The Case for Precise Temperament Tuning in 432.081hz instead of Equal Temperament Tuning in 432hz
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 окт 2024
- The case for Precise Temperament Tuning in 432.081hz (A5) instead of Equal Temperament Tuning in 432hz (A5) Tuning.
To listen to Precise Temperament Tuning music samples, search "Precise Temperament Tuning" on RUclips, or visit my website: robertedwardgr...
Also visit: www.tonimazzot...
-----------------------------------------
Robert Edward Grant
Website:
www.robertedwa...
Think Tank Podcast:
robertedwardgr...
Online Courses:
robertedwardgr...
Blog:
www.robertedwa...
Original series ‘Code X’ :
bit.ly/Gaia_Co...
Well done Robert, your “rediscoveries” are history in the making
Amazing. mentioning the sum of 9 in the triplets really made it all click together neatly.
Absolutely PROFOUND!
You explain it perfectly.
I get Goose bumps when you hit the precise points of this explanation.
I have been receiving downloads which I have difficulty understanding I keep wanting to put ego into the solution, but once I remove self, I find exactly the purpose and solution.
Thank You Sir Grant
❤❤❤
Much Love
Keep Shining
Thank you for sharing this!!! My family loves you Robert !❤
Omg what are these stupid bots. Ffs why on this video? ...
Ty for sharing your work! It is so much appreciated
Thank you for this Robert.
How did the longer decimal values get derived? I'm been trying to read all the papers/books on this and I still can't see how we got from 432 to 432.081... BTW, I am really loving how this tuning sounds.
Just intonation "doesn't sound good?" It sounds "super out of tune?" Wow, that's certainly an opinion I've never heard before and I doubt I'll ever hear again! It's generally agreed that just intonation, based on the natural harmonic series, is a standard by which we judge the relative consonance/dissonance of interval classes. Harmonies in just intonation (JI) are insanely beautiful and extremely aesthetically pleasing, which is why they are called "pure" or "just" in the first place. The first time I heard just tuning, it completely changed how I listened to and composed music, and I never felt comfortable going back to equal temperament. Chords like the 4:5:6 simply "purr," and music in JI has an unparalleled ability to "rest" at slow tempos, whereas tempered music has varying degrees of an unstable shimmer that propels the music forward. JI is not meant to be used systematically, but rather on a composition by composition basis: Grant is not comparing apples to apples here. Furthermore, the example he gives of a stack of three major thirds not closing on the octave--he's spelling out an augmented chord, a rather uncommon and dissonant-sounding chord that is absent from the seven diatonic modes. JI composers will also make use of enharmonic spellings, meaning that, for example, A# and Bb will actually be two separate notes, which they originally were with many meantone temperaments.
5 limit ji is out of tune. It is one of the only right things he said here. True intonation is always Pythagorean tuning aka 3 limit ji, or what i just call true intonation, yes even in chords. You can hear examples and find out more on my channel.
@@RememberGodHolyBible Something is only "out of tune" when it doesn't line up with what the musician or "tuner" wants. It seems highly presumptuous, even ludicrous, to say that an entire system is "out of tune." If you mean that 5-limit JI sounds less consonant than Pythagorean, then that's a subjective statement you're certainly entitled to, but I suspect now, seeing your username, that your motivations may be ideological (I'll check out your channel).
Anyway, there's a sort of general rule of thumb which I've found to be mostly correct (many caveats here but there's really no need to get into them now), which is that the simpler the ratio, the more consonant it is. 2:1, the octave, is considered more consonant that 3:2, the perfect fifth, followed by 4:3, 5:4, 6:5 etc. Those last two superparticular ratios of the harmonic series are much simpler than the Pythagorean major and minor thirds of 81:64 and 32:27, respectively. But they're all tools in the musician's toolbox, imo. Also I'd say that my research indicates physiological and even reasons relating to consciousness may be at play for our, what I would strongly suggest, innate preference for 5-limit JI. I'm quite familiar with Pythagorean intonation, but I prefer JI in most, if not all, cases.
5 limit is not holistic. If you listen in a completely relaxed and attentive way, listening to melodic intonation simultaneously with the vertical harmonic intonation, 5 limit sounds like the notes are never getting up to pitch or they are over shooting.
When I was in the New Age/Hinduism/Buddhism/Taoism etc., very intensely for about ten years, I preferred and swore by 5 limit. I was Mr. 5 limit, and I advocated for it everywhere I went, along with 7 limit to a lesser extent. I even recorded the first pop rock song in 7 limit just intonation. It is still on RUclips, but not on this channel. If you care to hear it, it is Lenses by the Deep Green Flame. I did the vocals keyboard and bass, and my friend at the time did the drums and a good part of the production.
