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, [email protected]
<[email protected]> a ecrit :
De: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Objet: Re: [LUTE] tuning fork at 433Hz?
A: [email protected], "Anthony Hind" <[email protected]>
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-fascinating/
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
