I thought this 432hz theory is all ******** .
I recorded my lespaul before retuning to 432hz then I recorded it retuned to 432hz .
I am shocked , it sounds way better than 440hz , as if octaves are increased & ads depth to notes
Are these Nazi Germany 440hz thing real ******** or really something to be scared of ?
I recorded my lespaul before retuning to 432hz then I recorded it retuned to 432hz .
I am shocked , it sounds way better than 440hz , as if octaves are increased & ads depth to notes
Are these Nazi Germany 440hz thing real ******** or really something to be scared of ?
The nazi thing is pure BS. The people who insisted on 440Hz were the Americans who originally wanted 439Hz but relented eventually because 439 is a prime number and this made it very difficult to produce electrically.
No classical orchestra in continental Europe actually uses 440 but use something between 442 and 445Hz. Although UK ones and the lesser US orchestras do actually use 440Hz.
Historically A could be anything from 385-460 or so. It is almost completely arbitrary prior to electronic tuners.
No classical orchestra in continental Europe actually uses 440 but use something between 442 and 445Hz. Although UK ones and the lesser US orchestras do actually use 440Hz.
Historically A could be anything from 385-460 or so. It is almost completely arbitrary prior to electronic tuners.
Review and Measurements of Benchmark AHB2 Amp | Page 38 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
Modern classical recordings are very bright, too bright -> spectacular in the auditorium. That is why I prefer older recordings, less aggressive for my ears / brain.
And many times, too many, the interpretations are also better or at least I like them more.
Modern classical recordings are very bright, too bright -> spectacular in the auditorium. That is why I prefer older recordings, less aggressive for my ears / brain.
And many times, too many, the interpretations are also better or at least I like them more.
+1 utter clickbait.
Why does it take half a dozen posts before anyone bothers checking at least the wikipedia article before they post?
Last edited:
Pitch is very interesting, tuning lower is easier, tuning higher requires better instruments that can have strong strings, harder pin blocks and better response to temp and humidity changes...
I attended 2 concerts recently, one being at a private home, the other at the national center, both were very nice. The orchestra tune at 444+ and the sound was breathtaking, so full of emotions and one of the best performance of Mozart symphony. I didn't liked the Chopin concerto...
So this is very particular, because Mozart is known to have composed with a like 400.. something piano forte which was very low... but his work sounded brilliant at 444+ with all the intent, the tragedy and the poignancy. It made me love Mozart again and appreciate him more with new eyes, and now I played one of my favorite record, of which I doubted the performance and recording quality... but it was a rediscovery, I was shocked how good it was and how much involving, eating cakes after cakes without stomach ache.
and I didn't had any drink. however at the private home concert, with drinks, it was not that great, except from the fact that I was in the room with the singers.
as long as pitch is constant, I believe there is not much difference as long as musicians plays their best.
If you want to look for conspiracy and explain how something sound different, I draw your attention to tuning systems (temperaments). how you actually remedy the unevenness of some intervals during the pitch progression is what makes the sound so different, this can have a great effect on the actual expression of music.
I attended 2 concerts recently, one being at a private home, the other at the national center, both were very nice. The orchestra tune at 444+ and the sound was breathtaking, so full of emotions and one of the best performance of Mozart symphony. I didn't liked the Chopin concerto...
So this is very particular, because Mozart is known to have composed with a like 400.. something piano forte which was very low... but his work sounded brilliant at 444+ with all the intent, the tragedy and the poignancy. It made me love Mozart again and appreciate him more with new eyes, and now I played one of my favorite record, of which I doubted the performance and recording quality... but it was a rediscovery, I was shocked how good it was and how much involving, eating cakes after cakes without stomach ache.
and I didn't had any drink. however at the private home concert, with drinks, it was not that great, except from the fact that I was in the room with the singers.
as long as pitch is constant, I believe there is not much difference as long as musicians plays their best.
If you want to look for conspiracy and explain how something sound different, I draw your attention to tuning systems (temperaments). how you actually remedy the unevenness of some intervals during the pitch progression is what makes the sound so different, this can have a great effect on the actual expression of music.
