Re: Tuner comparison CA-30 vs CA-40

On May 14, 9:15 pm, de...@xxxxxxxxx (Derek Tearne) wrote:
Mike Fleming <{mi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I suspect the CA-40 would be the one to go for but was really
wondering whether anyone had actually used both of them and could
compare the experience.

I just acquired a CA-40 so here's a bit of a comparison.

The CA-40 is a tiny bit larger than the CA-30 but appears to be a lot
larger due to the layout.  The screen is about 30% larger - which is
really good - it also means that the tiny check marks that allow you to
tune a pure major or minor third are actually visible should you ever
choose to do that.

The case is a major improvement.  With the CA-30 to replace the
batteries you have to squeeze the case and split into two halves - and
of course this also happens whenever the tuner is dropped.  The CA-40
has a little slide out cover on a battery compartment.  The CA-30 has a
pathetic little groove at the back that you can wedge a credit card or
similar in to make a stand (the CA-10 uses the same method) - the CA-40
has a proper fold out stand.

I chained three tuners - the CA-40, an old Boss TU-8 and the CA-30 at
the end -(the CA-40 has an output socket - another improvement on the
CA-30).  They all three gave the same results (phew), the two Korg
tuners were easier to read and use than the Boss - the CA-40 being the
easiest.

Normal tuning the three tuners were pretty similar and hard to pick any
differences even when tuning the low B (fundamental, not octave).  The
big difference was notes above the 12th fret, particularly on the B
string.  The Boss was flailing around like a landed fish whereas the two
Korg tuners were completely happy and solid.  

There are a couple of subtle differences in operation between the CA-30
and CA-40 - mostly to to with how you change the pitch of the audible
tone (press to cycle vs hold and change using the arrow keys) - the CA-1
uses the same method as the CA-30 so I suspect that the internal circuit
is the same.

--- Derek

--
Derek Tearne - de...@xxxxxxxxx
Vitamin S - improvisation from Aotearoa/New Zealandhttp://www.vitamin-s.co.nz/

I have the CA-40. Tried a few in the store and it heard my B string
(not harmonic) clearly everytime. The inline feature, although I
rarely use it, is handy. The only drawback for me is there's no
backlight, so on a dark stage you have to play games with the angle to
use available lighting to read it, or a flashlight. That part's a
pain, but otherwise I like it a lot. In very serious situations, I
generally use my Korg TU-2, but leave it at home most of the time. The
CA-40 does the job just fine.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Tuner comparison CA-30 vs CA-40
    ... I just acquired a CA-40 so here's a bit of a comparison. ... The CA-40 is a tiny bit larger than the CA-30 but appears to be a lot ... They all three gave the same results, the two Korg ... Normal tuning the three tuners were pretty similar and hard to pick any ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Tuner comparison CA-30 vs CA-40
    ... compare the experience. ... I just acquired a CA-40 so here's a bit of a comparison. ... The CA-40 is a tiny bit larger than the CA-30 but appears to be a lot ... Normal tuning the three tuners were pretty similar and hard to pick any ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Re: Help settling a bet
    ... apparently need the CA-40 - although my CA-30 seems to do a fine job of ... tuning the low B. ... I tune with the 12th fret harmonic on the low B and often the E; ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)