much self explanatory, it’s the minor third sound that’s flat to the fret. Usually that would mean 7:6.
I think it’s probably a handy term for differentiating the lower range of the blue note thing in that area of the octave without saying “blue third”, or 7-limit, which seem to have different meanings for different folks.
So, sub minor. The minor third sound BELOW the fret.
The terminology is confusing, but the alternative is to refer to everything by ratio, which is probably no easier at this level.
If I can find a term that locates some area of the octave without resorting to the ratio, for example, “bright leading tone” instead of 243:128, or “sub-minor” instead of somewhere between 8:7 and 7:6, I figure you’ll at least know generally where to look for that sound if the ratio is unfamiliar. Let me know if you think otherwise.
Thanks for taking the time to check that stuff out. Have fun!!!
I’ll have to bring some of my Uncle Elmer’s IPA and Bad Hair Brown down to the Domino Room next time you are through. I can brew some requests if you have a particular style you like. Just need a 5 week head’s up.
Enjoy your trip. Paying for my wedding is getting in the way of any travel plans this summer. What are you doing July 10th?
Looking forward to the Hopmonk show on 4/21
I always look forward to these (home) shows because
you have so much community connection in this area (Sonoma County)lots of good energy
I have to say though, the heat built up in the Forestville club was to the level of “way too hot”.
Too much community energy, lol.
Steve & West Coast Dwellers…
Because the pitch ratio changes ever so slightly from just tuning to equal tempered tunings, wouldn’t be easier to just say that its just 3 half steps? And not include all the ratio madness.Either Way… Peace From the east coast
Yeah, I know what you mean. The ratio thing is kind of a pain in the ass in the context of those playing examples.
It would probably serve to just say the approximate number of cents up or down from the nearest fret. Anybody with a ‘needle tuner’ could get in the ballpark, and that’s probably the easiest reference if you’re sitting there with your guitar.
So if you have 100 cents to the half step, that “3 half step” minor third would be 300 cents up from the tonic. The pitch we’re looking for is around 267 cents, so “33 down” would be the lick, right?
Yeah, if it was just 3 half steps that would be easier, but that’s not the note, so I guess we’ll go with the cents off-sets from equal in the future. Cool?
Yeah, cents off – from equal is better( personally).
Music Theory Joke:
Why Did the C Ionian get rejected from the Bar????…
Because he was A Minor….
Hey Steve how about a show in New England ?
You should work some of this blues music you have been playing into a duo with Jon Fishman. You can call it “Tom Hanks and Russell Crowe Have the Blues”
Yes.
I judged one this year, in fact.
I was hesitant, because I said that they are slanted towards the “Shredder” types. They (of course) said, “No, that’s why we’re asking for certain people to judge”. Right.
Well, the “Shredder” won! LOL
One other judge and I were talking about how far down in the rankings this Shredder was. However, the 3rd. judge must have slanted things WAAAYYYY towards the Shredder Dude.
Because there was no way he could have won without a VERY lopsided judging panel.
All of this has re-confirmed my long standing thoughts on “Musical Contests” in general, and this contest in particular.
Anyway, having written all of this;
I really don’t think this particular Thread is the ideal setting for this Topic.
So, what do YOU get from the video Lessons Mr. Kimock has so graciously provided?
I get a headache from the lessons. Might as well be taught in Greek as far as I am concerned. As I have mentioned prior, I sure am thankful to those of you that understand this stuff and put it into practice.
I was just asking about the KOTB in regards to my 20yo stepson making it to the third round in Denver. Not sure who else to ask about those kinds of things. I’m new at this.
Congratulations on your syepson making it through that round!
Kinda brutal, to sit up there alone, and solo for 5 solid minutes to a crowd of other Guitarists!
I commend him for getting out there and doing it.
As to Mr. Kimock’s Video Lessons, don’t be put off by the talk and the Terminology, etc.
Just LISTEN hard. Sing/Hum those Pitches.
When you can do that repeatedly, Sing/Hum the Examples without any help, you’ll have a big chunk of the Lessons learned.
At least, that’s my opinion. Probably should ask Mr. Kimock about that, as they are Lessons HE’S teaching! LOL
But, I feel pretty confident recommending you learning to really INTERNALIZE those Examples.
Hope this helps, and that your head feels a little better now.
