I don't think it was me made the remarks about tense people tuning sharp, it's not an effect I've noticed.
Gordon -----Original Message----- From: lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu [mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf Of Anthony Hind Sent: 07 January 2012 13:59 To: t...@heartistrymusic.com; e...@gamutstrings.com; howardpos...@ca.rr.com Cc: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Subject: [LUTE] Re: tuning fork at 433Hz? Thank you all for your responses, and your detailed explanations, Tom. I agree that "In fact, that's one reason pitch has risen over the past few hundred years - more string tension = higher volume and brighter sound. Even today some orchestras tune to 442 -444, to take advantage of this effect." and this search for brightness, also partly explains the change from gut strung instruments to metal strung ones (while of course the fragility of gut stringing might perhaps have kept pitch down to save string breakage). I recently heard a performance of Stravinsky's Pulcinella on "period brass instruments" and a gut strung bowed section by the "Musiciens du Louvre-Grenoble" (Mark Minkowski director); MM argued that even in 1905 gut stringing was fairly standard. He did not say at which pitch they were playing, however, I presume it may have been at 433 Hz. The performance was in no way unsatisfactory, as the modern "brightness" was replaced by more harmonic texturing, coming both from the gut strings, and from the warmer but also "rougher" sounding period brass instruments. While the threads of the music remained exceptionally clear, as no instrument type seemed to be covering the other. In relation to tuning over high, I seem to remember that in an article on tuning, Gordon Gregory suggested that relaxed people tend to tune too low, while tense people would tend to tune too high (I certainly read that somewhere, but not certain it was in Gordon's article). However, this coincides well with my own experience, as I always tend to tune too high, if I tune by ear (I would certainly not classify myself as relaxed). Relative brightness would be associated with increased emotional tension, which by some, might be felt as somehow a more exciting sound. Tuning too high, as Ed says, does result in out-of-tuneness, but it can also be considered as an over-bright tonal aberration. In relation to this (and the above), it is recorded in many hifi sites that a change from over bright distorting resistors and capacitors to better noise performance ones, initially results in the hifi enthusiasts feeling that the sound is less exciting (something is missing), before they finally realize they are suffering less listener's fatigue (could be the same with the change to better mics). Perhaps a piece played at 433 may therefore somehow sound more relaxed (and just as interesting on harmonically rich period instruments), when compared to 440 on modern instruments (or period instruments that have been altered to support modern string tensions); although it would indeed seem difficult to explain why 433 might be the "harmonic frequency of the universe". Ed's description of competitive tuning between violinists (presumably not gut strung), reminds me of a tale about a televised presidential debate between two candidates here in France. One of the contestants was rather short, and his advisers kept bringing in cushions to make him look taller, but of course those of his taller opponent, began reacting similarly, resulting in something of a "Lewis Carrol" moment for my friend who was organizing the filming. Back to Ed, how those Baroque Strads must have suffered over the years from this almost "Darwinian" striving to be better heard than your neighbour. Regards Anthony PS I will think of you Tom, if I decide to let it go. When I am back in Paris I will make a photo of the fork with resonator-case. --- En date de : Ven 6.1.12, t...@heartistrymusic.com <t...@heartistrymusic.com> a ecrit : De: t...@heartistrymusic.com <t...@heartistrymusic.com> Objet: Re: [LUTE] tuning fork at 433Hz? A: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu, "Anthony Hind" <agno3ph...@yahoo.com> Date: Vendredi 6 janvier 2012, 23h39 This is very interesting to me, because an old friend recently alerted me to a new line of thinking claiming that 432Hz OUGHT to be true concert pitch. There are websites devoting a lot of space to articles and discussions about this. [1]http://www.omega432.com/music.html [2]http://www.solfeggiotones.com/432-hz/ [3]http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2007/12/26/a-432hz-vs-a-440hz-a-sonic-expe riment-fascinating/ People claim things like "it FEELS better", or "it's the harmonic frequency of the universe" ... ("New Age" / "Airy-Fairey" ...) As a piano technician with perfect pitch, I'm pretty locked into 440. But it's fun to experiment with other pitches and temperments. Plus, I am human and cannot say that I'm ALWAYS spot on standard pitch, although I'm usually so close it doesn't matter. I still use a fork to set A4. But when it comes to tuning my lute or guitar I just "ear" it. I tune my lute low. Sometimes I tune my guitar a smidge higher when playing solo to get a brighter sound. In fact, that's one reason pitch has risen over the past few hundred years - more string tension = higher volume and brighter sound. Even today some orchestras tune to 442 -444, to take advantage of this effect. Anthony, if you ever decide you'd like to part with your 433 fork I'd be interested in having it. Then maybe I, too, can be in harmony with the universe! (Or close to it?) Tom > Dear luthenists > A friend gave me an amusing tuning fork, which is clearly of > some age. > I am not (here) in a position to be able to load a photo of it, but > it fits into a tight wooden case, and at the end of this there is a > hollow metal peg. I quickly realized that if you place the case on > a table, and set the tuning fork ringing while holding it in the > metal peg's hollow, the resonance is amplified. I measure the > resonance as 433Hz. Would this be the London Philharmonic Orchestra > pitch of 1826? This is what I read at > [4]http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-84975.html > "In 1939, an International Conference met in London and unanimously > adopted 440 Hz as the standard frequency for the pitch A4, and that > is the almost universal standard at present. Previously, the > standard was A=435 (fixed, Paris Academy, 1859, as diapason normal; > and confirmed, Vienna conference, 1885, as international pitch). > The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) > broadcasts a precise 440 Hz reference tone on its short wave radio > station WWV (Along with time data). In the 1800's there was also > Philharmonic Pitch, that of the London Philharmonic Orchestra. It > varied from 1826, were A=433 Hz, and in 1845, was raised to A=455 > Hz. Historically it has ranged from A=403 Hz to 567 Hz. !!!" What > do you think. The fork is unfortunately not perfect, having been > effected by some rust, but I don't think this would explain the > 433HZ. I was not intending to use it, but it is an entertaining > looking (if no doubt useless) object. Regards Anthony > > -- > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > [5]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html Tom Draughon Heartistry Music [6]http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html 714 9th Avenue West Ashland, WI 54806 715-682-9362 -- References 1. http://www.omega432.com/music.html 2. http://www.solfeggiotones.com/432-hz/ 3. http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2007/12/26/a-432hz-vs-a-440hz-a-sonic-experiment-f ascinating/ 4. http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-84975.html 5. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html 6. http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html
