"432 Hz tuned music can decrease heart rate more than 440 Hz tuned music"

This 432 Hz theory is sort of like saying that if we measured the meter as being slightly shorter, people would have an easier time running a 5k.<p>Music exists in multiple keys, and a song can be in a high or low range regardless of what key it’s in. Changing the standard tuning wouldn’t fundamentally affect anything.<p>Also, did the study authors simply taking a recording and pitch shift it down to 432 Hz? That would affect the tempo of the song as well as the pitch. Even if they performed time stretching to keep the tempo the same, it shouldn’t be surprising that lower pitches make people slightly calmer than slightly higher pitches.

&gt; Results: 432 Hz tuned music was associated with a slight decrease of mean (systolic and diastolic) blood pressure values (although not significant), a marked decrease in the mean of heart rate (-4.79 bpm, p = 0.05) and a slight decrease of the mean respiratory rate values (1 r.a., p = 0.06), compared to 440 Hz. The subjects were more focused about listening to music and more generally satisfied after the sessions in which they listened to 432 Hz tuned music.<p>I think this abstract says &quot;we really don&#x27;t want to admit we found nothing concrete, in spite of the novelty of the differently tuned music&quot;. Don&#x27;t people usually roll their eyes when p is almost 0.05? This paragraph mentions something that is not significant, then &quot;p = 0.05&quot; (marginal), then &quot;p = 0.06&quot; (usually not considered significant right?). How many different things did they test and not even mention?

&gt;the study results suggest repeating the experiment with a larger sample pool and introducing randomized controlled trials covering more clinical parameters.<p>Habituation should be one of the controls.<p>Novelty alone might explain the effect. What happens after a week, or month of listening music tuned to 432?

In order for this 8Hz to be making a difference, surely it&#x27;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&#x27;re not powered by crystals, or even metronomes.<p>It could be the case that they slowed the music down and that had an effect. Or in theory resampling it could&#x27;ve introduced artifacts that slowed listeners&#x27; heart rates. Or there could be an effect from recording at 440Hz then slowing it down (Dolly Parton&#x27;s Jolene at 33rpm sounds great[0]). Or it could just be a shit study.<p>In order for 432Hz to be &quot;special&quot; I think you have to radically rethink some biology.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=CMrfM711vXI" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=CMrfM711vXI</a>

You can test this in Audacity: Right-click on the waveform left panel &gt; Rate &gt; Other... &gt; Reduce 44100 to 43298, or 48000 to 47127.<p>That&#x27;s like slowing down the motor on a record player by ~ 2%.

I would love to see some direct comparison music. Listened to one quick guitar riff on youtube that I could find and 432 just sounded out of tune to me. Which, I suppose, it would be.<p>I question how much effect this would have over time. 8Hz would be a shockingly small amount of change to not have accidentally stumbled on to this being &quot;better&quot; hundreds of years ago. So I&#x27;d wager it&#x27;s maybe something to do with the music sounds just enough &quot;off&quot; from normal that the mind becomes more engaged with the music.

&gt; Participants: 33 volunteers, not suffering from acute and&#x2F;or chronic diseases.<p>The study thinks it&#x27;s testing A440 vs A432 music. It&#x27;s probably testing the effect of normal-sounding vs weird-sounding music.

How about 220 Hz music and 880 Hz?<p>(Obviously this study won’t replicate and categorising music by the frequency of the note A is not a reasonable thing to do.)

Now try 430Hz.

I quite enjoy 432Hz music.<p>However, I suppose that’s because I have perfect pitch and my childhood piano was tuned to 432, so that tuning evokes a certain nostalgia for me.<p>I doubt there’s any real effect that makes 432 special outside of that. If it lowers heart rate vs 440, then let’s try 432 vs 424 (or whatever the next step would be). I’d bet you’d see similar results.

Meet a worthy candidate for the next Ig Noble Prize.

Does anyone have access to the corrigendum?

They should have gone to 220 in that case.

numerologists might love that the prime factors of 432 are 4 2&#x27;s and 3 3&#x27;s