 |
Korg Forums
A forum for Korg product users and musicians around the world.
Moderated Independently.
Owned by Irish Acts Recording Studio & hosted by KORG USA
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sharp
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Posts: 18197
Location: Ireland
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| EvilDragon wrote: | Also, the majority of the world uses meter as a reference (and actually, the whole of math uses it, since it's an SI base unit), not feet or miles 
Also, sun's diameter is not fixed, it is going to change over time as hydrogen reserves deplete, first it's going to increase, then it's going to cool off to a white dwarf not much larger than Earth.
That video is just a lot of mumbo-jumbo for no good purpose really. |
There's a lot that's to question there too. Just like the standard of 432Hz Middle A changed, a mile was the standard unit of measurement. If you stick with just the label of "Mile" it's believed it comes from the Romans. Its based on the average length of the human leg at X amount of steps, but if you drop the label "mile" as a measurement goes back as far as recorded history. Oddly enough no matter how far you go back in recorded history, it's easy to tie all this together so the maths always work.
The variation in size of the sun doesn't matter. The math's still balances with no remainder when you take proper measurements which are in order to assign something a value, you calculate it's average.
lol.... You must all think I'm barking mad.  For me science simply doesn't answer any of the real interesting questions in life.
Regards
Sharp.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
EvilDragon
Platinum Member
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 1992
Location: Croatia
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sharp wrote: | | lol.... You must all think I'm barking mad. |
Yep, pretty much. 
"Averages" don't help. That's why mile was replaced with a more precise, standardized unit of meter. Miles differed through the ages. Meter is consistent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sharp
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Posts: 18197
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EvilDragon wrote: | | Sharp wrote: | | lol.... You must all think I'm barking mad. |
Yep, pretty much. |
lol...
While I wouldn't dream to compare myself to anyone as awesome as Christopher Columbus, the best minds of his time believed he as mad too and would fall off the edge of the earth.
That was only 500 years ago.
40,000 years ago the Mayan people knew things about the math's of the Galaxy we modern man couldn't verify until the 1970's.
| Quote: | | "Averages" don't help. That's why mile was replaced with a more precise, standardized unit of meter. Miles differed through the ages. Meter is consistent |
That's why I said if you only wanted to look at the label "mile". The actual measurement goes back as far as recorded history and comes from nature.
Just as 432Hz is a measure inline with nature, and 440Hz is not, It's man made value that fits only "modern manufacturing" needs.
Regards
Sharp.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EvilDragon
Platinum Member
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 1992
Location: Croatia
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sharp wrote: | | Just as 432Hz is a measure inline with nature |
I don't buy this premise at all. Numerology alone is not proof enough to support it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SanderXpander
Platinum Member
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | A small controversy exists between the world wide accepted music tuning frequency where A = 440 Hz vs. the alternative frequency where A = 432 Hz. |
There is no controversy, you can tune to whatever you want. The only controversy here is is the one created by articles like this about the various superstitious/numerological nonsense going around.
| Quote: | | This controversy, though small, is said to have a profound impact on the music we listen to today, and for the last 60+ years. There are even stories about Nazis playing a part in this dispute. This debate also tends to involve conspiracies but I’ll keep it more factual based. |
I shall prove how this article is anything but "factual based".
| Quote: | What is A = 440 Hz?
A = 440 Hz is the musical term for how the note A will be finely tuned, so that it vibrates at 440 cycles per second, or hertz. This accepted standard is consistent among all music instruments created and is designed to make it easier to match other instruments. The frequency A = 432 Hz is slightly lower pitch, but it, instead, is considered the “Universal Tuning”. |
I'm going to assume "Universal Tuning" in this context means "tuning to the universe" mumbo jumbo because it certainly isn't universal in any other sense. Neither is 440 except in digital instruments and modern pop bands.
| Quote: |
A Quick History
A = 440 Hz is the standard note frequency for middle A that the American Standards Association recommended in the mid 1930’s. It quickly was adopted in other countries and with all music instrument manufacturers. Before this time, the primary pitch used was A = 435 Hz. |
Before the nineteenth century, there was NO standard. Everybody just tuned to whatever. Today, orchestras across the world tune to many different pitches. E.g. the NY Philharmonic tunes to 442, in Germany most modern orchestras tune to 443, in Russia they tune as high as 450, old music tends to tune to 415, etc. etc.