I spent years researching the theory of 5 limit composition as well as designing potential instruments for 5 limit playing. But about 2 year ago, the Lord had me stop with 5 limit and started showing me 3 limit, and showing me that it is a far more ideal tuning, and also showed me the reasoning behind my preference for 5 limit. He opened my ears to hear 3 limit as in tune, which was impossible for me prior. Now I cannot trick my ear for very long to hear 5 limit in tune, or anything but 3 limit. I once thought 3 limit was for lower consciousness like plants, but was just because devils were twisting my mind from all the occult things i was into. So much energy was spent on focusing and hyper focusing on the present moment, that my ear only checked for intonation in the present moment, listening for if a chord beated or not, or fit into a h5 limit harmonic "slot". This is an unnatural way of listening, one conditioned by devils. Music happens over time, you experience the present in context of the future and past. I think many 5 limit advocates have fallen prey to this without realizing as was the case with me.
It is more than just one having simpler ratios, I mean no offense but that way of looking at it is extremely simplistic and misses the bigger picture. 5 limit tuning cannot have fixed pitched instruments that are fun to play and provide a reasonable amount of pitches for modulation. It as a musical system is illogical and unpredictable, and if you spend enough time with it and composing for it, and hear your compositions, it becomes clear that the system may be able to sort of work with certain music with some sense of logic, but once the myriad sizes of half steps come into play by necessity, you see the whole thing just does not work coherently. 5 limit is a concept based off of a false premise, that the 5/4 is the ideal major third. But a major third is four perfect fifths. The 5/4 is a slightly sharp diminished fourth, an Fb above C, not an E. A musical key is defined as 6 perfect fifths in an unbroken chain yielding 7 notes. If you have notes going outside that definition as is the case with the thirds sixths sevenths and sometimes seconds, the ear hears that as outside of the key even when the thing is supposed to be diatonic.
I am not saying these things lightly. I spent many many many years, day in and day out thinking about this, listening, and studying.
There are certain timbres, usually artificial electronic timbres that can cause the Pythagorean major third to sound harsh or rough, but to my surprise I learned this is never an issue of intonation, but rather an issue of timbre. The same major chord that sounds really rough on a synthesizer, can sound completely smooth with voices, or a real acoustic instruments. And not all electronic instrument timbres have this problem, only some of them. But it is never an intonation issue. And the same problem can be there in 5 limit, you can have certain timbres which make the 5/4 sound very bad, even out of context, just as an interval.
Musical intonation is about much more than one ratio being smaller than another. It is about the system as a whole, and the brain's ability to process the collection of notes and their relationships to one another on the fly unfolding over time in a consistent and logical way. Having octaves as the powers of 2 and ALL pitch classes as the powers of 3, with 17 notes existing in the vicinity of any given tonic chord, 7 naturals, 5 sharps, and 5 flats, allows the brain to perceive the perfect harmonic relationships melodically, a voice moving from one note to the next, as well as harmonically, multiple notes sounding at once. @@The60Pattern
You wrote, "because devils were twisting my mind." This is why we can't have a rational discussion about this. If the person I'm talking to does not take responsibility for their own faculties, and claims outside interference is at play, then there's really no point of continuing any further. It's a cognitive, ideological barrier that I do not wish to run up against.
I will say, for those reading this, that above comment that "5 limit is not holistic" brings up a good, relative point. Any "be all-end all" approach to tuning, this kind of "tuning puritanism" that we see here, is by definition not holistic. My personal approach, however, IS holistic. I simply advocate for the musician to have the entire gamut of tuning at his or her fingertips. If you want to compose with Pythagorean intonation--great! More power to you. I have composed with it quite a bit myself. It has a wonderful, austere quality, and it does seem fitting for religious or spiritual music--almost like an angelic choir of sorts. The ears can and will adjust to most, if not all, tunings. But the approach to tuning need not be systematic--that is common fallacy, especially in this day and age with modern music technology. I often tune on a song by song basis, with the tuning becoming an additional, creative element that fits (or clashes, depending on what you're trying to achieve) with all of the other elements of a piece.
While some of the statements made in the comment above are true or based on musical truths, many are inaccurate, irrelevant, and or inconsistent, and I don't care to pick them apart one by one. Clearly there's a religious bias that is driving this, leading to clouded judgment and illogical reasoning. It's like "vegetarianism" for music.
My own work, in the documentary The 60 Pattern, potentially informs us as to why 5 limit JI is almost universally preferred (note this is not a prescriptive statement), as our bodies, certain aspects of our physical environment, and perhaps even consciousness all fit within what we can describe as a 2-3-5 prime factorization pattern.
