accuracy between different tuner types

[captain_jack]

Hey all,

Reading one of the recent threads about clip on tuner brands got me thinking about tuners in general. Between searching the forum and some googling, I have found some good info on the differences between tuner types, but the one thing I haven't seen mentioned anywhere is accuracy.

There seem to be three basic types of tuners:

1 - tuner pedals that worked by identifying the electrical signal received via their input (I think something like a Korg with a cable plugged into it falls into this category as well)

2 - clip on tuners that use a contact microphone that senses physical vibrations caused by the strings

3 - microphone tuners that use a microphone to pick up the sound generated by the guitar (smart phone apps, using the microphone on a Korg style tuner, etc).

Now for someone who doesn't have a deep grasp on the science behind how these work (1 and 2 especially), it would seem like if they were ranked in order of potential accuracy, it would be in the order I have listed above. And to be clear I don't mean comparing a crappy clip on to an expensive pedal, using a mic tuner in a loud environment, etc. I just mean from the perspective of which tuning method or technology has the potential to be the most accurate.

In my mind it makes sense that a device that is analyzing the electrical signal provided by the instrument would be the most accurate. Whereas a clip on tuner has to "hear" the vibration and convert that to an electrical signal and a microphone has to hear the sound and convert that, I would think there is more room for something being lost in translation, if you will.

Is that reasoning at all true?

I also have a second question. I see many acoustic guitars that have a built in tuner on the side, but the spec sheets never really provide any details. Are these typically like a clip on tuner, just with some sort of sensor attached to the back side of the soundboard, or are they some other type?

thanks all for any input and hope everyone had a lovely New Years eve!

[jrdavies]

Andertons did a review of a number of different tuners. I don't think it answers the technical questions but it does show the difference in accuracy https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WWJAdXGwztU.

[charles Tauber]

While not addressing your question about which type is most accurate, it is important to identify just how accurate a tuner needs to be for practical purposes. A "good" ear can distinguish between pitches about 2 cents (2/100 of a semitone apart). Having greater accuracy than that doesn't accomplish much since most people can't hear it.

That said, each of the tuners relies on some sort of transducer to convert mechanical vibration into an electrical signal that can be analyzed. So, one aspect of your question is which transducer type, if any, is more "faithful" in that conversion.

The next part of the equation is the electric circuitry involved and whether or not they are all created "equal" for the purposes of identifying pitch (frequency) and comparing it to a target.

The last part of the equation is the human interface. Some tuners have go/no-go lights indicating something is in-tune, or not. That leaves very little granularity between "in-tune" and "not in-tune". How close is "close-enough" for the lights to change from "in-tune" to "not-in-tune"? Some tuners have strobe interfaces. They can be difficult to read as one is looking for a number of rotating patterns to stop rotating. Deciding when one of the patterns has stopped rotating isn't always easy.

So, your question isn't as simple to answer as you might think. Perhaps, a more practical question is which types and brands are not sufficiently accurate.

Then there are the issues of intonation and temperament. If the tuner says, for example, that an open string is in tune, it doesn't really tell you much about how in-tune the fretted notes are. Then, even if the fretted notes are perfectly in-tune, the guitar will still sound out of tune - that's the equal temperament to which the guitar was designed and made. The question of what pitches are the target to which you want to accurately be in tune becomes important.

[dnf777]

I think as long as the tuner receives a reliable input signal, the accuracy will depend on the tuners mechanism, which are microprocessor chips (except true strobe tuners) From my experience with several brands if all three types, i find plug in the most reliable, then clip on vibrational, and lastly, microphone. Im not saying anyone is inherently better, but less susceptable to ambient noise or signal loss. The Peterson stroboHD has all three modes available, so you can compare them easily on the same device.

[nightchef]

To me, the accuracy of a tuner only matters up to a point, because I expect to have to finish tuning by ear anyway. Tuning a guitar with pinpoint accuracy to a letter-perfect tempered tuning will yield, in most cases, a guitar that sounds to me almost, but not quite, in tune — at least for the kinds of musical purposes I’m going to put it to. A good tuner gets me 98% of the way there, and an even better tuner will still only get me 99% of the way there. So 98% is good enough.

That said, I would tend to agree that I’ve found plugin tuners more reliable than clip-on ones. If I was in a situation where I did not have the luxury of finishing tuning by ear—and some gigs are like that—I’d want a plugin pedal tuner. I’ve always found the Boss tuner pedal very reliable.

[phcorrigan]

This one has maintained its accuracy for about fifty years!

[rllink]

I try not to get too obsessed over things that make me lose sight of what I'm really there to do.

[Rosette]

There's also phone apps. I always use tuning apps for my acoustics since my phone is usually with me. I don't think they sacrifice anything as far as accuracy goes. My favorite is the free Pano Tuner app.

[captain_jack]

Thank you everyone for the input! I didn't mean to give the impression I was on a mission to find the worlds most accurate tuner for myself. I'm a beginner with a cheap guitar and a terrible ear so even the worst tuner is likely "good enough" for me right now .

I have a Daddario micro clip on and also a Korg tuner/metronome combo. I usually only use the clip on, but sometimes it has trouble locking in on the low E string so I'll use the Korg mic. If I check both on each string, they are normally very close but not always 100% the same. Between that and all the debate over the best headstock tuner on the forum, it got me wondering which could be more accurate. But I'm just curious tho, I'm happy with the clip on I have.

[Robin, Wales]

The electronics inside each tuner is probably potentially very accurate but "accuracy" is only useful if it is usable.

So the display's readability and its speed of response make a real time difference in how easy a tuner is to use.