Well thanks. The kid is just gifted. In fact, I have given him every guitar, peddle, cord, and amp that I had. He does a lot more with them than I ever could. Well, I did keep the Guild although I’m not sure why.
In reality, I am just a fan. A huge freaking fan. I love to hear people play the guitar the way I wish I could play it and I’m just not one of those people.
It’s why appreciate players like Steve so much and will seek parental advice from any player when it comes to Aaron as he has so much to give and I have no idea how to assist him. I’ll just keep trying I guess.
Hey, Steve, when you have a minute or 10 would you shoot me an e-mail? (grab it off of here if you can or TGP) I have some ???s about the Phoenix (which arrived yesterday) I talked to Scott but what I was experiencing didn’t compute with him.
I would like to continue the discussion about temperament and tonal accuracy.
On a previous post, I said something like “I understand that the guitar has a fundamental tuning problem that the keyboard, for example, does not.”
The reply I got was to the effect of “The keyboard/piano actually has the same problem.”
The poster appeared to know what they were talking about, so I left it at that, but I still don’t understand this.
When you tune a piano, you tune each string, just as you would tune a guitar. You can get the exact note, just as you can when you tune a guitar and all the strings when played ‘open’ are perfectly in tune.
The problem with guitar is that the instrument is not played only by plucking open strings, but usually by fretting the string somewhere up the neck. And on every guitar I have played, even when the open strings are in tune, the fretted notes are usually off.
So, it appears to my limited understanding that because every string on a piano is played ‘open’, when tuned correctly you will encounter no problems with tonal accuracy.
On the guitar, it appears to be a simple design flaw, and perhaps if the frets were spaced differently, as in a ratio for spacing each interval of the scale, the tuning problem would not exist.
I am clearly missing something big about this topic. I mean, every guitar would not have the same design flaw, so obviously there was a decision of “this is the closest we can get”.
Look at it like this.
If you started with a single pitch and used its overtones to make a triad, you would have a nice smooth “in-tune” chord, right?
We all do that on the guitar, tweak it so it works for this chord or that.
That’s “tuning” you could say, or that’s a tuning.
Now you could keep going with this idea, which is kinda what were doing here, and build an entire scale from that first pitch, but when you see the interval sizes you wind up with you realize that you’re stuck in that key.
If that first note was a C, you would be looking at D around 204 cents up, and E up around 386 cents above the tonic.
So your first whole step is 204, and the second whole step is what, 182?
So, you can’t start a new “in-tune” scale using your second pitch as tonic. You would need two keys on your keyboard, or two frets on your guitar 22 cents apart to handle both versions of D. . .
and we’re just getting started.
Dig, it’s not the open strings of the guitar and the “open strings of the piano” that represent the same system, it’s the keys and the frets.
On both instruments, that D is tempered from 204 to 200 cents, so it can make do for either/or/any pitch.
That’s temperament.
The purpose of that temperament is to allow the greatest number of useable triads with the fewest number of pitches.
We get to modulate through all 12 keys with some loss of purity in the tuning, but we don’t have to deal with 30 something keys or frets per octave.
That’s the trade-off.
The “closest we can get” is a function of the number of divisions of the octave we’re willing to put up with, so the guitar and the piano share that; the same compromise of tuning to temperament common to 12 divisions of the octave.
Ah. I think I am starting to see the light. I admit I only understood about half of what you said, but it made sense, and I am going to come back to it to get the rest.
So, basically if I wanted to play a ‘tonally accurate’ D major scale, I would have to have a guitar where the fret intervals were set up for that, and it would be useless outside of that?
When you say “We get to modulate through all 12 keys with some loss of purity in the tuning, but we don’t have to deal with 30 something keys or frets per octave,” that makes me think that an older system of tuning, with more tonal purity, would sound different than the music I am accustomed to listening to. I am curious as to what this would sound like. Do you have any examples of older music that is played in “pure tuning”, or whatever you call it?
And thanks for the help, big guy. I am slowly starting to get a grasp on this complex issue.
You got it! That’s the whole thing in a nutshell.
Re: Old music, “pure tuning”, any of the rest of the worlds music without keyboards would qualify, the lap guitar examples on this page qualify, but I suspect you’re just looking for 12 tone examples or comparisons of the regular modern 12 tone equal temperament with other temperaments.
