[LAU] "droning" project: 249-257

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 21:45:34 -0400, jonetsu at teksavvy.com wrote:
>Even today, some philharmonic orchestras are not tuned to A 440Hz.
>Other tunings are certainly not dramatically off from 440Hz, but this
>is just to say that A 440Hz is not set in stone.

There are reasons even for pop music to chose another pitch for A. There
are reasons to chose different temperaments. Non of those reasons
should be esoteric. FWIW a while back it was common practise not
necessarily to chose another tuning for A in pop music, but to e.g. drop
the e string of e. guitars down to d. The reasons should be playing
technique, tone color etc.. No tuning ever could be consistent or
inconsistent to the universe. A tuning only could be consistent or
inconsistent to a human fashion or esoteric magic of numbers.

On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 21:47:18 -0400, jonetsu at teksavvy.com wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 23:24:27 +0200 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
>> What does it mean to be "mathematically consistent with the
>> universe"? A=424,242 Hz would be mathematically inconsistent with
>> the universe?  
>
>Haven't done the maths although it should be reasonably accessible.

To do the maths we need to know for what it should be applied.

The secret of 432Hz perhaps leads to cold fusion, the perpetuum mobile
car engine, the length of gods long white beard?

432Hz in relation to speed of light, Gauß, Planck, age of Mohammed
youngest wife, virgins in paradise? If e.g. speed in relation to
the speed of light, then measured in miles or meters or multiüple
units of god's beard length? Are seconds consistent to the universe?
Assumed we should find the perfect measuring units, what should be the
expected result? A prime number, a set or perhaps as mentioned by Set a
Fibonacci number?

My choice for universe consistency is Douglas Adams Holy Trinity 424,242
Hz, but I don't know the question, resp. against what the maths should
be applied.

Regards,
Ralf