Better than a Snark?

[12barBill]

Originally Posted by ljguitar

Hi Barry

More Accurate is a relative term.

The difference between 3/100 and 1/1000 of a pitch are neither audible to listeners, nor to most players.

BINGO!!
Thank you Larry.

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by d.loseth

I've heard really good things about the Korg Sledgehammer Pro, I'm also on the search for a new one soon, firstly because I can't find mine and secondly because mine is a house brand one I've had for years that isn't very accurate, but it is super good on batteries.

I'll have to look into the Unitune and Polytune, never heard of them.

Hi d.l.

Maybe this will contribute to the thread. I play acoustic and electric guitars and am picky about tuning. I frequently have to tune in the middle of the song in the middle of our church's worship band (fairly agressive rock with acoustic drums on a moderately small stage).

I use a Sledgehammer with my Electrics. It picks up better than my Polytune. The Polytune picks up my acoustic guitars better, whereas the Sledgehammer has a harder time with them…especially on stage with music playing.

The Sledgehammer will allow me to tune my Strat in the middle of a song in the middle of the band, and the Polytune will do the same for my Olson (middle of the tune in the middle of the band).

I use a phone based version of the Peterson software app (iPad Pro actually) for intonating guitars. That is done in a silent room with zero outside influences.

All three (Polytune, Sledgehammer & Peterson land based tuner) are the same amount of accurate.

The Peterson on the iPad reads out in fractions of cents for when I'm setting intonation, which makes it an obvious choice for that task.

The Korg Sledgehammer holds the notes active on screen longer on the electric which makes it an obvious choice for my electrics.

The Polytune handles my Acoustics best (all four of them). It locks onto notes better and holds them longer than the Sledgehammer on my acoustics.

I still clip a Snark upside down in my Voyage-Air case and it works just fine when I'm traveling. In fact you can fudge a Snark by watching the needle 'almost' be sharp or flat, and fudge the pitch the direction it needs to be tweaked (some call it sweetening).

After 12, 14 and 26 years with my acoustic guitars, I know which strings need to be tweaked and how much. A Snark does a good job with that. In fact there are three of them laying around the living room when friends drop by to play.

The best clip on tuner on it's bad day is still better for me than a floor tuner, because the audience is 'out there' not 'down there', and I want to connect with audiences.

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

The best, most accurate tuner available can deliver a perfect frequency. But guitars don't often function well on perfect frequencies.

So, any tuner should only be based on getting you in the ball park. After that, you ears will tell you plus or minus.

That plus or minus depends on the guitar, the strings, the key you play in, how good your tuning machines are.

You’re right if close is good enough to suit you. It isn’t for me.

I buy a tuner so I won’t have to fool with tuning after using a tuner. To each his own but my ear isn’t as good as a Peterson (or similarly accurate) tuner, so I let it do what it’s designed to do. It gets my guitar as in-tune as is possible without input from mortals.

[lowrider]

Originally Posted by ljguitar

Hi Barry

More Accurate is a relative term.

The difference between 3/100 and 1/1000 of a pitch are neither audible to listeners, nor to most players.

That might be true, but when all those 3/100’s to 1/1000’s are in tune, it just sounds better, even if you can’t tell why.

The only reason I got the Peterson was because I had $25 of free money on my credit card and GC was one of the places I could have spent it. However, now that I have it, if I lost it, I’d get another.

[Purfle Haze]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

It gets my guitar as in-tune as is possible without input from mortals.

This is very revealing. Tuning without ears, for those who cannot hear.

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by Purfle Haze

This is very revealing. Tuning without ears, for those who cannot hear.

Cleaver by half.

I can hear extremely well and that’s how I can appreciate an extremely accurate tuner. Those who cannot hear can’t appreciate the harmonic balance achieved by such an incredible innovation. I’m sure you understand.

[raysachs]

I love Snarks except for 1) they're in the bottom rung as far as accuracy (still, works well enough for me), 2) they eat batteries at an alarming rate, 3) the rubber casing gets really sticky and gross really quickly, and 4) they disintegrate if you look at them funny. I think I still have a few laying around but i don't remember the last time I used one of them.

I use two tuners. On my pedal board for when I'm playing electric or on the rare occasion I put my acoustic in, I have a Polytune 3 pedal. I use it in needle mode except when I'm setting up a guitar and trying to nail down the intonation - I use it in strobe mode for that. I absolutely LOVE the "always on" function such that you can always see what note you're playing in real time as you play. I'm not one of those guys with an encyclopedic knowledge of the fretboard, but having that always on feature is getting me really close.

For my almost always unplugged acoustic I also have a Polytune clip but really only use it on the rare situation where I'm checking intonation. For day to day tuning needs, though, I use one of the little D'Addario / Planet Waves mini tuners. I mount it inside the soundhole of my Emerald X7 with dual lock. When I had a traditional soundhole guitar, I used their soundhole tuner (same tuner, different mounting setup), but it doesn't fit well inside Emerald's non-standard soundhole. But I just cut the little mounting nub off of the mini-tuner, put some dual lock on it and in the soundhole, and viola, out of anyone's sight but mine, VERY close and visible for me, accurate enough for tuning up if a little rough for setting intonation.

