432HZ ?

[FrancisHarmany]

Why am I reading that 432Hz is better then 440Hz ?

Will Xite have 432 modes ?

http://www.432hz.org/

[FrancisHarmany]

can we make this in modular ?

something which pitches down 8hz ? I think it should actually make everything go *slower* right ?

do the regular modules do this ? hmmm.... help me out here I am very curious about this

[FrancisHarmany]

yes!!

I want to explore both sides........... how ?


edit: """To tune to 432 from 440 - you have to shift the pitch down by 1.82%."""

[kensuguro]

432Hz quality
Music on a basis tone of A=432Hz is more transparent, more marked, clearer, gives an obvious musical picture and the Overtones and undertones moves more freely and can multiply themselves more. Music based on 440Hz represents emotions and locks up the head.

This is insane.. There is not one bit of useful information in this statement.

By lowering the pitch 440Hz - 8Hz to 432Hz, the music changes. Which first was painful to the ear changes into a beautiful, warm music whereby relaxation is natural. Overtones are decisive for the sound, this holds for instruments as well as the human voice. The piano tuned in A= 440Hz creates an artificial clarity and strengthens the high stress levels of today. The instruments on which Mozart and Verdi composed their masterpieces were in 432Hz -is the same as C=256Hz- pitched. The original Stadivarius violin was developed to resonate at 432Hz.

Again, this is gibberish. I could care less what the pitches are labeled, but simply this person telling me that "overtones are decisive for the sound" and whatnot has absolutely no value. "strengthens the high stress levels of today"... This has got to be a joke. This is rhetorical nonesense.

I won't dismiss the theory completely.. but the argument is presented so weak, that I seriously doubt this is based on any reliable substance. Notice how the 432Hz deal is overloaded with political reinforcement like "Nazi propaganda", "Freedom of choice", "frequence of the earth", "is it yourself you are expressing or is it the systems". It's simple, you surround the idea with negative statements that would come try if you were to turn down the idea. The the rational becomes "if you turn down 432Hz theory, you agree with Nazi Propaganda", or "you are giving up your feedom of choice", etc. Worst yet, none of these are music related statements.

Now it would make sense if 432Hz is closer to some critical band in the equal loudness curve (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... qloud.html). Or perhaps 432Hz resonates better than 440Hz in a certain hall or room. Perhaps the specific instrument (or a group of) was designed to work at 432Hz.

A simple counter test would be this. Take a sine wave at 432Hz, and create a tritone over that. Or create a harmonic sequence as you wish over that. The do the same with 440Hz. I seriously doubt that the waves themselves would do anything special in the air. None at all, as in impossible by the laws of physics. A sine wave at 432Hz will not be "fuller" than a 440Hz sine wave. Do it with a saw wave. Should be the same.

With acoustic instruments, it's all about design. So if you take an instrument designed for 440Hz, or 442, and tuned it down to 432Hz, the possibility of the instrument creating more resonance is quite slim given that the resonating body wasn't built to resonate at that frequency. So how did these people make 432Hz music? I have absolutely no idea. Maybe they just tuned down the recording post process. Which could mean that the formant got shifted a bit wider, and created a bit of the reverse chipmonk effect.. but that's old school. With pitch lowering technology of today, the formant is maintained so then again, it's the same as the sine wave test. Physics wise, the same thing happens.

So then it's after the waves enter the ear. A problem of cognition. Again, this could have something to do with critical bands.. or perhaps it is a matter of being able to fit more harmonics into the audible range. If the top was 20Khz, then 440Hz would fit 44 (44.454545...) harmonic series, and 432Hz would fit 45 (45.296296...) Perhaps that 1 makes all the difference? But given that the hearing range varies greatly from person to person, the consequence is not that big. Certainly not enough to deem 432Hz as superior.

