Please note this is an archived topic, so it is locked and unable to be replied to. You may, however, start a new topic and refer to this topic with a link: http://www.banjohangout.org/archive/87393
teddy111 - Posted - 07/08/2007: 11:10:52
I'm new with Minstrel banjo, I have Nylgut strings from Aguila on my Prust tackhead and I 've tune the banjo in regular G tuning...! I read some articles on lower tunings for Minstrel Music... can you tell me more about it ?
Take a look at my site : http://homeusers.brutele.be/goodtimerollers/
JimD - Posted - 07/08/2007: 11:42:28
There are several minstrel tunings that are indicated by the period books. They are all lower variants of gCGBD:
The earliest extant banjo tutor (Gumbo Chaff's Complete Preceptor for the Banjo 1851) lists cFCEG (this is a fifth lower than modern bano pitch.
Briggs' Banjo Instructor (1855) uses dGDF#A --a whole step higher than Chaff's
Rice's Correct Method for the Banjo (1858) uses e AEG#B --another whole step higher
This last tuning is used also in theBuckley (1860) Converse (2 different books --both1865).
Several of the books (starting with Briggs) indicate some tunes are to be played with the 4th string raised a whole step. That would make the tunings transposed (lower) versions of the modern G tuning.
Some of the books mention tuning the whole instrument up or down a few steps to accomodate different keys. Your best bet is to choose a pitch that suits your voice (if you'll be singing) or the pitch that make your instrument sound most resonant.
Jim Dalton
http://www.singingstring.org/JD/
JimD - Posted - 07/08/2007: 12:12:34
Hey Jay,
I am new to this board and just checked out your website.
You have some fine looking and sounding banjos there. I have been playing a Wunder (Boucher model) and have been considering getting into gourd and grain measure instruments. I may very well be in touch some time...
Jim Dalton
http://www.singingstring.org/JD/
Edited by - JimD on 07/08/2007 12:13:05
KE - Posted - 07/08/2007: 13:04:41
Mr. Dalton, welcome to the BHO. I've noticed several of your posts today and hope you will continue participating.
brokenstrings - Posted - 07/08/2007: 14:06:09
teddy111, Aquila makes TWO sets of Nylgut strings for banjo, a regular set and a minstrel set. (Thanks to several posters who recently drew my attention to this.) If you have the minstrel set, you DON'T wanna tune it all the way up to modern pitch. And if you have the regular set and tune it down to minstrel pitch, your strings may be kinda slack.
As for tuning, I go with "high bass"--that is, d-A-D-F#-A.
Jessy
Frailaway, ladies, frailaway!
R.D. Lunceford - Posted - 07/08/2007: 23:40:34
quote:
Originally posted by JimD
Several of the books (starting with Briggs) indicate some tunes are to be played with the 4th string raised a whole step. That would make the tunings transposed (lower) versions of the modern G tuning.
Jim Dalton
That is interesting. I had thought that the lower version of the "G" tuning didn't appear in the minstrel literature until around 1865. Where in Briggs did you find that tuning indicated?
An interesting point is that in the mid-19th century the pitch standard was higher than today. At that time, "A" was closer to our modern-day "A#". That means that Rice's "E" equivalent of our gDGBD was actually an "F" tuning..........only a step below the modern tuning.
As Jim says though; if you are playing solo, tune your banjo where it responds the best.
R.D. Lunceford- "Missourian in Exile"
*************************
Model 1865 Bowlin Fretless Banjo
JimD - Posted - 07/09/2007: 05:08:16
Briggs indicates raising the 4th string on This Side of Jordan (p21) and on Pitch Burgundy Plaster (p28).
Jim Dalton
http://www.singingstring.org/JD/
vernob - Posted - 07/09/2007: 06:09:14
I am somewhat familiar with the tunings Jim Dalton mentioned, but not having a minstrel banjo, I haven't experimented with all of them. I have a no name banjo with a spunover rim that I set up with ball-end nylon guitar strings before switching to Nylguts. I had just heard Dan Gellert and he said that's what he did initially. He's now using gut strings on a banjo that he de-fretted. I was really interested in the publications Jim cited. Where did you find them?
Bruce
teddy111 - Posted - 07/09/2007: 06:42:51
I've also 2 sets of Aguila "Minstrel" strings... something seems strange for a newbie in Minstrel Music!
the diameter of the fourth cord is finer than the third and the second is different (wound)...
Is it a reason for that?
Take a look at my site : http://homeusers.brutele.be/goodtimerollers/
JimD - Posted - 07/09/2007: 07:11:52
I have photocopies of the old banjo tutors that I made at Boston Public Library, New York PL (Lincoln Center), Brown Univ. Lib., Library of Congress, and Trinity College (Hartford CT).
