Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Are All-Fourth tunings overrated ?
- Thread starter z14giv1
- Start date
I look at tunings as an extension of the instrument and the musical idiom at hand, whether it's an established form or novel or whatever.
listen to for instance the delta musician Robert Johnson he used many tunings not just for slide but to facilitate his picking style as well (32-20 blues is a great example of using alt tuning to facilitate syncopation, he doesn't use a slide but it's written and performed in a slide tuning). fwiw RJ used standard tunings on about half of his songs.
to me these conventions are developmental and prove themselves without having to resort to writing an essay. so i'll stand on my point that I think flatting the g string on a bass guitar is an interesting idea and worth pursuing!
Rock and Roll is over 70 years old. If that's not long enough to become a traditional artform, what is? Bluegrass? That's only about 10 years older.
if it were traditional it wouldn't be rock n roll. try showing a little less respect haha
There's a pretty big difference between invention and "I haven't learned how to use all the strings yet so I think maybe some of them are unnecessary."
Experimentation and exploration are great. Asking questions is great. But learning any skill also has a point at which one has to study history with humility before casting it all aside because their own personal experience trumps their understanding.
do you know how I know how Robert Johnson was playing 32-20 blues? I transcribed it by ear when I was 14 years old. nobody here needs your lecture move along.
There are guys who can effortlessly handle mentally different tunings, see all different ways to skin the cat, it must be an amazing mental skill.
I'm not one of them, so I'll soldier on with traditional tuning, but you go for it if it works an advantage for you.
I'm not one of them, so I'll soldier on with traditional tuning, but you go for it if it works an advantage for you.
great goodbye. i'm sure OP is gonna miss your insights.
it's funny, OP pre-emptively answered the obvious replies and this threak is still swamped with folks offended that the way they were told to do it might not be the end-all be-all for everybody. don't get it. if you don't want to build something stay out of the convo and let the rest of us discuss.
Sounds like you desperately need some lessons before you lecture anyone about anything related to music.
A casual, not particularly well-schooled observation here, but taking a shot anyway: Guitarists are usually exploring alternate tunings as ways to make certain chord structures easier, or to facilitate drone strings. On the other hand bassists are usually exploring alternate tunings as a way to increase the range of available (or readily accessible) notes.
A bassist could've done walks behind Robert Johnson regardless of how he tuned. And that doesn't mean Johnson's work was simplistic, only that for monotonic lines all the notes the bassist would need were already as accessible as they had to be, alternate tunings not required.
A bassist could've done walks behind Robert Johnson regardless of how he tuned. And that doesn't mean Johnson's work was simplistic, only that for monotonic lines all the notes the bassist would need were already as accessible as they had to be, alternate tunings not required.
Robert Johnson walked his own bass lines. you can listen and easily hear it, it's why Keith Richards assumed there was an accompanist.
James Taylor does something similar. his bassist leland Sklar has discussed it. many guitarists do. it must pain bassists but it's true.
as a longtime guitarist usually I find tuning is usually determinative, that is to say there is usually not another way to get to that musical outcome as a physical player.
so to me tuning is usually come see come saw, i've never really seen it where something is written in one tuning but then the author thought wait this tuning would be better to play it in after the fact. so I see it mostly as a writing tool but musically determinative. it's idiomatic. it's why there are folk tunings for suites of songs or genres. you are pushing your instrument to be biased in a particular direction, just the same as 'standard' tuning pushes things in a certain direction.
I certainly see no reason to doubt notching 4th tuning at the g string. in fact I think it is a really compelling idea.
i'd suggest the folks who think otherwise do themselves and stay out of OPs thread and let other folks discuss this. this forvm would be better for it
Last edited:
Sure but that wasn't the point, I was just trying to illustrate why bassists aren't usually as interested in alt tunings.
btw i'm earnestly interested in OPs journey here and I would personally appreciate it that if you aren't: MOVE ALONG. you're not contributing. make another thread if you want to discuss why it's a bad idea. I promise I won't sub.
most guitarists have long since learned to deal with the b string. it provides a very rich interval presentation and a wealth of double stops exactly where you want them in the upper register. haters please just leave. OP may be on to something. you other dudes are ruining this go away.
this has been a great friendly forvm but this threak is leaving me cold
most guitarists have long since learned to deal with the b string. it provides a very rich interval presentation and a wealth of double stops exactly where you want them in the upper register. haters please just leave. OP may be on to something. you other dudes are ruining this go away.
this has been a great friendly forvm but this threak is leaving me cold
Last edited:
