You are not logged in.

#1 2021-09-23 08:35:29

TomTom
Member

Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Hi.

If the music in the videos is not in 432 HZ please convert it for the future here. https://www.432hzconverter.com/



440 HZ (Most music) is out of tune and made in 1953 by the ISO cabal. The cells absorb 432 HZ a lot better and the main information of the video would be more clear.

Last edited by TomTom (2021-09-23 09:19:43)

Offline

#2 2021-09-23 12:59:16

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

I'd agree that having 432Hz music in advanced content like ours here would be adequate, as the regular 440Hz and others are actually toxic - and ruin my own experience for the videos, as they are badly dissonant if you are both sensitive to such and a heart-based musician (hence I prefer the transcripts, or at least use an equilizer to get rid of most music "noise".)

I like to outline that true resonant/healthy music also requires to be created using a pythagorean tonal scale, which is the one you get when tuning e.g. your piano or harp by ear and resonances, while the cabalistic standard linear 1/12th and other tonal systems still cause dissonances even if converted to 432Hz.

I understand that putting such a lot of effort into the music might be too much, as the content itself counts, and there's already plenty of work to cover even without such details. But maybe, since Gosia isn't doing this all alone, some people of her team are willing to look into using at least 432Hz music, as much of such is readily available e.g. on YouTube already, thus not needing the conversion effort.

Yet, all this being said: Using properly tuned music is likely to improve the absorption rate of the content.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#3 2021-09-24 03:05:17

Pymander
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

I'm not sure if this is true; but, from what I remember reading YouTube's own algorithm converts audio to 440hz even if the source is 432hz.

Offline

#4 2021-09-24 05:02:32

TomTom
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Pymander wrote:

I'm not sure if this is true; but, from what I remember reading YouTube's own algorithm converts audio to 440hz even if the source is 432hz.


No. YouTube don't convert audio or color of uploaded material.

I think the new powerful Sophia video is in 432. But I'm not sure. I just think its great.

Last edited by TomTom (2021-09-24 05:03:53)

Offline

#5 2022-03-19 13:34:00

mahengrui1
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Robert369 wrote:

I like to outline that true resonant/healthy music also requires to be created using a pythagorean tonal scale, which is the one you get when tuning e.g. your piano or harp by ear and resonances, while the cabalistic standard linear 1/12th and other tonal systems still cause dissonances even if converted to 432Hz.

Hello Robert369, to confirm it in math:

The cabal scale, bad scale is x*2**(n/12) Hz

The Pythagorean tonal scale is made by 2 and 3, it is

C  D  E  F  G  A  B  C
1/1  9/8  81/64  4/3  3/2  27/16  243/128  2/1

right? Or it can be anything possible in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_tuning ?

Offline

#6 2022-03-19 16:46:06

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

mahengrui1 wrote:
Robert369 wrote:

I like to outline that true resonant/healthy music also requires to be created using a pythagorean tonal scale, which is the one you get when tuning e.g. your piano or harp by ear and resonances, while the cabalistic standard linear 1/12th and other tonal systems still cause dissonances even if converted to 432Hz.

Hello Robert369, to confirm it in math:

The cabal scale, bad scale is x*2**(n/12) Hz

The Pythagorean tonal scale is made by 2 and 3, it is

C  D  E  F  G  A  B  C
1/1  9/8  81/64  4/3  3/2  27/16  243/128  2/1

right? Or it can be anything possible in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_tuning ?

This is correct, and it goes along "tuning by ear" e.g. if using quints.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#7 2022-03-26 07:15:19

pete
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Robert369 wrote:
mahengrui1 wrote:

...

The Pythagorean tonal scale is made by 2 and 3, it is

C  D  E  F  G  A  B  C
1/1  9/8  81/64  4/3  3/2  27/16  243/128  2/1

right? Or it can be anything possible in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_tuning ?

This is correct, and it goes along "tuning by ear" e.g. if using quints.

Could I ask why 81/64 for the major third (other than for the "3/2" maths of it)? Wouldn’t 5/4 sound more natural or more “consonant” to the ear?

Also what about intention behind the music? Does it matter whether the sound is consonant or dissonant if one’s intention behind producing it is not benevolent anyway?

Offline

#8 2022-03-26 09:05:34

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

pete wrote:

Could I ask why 81/64 for the major third (other than for the "3/2" maths of it)? Wouldn’t 5/4 sound more natural or more “consonant” to the ear?