Another speculation is perhaps it's just exposure to a new frequency relationship. The ear is accustomed to 440Hz and all concepts are related to that set of pitches. Change it to 432Hz and you get signals that do not have concepts related to them yet. (or atleast not familiar concepts) So perhaps it feels "new", or can be related to whatever concepts the listener chooses to relate it to. (or strongly wants to relate it to) And I think this can be seen throughout the site. Also, since 440 is a pretty common reference, tuning up or down can create an effect of relative comparison, which exists on top of the 440hz reference.

Bottom line is, I think contemporary music has moved so far from labeled pitches and distinct pitches, that tuning isn't all that important. We have music of timbre, noise, and randomness that spans way beyond the limitations imposed by a tuning standard. Exploring 432Hz is as equally interesting as tuning 500Hz, or varying it throughout the tune... (called "chorus" in my part of town) Or varying the phase of the waveforms, taking a sound source and putting it in an imaginary environment! All these new things! (I'm being sarcastic)

Na, actually, the importance is in making inspired music. And as long as that is there, it can be on a beat up record that won't play back at a constant pitch, sung by an untrained raspy voice, or keeps looping inside your head for no apparent reason. 432Hz may be cool, and worth exploring, but this site just presents it all wrong.

(one last jab)

the sound carries farther

This makes a volcano erupt in my head. The sound carries further when it has high amplitude, and is at an extremely low pitch (like 10hz) because it can corner around obstacles.

[valis]

There's a lot of exploration outside the normal tuning ranges in the microtonal synthesis circles.

[kensuguro]

yeah, and many of them have a very solid theory behind it. I didn't see one bit of that on this particular homepage. I don't discredit the 432hz idea, anything is worth explerimenting with.. it's just that people should learn to present better arguments, especially when they're trying to present a new concept... geez

I mean, how can you even explore an idea when you can't present it right? Don't support it with some sort of logic, rational... (other than spontaneously saying "because it's better")

Francis, sorry for being very sour about this.. it's not the idea, but the presentation, really. You can do it easily in mod, like stardust says. But I'm not sure if you can reap the full benefits by using synthesis since it doesn't have a tuned resonating body. (well, I guess you can tune the filter...)

[wayne]

Well put, stardust.

From a playing point of view - a violinist friend likes to tune down a little when tackling Bach Sonatas - he says it falls under the fingers better.

[dawman]

Yes Wayne,

That is very common w/ stringed instruments actually.

Look at Leo Koetke's sound achieved from his various tunings used, and many head banger rockers that tune down their Guitars to E Flat swear that the benefits are numerous.

Synths......I am not sure about..

But the resonant body example is the only thing that makes sense to me, for I have heard those results live.

On the other hand, many times that I have heard capoed Guitar tunings, seem to turn a Guitar into a Mandolin, it just sounds choked to me.

Nice discussion though, and Brotha; Man Stardust and Kensuguro have definately made valid points.

[FrancisHarmany]

Ok!!

Well, it seems I might have been a bit too over enthusastic

However this triggered in me a desire to better understand the nature of harmonics!
so I will study this further

[Shroomz~>]

Re- detuned synth lines - I'd often rather listen to some guy hammering out a nicely detuned synth voice with one finger than some 'player' chortelling around a keyboard playing GM soundbank crap like he's freekin' Mozart. All a matter of taste, eh...

[Fluxpod]

Not sure if i follow you here,do you refer to synth tuning or the general tuning of the ad/da? Like A-Weighted?

[valis]

yeah, and many of them have a very solid theory behind it. I didn't see one bit of that on this particular homepage. I don't discredit the 432hz idea, anything is worth explerimenting with.. it's just that people should learn to present better arguments, especially when they're trying to present a new concept... geez

Bringing up microtonal synthesis was my way of pointing out that there's a lot more to alternate tunings than just reverting to an 'old standard' for pseudo-scientific reasons and upholding it as the One True Tuning. Of course I guess I could have just stated that outright.

It's my understanding that notes have generally been defined by their separation and not by the absolute value, also in my readings over the years it seems like the further back you go in European history, the more divergent the tunings were. Usually a certain monarchy or cathedral would define what people accepted as the de facto tuning for their area, and pieces composed there were often wildly different when performed elsewhere and/or performed today.

