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

121–130 of 332 posts

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

#121

Post by erbo »

dragonshine wrote: post #51

I have met some very competent musicians who have found 432 tuning to be powerfully effective. When I dug into this, I discovered they were tuning the other notes in the scal to frequencies in whole numbered cycles per second, using tables being passed around. So the real change was in the qualities of intervals ; many of these became far more resonant than the compromised resonant qualities we get with equal tempere…

If you're interested in this sort of thing, look for Wendy Carlos' album Switched-On Bach 2000. She revisits the material of her classic electronic music album with modern synthesizer equipment, and uses authentic Bach tunings for the pieces as well. The liner notes for the album explain the tuning systems used, and how they differ from the modern, mathematically-perfect equal temperament. She notes that Bach was himself a first-rate tuner and theorist, and was not above retuning "on the fly" to improve the sound of various compositions. Of course, with synthesizers, a tuning is just a block of data, which can be reloaded as needed.

(As a "bonus track" on the album, she included a realization of "Toccata and Fugue in D Minor." Especially appropriate for the season!)

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

#122

Post by thght »

I think it is totally irrelevant what the exact pitch is. I play guitar for over 40 years and I rarely tune my guitar exactly to 432 or 440, instead, I often tune my guitar about a whole note lower because I like the sound of the strings with less tension.

Whatever the pitch is, I have my moments playing great and playing terrible. If there is one special quality that might be heavenly then it is the artist composing or performing that beautiful piece of music in the moment, and I never experienced that moment being connected with 432hz in any way.

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

#123

Post by nonbel »

mutagen wrote: post #9

Here's the rant I posted to Facebook when someone posted about this a couple of years ago. The site that was on Facebook 404s, including the Wayback Machine, so I can't share all the craziness: The simplest argument against this is the casual way your typical garage bands tune. Not everyone is busting out the tuners and dialing up 440 Hz, when the guitar player figures out they're out of tune with the bass they just…

>"So a 432 Hz retune might be just the thing to mellow out to. Likewise, a 448 Hz retune might be just the kick in the ass I need in the morning to get going. So retune all you like."

I have no idea why my speculations here* seem to be controversial (as judging by the votes), but have you considered that the preferred fundamental pitch actually varies with season, latitude, and time of year? That would explain why no one has settled on a specific pitch for all circumstances. It is ultimately controlled by the length of day. Perhaps time of day as well, if we split the day into sun up and sun down.

*https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12781437

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

#124

Post by jboles »

fl0wenol wrote: post #96
na85 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it work the other way? I'm Canadian and a huge part of our culture is defined by the ways we are unlike Americans. Can't imagine Anglo-French culture works quite like that.

And as an American, I don't know anyone who doesn't like Canada or Canadians, while simultaneously not understanding what makes it different other than basically superficial stuff (i.e. french language, metric, being polite, etc.) So I don't think we have that England/France relationship at all either. It seems pretty special on the world stage. From anyone familiar with it, is New Zealand and Australia's relationshi…

More like Canada and USA.

- At one point New Zealand was part of the colony of New South Wales (until 1841, while the nation of Australia came into being in 1901)

- Australia and New Zealand have fought a number of wars together as close allies.

- Special visas available for New Zealanders in Australia (and vice versa I believe)

- Arch-rivals in sporting matches.

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

#125

Post by ptaipale »

djtriptych wrote: post #59

A second is also pretty close to the time between adult heartbeats at rest. There is some evidence that the human heart rate can quicken or slow in accordance with rhythm in music. Wonder if that changes anyone's argument in here.

Variance in heart rate is much greater than the differences we're talking about.

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

#126

Post by RandomName2020 »

djaychela wrote: post #29
bravo22 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

439 being a prime would be an issue if you were up multiplying a lower frequency to generate it, for example using a PLL. However it is such a slow signal that it would be generated by dividing down a higher frequency. For example you can divide it down from an 18 MHz clock. So, nope his claim doesn't make sense.

Would it not just have been created natively using an appropriate osciallator, given that the reference was from 1939?

Quartz oscillators are usually made in at leas 10th of kHz range, for whatever reason. Second most stable oscillators are LC and would require large coils for lower frequencies.

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

#127

Post by drewmate »

rdiddly wrote: post #113
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…

Anywhere in the USA where there's electricity, the frequency we're hearing the most is probably 60Hz and a couple harmonics thereof. It's between B and B-flat. I've been curious for some time now what it would sound like to perform in a scale tempered around that, such as B = 480 (and 60), which translates to A = about 427.6 by my rough calculation. 60 Hz is everywhere, often at a subliminal level, sometimes at an ob…

Perhaps it is fortuitous that music isn't 'in tune' with everyday background noise. The fact that the frequencies (now consistent) are entirely separate from the buzz of a transformer or garage door opener puts music in its own plane just a bit more magical and pleasing than the quotidian drone we tend to ignore.

Then again, maybe it's just a number and our brains couldn't care less either way.

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

#128

Post by fibo »

Mathematician Here: Pitagora, who discovered music, studied that the lower sound we can Here clear is 27hz, and 432 is a multiple of 27. 27hz is A, and so it is 432hz.

432hz makes a lot of sense, other than that it is up to the director if the orchestra tune on 432 or 440, but since the vibration is so powerful, especially the resonance, it makes sense to use 432 to keep harmony, in my opinion.

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

#129

Post by hamiltonkibbe »

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…

According to NIST It's slightly more arbitrary than that:

The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.

Not sure of the numerological significance of 9192631770.

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

#130

Post by DiabloD3 »

a3n wrote: post #19

> the BBC required their orchestras to tune to 440 Hz instead of 439 Hz because 439 is a prime number, and the corresponding frequency is hard to generate electronically. I followed, until this. Earlier he debunks the significance of 432 per second (including that it's a sum of four consecutive primes), because a second is an arbitrary length of time. But now he says that 439 per second is difficult to generate elect…

And that doesn't even make sense.

An instrument will go ever so slightly out of tune by the time the orchestra is done playing. Temperature and humidity play a large role in how an instrument is tuned.

Post reply on HN