432 tuning fork

On a facebook group we are debating about thia question (search IL diapason... "LA" a 432hz):
there is a theory (Ananda Bosman and others) that suggest to reduce the 440 frequency of the tuning fork to 432 Hz.
In my opinion it would be right to reduce the tuning fork frequency but it is a nonsense the number 432; you know what is the Hertz unit, it is in relation with the "second" time unit. If this time unit was more or less than the actual, the theory (and others) would be a poor bluff.
What do you think?

Tags: audio, fork, frequency, hertz, tuning

This content has been seen 1682 times

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Christopher on September 28, 2010 at 9:00pm

I think I might have some alternative. On a "cosmic scale", and in relation to our local star system, there are certain "coordinators of life" or "coordinators of consciousness" so to speak. Pulsars. A nervous system of the Universe. For the reference example - see on my profile page the "Heart of God" album. The name I use to describe orion/crab location came from one of my nonphysical journeys, which I describe in my book (unfortunately - in Polish only). The crab nebula is called the "heart of god" by neighbouring systems; it is somewhat similar to our ancient times, when China was described by "tourists" and traders as the "Central Country". The cover art of my album - came from astronomy, it was only rotated and gamma/brightness reduced. Looks somewhat like a human heart. In the sound meditation "Finding the 'Heart of God'" - the heartbeat is a pulsar heartbet. Pulsars are measured by radioastronomy, and such electromagnetic recordings can be converted into a sound (the frequencies and shape of signals remain the same). This one has been shifted down (in a simple way, as you did with gramophone disks) exactly by a few octaves, resulting in almost 1 second cycle.

I guess, when we use certain systems of reference - in terms of sexagesimality, but also in terms of resonant time units - we "tap" our global as the personal consciousness - into a specific kind of resonant network, like an internet of common patterns. You log in and agree to participate in a certain game according to certain rules (or you just perceive in a way generated by the globality of system).

Looking for alternative time units - I would seek for cosmic references, but also on atomic level, for some universal rhythms. These would be for general GPS-like rulers between particular systems. Then - I would seek for dynamic systems of multidimensionality, like our one. Our brain has certain kind of plasticity, our awareness is capable to travel on different levels through various octaves of these levels. Our consciousness is capable to change in a way very different from changes we observe for example in crystal forms (which are in general mor ehomogenic and simplified, in comparison to our "software of life").

And moving back to the tuning fork topic. Does anybody knows the mathematical formula to calculate the "beating" frequencies in chord patterns? In general, for three sinusoid frequencies. It appears that my gues from the past was incomplete, and calculated properly inly in a certain range of chords (so this probably is related to the harmonic series).

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christopher on September 28, 2010 at 9:02pm

I'm exactly 108, but only when I record verbally guided exercies.
This came from accidental measurement (-;

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marco Tonini on October 10, 2010 at 1:08pm

@ Skye:

no, I accept all if there is an explanation, I agree with you about your considerations but it seems to me we run around the real question.
I'm not interested about what ancient culture decided about the second calculation. And the answer "it was a convenient choose" doesn't solve the problem, so I try to submit my anwer like a my consideration:

second unit is a conventional unit of measurement (are we agree? this is the real question!), so I think is useless to find a particular/mystical meaning about a pitch, in our case 432 Hz. Numbers can be magical, not the elements which the numbers refer to. If we can verify the second is a conventional unit of measurement, the 432 tuning fork theory becomes obviously a bluff.
Can somebody prove to us the second is not a conventional unit?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skye Løfvander on October 10, 2010 at 1:35pm

@ Marco:
I agree with you that it doesn't give much sense to use a time unit which actually belongs to another dimension - like when we in music we use the time unit a second (wawes pr. second ~ Herz) to measure the frequency. Obviously the time cycle of the earth day - which is the foundation for the second as a time unit - is so wide apart from the time measures we deal with in music that I agree about your point that 'the magic' becomes somewhat speculative.
It is also a bit ironical that we when baking a bread or other everyday activity actually are relating the weight measures to the size of the earth because the meter was originally defined as a fraction of the earth diameter (and they didn't even get it right!) and the standard kilo was defined as the weight of one cubic decimeter of water.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christopher on October 10, 2010 at 1:41pm

I agree, that the second is a conventional unit of time measurement. Yet regarding the 432 tuning fork theory, my agreement depends on context.

The 432Hz frequency itself - has nothing to say to me. Also the pitch shift between 440 and 432 scale is insignifficant if you deal with singular frequency. But:

1) if you deal with entire musical systems (two, three, or more tones, I don't know), capable of producing complicated intervals, chords and musical (therefore logical) structures,

2) if you deal with multiple tuning forks, tuned not only to one pythagorean frequency, but to multiple frequencies within this scale,

then the 432Hz tuning becomes significant to me.

The 1.8% or (or 32 cent) shift (down) between whole musical systems (in relation to the "listener", that is perceptually trained/educated to know, recognize and accept the 440 scale as "normal") - produces new psychophysiological (brain rewiring) meaning of sound.

The internal proportionalities within the pythagorean scale, based on generally whole numbers (there are esceptions), like 256 and 432 [Hz] (in relation to the "listener", that is perceptually trained/educated to know, recognize and accept the 12-TET scale as "normal") - produces new psychophysiological (brain rewiring) meaning of sound and vibration.

