Lfalex v1.1 Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Why is it that so many of my favourite songs are written/recorded either side of the concert pitch standard of A=440Hz My mp3 player's just been chucking them at me tonight... Why do my ears like them so much? Is it just because they are subliminally different? (The last was "Golden Brown" - The Stranglers) Does anyone else suffer too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul torch Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 A lot of the recorded kinks stuff is off pitch. If we are talking about the same thing that is. I've heard a theory that it was to do with the piano in the studio being slightly off pitch so everything had to be tuned to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_5 Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 First 'Van Halen' album. Tuned to Eb and a bit more, but not enough to be 'E'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]This question was asked during an interview with the producer Tony Platt which I thought may be interesting:[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=2][b]What piece of technology do you think has been the most detrimental in the evolution of the recording realm?[/b][/size][/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=2]'It would be the digital guitar tuner. When I first started, there were no guitar tuners, guitarists would tune to the piano, as the piano was always in tune in the studio. And so the guitar players always had the capacity to hold a guitar in tune. If they heard a string going out, they’d pull it a little bit to bring it back in. So things weren’t absolutely perfectly in tune but there wasn’t this focus of attention on the tuning so much. People were focusing on getting the feel right and getting it to where it was exciting. Now what happens is one string goes out of tune, everything stops, guitarist plugs into his tuner, tunes his guitar and then starts off again, but it has broken the momentum of the session so much. And again what happens is we have this overabundance of guitar players who have this overriding reliance on this piece of technology. They’re not thinking of tuning in their head, they’re not hearing the tuning in there, they’re looking at it, on the scale on the tuner.'[/size][/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]...I hadn't considered the effect a digital tuner may have on the momentum of a recording session. [/font][/color] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gub Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 I had never really thought of the above ,but totally makes sense! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbass4k Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Machine Head's stuff is at an annoying pitch, they tune to C# standard and drop B but about 40 cents sharp. Really fiddly to play as on must tuners I've found you can't set the reference pitch that high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='bobbass4k' timestamp='1358634399' post='1942721'] Machine Head's stuff is at an annoying pitch, they tune to C# standard and drop B but about 40 cents sharp. Really fiddly to play as on must tuners I've found you can't set the reference pitch that high.[/quote] Maybe they did it on purpose to prevent easy learning of their material... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 A lot of songs recorded on tape would be vari-speeded to their final tempo during mixing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lfalex v1.1 Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1358635267' post='1942733'] A lot of songs recorded on tape would be vari-speeded to their final tempo during mixing. [/quote] And on some the tape just ran plain S-L-O-W...! edited for worst typo ever. Edited January 19, 2013 by Lfalex v1.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BILL POSTERS Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1358635267' post='1942733'] A lot of songs recorded on tape would be vari-speeded to their final tempo during mixing. [/quote] Thats what I have always put it down to. That and cos way back when not many people had tuners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HMX Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 The Peace Sells album by Megadeth was 1/4 step down, wasn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) [quote name='HMX' timestamp='1358635846' post='1942747'] The Peace Sells album by Megadeth was 1/4 step down, wasn't it?[/quote] Nah, that was a step backwards. [JOKE] Edited January 19, 2013 by discreet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molan Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Isn't some of this due to songs being fractionally sped up or slowed down? I played with Carol Decker once on China in Your Hands and she told me to use the album version to learn because the single had been increased in speed and it was fractionally out of tune if you tried to use concert pitch tuning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HMX Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='discreet' timestamp='1358635974' post='1942748'] Nah, than was a step backwards. [JOKE] [/quote] Hope you have your coat in your hand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) [quote name='HMX' timestamp='1358637221' post='1942768'] Hope you have your coat in your hand [size=4][/quote][/size] [size=4]I do, and I have my spell checker switched on now as well! [/size] Edited January 19, 2013 by discreet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulconnolly Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='discreet' timestamp='1358633257' post='1942702'] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]This question was asked during an interview with the producer Tony Platt which I thought may be interesting:[/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=2][b]What piece of technology do you think has been the most detrimental in the evolution of the recording realm?