The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Why don't we switch to 432Hz tuning? Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 16th April 2018
  #91
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
There's a big difference between physics and anthropology.
Indeed. In anthropology you can just make stuff up.

Quote:
In anthropology a distinction would be made between the relative natural reference tuning of different cultures; a major empirical tuning might be seen as hegemonic.
See above.

Alistair
1
Share
Old 16th April 2018
  #92
Lives for gear
 
evosilica's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 64gtoboy View Post
Wtf, this plugin turns everything into my song. Why they stole my song?
1
Share
Old 16th April 2018
  #93
Lives for gear
 

The real question: digital at 432 or analog at 440. Which sounds more cosmically universally natural?
Old 16th April 2018
  #94
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Putting aside the "300 leading" lol. . . . its fallacious reasoning anyway

Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia
Fallacious reasoning? Sutherland. Domingo, Pavarotti? It's a fact that those singers signed a petition requesting the lowering of reference pitch. No argument there.
Old 16th April 2018
  #95
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Indeed. In anthropology you can just make stuff up.



See above.

Alistair
What are your qualifications as an anthropologist?
Old 16th April 2018
  #96
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Putting aside the "300 leading" lol. . . . its fallacious reasoning anyway

Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia
Fallacious reasoning? Sutherland. Domingo, Pavarotti? It's a fact that those singers signed a petition requesting the lowering of reference pitch. No argument there.
Yes. That's 100% logically fallacious reasoning. And you've actually switched the angle of the fallaciousness here, from populum to authority: Argument from authority - Wikipedia

Saying "all these people think this" or "these authorities think this" proves ZILCH, logically. You're providing an observation of opinion, not proof of fact.
Old 16th April 2018
  #97
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Yes. That's 100% logically fallacious reasoning. And you've actually switched the angle of the fallaciousness here, from populum to authority: Argument from authority - Wikipedia

Saying "all these people think this" or "these authorities think this" proves ZILCH, logically. You're providing an observation of opinion, not proof of fact.
It is a fact that Sutherland, Pavarotti and Domingo (and others) signed Schillers petition. A fact, not opinion as you claim.
Old 16th April 2018
  #98
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
It is a fact that Sutherland, Pavarotti and Domingo (and others) signed Schillers petition. A fact, not opinion as you claim.
Lol. Yes, the part that they signed a petition is fact (I'm taking you at face value and assuming this is true at least, I haven't actually checked).

You were using this fact to support a universal claim about 432 though, which is where the error takes place.
Old 16th April 2018
  #99
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Lol. Yes, the part that they signed a petition is fact (I'm taking you at face value and assuming this is true at least, I haven't actually checked).

You were using this fact to support a universal claim about 432 though, which is where the error takes place.
No I didn't. You're making stuff up.
Old 16th April 2018
  #100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
Quote:
Putting aside the "300 leading" lol. . . . its fallacious reasoning anyway

Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia
Fallacious reasoning? Sutherland. Domingo, Pavarotti? It's a fact that those singers signed a petition requesting the lowering of reference pitch. No argument there.
Argument from authority - Wikipedia

We might laud those singers' artistic abilities, but those performance abilities do not establish them as authorities on tuning, its history, the tuning of other instruments in the orchestra, the argued physics some bring into the extended discussion or, really, necessarily anything outside their own experience and practice unless they have some special training or education in one or more of those fields.


Now, if a specific alternative tuning standard offered all the advantages claimed by some, one would think such alternatives would have made far greater inroads, particularly in contexts where tuning is a relatively trivial exercise (as opposed, for instance, to the piano -- but if a pianist is committed, there's no reason he can't begin tuning his instrument to 432, people certainly have).
Old 16th April 2018
  #101
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
No I didn't. You're making stuff up.
Fine. That tends to be the implication when people say "300 leading people agree on xyz" or "the top 3 in the field" agree on xyz. I was responding to that implication.

My bad if this was just a simple face value fact you were noting, without meaning it to be evidence for anything. Its not evidence for anything, that's my point.
Old 16th April 2018
  #102
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
You're making stuff up.
Well, you DID come very close to accusing him of being an anthropologist...

...Just sayin'...
.
1
Share
Old 16th April 2018
  #103
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Fine. That tends to be the implication when people say "300 leading people agree on xyz" or "the top 3 in the field" agree on xyz. I was responding to that implication.

My bad if this was just a simple fact you were noting without meaning it to be evidence for anything.
No. You don't get off that easy. You said this:
Quote:
...You were using this fact to support a universal claim about 432 though, which is where the error takes place.
Where do I make 'a universal claim about 432'?
Old 16th April 2018
  #104
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
No. You don't get off that easy. You said this: Where do I make 'a universal claim about 432'?
You didn't. I already said "my bad."

It was implied though, whether you meant the implication or not. If you didn't mean that implication, and weren't saying all this as evidence for 432 claims, then once again, fine, my bad for putting that on you.

In the context of proving 432 claims, populum and authority claims are meaningless. That's my point. But seems you agree so we're all good
Old 16th April 2018
  #105
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
You didn't. I already said "my bad."

