What kind of orbs do you use?

For those of you who are experienced:

Do you use wide orbs (10 degrees or more) or tight orbs (5-6 degrees)? Or a mix, depending on the aspect type, or planet?

Wanted to post this as a poll, but it seems I don't have the privileges....

Phil said:

For those of you who are experienced:

Do you use wide orbs (10 degrees or more) or tight orbs (5-6 degrees)? Or a mix, depending on the aspect type, or planet?

Wanted to post this as a poll, but it seems I don't have the privileges....

Click to expand...

I use 8 degree orbs for conjunctions and oppositions. 5 for sextiles. 8 for trines.

2 degrees for the minor aspects.

Tight: 6 for conjunction of the luminaries; 5 for conjunctions of all other planets; 5 also for opposition and other hermetic aspects regardless of luminary or planet involved; 1.5 for parallel of declination; 1 for parallel of latitude; for longitudinal conjunctions with stars: 3 for mag 1 stars, 2 for mag 2 or mag 3 stars, 1 for mag 4 or mag 5 stars (and nebula); 1.5 for parallel of declination with mag 1 through mag 3 stars, 1 for mag 4 or 5 stars (and nebula)

On the astro.com free horoscope page for erecting charts I modify the orb by entering 60% in the designated box.

Less than 8 for natal, the closer the stronger the effect

Transits I use go up to 2-2.5 degrees either side for outer planets, and up to 2 for inner planets. The angles and the POF is also a good exact timer.

How did you guys decided on how tight your orbs should be?

I was influenced-when I first began studying astrology back in the 1960's-in these orb limits by certain Modernist authors (Charles Carter, Manly P. Hall) and since these orbs seemed to "work", I have continued using them over the subsequent decades.

Luminaries get a wider berth with me - I'll give up to 10 for a conjunction involving them and *sometimes* a degree or two more with other aspects than I would with other bodies. In general: Conjunctions, 8-9. Oppositions, 8. Trines, 7. Squares, 6. Sextiles, 4-5. Quincunx, 3. Fixed stars and parallels of declination usually receive no more than 2. (In the stars' cases, perhaps three if the magnitude is high.)

@LeadLeftHand: I chose these orbs through experimentation. Just studying/comparing the charts of myself and others I knew and arriving at the best conclusions I could based on real-life traits and events.

The orbs I use for predictive as based on my own observations when *things* happen.

LeadLeftHand said:

How did you guys decided on how tight your orbs should be?

Click to expand...

Experience. When you do a natal horoscope, for example, of persons you really know well, then you can see where the wider orbs are still noticeable.

I give the luminaries wider orbs, as others here.

I tend to use the following table:

Planet /........ conj.... opp.... square/trine sextile quincunx

Sun...............10...........9............7..............5...........4
Moon.............10...........9............7...............5...........4
Mercury...........8...........7............5...............4...........3
Venus..............8...........7............5...............4...........3
Mars................8...........7............5................4..........3
Jupiter.............8...........7............5...............4..........3
Saturn.............6...........5............4...............3..........2
Uranus.............6...........5............4...............3..........2
Pluto................6...........5............4...............3..........2

I then add the sum of 2 elements and divide by 2.
For example: Sun Conj Uranus Orb = 10 / 6 = 8
.

Phil said:

Experience. When you do a natal horoscope, for example, of persons you really know well, then you can see where the wider orbs are still noticeable.

I give the luminaries wider orbs, as others here.

I tend to use the following table:

Planet /........ conj.... opp.... square/trine sextile quincunx

Sun...............10...........9............7..............5...........4
Moon.............10...........9............7...............5...........4
Mercury...........8...........7............5...............4...........3
Venus..............8...........7............5...............4...........3
Mars................8...........7............5................4..........3
Jupiter.............8...........7............5...............4..........3
Saturn.............6...........5............4...............3..........2
Uranus.............6...........5............4...............3..........2
Pluto................6...........5............4...............3..........2

I then add the sum of 2 elements and divide by 2.
For example: Sun Conj Uranus Orb = 10 / 6 = 8
.