[/b][/size][/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif][size=2]'It would be the digital guitar tuner. When I first started, there were no guitar tuners, guitarists would tune to the piano, as the piano was always in tune in the studio. And so the guitar players always had the capacity to hold a guitar in tune. If they heard a string going out, they’d pull it a little bit to bring it back in. So things weren’t absolutely perfectly in tune but there wasn’t this focus of attention on the tuning so much. People were focusing on getting the feel right and getting it to where it was exciting. Now what happens is one string goes out of tune, everything stops, guitarist plugs into his tuner, tunes his guitar and then starts off again, but it has broken the momentum of the session so much. And again what happens is we have this overabundance of guitar players who have this overriding reliance on this piece of technology. They’re not thinking of tuning in their head, they’re not hearing the tuning in there, they’re looking at it, on the scale on the tuner.'[/size][/font][/color] [color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]...I hadn't considered the effect a digital tuner may have on the momentum of a recording session. [/font][/color] [/quote] Well yes that's true but is this really what the OP was on about? There is something about being in tune but a gnats' cock just off either way seems to add something to the feel. It mught be heresy to say it but bass can get away with this somewhat. However the deliberate detune proclivities of some guitarists to drop D or even drop C can be a bit tricky to deal with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveFry Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Some New Agers claim that tuning to A = 432 Hz is better for us than 440 Hz Of course they have dug up all sorts of ancient evidence to support their claim . There is loads about it on the 'net if you search for 432 hz tuning . Stuff like this ; [url="http://www.omega432.com/music.html"]http://www.omega432.com/music.html[/url] and [url="http://www.carnaval.com/music432/"]http://www.carnaval.com/music432/[/url] - Can't find a " shrugs shoulders " emotcion - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lfalex v1.1 Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='paulconnolly' timestamp='1358637715' post='1942778'] However the deliberate detune proclivities of some guitarists to drop D or even drop C can be a bit tricky to deal with. [/quote] A Five String fixes that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lfalex v1.1 Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='DaveFry' timestamp='1358637753' post='1942779'] Some New Agers claim that tuning to A = 432 Hz is better for us than 440 Hz Of course they have dug up all sorts of ancient evidence to support their claim . There is loads about it on the 'net if you search for 432 hz tuning . Stuff like this ; [url="http://www.omega432.com/music.html"]http://www.omega432.com/music.html[/url] and [url="http://www.carnaval.com/music432/"]http://www.carnaval.com/music432/[/url] - Can't find a " shrugs shoulders " emotcion - [/quote] That's scary stuff. Especially now I'm reading Einstein quotes whilst listening to (old) Vangelis..... which according to my ears/my bass ain't @ 440Hz... Conspiracy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danthevan Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) [quote name='DaveFry' timestamp='1358637753' post='1942779'] Some New Agers claim that tuning to A = 432 Hz is better for us than 440 Hz Of course they have dug up all sorts of ancient evidence to support their claim . There is loads about it on the 'net if you search for 432 hz tuning . Stuff like this ; [url="http://www.omega432.com/music.html"]http://www.omega432.com/music.html[/url] and [url="http://www.carnaval.com/music432/"]http:// - Can't find a " shrugs shoulders " emotcion - [/quote] Some interesting points of view there lol Edited January 19, 2013 by danthevan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjones Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) [quote name='DaveFry' timestamp='1358637753' post='1942779'] Some New Agers claim that tuning to A = 432 Hz is better for us than 440 Hz Of course they have dug up all sorts of ancient evidence to support their claim . There is loads about it on the 'net if you search for 432 hz tuning . Stuff like this ; [url="http://www.omega432.com/music.html"]http://www.omega432.com/music.html[/url] and [url="http://www.carnaval.com/music432/"]http://www.carnaval.com/music432/[/url] - Can't find a " shrugs shoulders " emotcion - [/quote] [color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=3]The connection of Stonehenge to the 25,920 year orbital procession of the equinox and the number 432 is obvious.[/size][/font][/color] Hippy, pseudo scientific, twiddle twaddle! Edited January 19, 2013 by gjones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulconnolly Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='Lfalex v1.1' timestamp='1358638070' post='1942785'] A Five String fixes that! [/quote]. It certainly does Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle psychosis Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 [quote name='molan' timestamp='1358637188' post='1942767'] Isn't some of this due to songs being fractionally sped up or slowed down? I played with Carol Decker once on China in Your Hands and she told me to use the album version to learn because the single had been increased in speed and it was fractionally out of tune if you tried to use concert pitch tuning [/quote] Some recordings are speeded up slightly in production---it gives them a little more "bounce"... Diana Ross speeded up a lot of the stuff Nile Rodgers did for her, rumour has it that she did it to sound younger! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 [quote name='gjones' timestamp='1358638461' post='1942791'] Hippy, pseudo scientific, twiddle twaddle![/quote] Ohhh, bad karma, man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveK Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Up to the 70s, If your band had a Hammond organ, then that is what you tuned to - The Hammond had no tuning facility... and depending on the power supply, they could run sharper or flatter. And, as has been said, tracks were often sped up, to tighten the sound and give them a bit more 'zing'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif.9ad672bb8b84505709f76b39c8c256ec.gif)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.