Greg Howard wrote:

As far as the restrictiveness of “uncrossed” playing goes, I stand by my comment with regard to physical movement.

I play both “crossed” (Stick) and “uncrossed” (homemade) instruments, almost every day, and I agree with this. Most complex engineering/ergonomic designs involve a series of trade-offs, unfortunately. If there is a loss of left-hand dexterity with uncrossed, there is also a different angle placed on the left wrist which is more comfortable, at least for me. I have more left-hand dexterity with crossed, but I can play longer uncrossed.

Uncrossed play is not an ergonomic panacea, though. Applying an uncrossed tuning to an instrument designed for cross-handed play might address one issue, but will introduce others. The standard cross-section of a wooden neck is to be thinner on the outside edges, and thicker in the middle, obviously. Uncrossed play puts the hands on the edges, and in a more “cramped up” configuration, which can be fatiguing to the hands. The fatigue is added to by a guitar player’s habit of trying to keep the left thumb directly beneath the fingers, as in a barre chord.

The only negative thing I can think of about the “open-handed” approach is that you can occasionally bump one hand into the other. But this doesn’t happen to me any more, especially using the Baritone Melody tuning.

That is one advantage with uncrossed play on a 10-string instrument. You can easily drop down a fourth with the right hand (putting both hands at about the same level on the fretboard), giving you the tonal range of a ‘baritone’ tuning on the low end, without having to give up the highest string.

If a player insists on having 4ths under the left hand, then I think a mirrored 4ths tuning is much better than the conventional 4ths arrangement.

One need only visit Rob Martino’s site to appreciate the validity of mirrored 4ths.

I think, though, that conventional (parallel, straight) 4ths and inverted bass 5ths are more compatible, mentally, for the player who does BOTH with the left hand. Greg’s “Dual Bass Reciprocal” tuning is an example. I have few mental adjustments for the left hand going from inverted 5ths in the bass, to tapping a 6- or 7-string guitar in straight 4ths. The relative locations of the left hand “roots” don’t change as one goes from inverted 5ths to straight 4ths, as we all know. That wouldn’t be the case with mirrored 4ths.

Am I being argumentative?

I hope so! I enjoy a friendly ‘argument’. This would be a boring forum if all we did, was write about how wonderful and perfect the Stick is.

Jay

Hi Jay,

Thanks for the corroboration. I’d like to pursue this with you a bit more. for now i’ll just deal with the issue of “open-handed” play (I hope you don’t mind my changing the subject back to what it was in my post you were responding to, since we’re still talking about the same thing.)

I would respectfully suggest that your fatigue levels when playing open-handed (what you call “crossed”) might not be an issue if you used more hand and arm energy and less finger energy. I realize I’m making an assumption about the way you play, but I know from my own experience with my students that once they make the change from a finger-movement approach to a more arm and hand-movement approach, the release of tension makes for a less fatiguing experience all around. The benefits gained in dynamic control and rhythmic certitude are also substantial.

Making the transition to the subconscious motion of hands and arms doesn’t happen overnight, but it does happen if you stay focused on practicing hand movement.

I believe that by reaching over each set of strings Emmett’s approach enhances the capabilities of the hand for executng a wider variety of musical lines. Here’s a great example:

Play this major chord shape with your left hand on strings 2,3 and 4 and then again on strings 8, 9, and 10. (the numbers in the diagram are fret numbers)

--3---
--3---
-----5

First play all the notes at the same time (you may need to double-stop the two 3rd fret notes for the 2, 3 and 4 chord). This is very much like holding the chord on a guitar would be. But we don’t have the other hand to activate the notes, so if we want to freely articulate and sustain the notes we need to liberate the left hand by opening it up so that it’s free to move. By dropping your left elbow down, you can very naturally form the shape of the chord as you reach over the strings. Keeping your fingers parallel to the frets won’t help.

Now play these same two chords as arpeggios, and try sustaining the notes. It’s not hard in either chord to play the arpeggio as individual notes. Sustain them as long as you can.

What do you think? How does the hand fit the shape in each instance? The open-handed orientation makes it much easier to command the individual fingers to do their jobs, especially when reinforced by a slight movement of the hand for each note played.

The sound of the sustained arpeggio is a great sound. If you’re not involving your hand much, or if you have your fingers basically parallel to the frets, it’s difficult to do.

Personally, I would trade this open-handed technique advantage for an extra high 4th any day of the week:) To me it’s not about how many notes I have available, but how it feels to play. And it feels great (the general public’s opinion of the music I’m playing is a whole other issue;).

Now if you are playing a shorter scale instrument these things might be less of an issue for “uncrossed” play. But I think on a bass scale length, if you can’t play these chords down near the nut, aren’t you also losing range? I think the series of tradeoffs is more involved than you make it out to be. I’ve studied Emmett method and taught it for many years. Assuming the player can learn to play more with the hands on the open hand orientation, here’s how it breaks down to me.

Emmett’s open-handed apprach with inverted 5ths:
-Greater hand mobility means a wider variety of techniques are available to the player.
-Greater visual cohesion as hands are generally more centered with the head.
-by tuning the melody string set slightly lower, or by practicing hand switching, the rare instance of hand collisions can be avoided completely.
-Expanded chords possibilities by reaching either hand over both sets of strings.
-Less finger energy required. Using large muscle groups in hands and arms is less fatiguing overall, and a stronger foundation for dynamic control and rhythmic consistency.

Uncrossed with dual 4ths:
-No hand collisions

Of course I’m open to other examples of things the uncrossed approach gives the player that aren’t available in the open-handed approach.

If someone can present examples of some techniques that are actually easier in the “uncrossed” position, I’d really like to see it. It would help me with my teaching. My feeling is that the desire to “uncross” comes from seeking the familiar as a comfort. It’s an understandable desire, but does it help with two-handed tapping? I’d like to understand the impulse as thoroughly as I can so that I can best help my students.

Happy Tapping, Greg