Tuning A Guitar To 432Hz

Of late I've been interested in scales and tuning, and have been reading a lot about the virtues of tuning to 432Hz. The modern convention is to tune A (A4) to 440Hz, but apparently 432Hz has a more natural (or supernatural) feel to it. There are plenty of theories and conspiracy theories out there in Internet-land explaining why this is so. It's the X-Files of tuning.

(The Lute Player - Caravaggio)

Anyway, I was wanting to tune my guitar to 432Hz, but wasn't quite sure how to do it. I think I've cracked it now though (however, if anyone knows better and can put me straight I'd appreciate it). I've done it using this frequencies table I found online;

[You can actually buy tuners that allow you to tune to 432hz, for example the Korg CA-1, which is what I currently use - much easier than all this faffing about :) ~~ Neil, 2018 ]

http://www.phy.mtu.edu/~suits/notefreq432.html

Normally a guitar would be tuned thusly;

E - 82.4Hz

A - 110.0Hz

D - 146.8Hz

G - 196.0Hz

B - 246.9Hz

High E - 329.6Hz

However, for 432Hz those strings would be tuned like this;

E - 80.9Hz

A - 108.0Hz

D - 144.2Hz

G - 192.4Hz

B - 242.5Hz

High E - 323.6Hz

Obviously, you'll need a tuner that can show Hertz to do this. I've been using this free gStrings App on my phone;

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.cohortor.gstrings&hl=en_GB

I should also point out that even though this tuning is 432Hz, it still uses Equal Temperament spacing. There's a whole other argument out there about Equal Temperament vs Just tuning, etc.

See here - http://www.phy.mtu.edu/~suits/scales.html

Anomalous Dating on Francis Bacon Image

I was recently perusing a book that was in part written by Francis Bacon. The book was published in the 17th Century - it can be viewed on Google Books here.

In the opening pages there's an image of Bacon, underneath which is written the date of his death - 9th April 1626. However, the first numeral of 1626 is written as a dotted 'j' instead of a 1. Normally I wouldn't have even noticed this, but I've recently finished Volume 1 of Fomenko's New Chronology and in it he states that at one point it was common for j to be the first value in such dates. He reasons that this value, instead of signifying 1000, actually stands for Jesus - so in effect j626 would read, not 1626, but Jesus 626 i.e. 626 years since the birth/death of Christ. This ties in with his contention that Jesus was born just a thousand years ago. He provides countless examples of the date being written in this manner in his book.

I guess I've found a little more evidence for him.