Some things have been said about this earlier.
I'm interested in finding out albums which are recorded with musical instruments tuned at 432 Hz and NOT reducing speed of a full track recorded with 440 Hz tuning. Reducing the speed might reduce the 440 Hz to 432 Hz ( if it is present!) but it will also alter voice and other unrelated sounds. That's not acceptable.
So are all albums shown on Youtube just original albums being played slow or rerecorded with instruments detuned to 432Hz ? So will drums also come under this scheme ? Cymbals certainly wouldn't I guess.
Would be interesting to know if anyone has made any comparisons.
Cheers.
Edit: Just came across this link. Haven't read it yet. Something to look at later.
http://higherperspective.com/2013/12/heres-convert-music-432-hz.html
Wonder if it is all rubbish. Need to do some listening myself but would like to get some suggestion about which album.
one more link
http://omega432.com/432-music/the-importance-of-432hz-music
Check out this link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74JzBgm9Mz4#t=59
I'm interested in finding out albums which are recorded with musical instruments tuned at 432 Hz and NOT reducing speed of a full track recorded with 440 Hz tuning. Reducing the speed might reduce the 440 Hz to 432 Hz ( if it is present!) but it will also alter voice and other unrelated sounds. That's not acceptable.
So are all albums shown on Youtube just original albums being played slow or rerecorded with instruments detuned to 432Hz ? So will drums also come under this scheme ? Cymbals certainly wouldn't I guess.
Would be interesting to know if anyone has made any comparisons.
Cheers.
Edit: Just came across this link. Haven't read it yet. Something to look at later.
http://higherperspective.com/2013/12/heres-convert-music-432-hz.html
Wonder if it is all rubbish. Need to do some listening myself but would like to get some suggestion about which album.
one more link
http://omega432.com/432-music/the-importance-of-432hz-music
Check out this link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74JzBgm9Mz4#t=59
Last edited:
FWIW.......
Didn't John Lennon use 443hz on his A string?
Or, was it his D string that he tuned a bit flat?
It seems like I read something about this decades ago.
Didn't John Lennon use 443hz on his A string?
Or, was it his D string that he tuned a bit flat?
It seems like I read something about this decades ago.
Last edited:
There is a lot of stuff written about all this. Wonder how much of it is correct. I guess we could do some experiments of our own by searching out recordings that are suitable for testing. It would mean dedicating quite a bit of time to get to the bottom of it !🙂
A could be anything between 380 and 462Hz.
There was no consensus until the austrian government decided on 435Hz in 1885.
In 1936 the American Standards Association suggested 440Hz (originally they wanted 439Hz but engineers complained that 439 is a prime number and thus very hard to generate).
Modern baroque pitch is 415Hz although some organs adhere to Chorton pitch which puts A at 466Hz. Most european and the better US symphony orchestras use between 442 and 444Hz.
The pretty or not so pretty patterns the site shows on vibrating plates are completely meaningless as the pattern depends on the physical dimensions of the plate. You could quite easily make the 440Hz patterns look like the 432Hz ones by changing the size of the plate.
The length of one second and thus the number of Hertz is also completely arbitrary as it is 1 day divided by 24 divided by 60 and again divided by 60.
On a different planet with a different day length a second would also not be the same.
Bottom line: Complete hogwash.
There was no consensus until the austrian government decided on 435Hz in 1885.
In 1936 the American Standards Association suggested 440Hz (originally they wanted 439Hz but engineers complained that 439 is a prime number and thus very hard to generate).
Modern baroque pitch is 415Hz although some organs adhere to Chorton pitch which puts A at 466Hz. Most european and the better US symphony orchestras use between 442 and 444Hz.
The pretty or not so pretty patterns the site shows on vibrating plates are completely meaningless as the pattern depends on the physical dimensions of the plate. You could quite easily make the 440Hz patterns look like the 432Hz ones by changing the size of the plate.
The length of one second and thus the number of Hertz is also completely arbitrary as it is 1 day divided by 24 divided by 60 and again divided by 60.
On a different planet with a different day length a second would also not be the same.
Bottom line: Complete hogwash.
There is a lot of wishy-washy thinking regarding pitch, some "theorize" all kinds of junk, from misunderstandings of Kepler (some of which are entertaining, even if "new age wishful thinking") to other new age nonsense. There is a lot of junk in the early music scene, too, as the idea of a standard pitch for the time is absurd, yet the high priests of that world dictate the new dogma of low pitch.
There was a fascinating paper in the 70s later published as "the Pythagorean Plato" that makes some interesting use of number theory (among other things) pulled from Plato's Republic, which details how Plato's organization of society within that work is in fact a description of western tonality, with the intent that the perfect society should have perfect harmony. (Forgive me if I don't represent that perfectly, it's been many years since I read it!).
Here is a piece that (some personal quibbles aside) is a pretty good summary of the history of pitch standardization.
Concert pitch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There was a fascinating paper in the 70s later published as "the Pythagorean Plato" that makes some interesting use of number theory (among other things) pulled from Plato's Republic, which details how Plato's organization of society within that work is in fact a description of western tonality, with the intent that the perfect society should have perfect harmony. (Forgive me if I don't represent that perfectly, it's been many years since I read it!).
Here is a piece that (some personal quibbles aside) is a pretty good summary of the history of pitch standardization.
Concert pitch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I agree with darwin on this. Another example is in the construction os violin family instruments. The top and back are tuned to specific pitches ("tap" tones), which are they are tuned to different pitches from one another, make the instrument more resonant. Moreover, the top is not a consistent thickness, as the thickness is varied to where the naturally occurring nodes are made thinner. So, playing a guitar that is designed for a certain tuning will sound different at another tuning. That does not mean it has any relationship with the vibrating spheres or any other kind of nonsense, it is merely not what it was designed for, so it performs differently. People will here different volumes of sound and always think the louder one sounds better, or the sharper pitched. That is a different phenomenon, however, but these perceptual issues should not be inferred to have mystical characteristics or be proof of some silly non-scientific theory.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.