Those are numbers that are said to have been determined by Pythagoras, and they reflect the natural resonances of e.g. string instruments like a piano or harp. Nothing is more natural than "natural resonances", so I guess your term of "more natural" is subject to being used to a certain setting.

pete wrote:

Also what about intention behind the music? Does it matter whether the sound is consonant or dissonant if one’s intention behind producing it is not benevolent anyway?

Intention is important, but for this the music needs to be compared to speaking: Great content (good intentions) transmitted via nasty words (dissonances) is a poor speech and the target audience (your cells) are likely to dislike having to stand the speech until its end.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#9 2022-03-27 04:42:59

pete
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Robert369 wrote:
pete wrote:

Could I ask why 81/64 for the major third (other than for the "3/2" maths of it)? Wouldn’t 5/4 sound more natural or more “consonant” to the ear?

Those are numbers that are said to have been determined by Pythagoras, and they reflect the natural resonances of e.g. string instruments like a piano or harp. Nothing is more natural than "natural resonances", so I guess your term of "more natural" is subject to being used to a certain setting.

Hm, not sure I get your point. Could we perhaps look at this practically:

Let’s use a single string (so nothing different to what Pythagoras might have used - a monochord).

If you pluck the string, it would move/resonate in exact proportions to its length:
- the resonance along the entire length of the string would be called its fundamental frequency (1/1).
- the resonance along half the length would be an octave (2/1) - first overtone.
- third of the length would be a fifth (3/2) - second overtone.
- quarter of the length would be an octave again (4/2) - third overtone.
- fifth of the length would be the major third (5/4) - fourth overtone.
Etc.

You can ascertain the same if you touch/stop the string at those same points. For example, if you stop a string at the fifth of its length, the frequency (and the length) ratio would be 5/4 (or 80/64) rather than the Pythagorean 81/64.

That’s not a big difference if you are only playing a melody (and if you don’t have perfect pitch to notice the difference).

However, you might notice the difference if you play two notes together to produce the major third interval.

For example, say you play a C note at 256Hz and want to play a major third (E) together with C. If you use 5/4 ratio, your E frequency would be 320Hz, whereas if you use 81/64, your E frequency would be 324Hz.

If you compare the two major thirds, I would argue that your 5/4 E would sound more in resonance, or more "naturally resonant" with your C than your 81/64 E would. Why? Because some of the overtones would coincide exactly in the case of C and E of 5/4 ratio. That is, 3 out of the first sixteen overtones would coincide exactly - or resonate in unison. In other words, the two notes would reinforce each other - resonate together, because of coinciding overtones. However, in the case of 81/64 E, there would be no overtones at all that would coincide with your C’s overtones (its first sixteen overtones).

Hence, I’m struggling to see in what way would a third with an 81/64 ratio be more "naturally resonant" with your fundamental tone if none of the 81/64 overtones actually coincide or resonate with fundamental note’s overtones? Could you please point out what I’m not seeing here? Thanks


Robert369 wrote:

Intention is important, but for this the music needs to be compared to speaking: Great content (good intentions) transmitted via nasty words (dissonances) is a poor speech and the target audience (your cells) are likely to dislike having to stand the speech until its end.

Nicely put smile

Offline

#10 2022-03-27 04:47:58

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

pete wrote:

Hm, not sure I get your point. Could we perhaps look at this practically:

Let’s use a single string (so nothing different to what Pythagoras might have used - a monochord).

Sorry, it seems that you misunderstood the basics of tonal resonances, as those are between different tones, hence this cannot be understood using a single cord really.

We are talking of acoustic resonances that align with the natural overtones, hence we can tune our instrument by ear by matching the overtone and resonances of two cords, which works best for a quinte.

If you need to learn more about inter-tonal resonances and ear-tuning, you best read up somewhere - no point in rewriting the internet.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#11 2022-03-27 05:40:58

pete
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Robert369 wrote:
pete wrote:

Hm, not sure I get your point. Could we perhaps look at this practically:

Let’s use a single string (so nothing different to what Pythagoras might have used - a monochord).

Sorry, it seems that you misunderstood the basics of tonal resonances, as those are between different tones, hence this cannot be understood using a single cord really.

We are talking of acoustic resonances that align with the natural overtones, hence we can tune our instrument by ear by matching the overtone and resonances of two cords, which works best for a quinte.

That's exactly what I was asking, though I admit the post was perhaps too long/detailed to read. I can paraphrase the whole thing in short if that helps:

A major third between two tones together (C and E for example) with a ratio of 5/4 has more coinciding overtones (3 out of the first 16) than a major third with a ratio of 81/64 (pythagorean) which has no coinciding overtones at all.