It was implied though, whether you meant the implication or not. If you didn't mean that implication, and weren't saying all this as evidence for 432 claims, then once again, fine, my bad.
OK so you're saying I didn't say what you said I did; but that's what you think I might of implied...so that's OK is it? 'Your bad' is it?
Please stop making things up.
Old 16th April 2018
  #106
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Just for the record:

I make stuff up all the time, and have absolutely NO qualifications at all as either an anthropologist OR as an opera singer!
.
1
Share
Old 16th April 2018
  #107
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
OK so you're saying I didn't say what you said I did; but that's what you think I might of implied...so that's OK is it? 'Your bad' is it?
Please stop making things up.
I've made nothing up. There was a clear implication there, that you apparently did not mean, and I'm saying I accept that this isn't what you meant, to the point of apologizing for misreading you. Let it go man, I'm being cool, don't dig in further. Sheesh.
Old 16th April 2018
  #108
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
I've made nothing up. There was a clear implication there, that you apparently did not mean, and I'm saying I accept that this isn't what you meant, to the point of apologizing for misreading you. Let it go man, I'm being cool, don't dig in further. Sheesh.
You did make something up: you said I made 'a universal claim about 432.'
Old 16th April 2018
  #109
Lives for gear
 

Or don't let it go. I'm out for now.
Old 16th April 2018
  #110
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Or don't let it go. I'm out for now.
Good; perhaps now the thread can have a real discussion about the relevance of lowering the reference pitch.
Old 16th April 2018
  #111
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
Good; perhaps now the thread can have a real discussion about the relevance of lowering the reference pitch.
Ok wow, I'm not out. No more cool from me, no more benefit of the doubt for you.

Apology retracted. I think you're just being a pr*ck. That you absolutely meant the very clear implication that theblue1 and I read into what you wrote, and that you're dead wrong about it.

NOW I'm out.
3
Share
Old 16th April 2018
  #112
Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Ok wow, I'm not out. No more cool from me, no more benefit of the doubt for you.

Apology retracted. I think you're just being a pr*ck. That you absolutely meant the very clear implication that theblue1 and I read into what you wrote, and that you're dead wrong about it.

NOW I'm out.
Well you never apologised in the first place - you did say 'my bad' which suggests you acknowledge your error but that falls short of an actual apology.

What implication did I make and what am I dead wrong about?
Old 16th April 2018
  #113
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Maybe I'm missing something, but are there certain jurisdictions out there where this issue is a matter of law or something?

If so, how about just lowering it to A=436Hz, and just see how it goes from there?
.
1
Share
Old 16th April 2018
  #114
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
Maybe I'm missing something, but are there certain jurisdictions out there where this issue is a matter of law or something?

If so, how about just lowering it to A=436Hz, and just see how it goes from there?
.
Yeah. No kidding. Been saying it all along. I fully, absolutely do not care what tuning standard others use.

My only dog in this fight (if one can pardon the brutal metaphor) is abhorrence of pseudoscience and nonsensical rationalization in support of personal preference.
4
Share
Old 16th April 2018
  #115
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Yeah. No kidding. Been saying it all along. I fully, absolutely do not care what tuning standard others use.

My only dog in this fight (if one can pardon the brutal metaphor) is abhorrence of pseudoscience and nonsensical rationalization in support of personal preference.
Well, yeah, I know what you mean there:

This thing bordering on religious fervor about this seems to be a rather new development.

Back in the day, I recorded many a project without so much as a pitch pipe or tuning fork (let alone an electronic tuner) anywhere in sight.

Often, the only time anybody thought much about this stuff was when using a piano/organ/etc. ...And if such an instrument was overdubbed, we'd just grab the vari-speed knob and tune the tape to the instrument (assuming the instrument was in tune with itself).

I DO remember some of the "classical" crowd getting all apoplectic about playing certain older pieces on vintage instruments in "vintage tunings", but...

Its kinda like there are now two competing factions of "pitch-natzis" out there: Those who seem to have autotune as a religion, and those who worship the number 432.
.
Old 16th April 2018
  #116
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
...Its kinda like there are now two competing factions of "pitch-****s": Those who seem to have autotune as a religion, and those who worship the number 432.
That's a weak analysis based on a binary opposition. The real world is far more nuanced. There are people here on Gearslutz who would like to discuss this without being labelled as 'one or the other.'
Old 16th April 2018
  #117
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Stone View Post
That's a weak analysis based on a binary opposition. The real world is far more nuanced. There are people here on Gearslutz who would like to discuss this without being labelled as 'one or the other.'
It is not "binary".

The way I see it there are are NOT TWO, but THREE factions out there:
1) Those who insist on A=440, equal temperament, and autotuning everything to within an inch of its life

2) Those who worship the number 432

3) Those of us who think this is all a really stupid argument.
(I place myself in the last category.)
.
Old 16th April 2018
  #118
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
It is not "binary".

The way I see it there are are NOT TWO, but THREE factions out there:
1) Those who insist on A=440, equal temperament, and autotuning everything to within an inch of its life

2) Those who worship the number 432

3) Those of us who think this is all a really stupid argument.
(I place myself in the last category.)
.
Is anyone arguing FOR the absoluteness of 440? Haven't seen that come up.

The argument is simply against the cosmic universality of 432. Its all entirely arbitrary. . . just choose your tuning wherever you care to, none is more special than the other.
Old 16th April 2018
  #119
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
It is not "binary".

The way I see it there are are NOT TWO, but THREE factions out there:
1) Those who insist on A=440, equal temperament, and autotuning everything to within an inch of its life

2) Those who worship the number 432

3) Those of us who think this is all a really stupid argument.
(I place myself in the last category.)
.
My angle is 'why do some people have a preference for 432?' - is it a cultural preference or a biological one?
Old 16th April 2018
  #120
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Is anyone arguing FOR the absoluteness of 440? Haven't seen that come up.

The argument is simply against the cosmic universality of 432. Its all entirely arbitrary. . . just choose your tuning wherever you care to, none is more special than the other.
You need to get out more.

What do you think Autotune does to 432HZ?
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump