Talk:Reentrant tuning

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Musical Instruments This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of musical instruments on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Musical InstrumentsWikipedia:WikiProject Musical InstrumentsTemplate:WikiProject Musical Instrumentsmusical instruments articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

At least in standard tuning it isn't. There may be some variant tunings that are re-entrant, although I've never heard of anyone using them. And anyway, the tuning on /any/ stringed instrument could be varied in a non-standard way to make it "re-entrant," but that doesn't necessarily make that instrument a good example of reentrant tuning in general. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.174.105 (talk) 02:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Yepes tuning is re-entrant, although for different reasons than re-entrant tuning is used on most instruments. In this case it's done to improve the resonance of certain otherwide weak pitches on the guitar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 22:08, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In anything I've ever read about reentrant tuning, there is never any mention on why this is done. Is there some advantage, or at least, some technique enabled by this method of tuning not available in a "standard" tuning? Wschart (talk) 12:29, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Various reasons:

• Most often re-entrant tunings have been arrived at simply because either the size or the design of an instrument didn't well support the sound of a lower-pitched string at that location. This is almost certainly the reason for charango tuning, and also for early ukuleles. A soprano uke non-re-entrantly tuned, for example, doesn't sound as "bright" or as "present" as it does in re-entrant tuning, because it resonates and projects a high 'A' (D-tuning) or high 'G' (C-tuning) better than a low ' A' or a low 'G'. Having these instruments tuned re-entrantly does influence technique, but it's more a case of the tuning driving the technique, than vice-versa.

• Advances in both instrument and string technology have rendered this consideration relatively moot, allowing people to successfully experiment with other tunings -- but the re-entrant tuning has been retained either through the inertia of tradition, or simply because people like the sound of it better.

• In some cases re-entrant tuning is employed for the same reason as any other Scordatura: to produce a particular aural effect, and/or to facilitate the playing of certain otherwise difficult (or even otherwise impossible) passages. This was a frequent rationale for instruments like the theorbo, although one can quickly get into a "chicken/egg' situation here (e.g., was the tuning adopted to play certain music, or did a pre-existing tuning suggest the music that came to be written for the instrument? Sometimes both.)

• In the case of Yepes' tuning for the ten string guitar, the original rational was mainly acoustical. Strings were added tot he classical guitar, and tuned to specific pitches that would add resonance to certain otherwise weak notes played on the original six strings. Since improvement in acoustical performance was the main goal, the octaves picked for the added strings were selected to provide the best resonance over the broadest range.

HTH.

74.95.43.249 (talk) 22:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This was the question I came to answer. I'd love for HTH to post that explanation in a more objectively-worded fashion in the main article. Also, there is a line or two about the Yepes tuning that read as opinion and should get a slight rewrite to cite a source and speak objectively. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:43B0:1910:C95D:52D7:58D1:25CC (talk) 05:48, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]