#1
How many of you out there have tried to play in New Standard (CGDAEG) tuning?

I've tried it myself but found it quite difficult, I was just wondering what other people thought of it.
#3
Quote by DeathDealer
new standard??


Don't worry, it hasn't replaced standard...
Whoever thought of it just couldn't come up with an original name.

Personally I haven't, but I see no significant advantage in playing a different tuning except for it giving a wider range of notes. Like when someone gave me a bass guitar, played in what was apparently "A cool tuning" a riff which just involved the open strings and said "Be musical" when I asked what the tuning was. Well, not the same, but still.
Quote by Paul Lambeth

Is it lame to quote yourself in your sig?
#5
Actually, at first I thought the tuning modeled violin/viola tunings. Except for the high G, that one's probably so you don't snap the high E string. But fifths and thirds...interesting.

I have never played in "new standard" tuning, as it would seem harder to stretch your fingers through a scale in 5th interval strings...
#6
Quote by Paul Lambeth
Don't worry, it hasn't replaced standard...
Whoever thought of it just couldn't come up with an original name.

i was more like asking what it actually was...but i did a search on google already
wouldn't hurt to try, i made my own tuning once
#7
as it would seem harder to stretch your fingers through a scale in 5th interval strings...


yes, looks like a 6 finger stretch just for a major scale. Although on the flip side you apparently get an increased range on both ends. Plus, you wouldn't have to tell people not get stuck in box shapes, as I doubt they would exist.
#9
Quote by capiCrimm
yes, looks like a 6 finger stretch just for a major scale. Although on the flip side you apparently get an increased range on both ends. Plus, you wouldn't have to tell people not get stuck in box shapes, as I doubt they would exist.

according to wiki the chords are supposed to be a lot easier & scales aligned more symmetrically
#10
^
Looks to me like someone just trying to get remembered for something with music. What's wrong with standard now? There are going to be issues to overcome no matter what tuning you play in, so I don't see why someone ever even came up with this.
Got Death Magnetic a day early!

The Low-Cardinal of Zeppelinism - If you're a diehard fan of Zeppelin, join Zeppelinism here


Winner of the "Biggest Led Zeppelin Fuck" award in the CR forum (2 years running!)
#11
Quote by Page&HammettFan
^
Looks to me like someone just trying to get remembered for something with music. What's wrong with standard now? There are going to be issues to overcome no matter what tuning you play in, so I don't see why someone ever even came up with this.


Well there are schools which teach with this tuning...so they have gone all the way with trying to make it a new standard tuning.
#12
Quote by Paul Lambeth
Don't worry, it hasn't replaced standard...
Whoever thought of it just couldn't come up with an original name.

.


Robert Fripp came up with it. It was meant to be the "new standard" tuning as the name implies. Followers of Fripp that use this tuning actually refer to standard tuning as "old standard tuning". Ironically, "New Standard Tuning" is used by very few people, and there is really nothing "standard" about it. That being said, its as worthy of exploring as any alternate tuning.

Like any tuning, it will open up new voicings, while make some others impossible.

New Standard Tuning

Robert Fripp
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Feb 24, 2008,
#13
What's wrong with standard now?


Plenty of them, as you said there are issues with any tuning as it is.

so I don't see why someone ever even came up with this.


because different tunings have different problems. From what I read this tuning is attempting to strive towards an all fifths tuning(which is possible, but not with a stock guitar). It gives allows for seeing the guitar in a different light.
#14
Quote by Page&HammettFan
^
Looks to me like someone just trying to get remembered for something with music. What's wrong with standard now? There are going to be issues to overcome no matter what tuning you play in, so I don't see why someone ever even came up with this.

+1 good call.
shred is gaudy music
#16
Quote by bangoodcharlote
How do you tune to that? Is the following correct?


e up a minor third
B up 2.5 steps
G up 1 step
D remains the same
A down 1 step
E down 2 steps



The tuning is (from low to high): C(6th string) - G(5th) - D(4th) - A(3rd) - E(2nd) - G(1st).
shred is gaudy music
#17
Quote by GuitarMunky
The tuning is (from low to high): C(6th string) - G(5th) - D(4th) - A(3rd) - E(2nd) - G(1st).
I got that. Did I post the correct way to get to that tuning?
#18
To be honest I think every King Crimson song I like is before he started using the 'new standard'. I've been meaning to try it out actually.
#19
BGC, I just tuned my highe E up to G, and broke it.

