Heaviest standard tuning bands
- Thread starter Anarkissed
- Start date
Kir-ir-Bannog
...no ordinary rabbit
gives you a much "thicker" sound. examples are life of agony (early stuff) and type o negative. without this tuning they would have written very different sounding music, that is for sure (and even one could even argue not been as successful).
Oh, okay. I'm sure you're right. I mean Charles Ives must've been an idiot. And I'm sure prepared piano is out for you, too? Stupid stuff. I'll let John Cage know (okay, so he's dead...I'll have a seance or something).
And while we're at it, I suppose we ought to retroactively disallow a great many famous lute pieces from being played. Lots of alternate tunings there...
Okay, so that was a bit sarcastic... but my point is that it's not only the stinking masses of musicians who mess around with their tunings. Composers have for years. And besides, the frequency of concert pitch A (most often 440 now) has fluctuated greatly over the years. Check this out from uk-piano.org:
Scholars who have studied historical instruments claim that the pitch of the note "A" in the seventeenth century may have varied from 373.7 Hz to 402.9 Hz. The following is an incomplete list of pitch standards from various sources.
1640 Vienna Franciscan Organ A457.6
1699 Paris Opera A404
1711 John Shore's tuning fork, a pitch of A423.5 He invented the tuning fork, one of which still exists today.
1780 Stines, for Mozart, A421
1780 Organ builder Schulz A421.3
1714 Strasbourg Cathedral organ A391
1722 Dresden's chief Roman Catholic church organ A415
1759 Trinity College Cambridge organ A309
1762 Stringed instruments at Hamburg A405
1772 Gottfried Silbermann built the organ in the main Roman Catholic church in Dresden, and it had a pitch of A 415 at the time.
1780 Organ builder Schulz A421.3
1780 Stein's tuning fork A422.6
1751 Handel's own fork A422.5
1800 Broadwood's C fork, 505.7, which is about half a semitone lower than that of today
1811 Paris Grand Opera A 427
1812 Paris Conservatoire A440, as modern pitch
1813 George Smart adopted for the Philharmonic Society the pitch of A423.3.
1820 Westminster Abbey organ and possibly Paris Comic Opera used a pitch of A422.5.
1828 Philharmonic Society A 440
1834 Vienna Opera A 436.5
1835 Wolfels piano maker A443
1836 Pleyel's Pianos A446
1846 Philharmonic pitch was A452.5 (very high) which lasted till 1854
1846 Mr Hipkins piano tuner (Meantone) A433.5 (Equal) A436.0
1849 Broadwood's medium pitch was A445.9 which lasted till 1854
1858 New Philharmonic pitch C522
1860 Cramer's piano makers of London A448.4
1862 Dresden Opera A 440
1871 Covent Garden Opera House A 440
1877 Collard's piano maker standard pitch was A 449.9
1877 St. Paul Cathedral organ A446.6
1877 Chappell Pianos A455.9
1877 Mr Hipkins piano tuner A448.8
1878 Her Majesty's Organ A436.1
1878 Vienna Opera A447
1879 Covent Garden Opera A450
1879 Erard's factory fork 455.3
1879 Steinway of England A 454.
1879 British Army regulation pitch for woodwinds A451.9
1880 Brinsmead, Broadwood, and Erard apparently used a pitch of A455.3
1880 Steinway may have been using a pitch of A436. According to Steinway of New York, 1880 is right around the time they switched from three piece rims to the continuous rim that is used today. So it is unlikely the pitch was any higher before 1880, yet Steinway of London had a fork A454.7.
1885 In Vienna a pitch of A435.4 was adopted at a temperature of 59 degrees Fahrenheit for A.
1885 At an international exhibition of inventions and music in London a pitch of A452 was adopted.
1896 Philharmonic pitch A439, giving C522
1925 On the 11th of June the American music industry adopted A440.
1936 American Standards Association adopted A440.
1939 At an international conference A440 was adopted.
The pitch of A440 has remained the standard since 1939. Pitches have risen a little, particularly in Eastern European countries, which often wish pianos to be tuned to A 444 or even a bit above. Some concert halls in the UK and European countries have two pianos on site, one tuned to A440 and one tuned to A 444.
