"I cannot say with certainty that there is no difference in the psychological effects of A = 432 Hz and A = 440 Hz, but I" you lost credibility right there... get out of here scrub.
The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
281–290 of 332 posts
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Werent they trying to count the atoms in a perfect sphere of silicon?
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
"if you take a track and play it a little bit faster or slower it still sounds great or awful as at the default speed in most cases." Yup. Another example: in most of the world (where the television system is PAL or SECAM) movies are played on TV or released on DVD at 25 frame per second. But to achieve this frame rate, they take the theatrical film release at 24 fps and speed the video and audio up by 25/24th (4.17%…
Another example is the kind of dastardly television trick of increasing the speed of a television program to shorten it and thus increase the amount of advertising space that can be run alongside the program. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6i1VVikRu0 This video claims that TBS is currently increasing the speed of Seinfeld episodes a whopping 9%, reducing a 25 minute episode to some 22.5 minutes.
Stanley Kubrick would have hated this. ;)
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Message-From-Stanley-Kubrick-...
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
She's right to get angry. There's nothing special about 432Hz (see my comment above on it's absolutely arbitrary nature), BUT the numerology that falls out of musical harmony is is indeed special and makes most of human race happy because of the aesthetic satisfaction that Pythagorean harmony (or even it's equal-tempered cousin) delivers to people. Science is very good at describing things and why they're interesting…
> science can't tell you what's beautiful or how to live. Yes it can. If you feel otherwise, it is because you're ignorant of how science actually works and how general its base principles are.
Thats a very flippant comment.
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#285I 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…
There's something special about 432 Hz that has nothing to do with how the music is perceived -- if you're tuning the traditional way, by forming fifths above and below A as ratios of 3/2 and 2/3, then a lot of the numbers you hit are nice integer numbers of hertz as well, because 432 is 2^4 * 3^3. Meaningless in practice, but it makes it convenient to describe the tuning of, for example, a stringed instrument.
If it's a high composite number is all you need, then why not define 440 Hz as any highly composite number of your liking, ignore the SI-related-fractions and don't worry about odd ratios anymore. Or is this more about an issue with cumbersome input on digital (tuning) devices?
Just to pick two:
45360/100 is not that far away either
55440 (a superior highly composite number, 2ˆ4 ⋅ 3ˆ2 ⋅ 5 ⋅ 7 ⋅ 11 ) would have a built in Base-10 mnemonic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_composite_number
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_highly_composite_numb...
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#286I 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…
"if you take a track and play it a little bit faster or slower it still sounds great or awful as at the default speed in most cases." Yup. Another example: in most of the world (where the television system is PAL or SECAM) movies are played on TV or released on DVD at 25 frame per second. But to achieve this frame rate, they take the theatrical film release at 24 fps and speed the video and audio up by 25/24th (4.17%…
If anyone wonders where the odd NTSC frame-rate ratio originated from, Matt Parker (standupmaths)
did a comprehensive video, with some original write-up on this recently:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GJUM6pCpew
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tunings (whether by key shift or by reference frequency or whatever other means) can evoke a different sort of feeling and mood in music IMHO. Music is such a personal thing in so many ways, so even though the "beneficial healing energy" / "pure tone of math fundamental to nature" thing is kind of BS, I'll allow a little out there mystical pseudobabble. :) It's just a pity in a way that the mystical BS focuses only o…
Yea, I don't like this idea of belittling people because they got pulled into this idea. Tuning is arbitrary. I've listened to some comparisons between A=432 vs 440 and I think the 440 actually sounds better. But then again, like this article even states, it depends so much on the piece. If you're listening to stuff from the 1700s/1800s, it would make sense to try to use the tuning they used at the time, if only to t…
> 440 actually sounds better
I'm curious how you can tell. A double-blind test spaced a few minutes apart (enough for you to forget the frequency so you couldn't tell if what you were hearing was tuned higher or lower than what you heard on the previous trial) would be interesting.
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. That's exactly why, actually. This is what the second was once defined as, but the problem is that the length of a day varies slightly - up to ~8s depending on the time of year and other seconds. As the article men…
>"It'd also be crazy hard to keep track of how long a second is at any given moment, since some of the variation is random from tidal forces." I think you could use something like this, which may be accurate enough: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_equation It may be more accurate to use something like the JPL ephemerides to convert between the two though: https://naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/toolkit_docs/FORTRAN/…
If I understand you correctly, you are advocating for defining the second such that its length varies, but its connection to a day does not? And you would also introduce locality to the definition?
edit: Or perhaps you meant to tune variably, and not redefine the second. That sounds more sensible, but not as practical.
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
"if you take a track and play it a little bit faster or slower it still sounds great or awful as at the default speed in most cases." Yup. Another example: in most of the world (where the television system is PAL or SECAM) movies are played on TV or released on DVD at 25 frame per second. But to achieve this frame rate, they take the theatrical film release at 24 fps and speed the video and audio up by 25/24th (4.17%…
> For NTSC, the film release is sped down by a much smaller amount (0.1%) during the 3:2 pulldown to adjust from 30 to the exact 29.97 fps that NTSC needs. No. For NTSC they just drop (throw away) 1 frame from every 1000 frames, so there's no speed-up or speed-down in audio track.
There must be a speed-up since the audio track is not divided into frames. Dropping a 33ms chunk of audio would be very noticeable.
Re: The “432 Hz vs. 440 Hz” conspiracy theory
#290I 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…
The second is defined as the time it takes for two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the 133 Ce atom to make 9,192,631,770 transitions. How is that not special?
9,192,631,770 is divisible by 441, why are we not using 441Hz?!