So now I have a five-string guitar all tuned in fifths and I'm actually loving this tuning. The shapes for scales are very logical (although require stretches/movement) and it makes interesting chords quite easy. I almost never use anything other than standard or drop d, but this may become a regular tuning for me.

When I restring, I'll either tune the hight E down to B, or leave it at E
My name is Andy
Quote by MudMartin
Only looking at music as math and theory, is like only looking at the love of your life as flesh and bone.

Swinging to the rhythm of the New World Order,
Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums
#20
If you broke your string tuning up, why not try this tuning tuned down 1/2 or 1 full step?


Edit: Hold up! WHy does it go in fifths and then a minor third? Just because?
Last edited by bangoodcharlote at Feb 24, 2008,
#21
Then I'd be down in B-Bb territory, and that place scares me.
My name is Andy
Quote by MudMartin
Only looking at music as math and theory, is like only looking at the love of your life as flesh and bone.

Swinging to the rhythm of the New World Order,
Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums
#22
I'm just going to note, from the wiki talk page, it seems like people are using custom gauges to tune to this. Otherwise your just asking for a string break.

@Enimus

what exactly is your five string guitar? Do you mean a bass?
#24
Apparently you need custom gauges. Also read that you would need to forget about bending... No thanks to NST for me.
#25
Quote by bangoodcharlote
If you broke your string tuning up, why not try this tuning tuned down 1/2 or 1 full step?


Edit: Hold up! WHy does it go in fifths and then a minor third? Just because?


Just because it is impractical to tune the e string up a perfect fifth to the logical b. It also aids chording, to have a smaller interval.
#26
Quote by bangoodcharlote
If you broke your string tuning up, why not try this tuning tuned down 1/2 or 1 full step?


Edit: Hold up! WHy does it go in fifths and then a minor third? Just because?

Well, I imagine tuning up from an E to a B would e pretty hard on any guitar string, and also having a perfect "arc" of fifths wouldn't do as much good for chords and such, that's why we don't keep using perfect fourths after the G string.

If that makes any sense.
#27
i have never understood what the point of any other tuning besides standard or drop d.

standard makes sense for obvious reasons (as well as all the down-tuned versions of it)

drop d makes sense because it makes playing power chords easier.

i suppose open tunings make sense to me, i just dont really like them.

whats the point of anything else?
#28
Quote by Guitar x Dude 7
i have never understood what the point of any other tuning besides standard or drop d.

standard makes sense for obvious reasons (as well as all the down-tuned versions of it)

drop d makes sense because it makes playing power chords easier.

i suppose open tunings make sense to me, i just dont really like them.

whats the point of anything else?


What's the point of standard? It makes common chords voicings easy.
What's the point of alternate tunings? They make other chord voicings easy.
Someones knowledge of guitar companies spelling determines what amps you can own. Really smart people can own things like Framus because they sound like they might be spelled with a "y" but they aren't.
#29
EDIT: This is @ bangoodcharlote. That was the last post when I started typing

There's an easy answer to each of those questions:

E goes to G:
1.) Because it would be insane to tune your high E up to B. I've read that a structurally intact E string will break just below G#, lower depending on how hard it's played... I think it was an old Guitar One column about breakage coefficients and some other physics shit.

2.) The 5th string is tuned to G, and if the 1st string sounds the octave of that, scales and chords are easier.

As for tuning down, If you tuned lower, your low strings would probably not sound clearly or stay in tune.


My thoughts:
It would be cool to design a guitar around this idea.

Do fanned frets/compound scale, and use one of those ridiculous Zakk Wylde GHS string sets to get like .072-.010 strings

Tune to G-D-A-E-B-F#
I'm sure the G would sound ok with those strings with a 25.5" scale at the bass end, cause BLS had a couple of songs in "Drop Ab" (tune the E string down the A, then whole guitar down 1/2 step)


Heh... whoops.
Wait a second.

If you go 6 notes through the Circle of Fifths, your first and last note will be 1/2 step apart. That's no good for chords... Maybe the consecutive 5ths tuning wouldn't work.

...Unless you tuned the 1st string up to G. That might be cool but would defeat the idea of tuning to 5ths. Does someone want to try to figure out some chords in GDAEBG and let me know if they work?

