432 or 440 tuning

[121]

Anyone prefer tuning their guitar to 432 rather than 440 ?

[CoryB]

By yourself, tune however you want. If you play music with others, they will likely be at 440.

[M.W.P.]

I do, too.

[DesertTwang]

Ok, I'll bite, out of curiosity. What's the point in tuning to 432Hz, as opposed to, say, 457Hz?

[davidbeinct]

When I’m in a mellow mood I tune to 420.

[Mr. Jelly]

Only when I pick up my guitar and it's out of tune but in tune with itself

[Earl49]

Originally Posted by CoryB

By yourself, tune however you want. If you play music with others, they will likely be at 440.

^^ This. I sometimes tune down a half step to Eb, but that is always relative to A-440. I play with others routinely, so absolute pitch matters. I don't think there is any mystical property to A=432.

[dnf777]

What is that in terms of tones? Is that near a half-step down?

[Tannin]

It's roughly a third of a semitone. Not enough to make any concrete difference to anything, but plenty enough to sound badly out of key if you play it together with something in standard tuning.

The idea of A=432 is that the frequency can be derived mathematically from certain natural forces or objects. It is, so the story goes, more in-tune with nature and the universe and they have the maths to "prove" it. It all sounds quite promising ... until you realise that their entire argument stands or falls on their maths, and their maths is based on the relationship between various natural measurements and .... wait for it .... the second. The length of a second, of course, is totally man-made. It has no connection with any natural law, force, or object. It's just an arbitary unit of more-or-less random length that someone decided would be as good a way of keeping time as any other. (And no, it is not even a whole fraction of a day or a year. It is just a made-up length of time.)

In short, setting A=432 has no possible benefit. If you don't want to play with anyone else, and your instrument is easily re-tuned (don't even think about a piano or a church organ) it does no harm, but it is entirely pointless.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by Tannin

It's roughly a third of a semitone. Not enough to make any concrete difference to anything, but plenty enough to sound badly out of key if you play it together with something in standard tuning.

The idea of A=432 is that the frequency can be derived mathematically from certain natural forces or objects. It is, so the story goes, more in-tune with nature and the universe and they have the maths to "prove" it. It all sounds quite promising ... until you realise that their entire argument stands or falls on their maths, and their maths is based on the relationship between various natural measurements and .... wait for it .... the second. The length of a second, of course, is totally man-made. It has no connection with any natural law, force, or object. It's just an arbitary unit of more-or-less random length that someone decided would be as good a way of keeping time as any other. (And no, it is not even a whole fraction of a day or a year. It is just a made-up length of time.)

In short, setting A=432 has no possible benefit. If you don't want to play with anyone else, and your instrument is easily re-tuned (don't even think about a piano or a church organ) it does no harm, but it is entirely pointless.

Precisely, well said.

It's BS, in short.

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by 121

Anyone prefer tuning their guitar to 432 rather than 440 ?

Hi 121

There are people who obsess about the reference frequency (frequencies) we tune to and apocrvaphyl stories about why. YouTube used to be full of everything from rants to long discussions.

I'm thankful for a set reference pitch (A=440). I can most often play along with YouTube videos when I'm learning a piece using the monkey-see-monkey-do process.

On a personal level…
The only benefit I've ever seen from changing reference pitches…
I sang in an a'capella choir for 5 years in college. On tours, when we hit very large auditoriums, our director would instruct the the person who hummed the reference pitch to make it slightly flat or sharp by a fraction of a semi-tone.

He'd also altar our tempo to match the reflective echo/reverb in the room.

His theory was the singers subconsciously know something had changed and become more attentive to pitch and dynamics etc. I think he was right. Some of our most memorable concerts (based on audience response, and we choir members talking about these concerts for days afterwards) were those where the reference pitch was altered.

I have zero issues with those who want it to be more 'special'/'unique'. I just see zero value to it.






[/size]