Exactly. Acoustic guitars, in particular, have a number of their own resonance frequencies, from the wood and from the air trapped inside the body. When you play, these resonances colour the sounds you're hearing; for instance, the main air resonance might add some "woof" to an open-E chord.
Now if you change the guitars tuning, the guitar's own resonances no longer line up exactly the same way with the newly retuned string frequencies. So your E chord may no longer sound exactly the same, for pretty much the same reasons why a first-fret barre F chord sounds slightly different than a second-fret barre F#.
When I started playing guitar, cheap guitar tuners didn't exist, and I was a penniless student with no money. I tuned by ear for a long time - and that means the guitar was rarely at exactly the same pitch twice!
Later I realized that I could tune the 3rd-fret "G" note on the low E string to match 100 Hz hum from the AC mains (I was in a country with 50 Hz AC at that time.) That gets you close to the 440 Hz standard, but not exactly. That G should be 98 Hz for exact 440 tuning - so I was about 2%, or one-third of a semitone sharp.
A few years later I moved to the USA, with 60 Hz mains. Now I tuned the 2nd-fret "B" note on the 5th (A) string to match 120 Hz mains hum. Once again, this is close, but not exactly the same as 440 Hz tuning: that B note should have been tuned to 123.47 Hz, not 120 Hz.
These sorts of small tuning changes makes no difference at all when you're singing and playing by yourself, as you only have to worry about your guitar being in tune with itself, and your voice being in tune with the guitar.
That changes when you make music with other people, or even play along with a record / tape / CD / DVD / WAV / MP3 file. Now your guitar has to match the pitch of the other instruments you're playing with. And that's when it becomes very useful to have a tuning standard, that everyone's instrument is set to.
So there is absolutely no magic that happens exactly at 440 Hz. It's just a convenient standard that helps everyone in the band (or the orchestra) to play together without too much trouble. And it gives instrument manufacturers a standard to design their instruments around, so that the cello's "G" string is tuned to exactly the same pitch as that 3rd-fret "G" on the 6th string of a guitar, and both instruments have strings that are not too tight and not too slack.
This brings back painful memories of a duo who used to perform together at an acoustic jam I used to attend regularly. Painful, because one played guitar, the other played flute, and they were never quite in tune with each other! They would play these beautiful musical pieces, but they sounded atrocious, because of the horrible tuning mismatch.
-Gnobuddy
Back in the day when Mamselle and I would go to the NY Philharmonic, Carnegie Hall or the Cleveland Orchestra over in Berlin Seijii Ozawa raised the pitch of the Berlin to 448 (it's now back at 442).
As Pitch in Opera Rises, So Does Debate - The New York Times
The A used by most symphony and opera orchestras today for uniform tuning ranges between 440 hertz, or cycles per second, to 444 hertz. By comparison, in 1740, Handel favored an A pitched at 422 hertz. Mozart, in 1780, tuned to an A at 421.6 hertz. The French standardized their A at 435 hertz in 1858. A little more than 20 years later, Verdi succeeded in getting a bill passed by the Italian Parliament to tune at A 432 hertz.
''All the great bel canto composers wrote for a pitch of about A 432,'' he said. ''We have now reached a pitch that is near a half step above the Verdi tradition. If the pitch continues to rise, it will undermine the entire Italian vocal tradition.''
As Pitch in Opera Rises, So Does Debate - The New York Times
The A used by most symphony and opera orchestras today for uniform tuning ranges between 440 hertz, or cycles per second, to 444 hertz. By comparison, in 1740, Handel favored an A pitched at 422 hertz. Mozart, in 1780, tuned to an A at 421.6 hertz. The French standardized their A at 435 hertz in 1858. A little more than 20 years later, Verdi succeeded in getting a bill passed by the Italian Parliament to tune at A 432 hertz.
''All the great bel canto composers wrote for a pitch of about A 432,'' he said. ''We have now reached a pitch that is near a half step above the Verdi tradition. If the pitch continues to rise, it will undermine the entire Italian vocal tradition.''
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.