Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

jakubmarian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 332 posts

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#201

Post by nitrogen »

castratikron wrote: post #165
cbr wrote: post #92

An equilateral triangle whose area and perimeter are equal has the area of exactly the square root of 432. Let's say we have an equilateral triangle with a perimeter of 3x units. Then each side is x units, and the area is sqrt(3) * x^2 / 4 square units. So we set: 3x = sqrt(3) * x^2 / 4 3 = sqrt(3) * x / 4 3*4/sqrt(3) = x 12/sqrt(3) = x Then the area is: sqrt(3) * (12/sqrt(3))^2 / 4 sqrt(3) * 144 / 12 sqrt(3) * 12 sq…

I saw that in the article, too, but it didn't make sense to me. One has units of area and the other has units of length. How can they possibly be equal? That's like saying a 700 foot wall is the same size as a 700 square foot apartment.

It is the intersection between a line and a parabola.

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#202

Post by tpeo »

anigbrowl wrote: post #76

I have been following this for years, being both a sound engineer and a bit of a hippie who knows a lot of other hippies. The basic issue is that 432 is a numerologically interesting number compared to 440. So if it's more interesting it should be better for artistic purposes, goes the argument. However this falls flat as soon as you consider that the 432 is only interesting relative to the completely arbirtrary dura…

Well, I'm not a sound engineer, but I think it's conceivable that 432Hz tuning might sound better due to entirely non-mystical reasons. From the perspective of harmonic entropy, or at least I think so, the tighter differences between each notes' frequencies and that makes the problem of fitting intervals into ratios harder.

I recognize that this bit is entirely personal, but I think that can make otherwise "simple" music more enjoyable. But my enjoyment of music is almost entirely dependent on the careful management of the "Wall of Sound" effect and by how much noise (in the form of timbre, attacks, number of different voices) is introduced or removed from the track. And I think that's the key difference between, say: a library piece, or a movie score; and pieces meant to be listened on their own.

Also, the expression "cargo cult numerology" pretty much made my day.

http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/paperspdf/HarmonicEntropy.pdf

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#203

Post by clay_to_n »

analog31 wrote: post #98

An amusing aside: As I understand it, a lot of rock bands use "drop" tuning, in which the guitars and electric bass are tuned down by a semitone or more. Explanations on web forums vary, but tend to revolve around the range of the typical male singer, as well as a preference for a more "heavy" sound.

This is true, but in drop tunings (and most alternate guitar tunings) the instrument is still usually tuned to 440 Hz - each string is just tuned to a different note in a 440 Hz scale.

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#204

Post by zimbu668 »

harrumph wrote: post #191

I have no idea why this laughable article/idea persists, but the actual answer about 440 Hz is completely commercial and mundane. Decisions made by the J.C. Deagan mallet instrument company at 1770 W. Berteau in Chicago are the sole reasons why A=440. I once worked in this building, still called the Deagan building. The company made chimes and xylophones and instruments. They had customers all over the US. Each symph…

Maybe you should read the article first:

"Why do we use A = 440 Hz? (spoiler: no Nazis)"

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#205

Post by vacri »

largote wrote: post #189
johncolanduoni wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that definition was grandfathered in such that it matched the previous definition of a second up to the previously specified precision. You've just moved the arbitrary part to the number 9,192,631,770. The same thing was done for the meter (defined such that the speed of light is precisely 299,792,458 m/s), ampere (current which produces 2 × 10−7 N/m of force between two parallel conductors). There's plans to…

Couldn't the Kilogram be derived from the Liter, which in turn can be derived from the Meter? From what I recall: - 1 Liter of pure water at 4 Celsius is 1 Kg. - 1 Liter is a cube with 10 cm on each side.

I always thought it was amusing that the basic definition of the liter was taken at 4C, but that lab equipment was calibrated at 20C...