I like this guy for that routine. . .http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bpl/larips/videos.html
I remember you saying “…then you can play stuff that’s ridiculously in tune, and that’s the stuff that really lights people up.”
I think this relates to what we were discussing pretty directly. I think the job of the musician is indeed ‘lighting people up’, in other words allowing them a moment to see the world with brighter lenses. That is why people come to the shows, because they get those moments.
Similar to the overarching theme of enlightenment… that the world is full of stuff, but because ‘the light is not on’, sometimes we think it is empty.
My question to you, then, is about how the ‘lighting up’ happens. I mean, it obviously takes a very skilled and dedicated musician, that much is clear. But does it come from more of the tuning side, or is it more of what I would call ‘the music itself’.
For example, Trey Anastasio, one of my all time favorite rockers, and someone you had the grand honor of performing with, talks about this idea of lighting people up as being the encouragement and gratification of performing. But I think he is coming from it not from a tuning perspective, but more from his ability to orchestrate solos and build the music to a soaring climax.
I am assuming a ‘tuning purist’ such as yourself has a different idea, but from my experience of a member of the audience (because that’s really all I have been), is that I am more illuminated when the orchestration of the guitar playing is beautiful.
First from the ‘tuning purist’ perspective, that’s not exactly the bag I’m working from, although it’s easy to see how it could be interpreted like that. There are obviously a whole bunch of fantastically gifted and creative musicians working under that rather large roof of composing in Just Intonation, using all manner of tunings and different divisions of the octave, and a lot of the music that results from those efforts is genuinely new music. That’s important work.
My own thing, the attitude, the examples, the application, isn’t that so much.
It’s not ‘tuning purity’ leading the charge in the service of new music.
What I’m doing here, while it leans heavily on Just Intonation or overtone series principles as a benchmark, does so largely in the context of 12 tone equal temperament.
So for the most part it’s about “Tune-on-the-fly” or Adaptive Just Intonation, applying overtone series tuning to existing 12 tone roots, in the context of electric guitar performance of existing music styles. Rock, blues, jazz, funk, whatever.
In my own experience, I’ve found a considerable disconnect between the application of existing basic music theory concepts and the guitarists responsibility or goal of achieving consistent results on a gig to gig basis.
I think there’s two main reasons for that, one being that the theory itself is based on observations of different music, and secondly it’s largely tied to the keyboard in a notational sense,
So, any theory based on a different music on a different axe is gonna require a tweak here or there relative to performance application every couple of hundred years. I think that’s not unreasonable.
That’s what’s going on here.
Just trying to update some of the methods by which a modern electric guitarist might obtain more consistent results in performance by acknowledging the fact that a greater degree of pitch resolution is required to accommodate the electric guitar’s greater potential for pitch variation. whew. . . blah blah blah. . .
Also acknowledging the fact that somewhere between 18th century Vienna and 21st century NYC, the music we’ve evolved leans heavily on African influences that lean heavily on harmony deliberately bred out of the European system.
So yeah, you’re gonna need to update some of that at some point.
What I’m attempting here is to do that from a performance application perspective for electric guitar.
Alright, so “Does it come from the tuning side?” Is that what lights it up, or something else?
Certainly no one single aspect of the experience is gonna carry it alone if the rest of the deck is stacked against it, but in my opinion, no single aspect is more likely to pull the whole thing together than the results of the process of studying pitch specificity in harmony.
When you look hard at the issue, you know, really put it under a microscope as a specialized field of study, it forces you to look back through history, and the further back you go, the more that specialized field of study rejoins general knowledge until the whole thing is just observation of the physical world.
That’s the origin of “harmony”, the way things are together.
You begin to see that very specialized field of study as the distillation of all human experience of the natural world, and in the polarity of that, every observation of the natural world is a lesson in harmony.
So to differentiate the practical aspects of working the axe and the long term benefits to the person studying harmony, from the working the axe angle, the pitch specificity is just one component.
The painfully slow emergent property of the study of pitch specificity is the appreciation of the harmony of the natural world.
Which would be all the rest of it, so to answer your question. . .
Wonderful. Your theoretical accuracy, melodic stability, and pitch specificity in the context of a song are all reasons why I keep coming to see you, and keep putting your tapes on to initiate my friends into the world of Kimock.
