432hz

[Ron Party]

So, I just stumbled onto this concept of 432hz v. 440hz. I've no idea. Is it legit? Are there any valid arguments supporting this concept? Has this been properly vetted?

Per the home page at 432player.com:

Welcome to the world of the 432 Player!
The 432hz community is rising.
Welcome to our home, the home of natural tuning.
Creating the 432 Player together, us as developers and you as listeners.
We will try and answer any question, would love to discuss about anything and everything and take any advice and suggestion to our heart.

When we talk about music, we talk about clean, pure sound.
The 432 Player is the only music player that allows music lovers to listen to their music in the A=432hz tuning, with no adjustments needed, just press play and start feeling the vibes.

Our goal is to share our love for pure tuned vibrations with the 432hz community all over the globe.
We want everyone to enjoy it.
So, we made a version which is completely FREE, no poor half baked app with expensive extras to purchase, just sit back and enjoy.

Why 432hz and Why 432 Player

There is a recent movement within the musical fields which has been initiated by a small yet rather passionate group of young people who advocate a change of musical tuning from 440Hz to 432Hz. Those in favor claim that tuning the music to this specific and particular tuning is going to result in a more natural sound which could reveal numerous advantages. Right off the bat, it’s supposed that this would make all of us happier as well as healthier and more peaceful. In any case, the movement also lays out series of rational explanations as to why 440Hz tuning is actually negative.

A Hypothesis Already Proven

In any case, a music scholar – Maria Renold described the way she tested out the actual impact of 432Hz tuning to people. By plating solfeggio tones to thousands of people for the last 20 years, she managed to come to the stunning conclusion that over 90% of all the people to whom she played the music preferred the 432Hz tuning. Interestingly enough, when asked about how what they’ve heard, people used words such as correct, peaceful, sun like and completed to describe the overall sensation that the music gave them.

The 432Hz Player Application

By taking into consideration all of the above and relying on the stunning and already proven qualities of 432Hz tuning, we’d like to bring to your attention this 432Hz App called “432 Player”. It is specifically designated to work on both Android and iOS devices.
This 432HZ Player is going to pitch-shift music from the regular 440Hz to the far better 432Hz tuning on the fly.
The application is incredibly easy to use, and you should literally press one button in order for it to start working. It’s fast, responsive and convenient and you can convert any song to the far more beneficial 432Hz frequency.

 

[amirm]

I can see someone wanting to tune an instrument that way but changing the speed of entire music production including vocals and such, makes no sense to me.

 

[RayDunzl]

My CD player has a slower-faster knob on it.

Useful for old boombox recordings.

I think I'll find 432Hz on it and see if Audio Buddy notes anything tonight without me saying anything.

The problem here would be tunes playing 98.18% of regular speed, since it isn't a pitch shifter.

changing the speed

I don't think pitch shifting changes the speed.

Audacity has the ability. Change pitch but not tempo. As I remember the results are a bit crude.

 

[Juhazi]

https://jakubmarian.com/the-432-hz-vs-440-hz-conspiracy-theory/
In 1939, there was an international conference held in London that resulted in a recommendation to use A = 440 Hz, as a compromise between the various tuning systems used at the time, some of which reached beyond 450 Hz. This recommendation was further supported by the fact that the BBC required their orchestras to tune to 440 Hz instead of 439 Hz because 439 is a prime number, and the corresponding frequency was hard to generate electronically with standard electronic clocks. Eventually, in 1955, the standard A = 440 Hz was adopted by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).

Virtually all commercially produced contemporary music is tuned to A = 440 Hz. Nevertheless, most symphony orchestras ignore the standard and tune to 441, 442 or 443 Hz instead, while orchestras specializing in older music may sometimes use a tuning close to the one for which the piece was originally written, which may range from 415 Hz to 470 Hz.

One of my friends is a piano teacher, she prefers 442Hz tuning!

