cavefish wrote:music has emotional values, it soothes and satisfies , not only to listeners but to players and , we know playing music is a wonderful experience that reaches far beyong listening , just imagine IF your instrument were taking away,assuming one plays one, honestly a state of depression would fall into place, music is a part of the Human factor, but as stated earlier sound and notes are a personal choice and feeling, why does one play a tuba, or a guitar or a piano, or a flugal horn or a whistle or flute Etc.----Because that person made a "choice" that soothed their ears and body and mind,, the choice satisfied,,, personally if there was not music i think we would fail as a person in some way or form, -----------music can also sway moods, anger , aggression , increase adrenaline, etc. Bagpipes ,drums instruments of war that created loyalty pride and unity , flutes victory cries, i can go on and on,
Hopefully not too much of a surprise to know that I'm with you on all of that!
but for anyone who claims something simple as a tuning deviation is useless does not "feel" the wonders and beauty of music itself
But have to say that 1. I never said different tunings are useless, and 2. I will defend myself to the hilt against any suggestion that I don't feel the wonders and beauty of music itself!
I have no problem with different pitch standards, several of which I've either played at or own recordings at. If 432 Hz was, say, the accepted standard for HIP Mozart (and it's not far off what typical period orchestras are using there), I'd be the first to say that's great and something I like to hear. Likewise, if that's what we used today rather than 440/442/444 Hz, I'd have no problem with it. My beef is entirely with the spurious mathematical, in-tune-with-the-whole-cosmos, 440-is-ugly-but-this-is-sweet reasoning behind its recent cult when gullible people are quite simply getting taken in there. Or, to put it another way, the 432 Hz cult proponents are trying to tell us that 440 Hz is wrong and we should all be listening at 432 Hz, whereas I'm not suggesting that any pitch is intrinsically wrong... just that it may be supported by faulty reasoning.
Sedi wrote:I thought most of the baroque stuff is played in 432. I read somewhere that people think baroque flutes sound nicer at that pitch.
415 Hz is the most common standard for HIP baroque, with 392 Hz also popular for some applications (especially French music, where a lower pitch was common). These two also happen to be conveniently a semitone and a tone below 440 Hz, but there have been a whole range of others such as 405 Hz and 409 Hz. I have owned 415 Hz recorders, will probably do so again, and still own a 415 Hz baroque flute. I could also argue that my 440 Hz descant and tenor recorders are simultaneously 392 Hz sixth flutes and voice flutes, but have never actually used them as such...
pancelticpiper wrote:I studied Baroque flute in Uni and back then (1970s) there was a 435 thing, it being the official French pitch in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Check out Diapason Normal again, Richard; it's really later 19th century (adopted in 1859) and not an 18th century thing, where pitch was typically substantially lower.
cavefish wrote:well, referring to a cult, well there are those who bond with nature and trees and such and the meditation arena around 432hz, is in play, but thats not me
All good, then!