Are you perhaps a CAGED trained guitarist or currently studying that method, Hibernal? Otherwise, I don't understand why you would limit yourself (or others).
hibernal_dream
A Mind Forever Voyaging
All those methods involve non-linear alterations, not shifting the frequency of each string equal to one or more semitones. Given that most metal artists downtune to get a "heavier sound", and barely even go past the 5th or 6th string, why even use a regular guitar? (By "regular guitar" I mean the six-stringed kind. I have no objection to seven-string or twelve string guitars which are adapted to a particular purpose). And I don't see what the changing concert frequency of A has to do with anything.
Okay, so your issue is with "linear detuning"? So you have no trouble with tuning to a chord?
To say that "most" metal guitarists don't go beyond the 5th or 6th string just can't be true. Some guitarists might be that limited, but I honestly think that it has to be a very small number. Is the preference in metal to compose riffs that focus on the lowest strings? Sure. It's a stylistic thing. But most guitarists venture out of that territory with some degree of regularity. If for no other reason than to solo.
Shifting concert pitch of A has everything to do with your argument. Only relatively recently was a standard frequency decided on. That means that, if you do the math, the range from lowest to highest A over the spectrum that I listed is the equivalent of about modern F# to about a quarter tone over A. That's what? Three and a quarter steps of variation over the years? That's pretty significant, if you ask me.
I used to downtune a half step with my band in college so my singer could hit the high notes... But I still thought of the open E chord form as an E, not Eb. Besides, it sounded better to me. Frequencies having names is only a matter of convenience for musicians. When all musicians in a performing group are on the same page, whether it's the Eastern European piano virtuoso who likes the Steinway to be tuned to A 444 or Tony Iommi tuning down to C#, what the names of the notes are doesn't really matter. Maybe if you have perfect pitch, this would bug you, but otherwise, I just don't see the issue.
Maybe you want more metal guitarists to follow the lead of the Presidents of the United States of America and play 3 string guitars?
Don Corleone
Emre
hibernal_dream
A Mind Forever Voyaging
FACT:
SIGNIFICANCE FOR MY ARGUMENT: ?
Don't overestimate the need for convenience. The abandonment of written theory in favour of moveable chords and scale patterns has in part led to standardization and simplification of modern music and illiteracy of music students. I'm not really a huge fan of the "rock methods" which have sprouted over the past few decades because they stifle creativity and lead to stylized song construction.
I'm not sure why what I'm saying isn't clear, and I apologize for that. I feel like it's obvious, but it musn't be. You're opposed to "linear detunings" or something of that sort. I don't see the harm in it. Especially since the way that we tune has varied over the years, anyhow. The note A (or E or D#, etc.) have been called different things. But the FREQUENCIES have always been, and regardless of what name you give 440 Hz, it is consonant and dissonant with frequencies which have intervallic relations to it (as I'm sure you know). For the listener, none of that note name business matters (again, unless you are, imo, cursed with perfect pitch). It's simply sound. That's all I'm saying. That from a listener's POV, whether someone downtunes or not doesn't really matter.
I appreciate what you're saying, and I fervently agree with you! But our popular music is really a folk music (at least metal is). No one is stopping serious composers from doing things correctly in a standardized way. But I'm also glad that some composers have pushed the limits and found ways for traditional instruments to sound new by playing or tuning them unconventionally. For example, Berlioz exploiting Col Legno technique in the Witches' Sabbath in Symphonie Fantastique or Berio using multiphonics with the flute in Sequenza I. If a sound that you can imagine can be made by an instrument, why not make that sound?
hibernal_dream
A Mind Forever Voyaging
True.
