This has been discussed before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29849033 It's a very, very bad study. If you want to know how bad: it would lend equal support to the hypothesis "everyone's heart rate drops 4.8bpm in one day".
Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
11–20 of 93 posts
Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#12How did they transform the original music to A=432Hz? If they did it in the naïve way, it would result in a decrease in tempo by almost 2%.
i'm also guessing they didn't test different temperament tunings either, which is a shame given that the whole argument for 432Hz has to do with mathematical symmetry
A 432 A makes the math behind music so much nicer to work with (ignoring legacy baggage).
Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
i'm also guessing they didn't test different temperament tunings either, which is a shame given that the whole argument for 432Hz has to do with mathematical symmetry
Nice to see this argument referred to on here. A 432 A makes the math behind music so much nicer to work with (ignoring legacy baggage).
Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#14https://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/versa/versa9.html
art. 282
(22) Convention of November 16 and 19, 1885, regarding the establishment of a concert pitch.
Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#15Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#16How did they transform the original music to A=432Hz? If they did it in the naïve way, it would result in a decrease in tempo by almost 2%.
Good question, but nowadays all video players and platforms are able to increase/decrease the speed of a video without affecting the audio's pitch, so I guess the reverse is also widespread...
There seem to be other things the article doesn't tell us, such as how the authors verified that the music they used had been tuned to A=440 in the first place (since it's far from universal) or why, given an infinite number of possible tuning frequencies, a great many of which have been chosen by musicians at some point, and given no obvious physical basis for this specific choice, they went for A=432 instead of any other value below 440.
[edit: removed warranted but uncivil snark]
Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#17Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#18Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice to see this argument referred to on here. A 432 A makes the math behind music so much nicer to work with (ignoring legacy baggage).
Why? The length of the second is arbitrary.
Re: Music Tuned to 440 Hz versus 432 Hz and Health Effects (2019)
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice to see this argument referred to on here. A 432 A makes the math behind music so much nicer to work with (ignoring legacy baggage).
Why? The length of the second is arbitrary.