KVR Audio

jackmazzotti · Post by **jackmazzotti** » Thu Mar 12, 2015 7:27 pm

Andrew, thanks again for your very detailed reply!
Who else can I ask that will actually explain things like you do?
Tuning others synths to properly to match up with KS is the whole point of my post. (which is why I keep bringing up the whole multi-format tuning lib). I understand concept of the reference pitch which is really ideal. I guess the best way to change keys for midi synths in JI tunings is to change the individual o/c pitches. That would keep the ratios intact right?

jackmazzotti · Post by **jackmazzotti** » Thu Mar 12, 2015 7:32 pm

Krakatau wrote:a little off-topic, i couldn't resist !

Galbanum wrote:Everything is relative, philosophically speaking...
...isn't this the expression of an absolute truth ?

the importance of hz are not entirely relative because our ears and vocal chords have finite limits

Andrew Souter · Post by **Andrew Souter** » Thu Mar 12, 2015 9:45 pm

jackmazzotti wrote: the importance of hz are not entirely relative because our ears and vocal chords have finite limits

Hertz is a unit derived from "seconds" Hertz is simply the reciprocal of seconds.

So, what are "seconds" really? Ever think about that? Is there something really, truly universal and absolute about the measurement of time we call "seconds"?

I bet maybe 1 in million or less can tell you where "seconds" comes from. Probably far fewer. And those who do have an answer will probably just recite something they read such as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second

(which is not a bad thing to do...)

I do not know the full details myself to be honest, but I will make a "gentleman's wager" that "seconds are more or less a contrived man-made invention/label". If there is nothing fundamental about the unit of time we call seconds, and/or if time itself is relative (go see Interstellar if you have not!) then "Seconds" and therefore "Hertz" are simply some labels we put on things for matter of social agreements and standards (also not a bad thing to have -- it helps us be more punctual when our armies try to kill one another.

)

Ergo, my thesis is there is nothing fundamental about seconds or hertz!

It follows from this, rather ironically, that relative measurements, due to their self-referential properties are more absolute than to so called "absolute" measurements which are in fact are relative only to a straw man.

The current scientific definition of a second is:

the duration of 9192631770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom.[1]

Really??

9192631770??

Factors:

2 3 3 5 7 7 47 44351

Seems quite an arbitrary number to me...

I think it is safe to say: there was a social tradition that created the idea of second based on an imperfect understanding of time, a long long time ago. At a much later date, we curve-fit the standard and supplied a contrived way to at least define it specifically/scientifically...

If there is a god out there, I doubt very much he/she/it measures time in seconds.

And to conclude it makes little sense to argue over magical significance of A=432 HERTZ or C=256 HERTZ .

For the record, I also happen to like the idea of C=256 when using Just Intonation, but it is not because I think it tunes me to the fundamental frequency of the universe of other such silliness that I have read in the "literature" that discusses the reasons for C=256, A=432... It is simply bc of the fact that 256 = 2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2 = 2^8, and 2^n is more or less the same as the identity "1" and thus powers of two are about as pure/simple of numbers that are possible... (and it makes it easy to do some neat tricks with merging rhythm and tonality... but that's another topic...)

Andrew Souter · Post by **Andrew Souter** » Thu Mar 12, 2015 9:52 pm

If I could start my own universe I and I were choosing some standard measure of time based on some physical property of the universe, I might choose the simplest atom out there "hydrogen" and some relatively simple scaling factor such as a power of two....

Maybe I should do a kickstarter for this project?? hahahah

Andrew Souter · Post by **Andrew Souter** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:15 am

...to clarify a tiny bit: "ranges" of Hertz values are certainly useful and Hertz is a fine of a unit of measurement as any other -- some form of units must be choosen and agreed to. If it is Hertz, so be it. No problem.

And if we do some kind of Fourier or Modal analysis to tune things to some observed object/siganl/phenomenom, also fine and great. No problem.

Hertz as an engineering tool is perfectly fine. It's just the idea of ascribing magic significance to specific hertz values that gets deep into X-Files territory very quickly.

When we read stuff like "C-256 Hertz is the natural absorption frequency of DNA down 100 octaves" which I have actually read somewhere, one has to smile and laugh, or cry, or both...

The one argument I find semi-interesting about A=432 hertz is that it theoretically puts less stress on the various standard vocal ranges.... this "might" have some validity.

I don't know.

Someone should try to study it rigoruslouly...