@@RememberGodHolyBible
Any ideological issue here is on your part. I am not escaping responsibility for my past actions, merely describing the mechanism by which I was deceived, and my perception was altered without my knowledge at the time.
I do wonder if you follow Robert's work, or your self are into any occult religion or practices. Because Robert's mind is likewise twisted by devils, even worse than mine was. In the occult when all of your attention is on "being in the present moment" and on yourself (which is not natural, nor good) your mind will be warped by that ideology and it may very well effect how you hear music.
It also depends on one's training. My first exposure, and many peoples' first exposure to learning "proper intonation" is learning 5 limit tuning, and usually by way of synthetic instruments with their synthetic timbres looking at intervals in a vacuum, not in music. They then begin to train their ear in that way. That warps the mind. All of that coupled with striving to always "be in the present moment" or "in the now", changes your perception to only check for intonation in a moment of time rather than in the moment in context to the past and future. Plus 5 limit is almost always taught and looked at as intervals in a vacuum, not in real music with real musical context. Yes, the 5/4 has that buzz and resonance, but that does not mean it is in tune musically. It doesn't make the 5/4 a major third. All of those things contributed to why I preferred 5 limit once and looked down upon 3 limit and could not hear it as in tune. And I suspect others who prefer five limit have at least some, if not all those factors in common.
Men's faculties can be warped by outside forces, whether it be by devils (which is quite common), or other men, or the lust of their own flesh. This does not mean one is not responsible for his words and deeds and thoughts of his heart, but to deny the fact man can be manipulated by things outside his awareness is extremely short sighted.
As you agreed, 5 limit is not holistic. 3 limit however is, totally and completely holistic, melodically, harmonically, and as a system at large. There are instances where you can trick your ear into hearing 5 limit as in tune, or a 5 limit chord as in tune, through varying arrangements, different timbres, speed, dynamics, repetition, etc., but it is always a trick, it is always a sleight of hand the musician has to execute, whether knowingly or unknowingly. When you bring the music into a clear hearing, when it comes to timbre, and dynamics, with orchestration scaled down to hear the voices and harmonies bare, 5 limit falls short every time. 3 limit however, sounds perfectly in tune.
Our whole music notation system, and music theory is based solely on Pythagorean tuning, not five limit, and not 12 tet (though it works better with 12 tet because 12tet is just slightly detuned Pythagorean). 7 natural notes that are altered by various sharps and flats. That is why key signatures go by fifths. Fifths get you all pitch classes, 5/4's get you nothing by compounding commas of every pitch you have in 3 limit, which go on indefinitely. 5 limit is just a detuning of 3 limit. One that spirals exponentially into greater and greater levels of incoherence.
There is a reason there is no key signature for A harmonic minor with only one G#. A key is 7 notes in an unbroken chain of 6 fifths. G# falls out side of that, it is broken off from the other notes in A minor in a chain of fifths. We use it as an altered A natural minor scale for various reasons, but that G# is not natural to the key, even in Pythagorean it, is broken off in the chain of fifths from A minor, with F# and C# being absent..
A key is not just a collection of notes. You can treat a collection of notes AS a key, but the point remains that doing that yields much more dissonant and exotic sounding music. Diatonic music is used as much as it is because the brain understands the relationships of the notes in an unbroken chain of fifths, especially with 7 notes. It is only with seven diatonic notes that each note appears as a unique degree in a triad only once. So for example, in C major, C is only ever the 1 in C major, it is the 1 of no other chord in the key. C is only ever the 5 of F major, it is never the 5 of any other chord in the key. It is like this for every single note in the diatonic scale, and it only is this way with 7 diatonic notes, not with less, not with more.
This is all lost in a 5 limit major scale because you need more than seven notes, you need 2 and 2-, 6 and 6+, sometimes even more than 9 notes, and this pattern of each note appearing as a degree of a chord exactly once, is lost.
The reason I bring this thing about keys up is when you have the brain tracking pitch classes by frequencies that are powers of 3 and octaves that are powers of 2, the brain can keep track of those 2 dimensions of harmonic movement very well. But when you add prime 5 into the mix with 5 limit tuning, now the brain has to track 3 different dimensions at once, AND track them in continually varying proportions one to another, and the brain cannot do that very well if at all, and so it just reverts or "gives up" to listening only in the present moment to check for an appreciate the "buzz" of the 5/4, or it just hears it as it is, out of tune, aka incoherent.