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#206

Post by timehastoldme »

tpeo wrote: post #202
anigbrowl wrote: post #76

I have been following this for years, being both a sound engineer and a bit of a hippie who knows a lot of other hippies. The basic issue is that 432 is a numerologically interesting number compared to 440. So if it's more interesting it should be better for artistic purposes, goes the argument. However this falls flat as soon as you consider that the 432 is only interesting relative to the completely arbirtrary dura…

Well, I'm not a sound engineer, but I think it's conceivable that 432Hz tuning might sound better due to entirely non-mystical reasons. From the perspective of harmonic entropy, or at least I think so, the tighter differences between each notes' frequencies and that makes the problem of fitting intervals into ratios harder. I recognize that this bit is entirely personal, but I think that can make otherwise "simple" m…

What???

Tighter differences between each notes' frequencies??

Please explain this thought.

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#207

Post by cc439 »

largote wrote: post #189
johncolanduoni wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that definition was grandfathered in such that it matched the previous definition of a second up to the previously specified precision. You've just moved the arbitrary part to the number 9,192,631,770. The same thing was done for the meter (defined such that the speed of light is precisely 299,792,458 m/s), ampere (current which produces 2 × 10−7 N/m of force between two parallel conductors). There's plans to…

Couldn't the Kilogram be derived from the Liter, which in turn can be derived from the Meter? From what I recall: - 1 Liter of pure water at 4 Celsius is 1 Kg. - 1 Liter is a cube with 10 cm on each side.

Generating a perfectly homogenous 4C over an environment large enough to contain a kilogram of any useful substance is going to be incredibly difficult and mearusing it even moreso. There's a reason every unit of measurement aside from mass is derived from an electrical property; we can measure electrical properties down to ridiculous precision, measurements small enough that all measurement uncertainty is removed.

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#208

Post by Retra »

largote wrote: post #189
johncolanduoni wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that definition was grandfathered in such that it matched the previous definition of a second up to the previously specified precision. You've just moved the arbitrary part to the number 9,192,631,770. The same thing was done for the meter (defined such that the speed of light is precisely 299,792,458 m/s), ampere (current which produces 2 × 10−7 N/m of force between two parallel conductors). There's plans to…

Couldn't the Kilogram be derived from the Liter, which in turn can be derived from the Meter? From what I recall: - 1 Liter of pure water at 4 Celsius is 1 Kg. - 1 Liter is a cube with 10 cm on each side.

You could do that, but if you're trying to set standards, you have to take into account your ability to measure these things reliably and accurately. (It doesn't do any good to set standards that nobody can conform to because their equipment is never sensitive enough to use them.) Can you measure a liter more accurately than you can measure a kilogram of some reference material?

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#209

Post by Turing_Machine »

gaur wrote: post #185
zokier wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 1MHz crystals are common off-the-shelf items, 440kHz are not?

In order for that explanation to make sense, one has to assume that 11x multipliers and 25x dividers were common off-the-shelf items during the time period in question. If the choice is between a custom crystal and two custom boards, the custom crystal is going to be the far less painful choice.

I would bet that the BBC was using the 1 MHz crystal and the associated division/multiplication circuitry for other frequency control purposes, not just the musical test tone. 1 MHz is smack-dab in the middle of the medium wave band usually used for AM broadcasting, and the BBC has always broadcast on many different frequencies at the same time.

Having all the broadcast frequencies controlled by a single reference crystal would have some obvious advantages (and a few disadvantages too, of course).

Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory

#210

Post by vacri »

nonbel wrote: post #95
anigbrowl wrote: post #76

I have been following this for years, being both a sound engineer and a bit of a hippie who knows a lot of other hippies. The basic issue is that 432 is a numerologically interesting number compared to 440. So if it's more interesting it should be better for artistic purposes, goes the argument. However this falls flat as soon as you consider that the 432 is only interesting relative to the completely arbirtrary dura…

I wouldn't be so sure there is nothing special about the duration of a second. It comes from dividing a day into two sets of 12, then those 12 into five sets of 12 (12x5=60), then those 60s into 60 each. We know our bodies do follow circadian rhythms, so you have the initial link to length of day. Then everything else is split into sets of 12, a number with exceptional properties that natural selection may optimize t…

12 is a funky number, but arbitrarily grouping them into 2's and 5's takes the shine off.
Post reply on HN