The Steel Guitar Forum Store 

Post new topic A=432 vs A=440
Reply to topic
Author Topic:  A=432 vs A=440
Joey Ace


From:
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 6:22 am    
Reply with quote

I occasionally play in a Classic Country band where the leader/front man wants to tune to 432.
No big deal for me. A few buttons on the Peterson tuner and I'm there.

I thought it was an odd quirk, but if he's more comfortable about a third of a tone below standard all's good.

I mentioned this to another band leader last night, a 440 guy, and he was intrigued.

He sent me this link:
http://www.viewzone.com/432hertz222.html

What your experience with 432? It get's deeper than I ever imagined. (Did Lennon record Imagine at 432?)

Was changing the standard to 440 Hz in 1939, responsible for a negative effect on today's culture?
The article in the link suggests that.

My head hurts, and I have a four hour matinee with the 432 guy later today.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website

Jack Stoner


From:
Kansas City, MO
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 6:34 am    
Reply with quote

I read that Buck Owens' band often tuned open to Eb instead of E.

Johnny Cash sang Folsom Prison Blues in F, not E as most do or assumed. I've watched videos of Luther Perkins playing it and he was apparently tuned to F as it looked like he was playing in E, and not with a capo.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Charlie McDonald


From:
out of the blue
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 7:19 am    
Reply with quote

I had a disterous experience with a cantor at something higher than 432, but it was with a piano so that's beside the point...
... except to say that's it's likely that Mozart's piano was tuned at 432 to reduce stress on antique pianos rather than a harmonious universe.

If there were any truth to the article, we should tune to 430 and be even healthier.

At it's end, "Next up is a review of hard scientific evidence of the benefits from listening to 432..."
Yes, hard to believe.

The writer also says that Led Zep recorded 'No Quarter' at 432 "... but I could not find any validation to this claim."

At the very least, Joey, if any of it's true, your headache will be less at the end of the show.
Certainly, all this stuff gives me one, it gets so 'deep.'
_________________
Those that say don't know; those that know don't say.--Buddy Emmons
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Ken Pippus


From:
Langford, BC, Canada
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 7:23 am    
Reply with quote

Hendrix and Stevie Ray tuned to Eb. Flatt and Scruggs tuned to almost (but not quite) F. Tuning an instrument to a different pitch with the same strings can produce a significant change in timbre: think high lonesome vs. fine and mellow. These changes would be expected to impact a sensitive listener. It's also a lot easier to stretch a .012 E string a whole tone when you're tuned lower.

I think it's a stretch to invoke right brain specific frequencies, or a function (very arbitrarily derived) with respect to the earth's rotation cycle, or the potential harmonic sympathy with whale song to explain the effect of changing tuning.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joachim Kettner


From:
Germany
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 7:58 am    
Reply with quote

Quote:
Did Lennon record Imagine at 432?

I don't believe that there were already any electronical tuners on the market in '71. Maybe the piano was not up to pitch. Charlie should know.
_________________
Fender Kingman, Sierra Crown D-10, Evans Amplifier, Soup Cube.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Charlie McDonald


From:
out of the blue
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 8:46 am    
Reply with quote

I think there was a Peterson strobe in use at the time, but not sure; would have been in use by piano and guitar techs before my time.

The recording of 'Imagine' that I have is on standard pitch in C, the key Lennon would have played in.

However, I just found another recording on Utube that's almost in B; same piano, same recording, same effects, but a little slower in tempo.
Maybe the recording was remastered?
The timbre of the piano is of an old one not up to pitch, but that's pretty subjective without proof. It sounds better in the higher key.
_________________
Those that say don't know; those that know don't say.--Buddy Emmons
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joachim Kettner


From:
Germany
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 9:14 am    
Reply with quote

"Misery" by the Beatles is also at a lower pitch. I had to tune my guitar to 435 Hz, to play along in tune.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzxdApFBBGQ

Btw, it was a white Steinway on which he played "Imagine"

_________________
Fender Kingman, Sierra Crown D-10, Evans Amplifier, Soup Cube.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Donny Hinson

 

From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
Post  Posted 1 Nov 2015 5:06 pm    
Reply with quote

IMHO, this 432hz hocus-pocus is based on the earth-frequency resonance of 8 hz...which it isn't. It's supposed to be 7.86hz (so physicist Winnifred Schumann said, anyway) which has no harmonic relationship with either 432hz or 440hz. As in the digital world, a harmonic or digital "miss" of .14hz is as good as a mile. The examples with the standing waves on the metal plate are also something I suspect as gobbledegook, since they use the same (size) plate for both frequencies. Laughing I'll bet you dollars to donuts I can size a plate that will give nice complete patterns at 440hz, and incomplete ones at 432hz, so that exercise proves, essentially, nothing.