With regard to the first part, it's probably because i'm a piano player at heart, which is probably the most inflexible instrument of all but downtuning on guitar really messes me up when i'm trying to read music or tab. Practically, it's great to think that chords and notes are interchangeable on the fretboard and notes don't matter. But when you realise musicians don't regard standard tuning as "standard" you can reject the need to learn anything deeper than the moveable positions, it's something that happened to me, and some level of creativity - which traditional theory used to facilitate - is lost. The power chord is also responsible to some extent. For the performers, Cage and Petrucci who can handle it, it's great but for those new students it can make them believe that an interesting solo is made simply by imitating blues scale shapes all over the fretboard.
With regard to the first part, it's probably because i'm a piano player at heart, which is probably the most inflexible instrument of all but downtuning on guitar really messes me up when i'm trying to read music or tab. Practically, it's great to think that chords and notes are interchangeable on the fretboard and notes don't matter. But when you realise musicians don't regard standard tuning as "standard" you can reject the need to learn anything deeper than the moveable positions, it's something that happened to me, and some level of creativity - which traditional theory used to facilitate - is lost. The power chord is also responsible to some extent. For the performers, Cage and Petrucci who can handle it, it's great but for those new students it can make them believe that an interesting solo is made simply by imitating blues scale shapes all over the fretboard.
Don Corleone
Emre
dave, hibernal dream never gives up. he never quits however lame and stupid his comments are.
by the way, i notice that you are selling your spawn soundtrack cd. shame on you, thats an excellent album =(
by the way, i notice that you are selling your spawn soundtrack cd. shame on you, thats an excellent album =(
Ah... pianist! You know, I've often thought that the piano is a far more elegant instrument than guitar. One key for each note. Brilliant! I was at a huge disadvantage in college as a music major with guitar as my instrument. Voice leading is ridiculous to try to figure out on a guitar!
And as I reread this thread, I understand the OP now. Sorry about shitting all over your plea for heavy songs you can learn without messing around with your tuning! For what it's worth, my vote is Iron Maiden.
I think Hibernal and I may have come to an understanding?
The Spawn soundtrack never did it for me. I wanted to like it (much like I wanted to like the movie HBO animated series was way better,imo). If you like it so much, why not get another?
Anyhow, insomnia sucks...
Don Corleone
Emre
RedinTheSky
Member
The terms heavy and brutal are open to interpretation.... I would suggest you invest in some thrash. Coroner, Sepultura (Beneath The Remains) . Also try Einherjer ( Norwegian Native Art ) .
Rocky Raccoon
I am the Walrus
Belligerent
Greekus Urungus
cool thread...
I always thought Opeth downtuned a shitload...
that is until I figured out the second half of Face of Melinda.
...does anyone have the correct tab for the first half and is it really THAT hard, cause it sure sounds like it
thanx
I always thought Opeth downtuned a shitload...
that is until I figured out the second half of Face of Melinda.
...does anyone have the correct tab for the first half and is it really THAT hard, cause it sure sounds like it
thanx
wankerness
Member
I remember thinking "Ride the Lightning"'s first three tracks were the heaviest thing ever recorded back in 9th grade, I guess they still are pretty heavy as far as standard tuning stuff goes, otherwise yeah Opeth and Dillinger Escape Plan are good responses.
Scourge of Malice
Member
The Spawn soundtrack never did it for me. I wanted to like it (much like I wanted to like the movie HBO animated series was way better,imo). If you like it so much, why not get another?
HBO serious FTW, although I've never seen the 3rd part of the DVDs. I have the first two though and they rule.
FRUGiHOYi
"Since 1981"
I never really thought that tuning down makes anyone sound heavier. There are other aspects of the music that contribute to heaviness much, much more.
I remember thinking the Spawn soundtrack was the best soundtrack ever, but I haven't heard it in a long time.
I remember thinking the Spawn soundtrack was the best soundtrack ever, but I haven't heard it in a long time.
Similar threads
