3 ms·
In order for this 8Hz to be making a difference, surely it'd have to be related to some biological human frequency. I think all our clock-type things are too ap
by Joeboy 3y ago
In order for this 8Hz to be making a difference, surely it'd have to be related to some biological human frequency. I think all our clock-type things are too approximate. Heart rates are very variable, brainwave ranges are approximate, we all have different ear canals. We're not powered by crystals, or even metronomes.
It could be the case that they slowed the music down and that had an effect. Or in theory resampling it could've introduced artifacts that slowed listeners' heart rates. Or there could be an effect from recording at 440Hz then slowing it down (Dolly Parton's Jolene at 33rpm sounds great[0]). Or it could just be a shit study.
In order for 432Hz to be "special" I think you have to radically rethink some biology.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMrfM711vXI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMrfM711vXI
- justatdotin 3y agoper second is planetary
- ordu 3y ago> In order for 432Hz to be "special" I think you have to radically rethink some biology. I could think of reasons behind biology. For example, if they used different records with differently tuned instruments, it may be that musicians reacted somehow to a wrong tuning. Or strings gave slightly different harmonics. It is unlikely, because frequency difference is small, but... They should have tried some other base frequencies, like +8Hz and +-20Hz.