I am going to come back to that epic post at a later date to better understand it, but Steve, thanks for taking the time. Really.
One thing that has been on my mind is taking ideas from other forms and adapting them to music. This comes partially from frustration, as I can’t seem to find the music I have been searching for. So I have been learning about architects like Frank Lloyd Wright and Walter Gropius, and trying to absorb their ideas and adapt them to string instruments. Also going back and reading ancient poetry… I feel like those ideas shed more light on my playing that any music I could throw on.
Do you think this is healthy development? I’m not saying that one should come at the expense of the other, but can other forms eventually translate back to music? Is there really some inter-connectivity?
I agree with both of you. There is one side of it, where any depth one can find in the world is a good thing, and will add more depth to their craft. The other side says that some aspects of the craft must be developed in its own sphere.
HEY STEVE … I am aware that this is supposed to be acoustic. However, Can I make a request for some electric lessons? Anything to enlighten to us non- slide playing guitarist. Thanks
Hi Jim, I was just doing the acoustic lap guitar to avoid the inevitable “gear-talk” running along with the intonation stuff.
Coming soon then, frets, regular tuning, plank and amp(s).
Anything special you want to start with?
I know it was discussed on TGP but not here, it seems like a good typical Kimock format that has many discussable topics just waiting to burst forward.
My question is “tuning on the fly” demonstrated at 13:30, this sounds like slide without a slide, I have a good idea what’s going on, I transcribed it
but I would like to hear your thoughts.
At 16:20 is a better, longer example of “on the fly tuning that sounds a bit like slide”.
I know it was discussed on TGP but not here, it seems like a good typical Kimock format that has many discussable topics just waiting to burst forward.
My question is “tuning on the fly” demonstrated at 13:30, this sounds like slide without a slide, I have a good idea what’s going on, I transcribed it
but I would like to hear your thoughts.
At 16:20 is a better, longer example of “on the fly tuning that sounds a bit like slide”.
Hey Steve , I understand. However, I personally don’t get off on gear…Not that there is anything wrong with gear heads. I am more interested in what exactly you may be “practicing”?. Also, beacause so many guitarists have a unique visual/physical approach I think the easier the lesson the more applicable. So Standard Tuning ?maybe scales with metronome? Chord Voicings? Licks and Timing?…
A lot of what I “practice” looks like the acoustic lap video demonstration stuff. lol . .
But yeah, I get you, can do.
I’ll try and dig up somebody to run the camera this week before I have to take off AGAIN, and I’ll show you some of the straight up physical stuff on the standard guitar.
48 Comments
( ADD A COMMENT )Okay, I’m still working on the other videos. But, I had to peek at this one!
That 1/4 Tone 3rd. sounds kind of congested to me, when compared to the JI Minor 3rd.
And when you said there should be 4 Scale Steps, but you played the 5 Scale Steps/Pitches, the second Pitch seemed almost like it had the Reciprocal type of effects. Like taking a Breath, and adding a little Motion.
Anyway, I’ll go back to my corner now. I still need to work more with the first videos……..
I will say this though, that many of the Pitches you’re hitting, sound like my old Blues Records I grew up hearing around the house. And I think that these Pitches are ones I’ve gravitated towards over the years. Those “out of tune” Bends, etc. that seem to work.
Very re-affirming.
Very nice Steve, Albert King, Jeff Beck, Frisell,
Johnny Winter,,,they play with this pitch sensitivity (in their own way) bend, whammy, bending the neck, it all comes out different and for their own purpose.
But the names are still new and confusing (sub minor)
Thank you for the Regal series, I’m diggin my dobro.
Great intro to your teachings.
Hi Cliff!
“Sub-Minor Third” is pretty much self explanatory, it’s the minor third sound that’s flat to the fret. Usually that would mean 7:6.
I think it’s probably a handy term for differentiating the lower range of the blue note thing in that area of the octave without saying “blue third”, or 7-limit, which seem to have different meanings for different folks.
So, sub minor. The minor third sound BELOW the fret.
The terminology is confusing, but the alternative is to refer to everything by ratio, which is probably no easier at this level.