In addition to it's convenience, these mini tuners also stays on for a few minutes rather than 30 seconds or so (the polytune is particularly quick to shut off and I don't think this is adjustable) and even with that additional "on" time, batteries last FOREVER on these tuners. They also dim very very slowly when the battery starts to go, so you have plenty of time to change it before it goes totally dead. I've gone nearly a year on a single battery with these tuners - I'm lucky to get a few weeks out of the same battery with a Snark. Polytunes do OK in terms of battery life, but that's partly because it's always shutting itself off.

unnamed by Ray, on Flickr

-Ray

[vindibona1]

I just wanted to provide a snapshot that contrasts three different tuners; a Snark, a Delta Lab and an iPad Strobe tuner (Airyware software).

As you can see, the Snark shows the pitch in tune, while the strobe and Delta Lab tuners aren't there. The strobe is showing the pitch still flat by 4.5 cents. And while it can get it in the ballpark it really isn't close enough to make the guitar sound its absolute best, especially because it can be off either sharp or flat, spreading the string intervals. But as @RaySachs said he likes to do, when I have the opportunity to plug in I'm going through a daisy chain of Korg CA40 into a Korg Pitchblack.

[Paddy1951]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

You’re right if close is good enough to suit you. It isn’t for me.



I buy a tuner so I won’t have to fool with tuning after using a tuner. To each his own but my ear isn’t as good as a Peterson (or similarly accurate) tuner, so I let it do what it’s designed to do. It gets my guitar as in-tune as is possible without input from mortals.

The point I was trying to make is even the best tuners are programmed to a specific reference point- frequency. You can tune you guitar to be spot on these frequencies and in some keys, things don't sound quite right. This is standard tuning I am speaking of.

It is not the fault of the tuner but the lack of even, consistent temperment.

Now, a person may or may not be able to hear the dissonance. If it doesn't bother you, fine. It is there, however.

For me, I do hear it sometimes and my ears are not that good anymore.

I would not do a good job of explaining this so I will not try.

Google The Guitar Journal, then an article called "The Secret to Tuning Your Guitar Perfectly."

There is a bit of music history/theory involved but it is explained well.

A really good tuner will hit the programmed frequencies perfectly but your guitar may still not be at its optimum tuning, may not be sounding its best.

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by vindibona1

I just wanted to provide a snapshot that contrasts three different tuners; a Snark, a Delta Lab and an iPad Strobe tuner (Airyware software).

As you can see, the Snark shows the pitch in tune, while the strobe and Delta Lab tuners aren't there. The strobe is showing the pitch still flat by 4.5 cents. And while it can get it in the ballpark it really isn't close enough to make the guitar sound its absolute best, especially because it can be off either sharp or flat, spreading the string intervals. But as @RaySachs said he likes to do, when I have the opportunity to plug in I'm going through a daisy chain of Korg CA40 into a Korg Pitchblack.

A perfect example Vin, thanks!

I experienced this many years ago and once was enough to convince me that accuracy varies between tuners.

Imagine all the strings being equally as out of tune as the string in the example.

It's no wonder the first time I heard my guitar tuned with a Peterson it was the best the guitar had ever sounded.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by DesertTwang

In terms of accuracy, I have not found anything better than Snark.

The Snark is not very accurate. It will do for sitting around at home but it's not accurate enough for stage or recording unless you have a great ear and only use the Snark to get close and then tune the rest of the way on your own. The Stroboclip, Polytune, and Unitune are all much more accurate than the Snark.

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

Really? I'm convinced you already know the answer based on the sheer number of threads on this subject. So why?

I had the same thought. With nearly 25,000 posts, it's implausible to think he's missed the numerous threads on this same subject that all yield the same answers.

[Purfle Haze]

Originally Posted by vindibona1

I just wanted to provide a snapshot that contrasts three different tuners; a Snark, a Delta Lab and an iPad Strobe tuner (Airyware software).

As you can see, the Snark shows the pitch in tune, while the strobe and Delta Lab tuners aren't there. The strobe is showing the pitch still flat by 4.5 cents. And while it can get it in the ballpark it really isn't close enough to make the guitar sound its absolute best, especially because it can be off either sharp or flat, spreading the string intervals. But as @RaySachs said he likes to do, when I have the opportunity to plug in I'm going through a daisy chain of Korg CA40 into a Korg Pitchblack.

Vin, I too like the Airyware tuner very much. My favorite software tuner. Better interface than the Peterson software.

[Purfle Haze]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

Cleaver by half.

I can hear extremely well and that’s how I can appreciate an extremely accurate tuner. Those who cannot hear can’t appreciate the harmonic balance achieved by such an incredible innovation. I’m sure you understand.

I hear well, thanks. But I have always wondered why those who "hear extremely well" need an "incredible innovation" to do something as simple as tune a guitar. Can't they use ears?

BTW, spell check is also an "incredible innovation."

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by Purfle Haze

I hear well, thanks. But I have always wondered why those who "hear extremely well" need an "incredible innovation" to do something as simple as tune a guitar. Can't they use ears?

BTW, spell check is also an "incredible innovation."

That's so funny!

For the same reason people with great eyesight use magnifying devices for intricate, close up work. An intelligent person always uses technology when it's available to improve the efficiency and accuracy of the task.

I thought that was universally understood, even if some resist those advances.

[catfish]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

I experienced this many years ago and once was enough to convince me that accuracy varies between tuners.

I even experienced that accuracy varies between the same tuner operated on different hardware. A bit off-topic, I use an old good Windows based AP Tuner 3.07.
I have it on a notebook and on a desktop computer with external mic. There is a difference -- tuner on notebook is less accurate than the same tuner on desktop, most likely because of primitive mic on notebook.