Lastly I do believe in a "canon" of notes, if you will. That C4 should be 256 Hz (ideally), A4 should be 432 Hz (again, ideally). Names of notes should have their specific frequency, they should not change, especially in the context of a piece. Otherwise, what good is their name if they are changing. Cb is Cb, B natural is B natural. There should not be a 15/8 B natural and a 243/128 B+ natural. Plusses and minuses, ups and downs, have never existed in music until very recently. And they are slapped on to the Pythagorean system we have, and they clutter up the page, and are not legible when written by hand. Ambiguity of pitch is what got me into intonation in the first place. I remember in choir, especially when I was on the third of the chord, I never knew exactly where the pitch should be, I was always just hoping for the best with thirds, sixths, and sevenths. When I came across 5 limit tuning, and an exact pitch could be identified and sung, I was greatly intrigued. But as I stated before the short comings of 5 limit in time revealed themselves, and I was back to everything being wishy washy again, 5 limit sometimes, 3 limit other times, some various tempering other times. All of it arbitrary and disconnected from the piece as a whole. Much of orchestra music today has this approach and it is why I generally detest it. The tuning is disjointed, and while many may not pick up on that consciously, no doubt it is very subtly destabilizing to the listeners and players. It is always a great joy when I hear a choir and or orchestra adhering as close as they can to 3 limit tuning. Subtly it leaves you feeling whole and settled having listened to it.
I'm not really buying this. Our standard, Western 12-tone equal temperament (12TET) already HAS a major third whose ratio is equal to the cubed root of 2 (1.25992 or 400 cents). So how is Grant's precise temperament tuning different from our standard 12TET? He bases his perfect fifths on 3:2, or 702 cents (one octave = 1200 cents), which is just 2 cents away from 12TET's already highly consonant perfect fifths of 700 cents. But you have to realize that temperament is always a compromise, so by making his fifths slightly more just or consonant, other intervals in his system will become slightly less so. But I want you to understand that it's a really miniscule difference that he's introduced here. If comparisons are made between the two systems when both are based on the same reference pitch, I literally cannot tell the difference and I'm a musician who's really into this stuff. But here's another thing: this is an uneven temperament, similar to a well or meantone temperament. That means that every key is tuned differently. For example, the perfect fifth from B to F# in his system is about 694 cents. Bach composed the Well-Tempered Clavier to exploit well-temperament's different "characters of the keys." This can be a feature, rather than a bug, but understand that this introduces certain complications. There's a learning curve to understanding all of the variations and idiosyncrasies of all of the keys--which ones are ideal for which purposes, which ones are generally better or worse, etc. It imposes certain limitations that do not exist with regard to standard equal temperament. Has Grant ever mentioned this or published a 12x12 chart showing the entire family of intervals in the system? In short, I just want you to understand what this IS and what it ISN'T. It IS somewhere in-between a well-temperament and 12TET, but being much closer to the latter, it ISN'T really anything new or something to get excited over, in my opinion.
Really well said. Thank you for saving my tired brain the trouble of poorly trying to say this. Since you're into this side of theory, as am I, help me understand something that I've contemplated for many, many years... What kind of temperament do middle school bands use? Even many highschool bands and even the community orchestra I play with seem to use it. It's similar to the key of Db or Gb with C based meantone tuning, but sounds much worse. I'm thinking it's gotta be from the era of neanderthals 140,000 years ago. Maybe they didn't have ears? Any ideas?
🤣 I think it's some form of meangorean tempertantrum@@theamaturepro
The bach-lehman 1722 temperament is the best use of adjusting the 12-tet I have ever seen/heard. You do not need to retune the instrument to play in all keys. 1/4, meantone is also amazing but you must retune play in all keys. Next to these the Werckmeister 3 tuning and the Kirnberger's tuning are also amazing and allow for playing in all keys without returning. All other temperaments are inferior in my opinion. 12-tet sounds only good on certain instruments where the intonation remains perfect. And you need a really good player to work out the clashes in the music. The unequal especially the bach-lehman temperament is so beautiful and rich you wouldn't even guess it was an unequal temperament. So in an unjust world (pun intended) there are better options out there than traditional 12-tet in my views.
What do you think of what's called "Master Key" or tuning at 444 hz?
@Robert_Edward_Grant this work is fascinating and I commend you on these insights. I wonder if you have come across the work of Ed Nightingale elaborated in The Giza Template: Temple Graal Earth Measure? I recently became aware of this work through an equally fascinating RUclips on the Alchemical Science channel by Jordan entitled: Ancient Architecture & Mathematics | Plasmoid Unification Model and The Giza Template. In this video Jordan very succinctly explains the relationship between the work uncovered by Ed Nightingale and the role it seems to play with the correct understanding of the Pythagorean Thing Principle.
