Good tuner for Intonation?

[muttley600]

You know exactly what I am saying.

I know what you mean but you don't know what you are saying.

When you play your note against the harmonic...hearing the smallest differences...(the "beats")...is not always easy.

A simple tuner will do that. You do not need a strobe tuner.

And just to be clear ...this is not about the actual, physical setup of a guitar or the building of a guitar...
...it's about tuning.

I know exactly what this is about.

I can hear a difference between a strobe tuned guitar and one done by ear. I don't need to be a luthier to do that.

No you can't. You may "think" you can but you can't.

 

[muttley600]

OK Muttley...I'll use the hand saw....

You can use what you like but when you start posting factually incorrect stuff I'm going to correct it.

 

[Lt. Bob]

No you can't. You may "think" you can but you can't.

It depends on who did the ear tuning. That's the part that I disagree with you over.
I do not believe that everyone can learn to tune by ear acurately. Hell ...... some people can't learn to tune at all!
I've seen people in theory class who were NEVER able to tell whether a note went up or down from the previous note.
That's an extreme case but not that uncommon.
It's just simply not true that just anyone can read the stuff you teach and learn to ear tune accurately.
I'd say maybe half of the players I know would have a very hard time tuning a guitar as well as they could with a decent tuner.
And yes ...... an electronic tuner will always read the same way everytime you use it but the cheap ones are all over the place calibration-wise.
So if you want to be sure you're at 440 you need one that's also accurate.
Hell ...... much more expensive things than tuners are all over the place.
I can flat out say that church organs vary from pitch a lot.
Hammonds are always where they should be (actually a tiny bit sharp .... maybe 442) because of how they work.
But Allens and Baldwins and many other church organs can be off as much as a quarter step. I saw it all the time.

 

[miroslav]

Wrong on both counts A harmonic series and fundamental of any note equates to a single pitch it has fuck all to do with the upper partials or harmonic series. They are what they are.

I'm not talking about "partials"....I'm talking about the pitch differences between the fundamental and its harmonic when you are setting intonation.
Keep playing word games...but I know you know what I'm talking about.

Cheap tuners do not vary each time you switch them on. If it gives you "A 440" one day it will give "A440" the next day. The chip in them is as accurate as a strobe what isn't as accurate is the calibration between units. Thats why they quote a margin of error. A single unit will ALWAYS give you the same result for the same pitch. There is nothing "ball park" about it.

It's not the internal accuracy that counts. Yes...even a cheap tuner's chip can be accurate and steady each time...
...it's their display that is NOT as accurate as a strobe...DUH.
I'm talking about what you visually see...beucase that's what you do when use a tuner...you LOOK at the damn thing, you don't listen to it.

And you can say I can't...but I'm telling you I CAN hear a difference when I tune by ear and by strobe....finer than you think.
So even though my ear can tell the difference...when I'm just using my ears, after a few note picks, you start to lose your reference, and you can be a tiny bit sharp or flat and your brain starts to lose focus and thinks it's the same. I'm talking about fine, fine differences.
The strobe eliminates the guess work, and you know what...you're still able to use your ears while looking at the strobe.

 

[muttley600]

It depends on who did the ear tuning. That's the part that I disagree with you over.
I do not believe that everyone can learn to tune by ear acurately. Hell ...... some people can't learn to tune at all!
I've seen people in theory class who were NEVER able to tell whether a note went up or down from the previous note.
That's an extreme case but no that uncommon. It's just simply not true that just anyone can read the stuff you teach and learn to ear tune accurately.

The point is this.

Setting individual string intonation can be done with a cheap tuner, no strobe required.

That is the first part. The more important part is stretching it after that and learning to tune each string relative to the others to get the common intervals to sound well. That is intonation and setup. Simply using a strobe isn't going to improve things unless you can teach yourself to recognise good intervals in 12 et and temper your tuning accordingly. No amount of noobness can be accomadated in that respect.

Just get a cheap clip on tuner and use your ears. They will thank you for it in the long run.

 

[muttley600]

I'm not talking about "partials"....I'm talking about the pitch differences between the fundamental and its harmonic when you are setting intonation.
Keep playing word games...but I know you know what I'm talking about.



It's not the internal accuracy that counts. Yes...even a cheap tuner's chip can be accurate and steady each time...
...it's their display that is NOT as accurate as a strobe...DUH.
I'm talking about what you visually see...beucase that's what you do when use a tuner...you LOOK at the damn thing, you don't listen to it.

