The proper way to tune is A= 432Hz is that true?
I have been doing some research on tuning and to me 432Hz sounds better then 440Hz or 444Hz how about you guys?
This is the math behind this…
http://youtu.be/VS3tureL0UQ
440Hz vs. 432Hz (sound comparison)
http://youtu.be/P5ILuyaZIO4

In my opinion, the proper way to tune is the way that is best for your song as well as the performers. It creates a cascading effect for everything in the song including the musicians.

Some singers do a better job when they sing something a half a step down. This makes the band tune a half a step down from 440. This makes guitar and bass strings have less tension which can make these instruments easier to play as well as allow a player with weaker fingers enjoy bending strings a bit easier. This can also make a song sound a little darker. The lower something is tuned, the darker it can sound.

The higher something is tuned, the more poppy it can sound. So in my opinion, there is no proper way other than the way that best fits your personal situation. I personally like 440 the best so that's what I use for everything.

-Danny

The proper standard is A=440Hz. (that is after a Nazi also back in WWII, I think Godel is his name). But the history of tuning is different at different ages, and in Russia a while back it was 435Hz, also I think at one time when I do not remember but it can be looked up on the Internet was 427Hz. Depends on the instruments of the ages, but the current standard took place about WWII. In France, opera singers were using a higher pitch for standard A, of about I have to guess trying to remember of about 452Hz or something, but they went on strike because it was wrecking the singer's voices being that much higher of a pitch, and they wanted it lowered. Well, I use the standard A=440Hz, because that was what I was taught, as well as it being the standard of today. (432Hz was brought up because of numbers and such numerology or something like that but it sounds flat after a while and the dullness of the tones gets boring to me after awhile. Just some people trying to claim they know something about music when they are just going by numbers just don't mean that much to actual people in the Industry especially Orchestral Symphonies and such.)

For what it's worth: the consensus amoung musical historians is that A was tuned to 415Hz back around 1700.  A few cents down from 440 is nothing, really.
 

This thread blew my mind and opened up a ton of questions. Off to google....Thanks!

I know this has been doing the rounds a lot on the internet recently, but it is utter nonsense.
 
Physics does not care about integers.  It's about the ratios.
 
Practice is what will make one's music sound better, not tuning conventions..

jb101


Physics does not care about integers.  It's about the ratios. 
       

The stars are aligned.


Me and dBxKenobi are in harmony on this one.


:-)

For me it all depends on the singers range & comfort zone. I prefer to tune a little lower as I have a lower voice to start with. Though for some reason tuning to E flat tends to piss me off and nothing sounds right so for most of my projects/bands if I am singing lead I tune a full step down. D G C F A D That is my comfort zone and leaves enough head room for me vocally to properly utilize my strongest vocal range.

I use 440. 

I like it because it is the accepted standard in most music these days. With my tuners set to 440, I can tune up and jump into a jam session or throw a song on and play along and I'm in tune. 

There was a time (in the 60's and 70's) when that was not always the case. I even bought a  JVC record turntable with a strobe speed control so I could "tune" the records to my guitar and not the other way around.  There wasn't a set standard apparently in the studios or with the bands.  Now, it's rare to find one not using 440. (At least on country radio) 

Yeah, I've always used 440 and never paid it much thought til now.