If you will have the set of tuning forks, or if you will use one tuning fork in a "440Hz" environment - you will get desired effects, and this is neither the placebo effect nor bluff. It's about understanding the relativity and adaptation of perception (and things connected to it). There is no universal rule, you must have a context. And this one is not only the cultural one, but neuro-psycho-physiological one. Should be enough (-;

-- "measurement of authenticity is the effectiveness" --

But I would pay for 432Hz tuning forks not a lot more than for 440Hz units. Production of tuning forks (in terms of technology and resources involved) - is not complicated; you need to do the same work. What you pay for - is the physical work of people (someone must produce the unit), cost of technology modification (null), and eventually for the idea (intellectual work, null, because it is an "easy adaptation" of something that exists and is widely well described).

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Perret on October 10, 2010 at 5:39pm

I'm not shure about the astronomical implications of the second. My reflection is that the second corresponds very nicely with the frequency of the heartbeat at rest ...or is it just my heartbeat at rest ? There is an obvious feeling difference in instruments tuned in 440 and 432. The gragual rising to 440 and 444 was also brought about the speeding up of our time and energy.
Daniel Perret

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skye Løfvander on October 10, 2010 at 6:04pm

Hi Daniel,
Like we discussed earlier of course you will notice differences when you have a reference. Of course you may notice a difference if your inner tonal reference system has become accustomed to a'= 440 Hz and then getting exposed to either a'=432 or 444 Hz.
The rising from 440 Hz to 444 is obviously an effect of 'inflation' - when listeners are used to a standard pitch the sound will appear brighter if it is raised. On a more practical level violins built for a much lower standard pitch than even 440 may have difficulties to stand the tension.
But all this is not really what the discussion seems to be heading at right now.
The idea of a 'standard heart beat rate' may seem at the same time promising and somewhat frightening.
I guess that even by looking at the second indicator arm of a normal watch some entrainment will take place, but like Marco I do not see any reason to force some 'cosmological' order into this when after all it is what he calls convention. Human pulse varies a lot - just like the tempi of the music - and the beauty of it is not to get stuck in the grooves of the system.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marco Tonini on October 10, 2010 at 8:56pm

Thank guys!
I would be very happy if someone can verify that the "second" is not a conventional choose, so to prove the 432 Hz theory is true.
I will wait all my life. Meanwhile I'll continue to seek the truth, he he ...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christopher on October 10, 2010 at 10:28pm

Dear Marco - just go and buy them, work with them for a while, and then - share your explorations (-:

A "master" is a someone, who can do almost anything or everything from almost nothing. An abstract idea, extracted from the void - becomes the manifestation of reality. Abstraction is the motor of reality. Almost nobody believes, that almost everybody or everyone - can be such a "master". You may wander your whole life around theories, modalities and concepts, but you can just "go with the flow". If you ask for the "general sense of life", the answer will be probably some nonsense if there will be any answer. But if you change your question, if you just ask for the "sense of your own private portion life" - then - you'll find everything. You will "become" the "sense", in the unity with all that is (so to speak). Become the living experience of an abstract idea that you explore. Feel it, not just think of it. Trust your heart; mind is rather a tool for making dualistic descriptions, not for manifesting non-dual reality. We live in a world of continuous flow, that creates us as a humans, and is created by us, like a directed river of life. Can you feel the poetry of these words?

(-;

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marco Tonini on October 13, 2010 at 3:22pm

Sure Christopher, good words and great poetry, but the 432 tuning fork theory is based on mathematical reasonings, so we can't talk using nice abstract concepts, which are interesting but out of the main context.
Numbers are numbers and my consideration was really simple.
Like Jens said on the first comment (and I'm agree), it can be a nonsense to use 440 Hz, many people think it is not a good reference pitch, because of bad feelings, inner sensations and vibrations, ... but I think we can't say 432 Hz is better without a mathematical explanation, and it seems to me very difficult because of the conventional time unit, the second.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christopher on October 13, 2010 at 7:21pm

I think, this conversation board is somehow problematic, because it does not shows the posts in chronological order. It's difficult to find replies in a proper way.

Numbers are numbers, and this is simple. Pythagorean tuning is strictly related to certain proportionalities between notes. "432Hz" concept a part of pythagorean tuning. It relates to proportionalities.

On the other hand - "432Hz" reference is something within acceptable range of lower-than-standard "A" (lower than modernly used "A", lower than 440Hz). This could be somewhere between 428 to 436Hz or in even wider range, but it is as 432Hz because 1Hz (or rather to say - 1 cycle per second) is related to the time unit we know. Wider range of lower-than-standard "A" means, that 1 second could be little more or little less, and yet - the pythagorean concept would be OK to perfom it in terms of mathematics.

It is not a matter of 440Hz itself, but about relating one sonic system to another in terms of psycho-physiological perception of sound. 432Hz is perceived in this special way because 440Hz was created and used as a basic system. Some hunderts years ago - they had "A" in much much wider range (from less than 400Hz to about 500Hz), and imagine how that was felt (-; But some hunderts years ago - there was less music and it was less complex than today (1 simple instrument versus MP3 player with orchestra).

Mathematics withouth physics, historical knowledge of culture and neuroscience/psychology is useless here. It must be considered in a living and dynamic/evolving context.

If this one and other explanations posted here - don't encourage you to redefine your questions, then you are on the seek for "holy grail" but not on the seek for measuralbe effectiveness. I say this, because long time ago - I was on similar crossway.

Good luck!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jens Mügge on October 13, 2010 at 8:36pm

Christopher said:

I think, this conversation board is somehow problematic, because it does not shows the posts in chronological order. It's difficult to find replies in a proper way.

Okay, let me know if you all prefer the chronological order or the threaded where replies are indented below the post or reply they respond to.