Detuning a guitar by 3 semitones

[Chalky]

Hi, there’s a song we do that the vocalist wants to do three semi Tones down, and for which the normally tuned guitar cannot realistically pull off, because the changed chords just dont sound right (they lose on the open strings if you know what I mean) and so my question is … is it possible to detune by 3 semitones to enable chords to be played on a normaly tuned guitar …. i have fiddled with most of the Pitch Factor algos but they all assume I want the dry signal left in. I believe it is possible on a Helix so I would assume that Eventide can at least match that!   

 

[brock]

Chalky wrote:

… is it possible to detune by 3 semitones to enable chords to be played on a normaly tuned guitar …. i have fiddled with most of the Pitch Factor algos but they all assume I want the dry signal left in. I believe it is possible on a Helix so I would assume that Eventide can at least match that!

I may be misunderstanding, but have you maxed out the MIX control to 100?  You’ll get varying degrees of accuracy; depending on the algorithm [H910 H949, HarModulator, PitchFlex, etc.].  Three semitones is about the limit where formanting artifacts become apparent.  The newer DigiTech pitch shift algorithms as one exception.

With Eventide’s algos, select the one that will complement what else you want to do with it [pitch glides, added modulation, intentional glitching, …].  For straight-up global retuning, I see advantages to the newer H9 algorithms, which reflect the latest code improvements.  Take PitchFuzz, as an example.  The following preset compares favorably with my DigiTech Ricochet (down to its 4 semitone limitation).

There’s a tiny processing delay added, to eliminate the dry signal.  No standard  MIX control here.

Here’s how the routing looks in the alternate view.  PITCH A is not audible, due to ARP LEVEL 99.

Another thing that makes sense to me is to use the internal Tuner whenever pitch shifting.  You’re using the same reference pitch that the pitch detecting ‘circuits’ are based on, to the best of my knowledge.

[Given To Fly]

brock wrote:

Chalky wrote:

… is it possible to detune by 3 semitones to enable chords to be played on a normaly tuned guitar …. i have fiddled with most of the Pitch Factor algos but they all assume I want the dry signal left in. I believe it is possible on a Helix so I would assume that Eventide can at least match that!

I may be misunderstanding, but have you maxed out the MIX control to 100?  You’ll get varying degrees of accuracy; depending on the algorithm [H910 H949, HarModulator, PitchFlex, etc.].  Three semitones is about the limit where formanting artifacts become apparent.  The newer DigiTech pitch shift algorithms as one exception.

With Eventide’s algos, select the one that will complement what else you want to do with it [pitch glides, added modulation, intentional glitching, …].  For straight-up global retuning, I see advantages to the newer H9 algorithms, which reflect the latest code improvements.  Take PitchFuzz, as an example….

Another thing that makes sense to me is to use the internal Tuner whenever pitch shifting.  You’re using the same reference pitch that the pitch detecting ‘circuits’ are based on, to the best of my knowledge.

Help me out here Brock. (Keep in mind, everything I know about “code” came from Jurassic Park.)  When you say “latest code improvements” are you referring to improvements in the actual “coding language” or the level of specificity Eventide uses when writing these new algorithms?

“Code is the language used to make things do stuff.”

Now, this quote may seem…simple…but it is a useful tool. The “things” refer the physical hardware of the H9 and “stuff” is pitch shifting. Since the hardware has not changed, the only way the pitch shifting can be improved is if the language used to communicate with the hardware has either been improved or, remained the same but used in new and clever ways to get the desired result?

I basically asked you the exact same question twice. If neither version makes any sense, refer to my quote again. That should provide all the clarity you need.

 

Chalky, the solution that sucks the least is to use multiple guitars, pitch shifting should be the last resort. If you are at “the last resort,” listen to Brock. There are reasons to use multiple guitars that have nothing to do with how well Line6 or Eventide and alter the tuning, they have more to do with not getting confused and keeping your fingers, ears, and brain on the same page while performing. Good luck! 

[brock]

Given To Fly wrote:

Help me out here Brock. (Keep in mind, everything I know about “code” came from Jurassic Park.)  When you say “latest code improvements” are you referring to improvements in the actual “coding language” or the level of specificity Eventide uses when writing these new algorithms?

“Code is the language used to make things do stuff.”