For example, I have a TC Polytune. It is probably no more "accurate" than a $5 clip-on but it has the easiest display to follow that I have so far found and is lighting quick and not often confused by harmonics. However, as has been said earlier, you may have your guitar in tune according to an electronic tuner but that doesn't mean that it will necessarily "sound" in tune due to other variables (intonation, temperament etc).

As for the accuracy between plug-in, clip-on and mic. Well plug-in will nearly always be getting a strong signal to work with; but they are obviously useless for any situation where you don't plug - in (which is >95% of most acoustic guitarists time playing).

Mic tuners are great if you have a surface close by to put it on and the background environment is quiet. I have an old Korg that sits on my setup bench and it is ideal when working on guitars but useless for playing at a session with friends or on stage at an open mic.

Vibration based clip-on tuners are great for noisy environments but can get confused by the vibrations they are reading. And this will vary from guitar to guitar and in different placements. They are easy to loose and look naff. The micro headstock and soundhole ones are popular because they can live on the guitar but the smaller screens can be awkward.

Also some guitars have built in tuners; an on board plug - in. Most of these suffer from bad displays which limits their potential "accuracy".

I have owned lots of different tuners over the years (including pitch pipes and tuning forks). They have all had their flaws and limitations.

The best tuning system I have come across I found in an article about Appalachian mountain dulcimer players written by a journalist travelling through the Southern Appalachians in 1912. "The accomplished player will tune the bass string to a good note and the others a perfect 5th above". It is advice that I have followed many a time that I have sat down to play dulcimer without a tuner or reference note in sight.

[Yamaha Man]

I use a Peterson Strobo Plus HD tuner, but I just use the sound generator feature and tune by ear, which works best for me. I don't like the clip on ones, and don't use the foot pedal ones.....


https://www.sweetwater.com/store/det...f3854442216a2b

[buddyhu]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

While not addressing your question about which type is most accurate, it is important to identify just how accurate a tuner needs to be for practical purposes. A "good" ear can distinguish between pitches about 2 cents (2/100 of a semitone apart). Having greater accuracy than that doesn't accomplish much since most people can't hear it.

That said, each of the tuners relies on some sort of transducer to convert mechanical vibration into an electrical signal that can be analyzed. So, one aspect of your question is which transducer type, if any, is more "faithful" in that conversion.

The next part of the equation is the electric circuitry involved and whether or not they are all created "equal" for the purposes of identifying pitch (frequency) and comparing it to a target.

The last part of the equation is the human interface. Some tuners have go/no-go lights indicating something is in-tune, or not. That leaves very little granularity between "in-tune" and "not in-tune". How close is "close-enough" for the lights to change from "in-tune" to "not-in-tune"? Some tuners have strobe interfaces. They can be difficult to read as one is looking for a number of rotating patterns to stop rotating. Deciding when one of the patterns has stopped rotating isn't always easy.

So, your question isn't as simple to answer as you might think. Perhaps, a more practical question is which types and brands are not sufficiently accurate.

Then there are the issues of intonation and temperament. If the tuner says, for example, that an open string is in tune, it doesn't really tell you much about how in-tune the fretted notes are. Then, even if the fretted notes are perfectly in-tune, the guitar will still sound out of tune - that's the equal temperament to which the guitar was designed and made. The question of what pitches are the target to which you want to accurately be in tune becomes important.

All good points in Charles’s post.

I think the human interface is an important element. A poor display, plus any delay within the processing and display of the input, plus the minor inaccuracies due to the limits of a tuner’s precision can leave you with an intolerable result after you have carefully used your tuner for each string.

And Charles’s last point is also very important. Some players i know will try to tune to the key they are about to play in, because it can be challenging to get a guitar to sound in all keys.

Bottom line: most tuners will get you close, and then you will need to spend some time fine tuning with your ear and compensating for the particular features of your guitar...its intonation and the degree to which its particular tone “confuses” your particular tuner.

You might also want to look into tuners that offer “sweetened tunings”, and look into James Taylor’s thoughts about adjusting the tuning of each string by a small number of cents (though that would require a tuner that displays cents).

[FrankHudson]

Charles and Robin make some excellent points in this thread.

Even for the uses of most of us, most of the time: at home, at our leisure, relaxed, the display and how the thing works with it, and how it interprets the reading is probably of primary importance*, and some of that interacts with how we pluck the string and use the device. Arguments about tenths of cent vs hundredths of a cent are nearly meaningless as far as I can see the issue.

Things I hate about tuners: ones that turn off too quickly. Ones that seem to have "unbuffered" "needles" that can never rest long enough to read. Ones that I can't read (I have bad eyesight). Ones that don't do a good job with indicating sharps and flats (I use alt tunings sometimes, and I have a pet peave with the beloved Unitune that indicates sharp notes with a mark to the left of the note name, which I'm always reading a A flat not A sharp/B flat, which is stupid of me, but even stupider for a machine that should know better).

As to mic/plug in/vibration tuners: they each have their place. Mic tuners are great for a variety of instruments (acoustic mountain dulcimer, for example). Plug in are great for electric instruments and those with pedal boards. Nice too in that most mute the output so the audience doesn't have to listen to the tuning song that only Ravi Shankar ever got applauded for. And since this is an acoustic guitar forum, the clip on/vibrational ones are the overall best choice for most of us, not all of whom have pickups or quiet stages/homes when we need to tune up.

.

*Is this the thread that linked to the Anderton's video where the guitarist recounted being in a band where both guitarists tuned with their own tuners and were then noticeably out of tune with each other. My first guess there was that one tuned to the attack of the note (or their electronic tuner was more aggressive about grabbing and holding the attack) and other tuned to the note as it settled into its sustain (which will be flatter than the former).