If I can find a term that locates some area of the octave without resorting to the ratio, for example, “bright leading tone” instead of 243:128, or “sub-minor” instead of somewhere between 8:7 and 7:6, I figure you’ll at least know generally where to look for that sound if the ratio is unfamiliar. Let me know if you think otherwise.
Thanks for taking the time to check that stuff out. Have fun!!!
Steve, it’s facinating
When do we get to talk about beer?
Eric, I’m getting on a plane in a couple of hours to fly to the west coast where I will be engaged in intensive research on the subject. Stay tuned!!
har!
I have my home brewery up and running in Bend.
“Small Kind Brewery”
I’ll have to bring some of my Uncle Elmer’s IPA and Bad Hair Brown down to the Domino Room next time you are through. I can brew some requests if you have a particular style you like. Just need a 5 week head’s up.
Enjoy your trip. Paying for my wedding is getting in the way of any travel plans this summer. What are you doing July 10th?
Great little blues jam at the end
Looking forward to the Hopmonk show on 4/21
I always look forward to these (home) shows because
you have so much community connection in this area (Sonoma County)lots of good energy
I have to say though, the heat built up in the Forestville club was to the level of “way too hot”.
Too much community energy, lol.
Steve & West Coast Dwellers…
Because the pitch ratio changes ever so slightly from just tuning to equal tempered tunings, wouldn’t be easier to just say that its just 3 half steps? And not include all the ratio madness.Either Way… Peace From the east coast
Yeah, I know what you mean. The ratio thing is kind of a pain in the ass in the context of those playing examples.
It would probably serve to just say the approximate number of cents up or down from the nearest fret. Anybody with a ‘needle tuner’ could get in the ballpark, and that’s probably the easiest reference if you’re sitting there with your guitar.
So if you have 100 cents to the half step, that “3 half step” minor third would be 300 cents up from the tonic. The pitch we’re looking for is around 267 cents, so “33 down” would be the lick, right?
Yeah, if it was just 3 half steps that would be easier, but that’s not the note, so I guess we’ll go with the cents off-sets from equal in the future. Cool?
Yeah, cents off – from equal is better( personally).
Music Theory Joke:
Why Did the C Ionian get rejected from the Bar????…
Because he was A Minor….
Hey Steve how about a show in New England ?
I like the idea of having definitions of these little bends that put so much expression in the playing.
“Cents Off” seems to be a pretty logical way of describing things.
I dunno, Steve, I like the ratios just fine!
But then… I’m a math geek. Bwahahaha…
You should work some of this blues music you have been playing into a duo with Jon Fishman. You can call it “Tom Hanks and Russell Crowe Have the Blues”
Just Bumping this whole thing up, to see if anybody else is doing the work?
Anybody else Playing, Listening and making Observations?
Or, just Sitting, Waiting, Wishing?
always bro
I was wondering if any of you folks know anything about Guitar Centers’ King of the Blues Competition? Ever heard of it? Every participated?
Yes.
I judged one this year, in fact.
I was hesitant, because I said that they are slanted towards the “Shredder” types. They (of course) said, “No, that’s why we’re asking for certain people to judge”. Right.
Well, the “Shredder” won! LOL
One other judge and I were talking about how far down in the rankings this Shredder was. However, the 3rd. judge must have slanted things WAAAYYYY towards the Shredder Dude.
Because there was no way he could have won without a VERY lopsided judging panel.
All of this has re-confirmed my long standing thoughts on “Musical Contests” in general, and this contest in particular.
Anyway, having written all of this;
I really don’t think this particular Thread is the ideal setting for this Topic.
So, what do YOU get from the video Lessons Mr. Kimock has so graciously provided?
THAT seems like the relevant Topic at hand!
Thoughts on the Video?
I get a headache from the lessons. Might as well be taught in Greek as far as I am concerned. As I have mentioned prior, I sure am thankful to those of you that understand this stuff and put it into practice.
I was just asking about the KOTB in regards to my 20yo stepson making it to the third round in Denver. Not sure who else to ask about those kinds of things. I’m new at this.
Congratulations on your syepson making it through that round!
Kinda brutal, to sit up there alone, and solo for 5 solid minutes to a crowd of other Guitarists!
I commend him for getting out there and doing it.
As to Mr. Kimock’s Video Lessons, don’t be put off by the talk and the Terminology, etc.
Just LISTEN hard. Sing/Hum those Pitches.