There may be others that I am not recalling at this time.
I also have a large personal collection of 19th c. banjo, guitar and mandolin music.
I have heard that there are reprints and possibly tab versions of some of these as well -- perhaps someone else can help with that.
Jim Dalton
http://www.singingstring.org/JD/
trapdoor2 - Posted - 07/09/2007: 10:34:34
Jim, "Tuckahoe" reprints are available at Elderly Instruments; Briggs, Rice, Converse and Buckley. There is also a set "The Early Minstrel Banjo" books, including seperate covers for Converse, etc., which are in TAB as well as notation. Then, Bob Flesher has two books of TAB out, one is a beginners course and the other is about 60 tunes in TAB, right out of the early tutors.
Additionally, there is "The Banjo Clubhouse" where you can listen to amateur recordings (many not quite so amateur!) of these early tunes. There is some TAB and notation available there too. http://www.milfordmusic.com/Banjo%20Audio.htm
"If banjos needed tone rings, S.S. Stewart would have built 'em that way."
===Marc
JimD - Posted - 07/09/2007: 12:03:20
Thanks Marc.
I never paid much attention to the reprints because I've had the photocopies for nearly 20 years. I've had my students work from them too.
Jim Dalton
http://www.singingstring.org/JD/
trapdoor2 - Posted - 07/09/2007: 12:05:03
quote:
Originally posted by teddy111
I've also 2 sets of Aguila "Minstrel" strings... something seems strange for a newbie in Minstrel Music!
the diameter of the fourth cord is finer than the third and the second is different (wound)...
Is it a reason for that?
Not sure, but the strings are usually numbered from treble to bass...and usually the banjo sets use the same string diameter for the 1st and 5th (short). So, the 1st thru 3rd should be plain (1st being the thinnest and third being the thickest), the 4th should be wound and the 5th should be the same diameter as the 1st.
edit: to address the tuning issue...
Try the different tunings (the early schemes were all the same regarding string-to-string relationships) and see what you like. Generically, the thicker strings will sound better with lower tunings. I also use 'feel' to judge whether a set is tuned where I like it. If the strings feel too slack, I'll move the whole tuning up a tone and try it there, etc. Also, certian head diameters tend to like certain tunings (just my opinion, of course). Big heads (like 12-14" diameter) like the lower tunings and smaller heads tend to like the higher tunings.
"If banjos needed tone rings, S.S. Stewart would have built 'em that way."
===Marc
Edited by - trapdoor2 on 07/09/2007 12:11:03
Tackhead - Posted - 07/09/2007: 12:08:25
quote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2
quote:
Originally posted by teddy111
I've also 2 sets of Aguila "Minstrel" strings... something seems strange for a newbie in Minstrel Music!
the diameter of the fourth cord is finer than the third and the second is different (wound)...
Is it a reason for that?
Not sure, but the strings are usually numbered from treble to bass...and usually the banjo sets use the same string diameter for the 1st and 5th (short). So, the 1st thru 3rd should be plain (1st being the thinnest and third being the thickest), the 4th should be wound and the 5th should be the same diameter as the 1st.
"If banjos needed tone rings, S.S. Stewart would have built 'em that way."
===Marc
The envelopes in my set were coded with colored dots to help identify the diameters-sequence.
~John
John Flynn
Tallahassee, FL
BAZ - Posted - 07/09/2007: 12:19:50
I have regular Nyguts on my tackhead and with the help of some great people on the BHO, I experimented with different tunings and settled on dADF#A. Any lower and the strings felt like rubber noodles.
teddy111 - Posted - 07/09/2007: 15:28:45
quote:
Originally posted by Tackhead
quote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2
quote:
Originally posted by teddy111
I've also 2 sets of Aguila "Minstrel" strings... something seems strange for a newbie in Minstrel Music!
the diameter of the fourth cord is finer than the third and the second is different (wound)...
Is it a reason for that?
Not sure, but the strings are usually numbered from treble to bass...and usually the banjo sets use the same string diameter for the 1st and 5th (short). So, the 1st thru 3rd should be plain (1st being the thinnest and third being the thickest), the 4th should be wound and the 5th should be the same diameter as the 1st.
"If banjos needed tone rings, S.S. Stewart would have built 'em that way."
===Marc
The envelopes in my set were coded with colored dots to help identify the diameters-sequence.