Now, this quote may seem…simple…but it is a useful tool. The “things” refer the physical hardware of the H9 and “stuff” is pitch shifting. Since the hardware has not changed, the only way the pitch shifting can be improved is if the language used to communicate with the hardware has either been improved or, remained the same but used in new and clever ways to get the desired result? …

That’s exactly how I see it.  I haven’t done much software programming since the Stone Age, so I’ll defer to the code jockeys with more recent experience here.  Modern digital devices perform everything in DSP: inputs and outputs, all processing & routing, etc.  A bare minimum of analog circuitry to share any of that load.

One (comparatively) powerful processor.  One mega-algorithm that covers all of the signal processing nuances, plus all possible FX and control signals.  How those resources are distributed will be determined by that (sub-) algorithm’s coding.  There are always more efficient ways to go about that, & new approaches to take.  As much art as science; reflective of the current programmer’s past experience & personality (I would think).

So the hardware remains fixed, but how you instruct it to act can be continuously variable.  Cycles saved in, say, a delay component, can be repurposed for improved pitch processing.  Largely speculative, but from what I’ve seen (and heard), the H9 algorithms are in a constant state of refinement.  It makes sense to me that the current crop of programmers build on the foundation they have from the original coder, or even improve on their own.  Look at how PitchFuzz shares a lineage with CrushStation & Sculpt.  Or how SpaceTime borrows from Plate and Diatonic delay feedback routings.

All that said … the pitch shifting algos come in many different flavors.  None would be my first choice for a pristine, clean “capo”.  I use them for the options that they give me.  Learn its faults & weaknesses, and apply those creatively.  One example: the glitchy, freaky Whammy4 pitch shifting.  Drop it down an octave, then pitch shift it back to unison with an H9 algo.  In theory, it’s back at the original input pitch, but it’s now thick with doubled processing FX and unique artifacts.

[Given To Fly]

brock wrote:

That’s exactly how I see it.  I haven’t done much software programming since the Stone Age, so I’ll defer to the code jockeys with more recent experience here.  Modern digital devices perform everything in DSP: inputs and outputs, all processing & routing, etc.  A bare minimum of analog circuitry to share any of that load.

One (comparatively) powerful processor.  One mega-algorithm that covers all of the signal processing nuances, plus all possible FX and control signals.  How those resources are distributed will be determined by that (sub-) algorithm’s coding.  There are always more efficient ways to go about that, & new approaches to take.  As much art as science; reflective of the current programmer’s past experience & personality (I would think).

So the hardware remains fixed, but how you instruct it to act can be continuously variable.  Cycles saved in, say, a delay component, can be repurposed for improved pitch processing.  Largely speculative, but from what I’ve seen (and heard), the H9 algorithms are in a constant state of refinement.  It makes sense to me that the current crop of programmers build on the foundation they have from the original coder, or even improve on their own.  Look at how PitchFuzz shares a lineage with CrushStation & Sculpt.  Or how SpaceTime borrows from Plate and Diatonic delay feedback routings.

All that said … the pitch shifting algos come in many different flavors.  None would be my first choice for a pristine, clean “capo”.  I use them for the options that they give me.  Learn its faults & weaknesses, and apply those creatively.  One example: the glitchy, freaky Whammy4 pitch shifting.  Drop it down an octave, then pitch shift it back to unison with an H9 algo.  In theory, it’s back at the original input pitch, but it’s now thick with doubled processing FX and unique artifacts.

Thank you! That was actually very helpful! This makes me think my “metronome algorithm idea” would not be very hard to create. I’ll admit, selling it might be hard, especially since I have not told anyone about it. 

Outside of the digital world, I know enough about pitch and its infinite scope, to appreciate how much Eventide has accomplished. I also understand that using pitch shifting as a “capo” may seem convenient and therefore a good idea. The way I see it, pressing a button with your foot does much less for you as a musician than re-tuning a guitar, experiencing how that physically changes the instrument (and your playing), and possibly using this opportunity to get a new guitar. I also think the “convenient” way would still not sound “real,” for lack of a better term. 

I had a Whammy IV. I used the 7th harmony all the time! jk I imagine you could really create some unique artifacts given the Whammy IV’s innate ability to already do use combined with your extensive knowledge of the H9. 

 

[Chalky]

Thanks everyone. Pitch really does seems to be an awkward one, I haven’t met a decent pedal yet that can crack it without some sort of glitching. I’m sure we’ll get there one day. Yes, the horrid inevitability of setting up a retuned guitar looms, that or replace the singer!!

[Author]

Posts