But even if this IS found to be true, I would say we can't say exactly A=432 hz has some mystical significance. The best we can do is to say "slightly lower frequency tuning standards have been statistically found to align better with the natural vocal ranges of the mean Soprano, Alto, Tenor, and Bass ranges." or something to that effect. A = 433 or A = 431 or A = 431.32154657894591 is mostly likely just as fine for any reasonable statistical confidence interval...

rustman · Post by **rustman** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:43 am

As for the 432 being the natural frequency of blah, blah, whatever- so what? Do we automatically infer that it has some healing, relaxing, whatever effect? That is the leap that I question. Just like rubbing a topical concoction of Emu oil on your skin will heal deep muscle or joint pain...or the latest rare plant of the day added to your shampoo magically fixes your nasty hair. People want to believe and willfully blind themselves to making that one assumption, the leap.
I love the concept of Zen, but I diverge when we get into things like energies, Chi, and chakras. ...but, if your shampoo has a French name, it's better...

jackmazzotti · Post by **jackmazzotti** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 1:13 am

Seconds and hz are just measurements yes but my point is the finite range of both hearing and the voice (also resonance of strings and bodies) clearly demonstrate that it is not purely relative.
I do not subscribe to the magic of A432 but all the music I hear in it sounds better and every vocalist I have tested 440 to 432 prefer 432.
The opera singers of Europe apparently protested against A440. Verdi used A432. Chi and chakras are not magical either. One just needs to develop sensitivity to them through specified training. Some people will be better at that then others just like some people have perfect pitch and some don't and never will. Like A432 people try to make chi and chakras magical as well. For lack of a better word those properties are just part of out bioenergetic field. I believe some day we have instruments that accurately measure them.

jackmazzotti · Post by **jackmazzotti** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 1:44 am

Galbanum wrote: For the record, I also happen to like the idea of C=256 when using Just Intonation, but it is not because I think it tunes me to the fundamental frequency of the universe of other such silliness that I have read in the "literature" that discusses the reasons for C=256, A=432... It is simply bc of the fact that 256 = 2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2 = 2^8, and 2^n is more or less the same as the identity "1" and thus powers of two are about as pure/simple of numbers that are possible... (and it makes it easy to do some neat tricks with merging rhythm and tonality... but that's another topic...)

rustman · Post by **rustman** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 2:06 am

Just for the record- I'm not trying to call malarky on anyone or belittle their beliefs.

Meditation does have a physiological affect on people. Creating a philosophy around it to make it digestible or accessible is OK with me. Likewise, no matter what the reason, if even the thought of 432 makes someone feel better in any way, thats a good, positive thing. I'm all for it. I often wish I could get onboard with things like this. I'd can always take a little more positive in my life.

Musical Gym · Post by **Musical Gym** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 2:32 am

Is there a 2CAudio forum?

I get a 404 when clicking Community Forum link at 2CAudio.com.

More Info link for Architecture Waveforms is dead. Is there a link for more info?

Sampleconstruct · Post by **Sampleconstruct** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:06 am

Back in town, back in Kaleidoland - here is a little journey through some new presets from the same family...

lnikj · Post by **lnikj** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 6:36 am

The division of time into seconds, or the categorisation of frequencies as hertz lacks any ontological basis, but that does not preclude the frequency represented by a particular hertz value as having some sort of physical significance. Unless somebody ascribes some sort of numerological significance to the number '432', it’s not the 432 that it is important, but the frequency represented by it, which we could represent in Planck units, moments, jiffies or some other time unit unrelated to the abritrary division of time into 12/24/60/60 (which has a history going through the ancient Egyptians, Hipparchus, Ptolemy, Al-Biruni and Roger Bacon.)

Cats' mews, dogs' whines, babies crying - these all evolved to occur at frequencies that we find particularly unpleasant. A resonant frequency did for Galloping Gertie. Then there is that probably apocryphal story about Throbbing Gristle's experiments with infrasound...

Whether 432 or 440 matters is not decided by the choice of measurement unit. The argument about vocalists is far more convincing than speculations about Schumann resonances or 432 being a multiple of the 'sacred' Vedic 108.

--

Welcome back Simon

Some great stuff there - are those all being driven by the same drum loop?

Sampleconstruct · Post by **Sampleconstruct** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:54 am

lnikj wrote:
Welcome back Simon Some great stuff there - are those all being driven by the same drum loop?

Thank's Nik, it's not a drumloop, but a physically modelled synth sound playing a repeating sequence.

Musical Gym · Post by **Musical Gym** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 8:41 am

Any examples of KS being used as complement to more traditionally arranged instrumental piece?
Can KS be controlled to follow chord changes?

Cinebient · Post by **Cinebient** » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:24 pm

I think i need hundread years to explore kaleidoscope

Dreaming that one day 2caudio release stuff for iPad too (when the cpu power is there...Breeze as Auria Pro plug-in would be a nice start

.

2CAudio Kaleidoscope | It's A Trip | Latest Update 1.1