So, saying that 81/64 ratio is more resonant than 5/4 makes no sense to me since the two notes with that ratio do not in fact resonate or reinforce each other (having no coinciding overtones).

Usually to "tune an instrument by ear" means to match its overtones in a way that would produce the least disonances. The least disonances happen when the overtones either coincide or are sufficiently far away not to cause "beating" (when two overtones are too close but do not coincide). Hence, if you are turning by ear, you are more likely to tune a major third to 5/4 than 81/64. To tune 81/64 accruately, you would need to count beats / disonance between third/fourth overtones.

Offline

#12 2022-03-27 05:48:48

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

pete wrote:

So, saying that 81/64 ratio is more resonant than 5/4 makes no sense to me since the two notes with that ratio do not in fact resonate or reinforce each other (having no coinciding overtones).

Your ear will tell you something different than the false math that is applied by today's "tonal resonance calculations" - and that is what counts and is reflected in the overtones.

And yes, the phythagorean system has some built-in dissonances, just like every other tonal system (because there is no perfect split), they are healthy ones and it is those that make music "lively" - proven by the ear-tuning.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#13 2022-03-27 06:11:38

pete
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Robert369 wrote:
pete wrote:

So, saying that 81/64 ratio is more resonant than 5/4 makes no sense to me since the two notes with that ratio do not in fact resonate or reinforce each other (having no coinciding overtones).

Your ear will tell you something different than the false math that is applied by today's "tonal resonance calculations" - and that is what counts and is reflected in the overtones.

I am talking about tuning by ear solely though, so this is not about calculations or fake science.

When you tune two sounds by ear, you have to listen for overtones, and with practice you are able to hear them better and better. So, when you tune a major third, you listen for the thrid/fourth overtones in the two tones, and you match them to get no beating between them in other words. That is when the two tones also happen to "ring", or resonate together, or reinforce each other. That's how you know you managed to tune them as purely as you can. Pythagorean 81/64 on the other hand never sounds that resonant really. And the same could be said about major sixth and other intervals.

Robert369 wrote:

And yes, the phythagorean system has some built-in dissonances, just like every other tonal system (because there is no perfect split), they are healthy ones and it is those that make music "lively" - proven by the ear-tuning.

That's I suppose what I'm asking - to my ear it does not seem that pythagorean system is more resonant than just tuning for example, for many of the intervals. So, if it's not about resonance that can be heard by one's own ear, then what would make pythagorean tuning "helathier" when compared to just tuning for example, or to any of the arbitrary temperaments? Some of them still resonate better than Pythagorean tuning, if we judge by disonances / beating between overtones.

Offline

#14 2022-03-27 06:46:02

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

pete wrote:

to my ear it does not seem that pythagorean system is more resonant than just tuning for example, for many of the intervals.

Due to years of getting "imprinted" with false sound patterns, most people don't hear or feel the difference anymore. And while it needs some training to get back to feeling what is "good sound" and "bad sound", this doesn't mean that using proper sounds will not have the described positive effects.

In other words: If you cannot hear/feel the difference, then you either train yourself until you do or simply do as I advised.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#15 2022-03-27 07:12:13

pete
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Robert369 wrote:
pete wrote:

to my ear it does not seem that pythagorean system is more resonant than just tuning for example, for many of the intervals.

Due to years of getting "imprinted" with false sound patterns, most people don't hear or feel the difference anymore. And while it needs some training to get back to feeling what is "good sound" and "bad sound", this doesn't mean that using proper sounds will not have the described positive effects.

In other words: If you cannot hear/feel the difference, then you either train yourself until you do or simply do as I advised.

Perhpas you could say what you mean by "false" sound patterns?

More to the point though, I thought we were discussing what you called "the natural resonances of e.g. string instruments like a piano or harp."

From what I understand, "natural resonances" have to do with the overtones of the strings and how these overtones combine together. Here maximum resonance would be when the tones reinforce one another, which would be basically when at least some of their overtones coincide exactly so that plucking one string of a harp literally excites the other string from silence into sounding, or reinforces it further if the other string was already sounding.

If you tune to Pythagorean 81/64 major third for example, this just doesn't happen. I mean there is nothing to be heard - the other string will just stay dead silent and won't resonate, or if it was already sounding, it would not be reinforced because there are no coinciding overtones.

So, if you are still saying that 81/64 is more naturally resonant than 5/4 (are you really? I'm not sure what you are saying at this point),  then I wonder if by "resonance" you mean something else other than how the overtones of the strings combine? Maybe you have in mind some higher dimensional things perhaps?