 

[BDWoody]

https://jakubmarian.com/the-432-hz-vs-440-hz-conspiracy-theory/
In 1939, there was an international conference held in London that resulted in a recommendation to use A = 440 Hz, as a compromise between the various tuning systems used at the time, some of which reached beyond 450 Hz. This recommendation was further supported by the fact that the BBC required their orchestras to tune to 440 Hz instead of 439 Hz because 439 is a prime number, and the corresponding frequency was hard to generate electronically with standard electronic clocks. Eventually, in 1955, the standard A = 440 Hz was adopted by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).

Virtually all commercially produced contemporary music is tuned to A = 440 Hz. Nevertheless, most symphony orchestras ignore the standard and tune to 441, 442 or 443 Hz instead, while orchestras specializing in older music may sometimes use a tuning close to the one for which the piece was originally written, which may range from 415 Hz to 470 Hz.

One of my friends is a piano teacher, she prefers 442Hz tuning!

I should try Reggae at 420... It'll probably just give me the munchies...

 

[pjug]

By plating solfeggio tones to thousands of people for the last 20 years, she managed to come to the stunning conclusion that over 90% of all the people to whom she played the music preferred the 432Hz tuning.

I never heard of solfeggio tones before but I looked it up and it is pretty funny. My wide is a yoga teacher. I am going to ask her if her gong is tuned to solfeggio frequencies and make her feel bad if she doesn't know.

 

[Juhazi]

https://www.researchgate.net/post/I...music_tuned_in_432_Hz_in_comparison_to_440_Hz

https://acousticengineering.wordpress.com/tag/432-vs-440-hz/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31031095

 

[Juhazi]

Reminded me of this saga https://londonjazznews.com/2014/07/14/lp-review-miles-davis-kind-of-blue-deluxe/

One of the interesting discoveries made in 1992 when the tapes were first exhumed, was that Side 1 of the stereo issue, consisting of the tracks recorded at the first session, So What, Freddie Freeloader and Blue in Green, had been playing at the wrong speed since 1959. (The fault in the tape recorder which caused this had been corrected by the time of the second session in April.) The prime stereo tape recorder had been running just over one percent slow, so on playback and during the mastering of albums it ran a little fast. Hence the stereo (but not the mono) releases of Kind of Blue — and virtually all the releases were stereo — had always had those three tracks playing at slightly the wrong pitch. Not just the LPs, but the CDs, cassettes, reel to reel tapes and MiniDiscs…

 

[PaulD]

As far as I know, it's the equivalent of a type of "cable sound" argument - people will hear what they want to hear. It's very difficult to test double blind because the subject will hear the pitch of the music. Instruments have typically been tuned slightly higher over the centuries because of improved manufacturing and because higher string tension makes them louder, ie better at projecting without amplification.

As a composer I don't care and I have never heard a convincing argument that it makes a difference. If it did then transposing music to another key would make a psychological difference rather than just moving it up or down in pitch. (I'm remembering Nigel in Spinal Tap going on about D-minor being the saddest key of all - ROTFL) It's part of a bigger idea about Historically Informed Performance... Some historical performance practice ensembles play in old tunings and pitches, it's just another thing to try guarantee authenticity, but there is significant debate about its usefulness and relevance. The wakypedia article on it is ok https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historically_informed_performance I'm sure there are plenty of recordings online.

Here's a paper that says the fundamental tuning frequency (432 vs 440) makes no difference. https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1138343/file.pdf

Here's one https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1550830718302763 that basically says that listening to music has health benefits regardless of the tuning.

 

[DonH56]

Despite playing for decades I have never heard of 432 Hz tuning (442 Hz, many times). I did know tuning was all over the map over the years, just never played a piece designed for A = 432 Hz I guess. Can't really imagine it matters...

 

[scott wurcer]

Despite playing for decades I have never heard of 432 Hz tuning (442 Hz, many times).

The was a USB sound card with a defective 44.1K clock (0.6% fast) verified several ways including a calibrated frequency standard. I could find no evidence that anyone ever noticed or that it was ever corrected.

 

[Daverz]

The pitch used by "HIP" groups seems to get lower all the time

"Thus for this recording we have – in common with some other groups in recent years – adopted A’ 392Hz as the basic pitch (‘tief-Cammerton’, i.e. a whole tone below modern concert pitch and a semitone below A’ 415Hz)"

I like it; it's a rich and mellow sound.