When you can do that repeatedly, Sing/Hum the Examples without any help, you’ll have a big chunk of the Lessons learned.
At least, that’s my opinion. Probably should ask Mr. Kimock about that, as they are Lessons HE’S teaching! LOL
But, I feel pretty confident recommending you learning to really INTERNALIZE those Examples.
Hope this helps, and that your head feels a little better now.
Ciao for now!
Well thanks. The kid is just gifted. In fact, I have given him every guitar, peddle, cord, and amp that I had. He does a lot more with them than I ever could. Well, I did keep the Guild although I’m not sure why.
In reality, I am just a fan. A huge freaking fan. I love to hear people play the guitar the way I wish I could play it and I’m just not one of those people.
It’s why appreciate players like Steve so much and will seek parental advice from any player when it comes to Aaron as he has so much to give and I have no idea how to assist him. I’ll just keep trying I guess.
Hey, Steve, when you have a minute or 10 would you shoot me an e-mail? (grab it off of here if you can or TGP) I have some ???s about the Phoenix (which arrived yesterday) I talked to Scott but what I was experiencing didn’t compute with him.
I would like to continue the discussion about temperament and tonal accuracy.
On a previous post, I said something like “I understand that the guitar has a fundamental tuning problem that the keyboard, for example, does not.”
The reply I got was to the effect of “The keyboard/piano actually has the same problem.”
The poster appeared to know what they were talking about, so I left it at that, but I still don’t understand this.
When you tune a piano, you tune each string, just as you would tune a guitar. You can get the exact note, just as you can when you tune a guitar and all the strings when played ‘open’ are perfectly in tune.
The problem with guitar is that the instrument is not played only by plucking open strings, but usually by fretting the string somewhere up the neck. And on every guitar I have played, even when the open strings are in tune, the fretted notes are usually off.
So, it appears to my limited understanding that because every string on a piano is played ‘open’, when tuned correctly you will encounter no problems with tonal accuracy.
On the guitar, it appears to be a simple design flaw, and perhaps if the frets were spaced differently, as in a ratio for spacing each interval of the scale, the tuning problem would not exist.
I am clearly missing something big about this topic. I mean, every guitar would not have the same design flaw, so obviously there was a decision of “this is the closest we can get”.
Anyone care to help me out?
Hi Andrew.
Look at it like this.
If you started with a single pitch and used its overtones to make a triad, you would have a nice smooth “in-tune” chord, right?
We all do that on the guitar, tweak it so it works for this chord or that.
That’s “tuning” you could say, or that’s a tuning.
Now you could keep going with this idea, which is kinda what were doing here, and build an entire scale from that first pitch, but when you see the interval sizes you wind up with you realize that you’re stuck in that key.
If that first note was a C, you would be looking at D around 204 cents up, and E up around 386 cents above the tonic.
So your first whole step is 204, and the second whole step is what, 182?
So, you can’t start a new “in-tune” scale using your second pitch as tonic. You would need two keys on your keyboard, or two frets on your guitar 22 cents apart to handle both versions of D. . .
and we’re just getting started.
Dig, it’s not the open strings of the guitar and the “open strings of the piano” that represent the same system, it’s the keys and the frets.
On both instruments, that D is tempered from 204 to 200 cents, so it can make do for either/or/any pitch.
That’s temperament.
The purpose of that temperament is to allow the greatest number of useable triads with the fewest number of pitches.
We get to modulate through all 12 keys with some loss of purity in the tuning, but we don’t have to deal with 30 something keys or frets per octave.
That’s the trade-off.
The “closest we can get” is a function of the number of divisions of the octave we’re willing to put up with, so the guitar and the piano share that; the same compromise of tuning to temperament common to 12 divisions of the octave.
Cool? Make sense?
Ah. I think I am starting to see the light. I admit I only understood about half of what you said, but it made sense, and I am going to come back to it to get the rest.
So, basically if I wanted to play a ‘tonally accurate’ D major scale, I would have to have a guitar where the fret intervals were set up for that, and it would be useless outside of that?
When you say “We get to modulate through all 12 keys with some loss of purity in the tuning, but we don’t have to deal with 30 something keys or frets per octave,” that makes me think that an older system of tuning, with more tonal purity, would sound different than the music I am accustomed to listening to. I am curious as to what this would sound like. Do you have any examples of older music that is played in “pure tuning”, or whatever you call it?