| Quote: |
Why was A = 440 Hz chosen? This part seems to have a bit of lore behind it, but the popular theory is that a Nazi propaganda minister named Josef Goebbels pushed for it to cause our bodies to be out of harmony with nature. Nature, it seems mathematically, also resonates at 432 Hz, not at 440 Hz. |
Nature resonates at 432Hz? I can't even begin to state how nonsensical such a statement is. Sure it does. It also resonates at every other conceivable frequency. Otherwise there wouldn't be any music, or light, or reality.
| Quote: | | In any case, 440 Hz has been accepted and is the standard in use today. |
Demonstrably false, see above.
| Quote: | A Little Bit of Tech
A = 440 Hz tuning is not perfect, matter of fact it’s far from perfect. When using 440 Hz as the reference pitch, the measured frequencies of the other notes start to fraction off. For example when A = 440 Hz, Middle C becomes 261.63 Hz. The E above = 659.26 Hz. The rest of the scale is fraction off in a similar manner.
A = 432 Hz tuning, on the other hand, is perfect. When using 432 Hz as the reference pitch, the measured frequencies of the other notes all become whole tones. Middle C = 256 Hz, E above = 648 Hz. This stays consistent throughout the entire note range. |
Considering the demonstrated math, we're not talking about tempered tuning I suppose. I wonder if the proponents of this idea ever tried to play any music using natural or Pythagorean tuning and realized how awful it makes most music sound. Also, consider how the length of a second and the use of the decimal system are completely arbitrary.
| Quote: | Benefits
Listening to music in 432hz is said to have a much more natural feel and a smoother sound. Other said benefits are less irritation at louder volumes, so we can listen to the music at a much louder volume. The last said benefit is a better tighter mid and low frequencies. Unfortunately, this is hard to prove, since the test’s are solely on how the music feels and sounds to us as individuals. The general consensus is that 432hz tuning does improve the sound and feeling. |
The general consensus is nothing of the sort, though I encourage everyone to enjoy music any way they see fit. "Tighter mid and low frequencies" are certainly quantifiable though, and I don't see any evidence for this claim. At face value, I must call BS. And I warn everyone not to play their music very loudly, no matter what tuning is used.
| Quote: | Negatives
The major problem with tuning to 432 Hz is that the standard is 440 Hz. Any acoustic piano would have to be retuned to play in 432 Hz which takes a professional. Digital keyboards will sometime have the ability to fine tune the pitch but not all. Lastly, the spacing of the frets on guitars are tuned for 440 Hz, so perfect 432hz becomes a bit more difficult to achieve. |
Not a problem in most instruments at all. Piano is one example where it is relatively tricky although if you really cared it's easy enough to do. But you can tune a guitar to 432 just fine, it has nothing to do with the fret spacing as its their relation to the string length that affects the accuracy of the note pitch. Another insight into the lack of understanding the writer of this article has.
| Quote: | Experiments
To hear 432 Hz at it’s best, you will need a good set of stereo speakers or a nice set of headphones. A song recorded fully in 432 Hz will yield the best results. There are some that can be found on youtube where you can hear a song completely recorded in this alternative frequency.
This experiment can also be done with decent results any popular song recorded after the 1940’s. You’ll want to use a audio edi ting programs which will allow a user to pitch a file up or down (Pro Tools, Peak, Audacity, Logic, etc). You’ll want to fine tune pitch down the song 32 cents (-32 cents). |
To hear any frequency at "it's" best you will need a good set of stereo speakers or a nice set of headphones. A song recorded in the intended frequency will surely give better results than anything you transpose digitally. Since the argument is that 432 works out so nicely without decimal points, it's worth noting that transposing a song at 440 down by 32 cents actually gets you an A of 431.942 Hz.
| Quote: |
Most pro keyboards have the ability to adjust the pitch. For guitar players, use a chromatic tuner that will tune to that frequency. Most chromatic tuners, though, only go to 435 Hz. |
I don't think I need to explain on this forum the drawbacks of transposing/tuning up or down any sample based instrument. I would venture that the artifacts or sound quality degradation produced by this are more detrimental than beneficial but beauty is in the ear of the beholder of course.
As for the video with the glass creating nice patterns from music tuned to 432 Hz against 440 Hz, this is just disingenuous. Use a glass that is slightly wider and the opposite will be true.