Click to expand...

My experience is for very tight orbs for uranus . About 1 degree or less especially if it is contacting your sun (at around age 42)

aspect orbs
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/dictionary/orbs.php
http://www.skyviewzone.com/astrology/aspects.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horoscope
http://www.myastrologybook.com/aspects-and-orbs.htm
http://www.astro.com/astrology/in_aspect_e.htm
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7107&highlight=orbs
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7867&highlight=orbs

this can be a contentious issue like house systems and vary quite a lot.

I use, 10' for sun/moon
8' + or - for hard aspects, conj,square,opp
6' + or - for trine easy aspects 120' and sextile 60'
3' + or - for quincunx

8-10 for the luminaries, 5-7 for other planets. 1 for sensitive points or asteroids. i would use a wider orb for a conjunction, opposition, or square, and a narrower orb for a sextile or quincunx.

But then:

1. Sometimes you will see a stellium where the planets are not all conjunct, but I tend to treat it as a big conjunction, because the midpoints are interspersed within the planets and these also have interpretive merit.

2. I stretch it a bit for synastry. Don't ask me why, but sometimes happy couples have aspects between important planets (like Venus and Mars) in orbs that I would normally disallow in an individual chart. Maybe 12 for luminaries and 8-10 for other planets.

3. Obviously the tighter the orb the more the individual is going to feel it.

4. Sometimes I look at minor aspects like septiles and noviles. Then you have to use a really narrow orb. Otherwise, the aspects start bumping into one another. For example, a quincunx of 150 degrees bumps into a tri-septile at 154 degrees and a bi-quintile at 144 degrees.

When I began studying astrology in 1972, fairly tight aspect-specific orbs were the rule: 5 for conjunctions, oppositions, squares, trines (maybe 7-8 if luminaries), 4 for sextiles, 2-3 for the common minors, 1 for the points. Since I recently began studying traditional astrology, I've loosened up a bit; obviously, though, tighter is always stronger. I read somewhere (Kevin Burk I think) that aspects don't have orbs, planets do. It's the physical, moving bodies that form and dissolve the angular contacts, the aspects are just mathematical expressions of the phase relationships between them, with no mass or moment of their own. Makes sense to me. Also, the nature of the planets involved says more about the quality of their relationship than the type of aspect between them. For example, a square between Venus and Jupiter can be easier to handle than a trine between Mars and Saturn.

Still, I can't indiscriminately swallow 15 degrees for the Sun, 12 for the Moon, 7-8 for Mercury, Venus and Mars, or 9 for Jupiter and Saturn in all cases. For major (Ptolemaic) aspects, I can live with, at most, 8-10 for aspects between the luminaries, 5-6 for Mercury through Saturn, and - because they hold their positions for so long - no more than a couple of degrees for the outer planets (although there is a school of thought that says they're more ponderous and therefore should have BIGGER orbs, not smaller). One degree for the personal points still seems about right (except, perhaps, for the "Gauquelin sectors" where I believe 5-6 is the rule). When it comes to minor (Keplerian) aspects, I go with no more than 3 degrees for the "hard" aspects and 2 for the "soft" ones. But in practice I have an elastic approach that weighs each aspect individually and in combination with other chart factors before I decide whether or not to "take" one with a wider orb. I always look for partile aspects first and work outward from there until I reach the limit of my "comfort zone."

ETA: Another consideration is "out-of-sign" aspect orbs. The "tradition" doesn't acknowledge these aspects, probably because astrologers originally used "whole sign" rather than "harmonic" positions. Unless the orbs are very tight ( no more than a couple of degrees for any planet and any aspect), I tend to treat them as of secondary importance, if at all. Bil (well, it's "Bil" on the book cover) Tierney called them "dissociate" aspects since they disrupt the elemental or modal consistency of an aspect pattern.