And thanks for the help, big guy. I am slowly starting to get a grasp on this complex issue.
You got it! That’s the whole thing in a nutshell.
Re: Old music, “pure tuning”, any of the rest of the worlds music without keyboards would qualify, the lap guitar examples on this page qualify, but I suspect you’re just looking for 12 tone examples or comparisons of the regular modern 12 tone equal temperament with other temperaments.
I like this guy for that routine. . .http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bpl/larips/videos.html
Yeah, thanks. I can hear the difference in the tuning, and I can relate that to the equal divisions of the octave.
Yeah, there you go. Now go listen to some Albert King!!! ;^ )
Thanks.
I remember you saying “…then you can play stuff that’s ridiculously in tune, and that’s the stuff that really lights people up.”
I think this relates to what we were discussing pretty directly. I think the job of the musician is indeed ‘lighting people up’, in other words allowing them a moment to see the world with brighter lenses. That is why people come to the shows, because they get those moments.
Similar to the overarching theme of enlightenment… that the world is full of stuff, but because ‘the light is not on’, sometimes we think it is empty.
My question to you, then, is about how the ‘lighting up’ happens. I mean, it obviously takes a very skilled and dedicated musician, that much is clear. But does it come from more of the tuning side, or is it more of what I would call ‘the music itself’.
For example, Trey Anastasio, one of my all time favorite rockers, and someone you had the grand honor of performing with, talks about this idea of lighting people up as being the encouragement and gratification of performing. But I think he is coming from it not from a tuning perspective, but more from his ability to orchestrate solos and build the music to a soaring climax.
I am assuming a ‘tuning purist’ such as yourself has a different idea, but from my experience of a member of the audience (because that’s really all I have been), is that I am more illuminated when the orchestration of the guitar playing is beautiful.
Those are good observations Andrew, nice. . .
First from the ‘tuning purist’ perspective, that’s not exactly the bag I’m working from, although it’s easy to see how it could be interpreted like that. There are obviously a whole bunch of fantastically gifted and creative musicians working under that rather large roof of composing in Just Intonation, using all manner of tunings and different divisions of the octave, and a lot of the music that results from those efforts is genuinely new music. That’s important work.
My own thing, the attitude, the examples, the application, isn’t that so much.
It’s not ‘tuning purity’ leading the charge in the service of new music.
What I’m doing here, while it leans heavily on Just Intonation or overtone series principles as a benchmark, does so largely in the context of 12 tone equal temperament.
So for the most part it’s about “Tune-on-the-fly” or Adaptive Just Intonation, applying overtone series tuning to existing 12 tone roots, in the context of electric guitar performance of existing music styles. Rock, blues, jazz, funk, whatever.
In my own experience, I’ve found a considerable disconnect between the application of existing basic music theory concepts and the guitarists responsibility or goal of achieving consistent results on a gig to gig basis.
I think there’s two main reasons for that, one being that the theory itself is based on observations of different music, and secondly it’s largely tied to the keyboard in a notational sense,
So, any theory based on a different music on a different axe is gonna require a tweak here or there relative to performance application every couple of hundred years. I think that’s not unreasonable.
That’s what’s going on here.
Just trying to update some of the methods by which a modern electric guitarist might obtain more consistent results in performance by acknowledging the fact that a greater degree of pitch resolution is required to accommodate the electric guitar’s greater potential for pitch variation. whew. . . blah blah blah. . .
Also acknowledging the fact that somewhere between 18th century Vienna and 21st century NYC, the music we’ve evolved leans heavily on African influences that lean heavily on harmony deliberately bred out of the European system.
So yeah, you’re gonna need to update some of that at some point.
What I’m attempting here is to do that from a performance application perspective for electric guitar.
Alright, so “Does it come from the tuning side?” Is that what lights it up, or something else?
Certainly no one single aspect of the experience is gonna carry it alone if the rest of the deck is stacked against it, but in my opinion, no single aspect is more likely to pull the whole thing together than the results of the process of studying pitch specificity in harmony.
When you look hard at the issue, you know, really put it under a microscope as a specialized field of study, it forces you to look back through history, and the further back you go, the more that specialized field of study rejoins general knowledge until the whole thing is just observation of the physical world.