And you can say I can't...but I'm telling you I CAN hear a difference when I tune by ear and by strobe....finer than you think.
So even though my ear can tell the difference...when I'm just using my ears, after a few note picks, you start to lose your reference, and you can be a tiny bit sharp or flat and your brain starts to lose focus and thinks it's the same. I'm talking about fine, fine differences.
The strobe eliminates the guess work, and you know what...you're still able to use your ears while looking at the strobe.

Wrong again on both counts.

Good work keep it up.

 

[muttley600]

It depends on who did the ear tuning. That's the part that I disagree with you over.
I do not believe that everyone can learn to tune by ear acurately. Hell ...... some people can't learn to tune at all!
I've seen people in theory class who were NEVER able to tell whether a note went up or down from the previous note.
That's an extreme case but not that uncommon.
It's just simply not true that just anyone can read the stuff you teach and learn to ear tune accurately.
I'd say maybe half of the players I know would have a very hard time tuning a guitar as well as they could with a decent tuner.
And yes ...... an electronic tuner will always read the same way everytime you use it but the cheap ones are all over the place calibration-wise.
So if you want to be sure you're at 440 you need one that's also accurate.
Hell ...... much more expensive things than tuners are all over the place.
I can flat out say that church organs vary from pitch a lot.
Hammonds are always where they should be (actually a tiny bit sharp .... maybe 442) because of how they work.
But Allens and Baldwins and many other church organs can be off as much as a quarter step. I saw it all the time.

Wow good edit.

Let me tackle this one at a time.

People who have no "ear" for pitch are incredibly rare. It is unlikely they would want to do intonation setups. If they did a simple tuner is all you need.

When setting intonation we are not concerned with "a440" we are concerned only that the harmonic pitch and the fretted pitch are the same as a starting point. Remember the initial question was what tuner do I need to set intonation. You do not need a strobe tuner. If you want to use one with presets for various reason thats fine but it's absolutely NOT the way to go when setting up a guitar.

There are a bunch of instruments that are not at a440 some deliberately some not. That has nothing to do with setting guitar intonation. You need a method of comparing the fretted and harmonic and a reference pitch to which you stretch when tuning. Thats it.

 

[miroslav]

Wrong again on both counts.

Good work keep it up.

WOW...such a detailed, and factual counterpoint!
I guess there's nothing left to respond to.

Yeah, you are right...everyone that uses a strobe is wasting their money and being foolish.
Muttley once again has the scoop on the whole world.

 

[Lt. Bob]

and let me point out that I have agreed with you right down the line so we're not at odds here.
And, once again, you're exactly correct that for setting intonation the cheapest of tuners is fine. It only has to tune accurately compared to itself .... that's all that's required.
but hardly anyone is gonna buy a tuner and only use it to set intonation. They're also gonna take it to the gig and use it in the studio and so on.
So for all those additional uses it's my contention that they're better off with a little bit better tuner.

I also disagree that people with no ear are incredibly rare. I've seen ( and heard) far too many of them to believe that somehow all the really tone-deaf people in the world just happened to pass my way. I agree that they're a smallish minority ..... but there's a much larger group who, though they're not tone deaf, aren't capable of tuning by ear well enough or quickly enough for gigging.

Gotta go ...... bikeweek gigs .... but this is interesting ..... I'll check back in on it.

 

[miroslav]

You need a method of comparing the fretted and harmonic and a reference pitch to which you stretch when tuning. Thats it.

Right...and a strobe is the most visually accurate *method* of any tuner or your ears.

 

[Zaphod B]

I use a Boss TU-2 tuner when I'm checking the intonation on my guitars. It's not the most precise tuner but it's accurate. It gets the job done.

Hell, two of my LPs and my Melody Maker have non-compensated single-piece stopbar bridges. Setting the intonation on those things is sort of like wishful thinking. But they still sound OK.

 

[muttley600]

Right...and a strobe is the most visually accurate *method* of any tuner or your ears.

You just don't want to consider any other option so as far as I'm concerned you are just plain ignorant. You are ignorant of the mechanics involved, you are ignorant of the tools involved, you are ignorant of the physics involved, you are ignorant of the terms involved and you are ignorant of the theory involved. Until you can at least take time to familiarise yourself with some of them there is little point discussing it with you. I will however pass on correct information and links should you ask for them.

Until then you can fuck right off because as far as I'm concerned you are a total n00b right now and passing yourself off as credible. You resorting to childish taunts and flaming with insults is best done in the cave. See yer there..

 

[muttley600]

I use a Boss TU-2 tuner when I'm checking the intonation on my guitars. It's not the most precise tuner but it's accurate. It gets the job done.

Hell, two of my LPs and my Melody Maker have non-compensated single-piece stopbar bridges. Setting the intonation on those things is sort of like wishful thinking. But they still sound OK.

It's all that talc on em. Trust me..

 

[Sky Blue Lou]

Hell, two of my LPs and my Melody Maker have non-compensated single-piece stopbar bridges. Setting the intonation on those things is sort of like wishful thinking.

Yeah I ain't touchin' the R4. Sounds good, plays good. I'll leave that one be.


lou

 

[miroslav]

You resorting to childish taunts and flaming with insults is best done in the cave. See yer there..

Where did I "taunt" you or toss "flaming insults" at you?
You just called me a bunch of names and told me to fuck off...so maybe you should take a look at your own posts and attitude.

AFA me not seeing any other way...again...look at yourself Muttley. I've never ONCE seen you reject your own viewpoint in favor of ANY other view point presented in ANY thread you've ever taken part in.
Maybe that's not being ignorant...but it sure smacks of egotistical stubbornness.
Is this still about the color of the BBS background...you feel white is best, so everyone else should too?

My view about strobes is not just *MY* view, so it has NOTHING to do with my own ego or any ignorance. Strobes make tuning easier and faster...PERIOD.
I'm not even sure what you are arguing about (other than not relinquishing your own views)...?
What...that the strobe is NOT more accurate...that it's too expensive...that tuning with some "ballpark" formula is better...???

I think you just like saying shit like...It's a waste of money, you don't need it.... 'cuz it kinda' makes you feel all-knowing, and that everyone else is just stupid and guessing at stuff.

Yeah...head for the Cave, that's a good place for ego, attitude and stubbornness.

 

[Zaphod B]

Yeah I ain't touchin' the R4. Sounds good, plays good. I'll leave that one be.


lou

I used to be kind of anal about keeping the strings intonated accurately, until I had guitars with these uncompensated bridges. That these guitars can sound fine and "in tune" just reinforces Muttley's point about tuning being a compromise.

 

[Zaphod B]

Strobes make tuning easier and faster...PERIOD.

I'm not trying to pile on, Miroslav, but that's an opinion, not a fact, that you have expressed.

In fact, in the past I have found strobes to be more time-consuming for simple tuning than a cheap but accurate chromatic tuner. If the goal is absolute precision, then a strobe is what you need. But in the past 30 years I have never found a need for that kind of precision.

 

[Milnoque]

I have a Conn ST11, A fine strobe tuner, but for my own setups I usually use a little Korg that I got for about $20. Muttley's right.

 

[miroslav]

Strobes make tuning easier and faster...PERIOD.

I'm not trying to pile on, Miroslav, but that's an opinion, not a fact, that you have expressed.

In fact, in the past I have found strobes to be more time-consuming for simple tuning than a cheap but accurate chromatic tuner. If the goal is absolute precision, then a strobe is what you need. But in the past 30 years I have never found a need for that kind of precision.

If you mean to say that because you don't see the additional accuracy of a strobe, that it makes for "easier/faster" tuning...OK, but that sounds a lot like saying, "what I don't know won't hurt me".

Yeah...there is certainly a learning period to using a strobe, just to get use to the "dancing" screen...so it certainly seems more time consuming and tedious, but I'm talking about the whole enchilada...not just one guy with his guitar.

In the studio environment, where I'm tracking lots of individual tracks over time, and they all need to sound like one cohesive "band"...tuning without a strobe is haphazard.
I'm not saying you can't get in tune...but the strobe becomes your reference point, and at 1/10th cent accuracy, it's a damn good reference...and that all begins with setting the intonation on guitars (since I use a lot of guitars).
So in that regard it is easier from a point of accuracy. You are not just tuning one string to another or one instrument to another...

At times, I've grabbed other tuners (I have a few of the "cheap" LED tuners and a Korg needle tuner) or just done it by ear, and yeah, it sounds *in-tune*...then I start to pull up the other tracks, and I can hear the differences. When I tune with the strobe (even if it appears to be more time consuming)...when I get it right, it IS right...so in the end it's less time consuming.

I just don't see what the strong objection is to using a strobe (and yes, that's been the thrust of the counter-argument...that they are a waste of time and money)?
It's also been about making people feel foolish for using a strobe and wanting that kind if accuracy...
...hence my responses.

 

[Sky Blue Lou]

I just read about the "Sweeteners" at the Peterson site. Interesting angle. It's basically equal temperament tweaked for what they think will be optimum for most players. So when you tune, your G may not be a G exactly. The preset is tweaked to sound better for most players. I'd like to try one to see...

Now this has me wondering what a tuner would read of the alternate tuned strings in Mutt's links. Would G be G or would it be G+/- some cents?


lou