[LAU] Is this the band Sky? Was: Text-based sound visualisation? Re: Linux-audio-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 32

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Wed Jun 22 23:05:59 UTC 2011


On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 00:20 +0200, Julien Claassen wrote:
> I'm not too bothered by tunings at all, since I don't have absolute hearing.

I'm far away of having absolute hearing. I don't have it too. The funny
thing is, that a lot of classical recordings IMO are to muddy, even
while the tuning is higher than 440 Hz.

I guess the tuning became higher and higher to avoid a muddy sound, IMO
a step in the wrong direction, since it became much to high, very
audible even when being far away of absolute hearing.

I don't listen to classical live music, I very seldom listen to
classical recordings, but at least for recordings I would prefer 440 Hz
or even lower and adding more brilliance by engineering, instead of
tunings > 440 Hz. Again, I'm a child from the 80's, generation x, drop
the guitar's e to d (Baroque ;) and give the sound brilliance by using
the bridge pick up. Unfortunately violins don't have different pick
ups ;).

Paradox, since I guess classical music shouldn't be mixed as pop music
should be mixed.

Hehe, not my problem, since I'm a pop and not a classical musician :).

Btw. I like the temperament for guitars by the Boss TU-12H, IIRC Fmit or
another Linux tuner is close to my taste too. I guess a piano tuned by
those tuners would sound disgusting, but I might be mistaken.

But anyway, it's hard to tune without having a reference point, such as
a tuning fork. But I guess we are able to recognise the character of a
tuning. Btw. without a reference point a guitarist will be able to tune
the guitar within +- one half step, regarding to the traction of the
strings. We might not be able to hear it, but we feel the traction of
the strings.



More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list