In fact one of the things that started people down the microtonal synthesis path was just trying to emulate tunings of other cultures where they didn't adhere to the western 7 whole note octave & circle of 5ths tuning, and then people have gone on from there to explore for pure geekery.

[Shroomz~>]

Fluxpod, non-standard tunings are just nicer on my ears for some reason.

[Fluxpod]

Fluxpod, non-standard tunings are just nicer on my ears for some reason.

In the synth domain i agree 100%.I was just thinking in the ad/da world like..A-weighted converters.

[Shroomz~>]

Ah yes. No I was thinking more in terms of creative timbre-based tuning perceptions.

[kensuguro]

Bringing up microtonal synthesis was my way of pointing out that there's a lot more to alternate tunings than just reverting to an 'old standard' for pseudo-scientific reasons and upholding it as the One True Tuning. Of course I guess I could have just stated that outright.

Ah, I see what you mean. I thought you were referring to the more recent ones like just intonation, etc. that would have more of an effect on how waveforms interact in a chord.

But ya, I think before people had a clear understanding of the physics behind waveforms, tuning and temperament were more or less "evolved" through common practice and therefore had locality. In terms of tuning, I'm much more interested in temperament, rather than just shifting everything up and down. Equal temperament at 440, 432, or 1000 for that matter, would still have the same physical effect because the 12 tone relationship is still the same.

I play lots of piano recently, and still can't get my head around the IV not being where my brain expects it to be.

[garyb]

tunings are tempered for things like harmonics and the behavior of metal and wood as the pitches are changed on an instrument as well as the resonance of the entire harp on a piano. it wasn't because people were stupid. it was because it sounded better(more consonant), even if it was less technically correct.

[valis]

And the classical cathedrals I referred to were often tuned to the material of the pipes used in the organ and the hall they were in, and so players tuned to that as well. Also in addition to the materials and immediate environment, one might suggest that things like the elevation and general cimate (barometric pressure) have had some impact on tunings across regions as well.

To go the other direction from the linked article, we could discuss to what degree the 12 tone system (the so called "pythagorean tuning" which might have even been present in Babylonian texts) is really a 'pure' system in some physical or metaphysical sense, and how much that's actually influenced by cultural bias. There are other systems that descend from non-western cultures where there are completely different tunings altogether.

A good example of this is a Gamelan assembly using the pélog tuning system, because while it does typically use 7 notes, in most cases only 5 notes are present in the Gamelan assembly and the intervals are a good counterpoint to the discussion of just intonation. In the chromatic scale (or diatonic scale) when an instrument is tuned to just intonation (or by using Hermode tuning in electronic instruments) the idea is to avoid the 'beating' that occurs when the intervals aren't simple ratios (3:2), especially with chords. However in the Gamelan assemblies the intervals are tuned not to avoid the beatings but rather to create the beating. In fact pélog tuning is setup so that the beating is actually constant across the 5 note range of the Gamelan assembly, so that no matter what notes (or chords?) are played the beating is constant and gives what is usually described as a 'shimmering' effect. And of course the Gamelan comes to us from Bali and Java, Indonesian cultures.

[kensuguro]

tunings are tempered for things like harmonics and the behavior of metal and wood as the pitches are changed on an instrument as well as the resonance of the entire harp on a piano. it wasn't because people were stupid. it was because it sounded better(more consonant), even if it was less technically correct.

right, I was a bit unclear. I totally agree. I was trying to say that there is something wrong with equal temperament which is supposed to be technically correct, and that there were many historical temperaments that sounded much better. Equal temperament is full of compromises and incorrect intervals.. but since it allows for transposition.. ya know, I really wonder. I still think IV is. It's a little more flat that what I think it should be. I've done the math before, maybe I can revisit it it since I remembered I figured out why.

[garyb]

it's maddening, no? some things still somehow defy logic. music's perfectly mathematic and yet the experience of it...