Newsflash!
(Hot off the web)

Quote:
There is concrete evidence to suggest that Mother Earth herself is shifting her vibration, in order to adapt to the paradigm shift. The Schumann Frequencies are the ‘sound’ of the earth. It’s like hearing the sound of a big drum, with that drum being the earth’s resonant cavity. Only a few years ago the earth was vibrating at around 7.8 hertz, but a few days ago, the Schumann frequency hit 16.5. This demonstrates that the earth itself is changing.


Well, I guess that revelation just shot the "magic 432hz" theory in the ass.

Maybe we can do something with 13hz? (13hz x 34 =442hz):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_XZl-DwXls



Oh Well
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Charlie McDonald


From:
out of the blue
Post  Posted 2 Nov 2015 3:18 am    
Reply with quote

Quote:
This demonstrates that the earth itself is changing.

Standard pitch has changed along with it, but not due to changes in the earth--more like changes in strengths of instruments.

'A' was 435 before it was 440; it was once 400. Orchestras kept getting brighter and brighter, and now we play around with 442.
Thinking that these changes affect us... it's more likely that the changes mirror us, reflect the times and the increased pace of life.
That increase has been going on since the beginning of history; to suggest that it's causal--probably not good reflecting or observation.

Meanwhile, the gateway to the subconscious is more like 6 or 7 Hz, not 13, but the sound of the Tibetan bowls is pretty, and relaxing--for some.
Looking for a magic number in the universe to tune to is like... I don't know. People will probably keep looking.
Perhaps they should look at the increasing frequency of the red shift. No wonder people listen to bowls.
I think I like dance music more, but it's a nice change.
_________________
Those that say don't know; those that know don't say.--Buddy Emmons
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Joey Ace


From:
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Post  Posted 2 Nov 2015 4:32 am    
Reply with quote

Thanks for the interesting replies.

I believe it's simply that this singer believes his voice resonates better at 432. He even told me that's the reason.

Since humans are not all the same it makes sense for him.

It did make it impossible to accompany a guitar playing guest. He did his songs solo.

I'm pleased to say changing from 440 to 432 did not require any tweaking of my pedals and levers.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website

Charlie McDonald


From:
out of the blue
Post  Posted 6 Nov 2015 4:20 am    
Reply with quote

Too late to be of any help, Joey, but here's a link I ran across: 432HZ DNA REPAIR- SLEEP [ 4 hours ] Delta 3hz

There are many more vids listed with 432 'music,' not to mention 936 Hz.
I still don't get it. Four hours of it probably won't convince me.
_________________
Those that say don't know; those that know don't say.--Buddy Emmons
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

b0b


From:
Cloverdale, CA, USA
Post  Posted 6 Nov 2015 7:27 am    
Reply with quote

The 432 Hz theory is pseudoscience. A bunch of baloney.

However, a singer who feels that his voice resonates better in the space between the 440 ET notes may have a better ear than most people. I know that certain songs I sing would be a lot easier if the high G was just a wee bit lower. Mr. Green

John Lennon often changed tape speeds to get the effect he wanted, most famously in Strawberry Fields Forever.
_________________
-𝕓𝕆𝕓- (admin) - Robert P. Lee - Recordings - Breathe - D6th - Video
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Charlie McDonald


From:
out of the blue
Post  Posted 6 Nov 2015 7:37 am    
Reply with quote

That may explain the discrepancy about 'Imagine.'

The cantor that wanted the piano's pitch lowered [the one where I broke an agraffe (string tree)]: he sang me his A; had to get his sound.
_________________
Those that say don't know; those that know don't say.--Buddy Emmons
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Luke Sullivan


From:
El Paso de Robles, CA, USA
Post  Posted 6 Nov 2015 8:12 am     Vocal muscle memory
Reply with quote

A half step is ok w/ me, but in-between, I resist. Ab is 415.305Hz. If muscle memory allows us to sing on pitch at will, vocalizing at A432 is unusual, for me,and makes for reduced strength in the notes. I find pitch by adjusting tension in the airway. Practicing with scales, on pitch, gives power and accuracy. Some under-pitched pianos are out there. Before we had electric tuners, everyone just tuned to their own pitch. I guess I'm talking about us folksingers, not real musicians. ...bOb, I can barely screech the E; you tenors are rare and valuable around here.
_________________
Mullen PRP D10, accordions, Harmony Sovereign guitar.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Dustin Rhodes