By the way, during Napoleonic times an effort was made to use a ten tone system because it "made more sense". It sounds horrible. The twelve tone tempered system is (with some distance) the best compromise between universality and capability for harmonic intervals that sound good. That said, our thirds and fifths aren't perfect, a fact that is completely ignored by the math of the 432 crew.
Last edited by SanderXpander on Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:51 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SanderXpander
Platinum Member
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FWIW, "science" should not be viewed as a list of answers but the method for a never-ending quest for answers. It's fine to dispute any answer given by science. But once you understand the method used to get the answer, it becomes pretty hard to do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EvilDragon
Platinum Member
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 1992
Location: Croatia
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SanderXpander wrote: | | FWIW, "science" should not be viewed as a list of answers but the method for a never-ending quest for answers. It's fine to dispute any answer given by science. But once you understand the method used to get the answer, it becomes pretty hard to do so. |
Quoted for truth! That's what science is all about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bald Eagle
Platinum Member
Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Posts: 2278
Location: Long Island, NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Davd C. Polich
Full Member
Joined: 29 Aug 2014
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This thread's a fun read.
Bottom line - A = 440hz isn't going to go away anytime soon. I'm sticking with A = 440hz! And I'm leaving my Kronos tuned to that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SanderXpander
Platinum Member
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hahaha in Dutch we have a saying, "hij heeft de klok wel horen luiden maar weet niet waar de klepel hangt". I'm not sure if there's an English equivalent but it basically means someone has heard all the right terms but he has no idea how they fit together. That link is a great example of someone randomly combining a bunch of scientifically valid numbers/facts, unburdened by any relevant education. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sharp
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Posts: 18197
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The reality of this seems to be ignored. It's through the normal course of science itself that verifies the existence of this very interesting mathematical “anomaly” that pops up all over the place.
Good science should not be blindly dismissive. In fact it should always be questioned.
Remember it was only 500 years ago Christopher Columbus sailed to America and didn't fall of the edge of earth. Quite an accomplishment too, but a drop on the ocean compared to the fact the Mayan people 40,000 years earlier knew exactly where we were in the Galaxy.
Since is only one tool of discovery. It takes fare more imagination to search for the true answers to the workings of the universe.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SanderXpander
Platinum Member
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 7860
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sorry, which reality? I think I pointed out most of the errors already. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jimknopf
Platinum Member
Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Posts: 3374
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sharp. we all like you very much!
Just accept that this theory is not going to convince us: it doesn't even begin to make any bit of logical sense to me. See above for some basic arguments in SanderExpander's post and the links Dan posted.
So please accept that we completely vibrate on 432 Hz sympathy frequence with you, but rather won't tune anything else according to that. 
_________________
Kronos 73 - Moog Voyager RME - Moog LP TE - Behringer Model D - Prophet 6 - Roland Jupiter Xm - Rhodes Stage 73 Mk I - Elektron Analog Rytm MkII - Roland TR-6s - Cubase 12 Pro + Groove Agent 5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sharp
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Posts: 18197
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SanderXpander wrote: | | Sorry, which reality? |
The one you believe in, as do I. We don't know everything though, so you have to consider the fact it's best to be open minded about things we don't understand yet.
| Quote: | | I think I pointed out most of the errors already. |
Not in anything I've said. I also felt the website was just dismissed without actually looking into any of this seriously.
Try this video. It's an experiment showing various notes tuned with Middle A at 432Kz vs 440Hz.
In my opinion, all notes where Middle A is 432Hz are clearly more define and natural compared to 440Hz.
Regards
Sharp.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sharp
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Posts: 18197
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jimknopf wrote: | Sharp. we all like you very much!
Just accept that this theory is not going to convince us: it doesn't even begin to make any bit of logical sense to me. See above for some basic arguments in SanderExpander's post and the links Dan posted.
So please accept that we completely vibrate on 432 Hz sympathy frequence with you, but rather won't tune anything else according to that. |
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I never said I believe all this myself either. I merely found it all very interesting to begin with, and felt the need to share it with my fellow musicians. The more I actually research this and not simply dismiss it, the more interesting it gets.
Check out that last video for example. Notes where middle A is tuned to 432Khz do look more natural than anything where middle A was tuned to 440Hz.
Is that not worth talking about? I find it very interesting.
Regards
Sharp.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
