Comparison of Tuners and Q-tune

R

Rpschultz13

Active member
Here is a comparison video of Q-tune and the 3 top tuners IMO, from Right to Left:
Polytune 3 in Buffer Monitor Mode
Q-tune (1590b) in Buffer Monitor Mode
Peterson Mini in Buffer Monitor Mode
Turbo Tuner 300 Mini in True Bypass (Buffer not available)

Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Similar to the above, only with Q-tune "Techie" Tuning Style.

Notice that the accuracy against a tone generator is generally +/- 0.05 Hz. With most of the strings this is <0.1 Cents, but as the frequency gets lower the distance between semitones decreases. And so even though the frequency accuracy remains about the same, the Cent accuracy decreases.

 
Last edited:
And here is what the waveform looks like for a guitar string. See how complicated it is. This is the challenge of writing tuning algorithms. The frequency of a simple sinewave is easy with a common zero-crossing algorithm. But a vibrating string is much more complicated, you can see the harmonics in the below video.

The Q-DSP-library that we are using (yes that's why we named it Q-tune) is very sophisticated. A very simple explanation is that it takes the signal, converts the zero crossings data to bitstream (1s and 0s) and THEN uses an autocorrelation algorithm of that.

 
Last edited:
I guess I didn't realize this until recently but it looks like Q-tune and Peterson have a very similar spin rate, while Poly3 is about twice as fast and TurboTuner is WAY faster. I've used TT for so long it never bothered me. But now I think I like the slower rate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top