From:
Owasso OK
Post  Posted 6 Nov 2015 8:50 am    
Reply with quote

There are a million songs out there where the tapes were sped up or slowed down to suit what they wanted. No crazy intentions with the tuning played a part. They usually wanted it faster or slower for a different feel.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Donny Hinson

 

From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
Post  Posted 7 Nov 2015 8:15 am    
Reply with quote

Bingo Dustin! Too many people just automatically assume it was the player or singer that changed the tuning, when it reality, it was the studio changing the recording/playback speed to get a different sound, or shorten the duration of the song. Wink
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

b0b


From:
Cloverdale, CA, USA
Post  Posted 7 Nov 2015 1:03 pm     Re: Vocal muscle memory
Reply with quote

Luke Sullivan wrote:
...bOb, I can barely screech the E; you tenors are rare and valuable around here.

I'm not a tenor. G is my highest note, and that's on a good day, with a lot of air behind it. From what I've read, that makes me a lyric baritone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baritone#Lyric

"The lyric baritone is a sweeter, milder sounding baritone voice, lacking in harshness; lighter and perhaps mellower than the dramatic baritone with a higher tessitura. Its common range is from the A below low C to the G above middle C (A2 to G4). It is typically assigned to comic roles." Laughing
_________________
-𝕓𝕆𝕓- (admin) - Robert P. Lee - Recordings - Breathe - D6th - Video
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Charlie McDonald


From:
out of the blue
Post  Posted 9 Nov 2015 4:03 am    
Reply with quote

Yeah, that Figaro was a riot.
_________________
Those that say don't know; those that know don't say.--Buddy Emmons
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Luke Sullivan


From:
El Paso de Robles, CA, USA
Post  Posted 9 Nov 2015 8:12 am     Yodel dee doo
Reply with quote

The upper vocal range can be extended by a gradual movement into high-voice. After years of yodeling, I find it challenging to transition into falsetto seamlessly. Yodeling is one way to get attention. Yodels are useful guit-licks. Following the link, I learned that Barbershop high 10'ers sing in falsetto.
_________________
Mullen PRP D10, accordions, Harmony Sovereign guitar.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Steve Duke

 

From:
Missouri, USA
Post  Posted 13 Nov 2015 7:55 am     A=432 vs A=440
Reply with quote

Funny this thread would appear. I bought a music book at a yard sale this summer for a quarter. The Eleanor Smith Music Course-Book Four. Last week I picked it up and was thumbing through it and found a passage THE RUDIMENTS OF MUSIC. A paragraph read "The pitch of a tone is its highness or lowness, and depends on the frequency of the vibrations producing the tone. The standard of pitch quite generally adopted is 435 A". This book was copyright 1908 by Eleanor Smith. FYI
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Don Griffiths


From:
Steelville, MO
Post  Posted 2 Dec 2015 4:10 pm    
Reply with quote

Great thread. I've been wanting to research this further.I do believe there is more to it than meets the ear.There are frequencies that are more pleasant. Don't musicians know this? They have actually healed human DNA at 528 hz. I thought all musicians were hip to this. The official term for this science is Cymatics, though having a scientific name doesn't necessarily make it more or less factual. Anyhow if Tesla and Einstein were backing it up I call it more than pseudoscience. Though I have to admit they lose me when they start referring to chakras.
http://educateinspirechange.org/science-technology/heres-convert-music-432-hz/
And of course like any new little understood technology,the benefits are oversold and overstated.
https://wholetones.com

And my curiosity with it is how does this tie in with just intonation and tuning and also the solfeggio scale??
I maybe wrongly assumed they were referring to J.I. when talking about the 432 hz shift.
And then there are the plant experiments where plants responded and grew positively better when exposed to classical music. Then when exposed to Heavy Metal their growth slowed or withered. There is definitely more to this than we currently know. Unfortunately everything I'm finding on the internet is followed by outrageous claims and a sales pitch.
I happen to have an extra set of solfeggio tuning forks I would reluctantly let go of for the right price that will produce a halo around the subject when finished using them. Check this out!
http://www.somaenergetics.com/solfeggio_frequencies.php

http://www.somaenergetics.com/products.php Laughing
_________________
Shobud Pro1,BMI U12, Santa Cruz F, PRS Standard, Fender Twin Reverb, ‘53 000-28
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail


All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Jump to:  

Our Online Catalog
Strings, CDs, instruction,
steel guitars & accessories

www.SteelGuitarShopper.com

Please review our Forum Rules and Policies

Steel Guitar Forum LLC
PO Box 237
Mount Horeb, WI 53572 USA


Click Here to Send a Donation

Email admin@steelguitarforum.com for technical support.


BIAB Styles
Ray Price Shuffles for
Band-in-a-Box

by Jim Baron
HTTP