 

[DonH56]

The pitch used by "HIP" groups seems to get lower all the time

"Thus for this recording we have – in common with some other groups in recent years – adopted A’ 392Hz as the basic pitch (‘tief-Cammerton’, i.e. a whole tone below modern concert pitch and a semitone below A’ 415Hz)"

I like it; it's a rich and mellow sound.

Hmmm... Well, since the high concert G's are a challenge for most trumpet players in BB #2, down a step could be nice, I suppose... I still have to practice it in the "normal" pitch.

 

[solderdude]

see:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/schiit-gadget-music-tuning-box.1980/

In 2017 Schiit came with the news and Mike Moffat claiming it does wonders and is almost ready for marketing.
Dec 2015 M. Moffat already was working on it.
Now close to 2020 and still no product.
Then there is this

I am glad I don't care about this and can enjoy music as it is recorded and have no idea about tuning instruments.
Will leave that to the guys that do the tuning, playing, conducting and recording.

What if recordings were not tuned to 440 and the player simply lowers the pitch of all recordings simply by a fixed percentage instead ?
Such a converter would have to determine pitch first, calculate to 432 and preferably not simply change the speed.
Doesn't seem like an easy feat.

 

[Eirikur]

No easy answers, but I like the explorations by Adam Neely

 

[Fluffy]

No easy answers, but I like the explorations by Adam Neely

I was just about to link to that exact video! Indeed, Adam Neely sums it up very well.

 

[solderdude]

Might the 440 and 432 bit just be preference ?

 

[Shorty]

Reminded me of this saga https://londonjazznews.com/2014/07/14/lp-review-miles-davis-kind-of-blue-deluxe/

One of the interesting discoveries made in 1992 when the tapes were first exhumed, was that Side 1 of the stereo issue, consisting of the tracks recorded at the first session, So What, Freddie Freeloader and Blue in Green, had been playing at the wrong speed since 1959. (The fault in the tape recorder which caused this had been corrected by the time of the second session in April.) The prime stereo tape recorder had been running just over one percent slow, so on playback and during the mastering of albums it ran a little fast. Hence the stereo (but not the mono) releases of Kind of Blue — and virtually all the releases were stereo — had always had those three tracks playing at slightly the wrong pitch. Not just the LPs, but the CDs, cassettes, reel to reel tapes and MiniDiscs…

A similar story surfaced at the time of the SACD release of early Rolling Stones albums. According to ABKCO, some of those albums were originally recorded on a tape deck that ran too fast. Consequently, when copied for production on machines running at the correct speed, on the resulting records all music ran slow and at a lower pitch.
I have no idea if the story was true or just a marketing ploy.

 

[Tks]

Might the 440 and 432 bit just be preference ?

Honestly this is all it seems like to me. I don't understand what the big hub bub is about. Also when multi-instrumental music is being played, the frequency graph is swamped with many frequencies at the same time, and when you're playing 440, you can bet 432 is pretty high since it's so close. It's not like you can mute out all 440 while you're playing 432 or something.

 

[Ron Party]

When I first read the website to which I made reference I thought to myself: is this akin to just putting a capo on a guitar? If not, why? I also wondered if this was nothing more than a flavor choice. But not having any idea if there was something more to it, I started this thread.

I see another website: https://www.432hzconverter.com/ : "The online 432 Hertz converter tool converts music between different frequencies. Popular frequencies are for instance 440Hz standard pitch, 432Hz, 528Hz, and 639Hz. "

Linked on the home page at that site is another page which includes the following language:

• Concert pitch: A reference pitch of a group (orchestra) of instruments.
• Standard pitch: A pitch often defined based on the A4. Popular values are 440 Hz, Baroque pitch (415 Hz), etc.
• Alternative pitch: A standard pitch used in esoteric, chakra, natural, and other alternative forms of music. Popular standard pitches are 432 Hz, 528 Hz, and 639 Hz. Alternative pitches are often said to sound better, be more harmonic, and have transcendental powers.

Now if alternative pitches have "transcendental powers" I want to know about it! I mean, I'm all for anything which will bestow that on me.