That’s the origin of “harmony”, the way things are together.
You begin to see that very specialized field of study as the distillation of all human experience of the natural world, and in the polarity of that, every observation of the natural world is a lesson in harmony.
So to differentiate the practical aspects of working the axe and the long term benefits to the person studying harmony, from the working the axe angle, the pitch specificity is just one component.
The painfully slow emergent property of the study of pitch specificity is the appreciation of the harmony of the natural world.
Which would be all the rest of it, so to answer your question. . .
Yes and no. . ;^ )
Wonderful. Your theoretical accuracy, melodic stability, and pitch specificity in the context of a song are all reasons why I keep coming to see you, and keep putting your tapes on to initiate my friends into the world of Kimock.
I am going to come back to that epic post at a later date to better understand it, but Steve, thanks for taking the time. Really.
One thing that has been on my mind is taking ideas from other forms and adapting them to music. This comes partially from frustration, as I can’t seem to find the music I have been searching for. So I have been learning about architects like Frank Lloyd Wright and Walter Gropius, and trying to absorb their ideas and adapt them to string instruments. Also going back and reading ancient poetry… I feel like those ideas shed more light on my playing that any music I could throw on.
Do you think this is healthy development? I’m not saying that one should come at the expense of the other, but can other forms eventually translate back to music? Is there really some inter-connectivity?
Well, if your Music is an extension of or reflection of yourself, then yes.
Whatever you soak up, will eventually be wrung out of you.
hmm, eye based communication vs auditory
There is something special with auditory communication, that’s why so many good players play with their eyes shut, like Steve.
I agree with both of you. There is one side of it, where any depth one can find in the world is a good thing, and will add more depth to their craft. The other side says that some aspects of the craft must be developed in its own sphere.
Steve,
Do you listen to any Caleb Quaye? He is my favorite new guitarist.
HEY STEVE … I am aware that this is supposed to be acoustic. However, Can I make a request for some electric lessons? Anything to enlighten to us non- slide playing guitarist. Thanks
Hi Jim, I was just doing the acoustic lap guitar to avoid the inevitable “gear-talk” running along with the intonation stuff.
Coming soon then, frets, regular tuning, plank and amp(s).
Anything special you want to start with?
Might I suggest “It’s Up To You”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfBmkwM1g8E
I know it was discussed on TGP but not here, it seems like a good typical Kimock format that has many discussable topics just waiting to burst forward.
My question is “tuning on the fly” demonstrated at 13:30, this sounds like slide without a slide, I have a good idea what’s going on, I transcribed it
but I would like to hear your thoughts.
At 16:20 is a better, longer example of “on the fly tuning that sounds a bit like slide”.
Might I suggest “It’s Up To You”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfBmkwM1g8E
I know it was discussed on TGP but not here, it seems like a good typical Kimock format that has many discussable topics just waiting to burst forward.
My question is “tuning on the fly” demonstrated at 13:30, this sounds like slide without a slide, I have a good idea what’s going on, I transcribed it
but I would like to hear your thoughts.
At 16:20 is a better, longer example of “on the fly tuning that sounds a bit like slide”.
Hey Steve , I understand. However, I personally don’t get off on gear…Not that there is anything wrong with gear heads. I am more interested in what exactly you may be “practicing”?. Also, beacause so many guitarists have a unique visual/physical approach I think the easier the lesson the more applicable. So Standard Tuning ?maybe scales with metronome? Chord Voicings? Licks and Timing?…
A lot of what I “practice” looks like the acoustic lap video demonstration stuff. lol . .
But yeah, I get you, can do.
I’ll try and dig up somebody to run the camera this week before I have to take off AGAIN, and I’ll show you some of the straight up physical stuff on the standard guitar.
There is a great YouTube clip of you (Steve), playing “Spoonful”.
So smooth and full sounding! Aahhhh!
I’m always up for some King!
Really? maybe it’s somebody else, I don’t recall covering that one, and I’m reluctant to squat on the mirror. . .
that’s a funny way to put it. lol
Eeeeeewwww!!
Isn’t this you? If not, it’s a pretty good Dub:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY24HfChAZ0&feature=related
I think Willie Dixon had the “good stuff”, you know? LOL
To me, he was “The King”!