Here's a couple

0
0
3
2
0
0 (G Major)

2
3
1
0
0
x
(D Major)
Quote by bangoodcharlote
^Owned.

I suggest not screwing with the UGer with the best name on the site.


Quote by Albino_Rhino
I don't see how prostitution is going to help out your string buzz...
#31
In an all-fifths tuning, using lots of strings for chords goes out the window, but simple patterns make a great deal of 3 string chords.

5x3 is your octave shape
553 is a powerchord
557 is a major chord
556 is a minor chord
555 is a sus2
577 is a sus4
5577 is maj7
5576 is dom7
5566 is min7

The major scale is just a repeating pattern:
1x3x56
1x3x56
moving two frets lower on each pair of strings.

So thats simple ways to play the most common chords and the major scale, but I love the way that any two adjacent strings played at the same fret is a power chord.
My name is Andy
Quote by MudMartin
Only looking at music as math and theory, is like only looking at the love of your life as flesh and bone.

Swinging to the rhythm of the New World Order,
Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums
#32
I so called that.

Is that guitar everything I said it would be, or what?
Quote by bangoodcharlote
^Owned.

I suggest not screwing with the UGer with the best name on the site.


Quote by Albino_Rhino
I don't see how prostitution is going to help out your string buzz...
#33
Your list of chords looks good except where you say that:

577 is a sus4 chord.

577 is a Maj 6 chord or a first inversion relative minor of the Major from 557. (in other words, 557 is F Major, 577 is F Major 6 (omit 5) or a 1st Inversion D min chord, depending on how you want to look at it musically)

The sus4 chord (following your fifth fret examples) is 558

(First 5 is root, Second 5 is the fifth, and the 8 is the fourth.... ie. sus4)

Great work on the others that you listed... I hope some people check it out... Having played exclusively NewStandardTuning for YEARS, I'll never, ever go back.
Last edited by ODdOnLifeItself at Jul 19, 2008,
#34
I see no point in this tuning as the guitar tuned to fourths allows all 12 notes to be played in the same 5 fret box, without too much of a stretch. Whilst this "new standard" means you'd have to make a massive stretch for some notes. Some songs (especially jazz/classical songs) already require massive stretches as is.

The only advantage is that sus chords are easier

Actually, IMO, all tunings suck other open tunings (for slide guitar) and tunings based of the real standard (like whole step down or hald step down). And these should only be used for playing slide or if you have a song that uses a note lower than E3? and dont want to transpose. Otherwise, keep to E standard, because its the standard for a reason.
        ,
        |\
[U]        | |                     [/U]
[U]        |/     .-.              [/U]
[U]       /|_     `-’       |      [/U]
[U]      //| \      |       |      [/U]
[U]     | \|_ |     |     .-|      [/U]
      *-|-*    (_)     `-’
        |
        L.
#35
Last edited by ODdOnLifeItself : Today at 12:57 AM. Reason: Fixing A Boner
Oi!!
My name is Andy
Quote by MudMartin
Only looking at music as math and theory, is like only looking at the love of your life as flesh and bone.

Swinging to the rhythm of the New World Order,
Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums
#36
Quote by toxica
How many of you out there have tried to play in New Standard (CGDAEG) tuning?

I've tried it myself but found it quite difficult, I was just wondering what other people thought of it.


No, I haven't bothered with it. The name "new standard" is a bit deceiving it as it is not, and likely will never be the standard tuning for guitar.

I see no advantages to using it. (although experimenting with alt tunings can be fun)
shred is gaudy music
#37
Hey demonofthenight,

Re: "I see no point in this tuning..."

Or translated: Why would I need a new hammer, I can drive nails in with my shoe.

Re: "...because it's the standard for a reason."

If guitar necks and catgut could have withstood the added tension, it's likely that Standard Tuning would have never come about. Look at a violin or a cello....they're tuned in 5ths...and yes, for a reason.

You're right, New Standard Tuning does require a little stretching. So does playing many Joe Satriani songs... so let's just get rid of them both.

Re: "The only advantage is that sus chords are easier."

That statement alone blatantly indicates that you haven't actually studied it. VIRTUALLY EVERY CHORD IS EASIER IN NEW STANDARD TUNING.

James