Robert, have you experience with piano tuning? - I would love to hear your take...
What is the title of the full video, and where can we watch it?
What if you wanted to tune a piano to 528 Hz? Would you start with A4? I just don't want to push the strings too much and tighten them too much risking damage to the instruments
That's A444
Will onschain be listed in gate io kucoin or something now, thats what they say?
Onschain will now be listed on p2b
🇧🇷Brasil 🌱
o/
Will Onschain be listed?
How can I buy from this onschain?
What is the price of onschain now?
On which exchange will this onschain be listed?
What is Onschain? What is everyone talking about?
It is said that onschain will rise 100x, is it true?
Dear Friends in unity:
I have posted a very special JS Bach recording in the new Precise Temperament. I also introduce in this music video my "acoustification' recording method using a vibration speaker and the surface of my guitar. Hope you get a chance see this tribute, Mr. Robert. It was just posted, or search "Let's Hear The New Precise Temperament Tuning!" All are invited to see.
Your,
- _Acoustic Rabbit Hole_
yes
Binance says Onschain will be $2500
Ok, so when can I buy my precise temperament tuning guitar tuner. Frequencies burned in and unable to be switched, just like the crummy 440 guitar tuners now selling. Best regards Robert. Let's get this into the International Standards and change the world, through properly played music.
As I came to understand, you can tune your guitar to a A432hz, but the guitar is built using equal temperament. You would have to re-fret your guitar to achieve that specific tuning. I cant figure out how different the frets would be though. Its pretty confusing to be honest.
@@sk8pkl Lol, you're right!. You'll still need a 432.08 tuner :P I've been tuning my guitars to 432 for years. There IS a difference.
@@adolforosado i do ear the difference and i prefer playing in 432hz. I dont think it is possible to tune a guitar precisely to 432.081hz. a change in temperature or in humidity is enough to tune out your guitar, as you know. I think re-fretting the guitar according to precise temperament intervals would be an even more noticeable change, but... No one does that yet.
Untill there is a way to set that should we set our instruments to 432.0 or 432.1 ?
Yes
@@Robert_Edward_Grant which one is it ? 432.0 or 432.1 ?
@@atakuruoglu For rounding, if it is not possible to select the decimal numbers, yes, you should put in 432.1, and not 432.0.
@@ToniMazzotti thanks ! And temprament is pythagorean is best right ?
They made Onschain with artificial intelligence, this is the first project in the world.
What is Onschain????
Fuck Onchain! I'm so over all these BS bots trying to do a pump and dump on this POS
❤❤❤
it's obviously a 121 though
I want Adam Neely to see this one
It will be listed for $5 in 2 months.
❤
The onschain team is very strong, and as if that is not enough, the artificial intelligence manages the project :D
If Onschain is listed on Binance it will be $3000
sold for 60 cents
This man is LYING to you.
He just said that you can reach the octave using perfect fifths, which is totally false, and is the reason many employ equal temperament. Then he claims that major thirds can't reach the octave which IS true, but again, it is why people use equal temperament.
He is lying when he says the major third is 5/4. I know many preach this lie, but it IS a lie and because it is repeated so often, people have believed it. The true major third is 81/64, yes even in chords.
Robert intentionally seeks to induce confusion so he can speak above your understanding and appear wise though he is telling you lies. It is why he puts the 3/2 fifth on the side of the triangles with the thirds and the 5/4 thirds on the side of the triangle that shows fifths.
If you start at Pythagorean tuning, aka 3 limit just intonation, aka deriving ALL notes from 2/1 octaves and 3/2 fifths, then you get perfect harmonic and melodic intonation at once. Robert creates a problem, and then seeks to solve it, to push his lies and temperament.
The major third is the result of four perfect fifths, it is not the fifth partial (5/4). The 5/4 is actually a slightly sharp diminished fourth, which is flatter than a major third. So above C the 5/4 is a slightly sharp Fb (not to be confused with E).
I bought about 15 thousand onschain tokens from 20 cents and even now my money has increased 3x.
#spambot
How can I buy from this onschain?
It is said that onschain will rise 100x, is it true?
❤❤❤
If Onschain is listed on Binance it will be $3000
What is the price of onschain now?
I'm so freaking tired of these stupid Onchain Bots 🤦♂️
@@Robert_Edward_GrantDon't be distracted by whatever 'noise', Robert. There's much more to come.
@@rolandhendriks7149 He is leaving a comment here that helps us understand what it is about. I didn't know what that was until now. And now I know. I think we need to participate in social media, making answers that are useful for others.