Correct tuning method?

[devellis]

Originally Posted by stringjunky2

I think it depends on which part of the note is most important to you. If you play fast then the attack part being correct might make more sense than tuning to the decay. I do the latter personally but I can see room for the first method.

That sounds right to me. Also, if you're tuning for the attack, it makes sense to hit the strings while tuning with the same force you'd use when playing.


If your playing involves long sustaining notes harmonizing with each other, tune for the sustain. If it involves sharp, quick notes that don't hang around very long, tune for the attack.



This is all further testimony to the fact that the guitar is never really in perfect tune.

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by stringjunky2

I think it depends on which part of the note is most important to you. If you play fast then the attack part being correct might make more sense than tuning to the decay. I do the latter personally but I can see room for the first method.

I like this answer. Part of the issue that we have with guitars sounding in tune is the pitch distortion that can occur when we strike the strings. Those of us who are heavy handed will have a more difficult time with intonation because of string deflection and need to accommodate the way we play when we tune. James Taylor tuning works with some guitars and some players because it accommodates some of this (along with some equal temperament issues).

[Jim Owen]

I wait til it settles--and L.J. is correct about the effect of attack. And as Jeff says, always tune up.

I know this is obvious to all who have played for a while--but perhaps not to the newest of us--start with the wound strings and then work from there. Then return for a second round.

I then tweak the b string so that when it's fretted on 3 it jibes with D. Sometimes I have to fret the e on 3 to make sure it jibes with G. It all depends. Tuning is a compromise as so many have said.