The 432Hz 'God' Note: Why Fringe Audiophiles Want to Topple Standard Tuning | Hacker News Reader

The 432Hz 'God' Note: Why Fringe Audiophiles Want to Topple Standard Tuning

vice.com

13 pointsofou20 comments

Getting a few orchestras to retune to 432 Hz was Lyndon LaRouche's greatest accomplishment -- right up there with the "public relations technology" of L. Ron Hubbard.

Personally I love scientific pitch [1] (C=128Hz, A=~432Hz, 12-TET), I wonder why the world is still using A=440, it doesn't make sense to me. Powers of two is the way to go.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_pitch

Power of two can't have any pure natural meaning because the length of 1 second is arbitrary.

The definition of the second is not arbitrary. It has deep historic roots.

That is the meaning of arbitrary. It doesn't have any relation to the way sound is perceived. So the power of two relation either doesn't matter or is a coincidence.

It's about order and congruence. This is why standards are created. I don't see good reasons for A=440 either.

Does it work out in Planck units?

Why does it need to be powers of two? The whole idea of 432 is nicer numbers, but if you’re using equal temperament (12-TET specifically), you’re already using the “ugly” 12th root of 2.

I agree... ugly, but based in the root of two. It makes sense to use the powers of two because you can literally remember the frequencies of C through octaves, C0=16Hz, C4=256Hz, can you do that with 440hz?

I don't see any advantage of using an arbitrary frequency such as 440 oscillations per second for A instead.

And yet you arbitrarily choose to base your system on C. With A, I can say A1=55, A2=110, A3=220, A4=440. C isn’t any more special than A except maybe scientific notation being based on C.

Your argument seems to hinge on being able to know the frequency of a specific “C”, but how often is that necessary?

When Tuning acoustic instruments for example.

The simple solution is a chromatic tuner that displays the note and octave. If I want to tune a guitar’s low E string, I just pluck it until my tuner says I’m at E2. Sure, it assumes A440, but I don’t need to know the actual frequencies of E2, A2, D3, etc., so I don’t care to use any other A4.

There's nothing "scientific" about choosing a note whose frequency is the average length of the day, divided by 24 by 60 by 60 by 256 by (fourth root of two, cubed). It's numerology.

It's easy to remember. C0=16Hz, C4=256Hz and so on. There any advantages to settle for 440 either. At least Scientific Pitch helps to remember frequencies based on octaves. Even calculating 12-TET (which is the standard nowadays) is calculated using roots of two.

This is like attaching great significance to the digits of measuring the Great Pyramid's base line in meters or inches.

Here is dark side of the moon in 432, presumably still with 12 tet. I found it hard to tell the difference listening to classical music I hadn't heard before in 432 since the intervals were mostly the same to my ear and I don't have perfect pitch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAbbJhlInyw

What a bunch of lunatics.

I don't care about the 432Hz argument, but more about Scientific pitch. It's not totally nonsense a powers of two based system. 440Hz doesn't make sense.

432Hz as phone tone would sounds ominous. "Something is wrong but I do not know what".

Pure tones is a whole different story, I hope the world turned into Scientific pitch in the future.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com