~John
John Flynn
Tallahassee, FL
Yes John, mine too... but the fourth string have a smaller gauge than the third? WHY ?Take a look at my site :
http://homeusers.brutele.be/goodtimerollers/
Tackhead - Posted - 07/09/2007: 15:52:11
quote:
Originally posted by teddy111
quote:
Originally posted by Tackhead
quote:
Originally posted by trapdoor2
quote:
Originally posted by teddy111
I've also 2 sets of Aguila "Minstrel" strings... something seems strange for a newbie in Minstrel Music!
the diameter of the fourth cord is finer than the third and the second is different (wound)...
Is it a reason for that?
Not sure, but the strings are usually numbered from treble to bass...and usually the banjo sets use the same string diameter for the 1st and 5th (short). So, the 1st thru 3rd should be plain (1st being the thinnest and third being the thickest), the 4th should be wound and the 5th should be the same diameter as the 1st.
"If banjos needed tone rings, S.S. Stewart would have built 'em that way."
===Marc
The envelopes in my set were coded with colored dots to help identify the diameters-sequence.
~John
John Flynn
Tallahassee, FL
Yes John, mine too... but the fourth string have a smaller gauge than the third? WHY ?
Take a look at my site : http://homeusers.brutele.be/goodtimerollers/
Well, I'm no physicist, but I'd guess it has to do with the tension and vigrating mass of a wound string versus that of a solid string. I know when I bought a set of all-gut strings, the fourth string *was* fatter than the third. Since the instrument was notched at nut and bridge for a 4th wound string, I couldn't use it. Please, someone who knows what he's talking about rescue me
John Flynn
Tallahassee, FL
vrteach - Posted - 07/09/2007: 15:52:46
Because it is wound. It's not really the thickness that makes the difference in tone, but the weight of the string (at least mostly).
I know that Aquila had experimented with a non-wound 4th, because the wound strings wear out quite fast. Marc (trapdoor2) had an experimental set and reported that the 4th string was MUCH thicker than the wound, thicker enough that to work best the nut & bridge would need to be modified.
Erich
-------
http://vrteach.freepgs.com/banjo/
trapdoor2 - Posted - 07/09/2007: 16:11:40
Yup. I'm still playing that 'experimental' 4th today.
I guess I didn't really understand the question. Yes, the wound 4th is smaller...due to the added mass of the windings. Bass strings have been 'loaded' with metal wire since very early on as gut can only get so thick before becoming shoelaces. 
Just like everything else in this ol' world, strings are a pile of compromises. You have to balance the amount of tension vs the scale vs the note required vs the tone vs player 'feel' vs rotational velocity of the earth...ok, maybe not the last one. 
Because there are such a variety of factors, you find many, many choices for strings these days. Everybody likes something just a bit different. I think we're very, very lucky to have a company like Aquila willing to produce specialty strings for such a small group of banjo players!
Another factor is that thicker, heavier strings tend to move more and require higher action. With the 'experimental' string, it is too thick to set down properly in the nut...but if I opened up the groove in the nut it would probably be too low and might buzz. Nylgut is fairly soft, so it kind of squeezed into the notch and has been quite stable for a long time now. I would have bought several wound 4ths by now.
"If banjos needed tone rings, S.S. Stewart would have built 'em that way."
===Marc
vrteach - Posted - 07/09/2007: 17:25:57
So, is your experimental 4th on a fretted instrument? I'm perhaps 6-8 weeks into my second wound Nylgut 4th on my bicentennial and I can already see a bit of a divot in the string at the 2nd fret. I have yet another replacement 4th in line for when this one goes out. But I've been wondering if I should look for a more sturdy wound string--something made for guitar?
I still have the same minstrel-gauge set of nylguts on the fretless tackhead that I put on at last November, or earlier.
Erich
-------
http://vrteach.freepgs.com/banjo/
Edited by - vrteach on 07/09/2007 17:26:36
R.D. Lunceford - Posted - 07/10/2007: 00:51:34
quote:
Originally posted by JimD
Briggs indicates raising the 4th string on This Side of Jordan (p21) and on Pitch Burgundy Plaster (p28).
So he does! Thanks for that info Jim, I missed that.
R.D. Lunceford- "Missourian in Exile"
*************************
Model 1865 Bowlin Fretless Banjo
trapdoor2 - Posted - 07/10/2007: 11:53:40
quote:
Originally posted by vrteach
So, is your experimental 4th on a fretted instrument?
Yes, on my Flesher. I'm still not totally sure I like the solid 4th, I'll go back to the wound 4th in a few months and see if I can draw any comparisons beyond the fret wear issues.
"If banjos needed tone rings, S.S. Stewart would have built 'em that way."
===Marc
Thanks for all the infos too !