Offline

#16 2022-03-27 11:55:21

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

pete wrote:

Perhpas you could say what you mean by "false" sound patterns?

More to the point though, I thought we were discussing what you called "the natural resonances of e.g. string instruments like a piano or harp."

From what I understand, "natural resonances" have to do with the overtones of the strings and how these overtones combine together. Here maximum resonance would be when the tones reinforce one another, which would be basically when at least some of their overtones coincide exactly so that plucking one string of a harp literally excites the other string from silence into sounding, or reinforces it further if the other string was already sounding.

"False" is whatever is not in resonance with our body, mind and heart - and by that not healthy.

Your description of what resonances between the notes is correct, but you miss that the goal is to firstly be in resonance with the body frequencies. And that's what the pythagorean system is about - and it is feelable if one is sensible/trained to musical resonances - which way too many people currently are not.

pete wrote:

If you tune to Pythagorean 81/64 major third for example, this just doesn't happen. I mean there is nothing to be heard - the other string will just stay dead silent and won't resonate, or if it was already sounding, it would not be reinforced because there are no coinciding overtones.

So, if you are still saying that 81/64 is more naturally resonant than 5/4 (are you really? I'm not sure what you are saying at this point),  then I wonder if by "resonance" you mean something else other than how the overtones of the strings combine? Maybe you have in mind some higher dimensional things perhaps?

You still seem to miss that there is no "perfect" tuning in a mathematical sense, meaning that there always will be dissonances somewhere. The tuning needs to be adapted to maximum resonance with our body frequencies and if those are the right dissonances, they will be healthy just as the resonant tones.

Since the numbers seem to confuse you and distract you from what the pythagorean tuning is about, I suggest to ignore them and use the quint for ear-tuning, by which this will automatically create the pythagorean tonal system and achieve the optimal tonal scale.

This being said, it is pointless to attempt discuss numbers while losing the focus on what is to be achieved.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

#17 2022-03-29 06:51:17

pete
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

Robert369 wrote:

Your description of what resonances between the notes is correct, but you miss that the goal is to firstly be in resonance with the body frequencies.

Thanks for clarifying that, since my impression was that it is resonances between notes that we were discussing. Turning now to resonances with "body frequencies".


Robert369 wrote:

And that's what the pythagorean system is about - and it is feelable if one is sensible/trained to musical resonances - which way too many people currently are not.
...

You still seem to miss that there is no "perfect" tuning in a mathematical sense, meaning that there always will be dissonances somewhere. The tuning needs to be adapted to maximum resonance with our body frequencies and if those are the right dissonances, they will be healthy just as the resonant tones.

Since the numbers seem to confuse you and distract you from what the pythagorean tuning is about, I suggest to ignore them and use the quint for ear-tuning, by which this will automatically create the pythagorean tonal system and achieve the optimal tonal scale.

This being said, it is pointless to attempt discuss numbers while losing the focus on what is to be achieved.

Thanks for your perspective. I'll offer a somewhat different perspective (not sure if it precludes or incorporates your perspective as well, up to you if you wish to clarify either way).

Body (energy, mind, etc) changes all the time. So, to always use the same tuning system (e.g. pythagorean) or even the same base frequency (e.g. 432Hz) seems like using the same exact remedy for each and every illness. It would seem more prudent to listen to the body/energetic needs at any given time and go from there. E.g. by establishing your tonic (fundamental tone) first and then building your intervals from there depending on what you body needs at the particualr time.

E.g. sometimes your sixth might be pythagorean, while your third needs be just, or maybe tempered, or maybe you shouldn't play it at all because it would unbalance your energetic system at that instance. In other words, it's not about the tuning systems, but about relationships between the notes, and how those notes relate to your body and what it is that you are trying to achieve / balance / stimulate / temper, etc.

Offline

#18 2022-03-29 07:12:11

Robert369
Member

Re: Request on 432 HZ background music in videos

pete wrote:

Body (energy, mind, etc) changes all the time. So, to always use the same tuning system (e.g. pythagorean) or even the same base frequency (e.g. 432Hz) seems like using the same exact remedy for each and every illness. It would seem more prudent to listen to the body/energetic needs at any given time and go from there. E.g. by establishing your tonic (fundamental tone) first and then building your intervals from there depending on what you body needs at the particualr time.

True healing is aiming at restoring the energetic and physical body and not at fighting whatever illness - that would be treatment which is the never-healing and always-earning Cabal method. And for healing you only need the perfect frequencies for your body's harmony.


Helping people to self-empower and liberate themselves, and by that ultimately the whole planet and beyond. See my profile for means to connect.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB