True Temperament Neck

digitalscream

frankus said:

1) Not invented here - anyone investing enough time learning at things fears that being overturned.
2) Static mindset - some people believe their achievements define them not their ability to adapt.
3) Whilst it's massively undervalued - we really do decide a lot based on touch and changes to that frighten some people.
4) The disbelief that we'd settle for anything less than the ideal solution. (sort of acknowledges our own eventual redundancy).

Don't forget #5 - characterising all objections to an "innovation" as somehow scripted or stereotypical and thus not worthy of consideration

impmann

Well, I can hear the difference on that Harpsichord vid. Very interesting... The trouble with a guitar is people have techniques based on the premise of straight frets at regular (diminishing) intervals and therefore I can understand the reticence toward these TT necks. 

Question for those who know more than I - if you use an alternate tuning, how will that work on a guitar fitted with these frets? Does it affect it?

Cabicular

ToneControl said:

Cabicular said:

I'm firmly located in the "for fuck sake" camp on this one...
Since I have never found it to be a significant problem and no one I know or respect as a player has bothered their arse then there are almost always bigger problems that need fixing

  Bigger problems than the scale sounding in tune?

On re-reading that sounds harsh. I apologise. If you feel it will improve your experience then go for it. 

My point is that most players maybe with the exception of Vai level obsessives will be able to spend the money in a way that will make a better real world difference to their playing and tone. 

Are you suggesting for example that every single piece of guitar music released noticeably suffers from being out of tune?

I think the real tell here is that I have seen Vai live in every incarnation since Eat em and smile and I have seen him use that guitar maybe twice.

I personally think its an interesting intellectual exercise but its solving a problem that nobody has otherwise he would play it all the time

viz

impmann said:

Well, I can hear the difference on that Harpsichord vid. Very interesting... The trouble with a guitar is people have techniques based on the premise of straight frets at regular (diminishing) intervals and therefore I can understand the reticence toward these TT necks. 

Question for those who know more than I - if you use an alternate tuning, how will that work on a guitar fitted with these frets? Does it affect it?

Yes, dramatically. These guitars are tuned to a few specific keys and one designed tuning regime.

Cabicular

frankus said:

ToneControl said:

We have a few scripts that we seem run through on this board:

Yep - Scripted behaviour, it's not just this forum.

Whereas, strangely to my mind, when someone posts: I think I will buy some latest guitar that challenges 1950s designs
others post stuff like:
Guitars work fine without this new feature
This is not needed
It does not work
It's a con
Any issues with tuning or intonation are irrelevant, it's the attitude in the playing that matters more (i.e. the punk ethos)

Why are people so comfortable about new ideas for amps and FX, but so conservative about guitars?

1) Not invented here - anyone investing enough time learning at things fears that being overturned.
2) Static mindset - some people believe their achievements define them not their ability to adapt.
3) Whilst it's massively undervalued - we really do decide a lot based on touch and changes to that frighten some people.
4) The disbelief that we'd settle for anything less than the ideal solution. (sort of acknowledges our own eventual redundancy).

Ultimately it boils down to one thing "what if I can't change" ... pretty much everything that gets piled on top of that is a discount of some sort: discount the existance of the stimulii - "I can't hear a difference" ... the significance of the stimulii - "I can hear a difference but it's not going to make a difference", the possibility for change "it'll never take off so I won't bother with it" and the possibility for personal change "I'd never be able to use it"...

It is scripted and, as you indicate, it's predictable and because of that, for the most part it's not authentic, people are feeling something and running away from that feeling... and burying why they're running away from it, especially from themselves, then the brain's interpreter kicks in and says "you don't like that, let me think of about 20 reasons you don't like that" and a false rationale is created.

I didn't like playing modelling guitars because it scared the crap out of me, it sounded more authentic than I did, but I still felt it sounded false... so what did that say about my playing? These days I think modelling guitars are good for the stock sounds I think of as cliched but are exactly the sounds I like in the guitar.. because a lot of my playing is cliched - partly because I practise stuff lots and it mioght not sound as fresh or original to me now.

Or 5. G.E.T. Good Enough Technology. For something to take off it has to provide a significantly better experience than the existing technology. Take the Dusk Tiger or the Firebird X.. Yes loaded with new features but ultimatly not as good as a VOS Lespaul and a decent Amp

 Line 6 are doing a lot to push things forward. I use a variax live because it does things that are a pain to do with existing technology (like give me access to a banjo or a 12 string for those songs that need it) However is their modelled Gretsch as good as my actual Gretsch..? no it isn't. In fact none of the electric models really cut the mustard compared to the actual equivalent

Its easy to dismiss people like me as old fuddy duddys who fear change but it's not the case. It just has to be actual change for the better not change for changes sake

digitalscream

Having looked into it, there doesn't seem to be a single way of calculating the position/shape of these "true temperament" frets - it seems that there are two popular ways of doing it, and which you choose depends on the type of music you play. Jazz chords sound better with one, and the other is better for specific major and minor keys. Even then they're not perfect, so you end up with better thirds than fifths (in fact, fifths are worse in both cases than the equal temperament frets we have at the moment).

So...it's more a case of choosing which of three compromises you'd rather have.

Of course...if you have two guitarists in a band, it's going to sound pretty horrific if both are using different temperaments. As such, it's not exactly a practical solution unless the entire industry a) rejects equal temperament frets at the same time, and b) settles on a specific alternative method.

maltingsaudio

Can the actual shape of the frets make such a difference? Now seeing as how, I am assuming, we are talking cents worth of improved accuracy in the fret position could you not make that adjustment with the position of your fingers fretting the notes?

Or taking it further wouldn't a fretless board be more to the point like string players?

Personally I think this sort of accuracy is more worthwhile on an acoustic instrument than an electric guitar because the way we play an electric guitar is not suited to absalute accuracy of every note and as players if we think a single note isn't quite right we just bend it to taste    

ToneControl

you can't flatten a note by bending a string

frankus

digitalscream said:

frankus said:

1) Not invented here - anyone investing enough time learning at things fears that being overturned.
2) Static mindset - some people believe their achievements define them not their ability to adapt.
3) Whilst it's massively undervalued - we really do decide a lot based on touch and changes to that frighten some people.
4) The disbelief that we'd settle for anything less than the ideal solution. (sort of acknowledges our own eventual redundancy).

Don't forget #5 - characterising all objections to an "innovation" as somehow scripted or stereotypical and thus not worthy of consideration

No, that's not a thing.

Consider:

What is the impact on you of someone creating a new thing?
Are you being forced to adopt it?
Are people's reactions equal to the little impact it'll have on them?

Now, any invention I've seen has not turned up pristine and immediately useful - it takes a stage of refinement, I'd rather be on the commitee of people finding the appropriate niche for a thing than the bunch of naysayers who have to backtrack when the necessary innovation follows invention.

It is easy to dismiss people - and that ease is something I'm wary of, when something new rocks up, doubt and curiousity are natural reactions... so when I read bold dismissive statements - I'm not seeing doubt or curiousity and it's reasonable to beleive I'm not seeing authentic behaviour.

I wouldn't want intonation over being able to bend strings in a familliar fashion, but I think on a Bass or a Jazz box it might be a good thing... perhaps on a Baritone...

ToneControl

here's how far you can take this idea for a blues scale, amazing to watch. Shame about the fuzz

digitalscream

frankus said:

No, that's not a thing.

It most certainly is - happens on here quite frequently when somebody brings up the latest gadget/widget/whatever and anybody criticises it.

frankus said:

What is the impact on you of someone creating a new thing?
Are you being forced to adopt it?
Are people's reactions equal to the little impact it'll have on them?

You're psychoanalysing where there really is no need to. Like many on here, the impact on me is that I research it and look into its usefulness and then try to work out situations which would fit its strengths and weaknesses, then figure out if any of those situations have crossover with my use cases (and people like me).

Nobody's being forced to adopt it, but like I said above...the assumption that this is a perfect solution is hugely flawed and the marketing material glosses over all of that. However, to raise objections and point out the problems (in the hope that nobody wastes money on it without that knowledge only to get a nasty surprise) always seems to get the "oh, you're just a dinosaur" dismissal without putting any critical thought into it whatsoever.

Ultimately, this is one of those solutions which causes more problems than it solves - if you're going to use it, then everybody you're playing with also has to use it, and it'll never fix the intonation issue completely because the nature of the instrument is that fret shape is only one part of the determining factor when it comes to pitch; the rest of it is technique.

ThePrettyDamned

ToneControl said:

here's how far you can take this idea for a blues scale, amazing to watch. Shame about the fuzz

The fuzz is proof of how well intonated it all is.  Usually, you'd hear a bit of dissonance on some chords.

On my guitar, the open e major sounds great when fuzzed, but the e minor is not quite so good - fine, but noticeably imperfect. 

ToneControl

here is a good video showing the problem

frankus

digitalscream said:

frankus said:

No, that's not a thing.

It most certainly is - happens on here quite frequently when somebody brings up the latest gadget/widget/whatever and anybody criticises it.

No it's not a thing, any more than someone saying "hey, don't worry" is a thing. Occassionally you'll get an oddball who'll say "but I like worrying, it's my favourite past time and you're wrong to shame my worrying... why only the other day I worried about a thing and a newspaper reported that it very nearly happened, so don't you mock my concerns, they've been validated by the daily mail!"

So it can be a thing, but that's the thing it'd be and frankly it'd be better not being a thing.

frankus said:

What is the impact on you of someone creating a new thing?
Are you being forced to adopt it?
Are people's reactions equal to the little impact it'll have on them?

You're psychoanalysing where there really is no need to. Like many on here, the impact on me is that I research it and look into its usefulness and then try to work out situations which would fit its strengths and weaknesses, then figure out if any of those situations have crossover with my use cases (and people like me).

I am psychoanalysing nothing. I wish people would stop saying that because I class psychoanalysts a little above paedophiles so you can imagine how unpleasant it is to me, to be compared to one.

Nobody's being forced to adopt it, but like I said above...the assumption that this is a perfect solution is hugely flawed and the marketing material glosses over all of that. However, to raise objections and point out the problems (in the hope that nobody wastes money on it without that knowledge only to get a nasty surprise) always seems to get the "oh, you're just a dinosaur" dismissal without putting any critical thought into it whatsoever.

The word "perfect" is marketting hype, as the sign over my son's gym says "don't aim for perfection, aim for improvement" makes sense to me, what can it be used for... not what is it been designed for, most stuff that sticks goes beyond the inventor's imagination - often utelising limitations - look at valve amps..  - we've been around the block enough times to know that, as for protecting against the waste of money - too late they're on a GAS inducing guitar forum.

I don't think I said anyone was a dinosaur, just that I saw a lot of scripted behaviour, that is emotional response being rationalised and defended in an overstated fashion. The only reason I can say that is it's repeated behaviour, is trying to move a conversation out of a negative rut scripted behaviour? It might be, but if it is it's one of the healthier scripts.

Ultimately, this is one of those solutions which causes more problems than it solves - if you're going to use it, then everybody you're playing with also has to use it, and it'll never fix the intonation issue completely because the nature of the instrument is that fret shape is only one part of the determining factor when it comes to pitch; the rest of it is technique.

Bass frequencies are more forgiving, rare and woundrous is the drummer who tunes his kit .. and even at a jam night keyboard players transpose keys so they can stay on the white notes...

Is it big enough to impact a whole band or wmall enough to be irrelevant... at the moment people are cautioning it'll be both .. which feels a bit like someone's describing a mythical beast.

Paul_C

ToneControl said:

you can't flatten a note by bending a string

side to side, no, but if you apply tension along the length of the string with your finger you can sharpen or flatten a note, like a violinist does for vibrato. By placing your finger onto the string in a particular way you can do this quite easily, enough for a tuner like my Peterson VSII to see the note as slightly sharp or flat.

ToneControl

Paul_C said:

ToneControl said:

you can't flatten a note by bending a string

side to side, no, but if you apply tension along the length of the string with your finger you can sharpen or flatten a note, like a violinist does for vibrato. By placing your finger onto the string in a particular way you can do this quite easily, enough for a tuner like my Peterson VSII to see the note as slightly sharp or flat.

but you can't make it flatter than the plain fretted note, unless you slacken the string with the trem
anyway - point is - you can't fix everything,even if you are that skilled.
However, the worst offenders are flat 3rds, apparently 14 cents flat, so they can possibly be fixed by the most talented

ICBM

ThePrettyDamned said:

ToneControl said:

here's how far you can take this idea for a blues scale, amazing to watch. Shame about the fuzz

The fuzz is proof of how well intonated it all is.  Usually, you'd hear a bit of dissonance on some chords.

On my guitar, the open e major sounds great when fuzzed, but the e minor is not quite so good - fine, but noticeably imperfect. 

It's certainly an interestingly different effect than a normal fuzzed guitar. It actually sounds oddly artificial, a bit like a keyboard playing a sampled fuzz-guitar sound, where the notes are fuzzed individually and then added together rather than than being added and then fuzzed, because you don't hear those dissonances being fuzzed.

It still doesn't address the problem that it only works in one key or one limited range of keys though. Essentially you're going to need one guitar for every key you want to play in.

digitalscream

frankus said:

I am psychoanalysing nothing. I wish people would stop saying that because I class psychoanalysts a little above paedophiles so you can imagine how unpleasant it is to me, to be compared to one.

Poor choice of words on my part...although I do think your classification of psychoanalysts might be a tad excessive there

Gonna skip the whole meta-discussion part...hope you don't mind, but I don't want to take the thread too far off-topic...

frankus said:

Bass frequencies are more forgiving, rare and woundrous is the drummer who tunes his kit .. and even at a jam night keyboard players transpose keys so they can stay on the white notes...

Is it big enough to impact a whole band or wmall enough to be irrelevant... at the moment people are cautioning it'll be both .. which feels a bit like someone's describing a mythical beast.

Yep, you probably wouldn't have so much of a problem with the bassist, as long as they didn't stray too far above the 12th fret (ie into guitar frequency territory).

I personally don't think it makes enough of a difference to completely overcome the technique-related issues, but it does make enough of a difference so that when two guitars are playing the same notes (or close harmonies), it's very noticeable. More than that, though, the fact that it's designed to work for specific tunings and make some intervals better at the expense of others makes it totally not worth it as far as I'm concerned.

Bidley

I'm pretty sure you can still buy guitars with straight frets.

frankus

digitalscream said:

I personally don't think it makes enough of a difference to completely overcome the technique-related issues, but it does make enough of a difference so that when two guitars are playing the same notes (or close harmonies), it's very noticeable. More than that, though, the fact that it's designed to work for specific tunings and make some intervals better at the expense of others makes it totally not worth it as far as I'm concerned.

I'm in the different camp - I've already decided I'm spending my retirement mapping out the notes on a Tele - tuned using the Donahue appraoch to indicate which keys they work in

I sometimes wonder if any of my confusion about music is based off hearing something and knowing it's different from something people were telling me it was the same as.