Guinness describes Tim Storms’s range achievement as ten octaves and reports endpoints of 0.7973 to 807.3 Hz. His separate lowest-note report is 0.189 Hz. These are different achievements and should not be combined into a newly invented certified range.
The printed range pair calculates to about 9.98377 octaves, rather than an exact ten-octave frequency ratio. Keep that arithmetic alongside the attributed designation instead of silently changing a published endpoint.
The range record and lowest-note report are separate
A range concerns a pair of boundaries. A lowest-note report concerns one particular event. A later or separate low event does not automatically revise the boundaries used in another account.
| Claim or calculation | Figure | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Guinness range designation | Ten octaves | An attributed published record description |
| Printed range endpoints | 0.7973 to 807.3 Hz | Use this pair for that range account |
| Calculated width of printed pair | About 9.98377 octaves; 119.805 semitones | Not an exact ten-octave frequency ratio |
| Separate lowest-note report | 0.189 Hz, described as G−7 | Do not substitute it into the other range pair |
| Period at 0.189 Hz | About 5.29 seconds per cycle | A calculation, not a new listening test |
These figures are attributed published reports, not new measurements performed by this website. This guide does not claim a fresh record-holder search or current laboratory certification.
The lowest vocal range guide explains why record categories, conventional bass references and useful musical low notes need different descriptions.
Calculate the printed range ratio
Octave width equals log base two of the upper frequency divided by the lower frequency. For the printed pair, divide 807.3 by 0.7973, then take the base-two logarithm.
The result is approximately 9.98377 octaves. Multiplying by twelve gives about 119.805 semitones.
An exact ten-octave ratio is 1,024 to one. The printed endpoints produce a slightly different ratio, so a responsible explanation should preserve both the source designation and the calculation.
Do not quietly replace 0.7973 or 807.3 with another number to make the arithmetic exact. A numerical mismatch is not permission to invent a corrected source.
Why the separate 0.189 Hz event cannot be substituted
Using 0.189 Hz as the low boundary while retaining 807.3 Hz as the high boundary creates a different calculation. It is not the same published range account.
That new arithmetic would still need evidence that the pair belongs to one certified measurement under compatible rules. The mere existence of both reported achievements does not establish that.
The famous singer ranges guide explains why combining unrelated endpoints can make a range total misleading.
Keep the report’s identity, conditions and category attached rather than treating every famous low and high value as interchangeable.
What does 0.189 Hz mean mathematically?
Frequency describes cycles per second. The reciprocal of 0.189 is about 5.29, so one cycle at that rate takes approximately 5.29 seconds.
That is a calculation about the reported periodic rate. It is not a claim that an ordinary listener experiences the event as a conventional musical bass note or that every playback system reproduces it.
A source’s G−7 description should remain attributed. Do not turn it into a newly verified equal-tempered note measurement without the relevant conditions.
The vocal range notes guide explains octave numbering, while the human vocal range guide distinguishes different measurement tasks.
A record does not describe equal musical control everywhere
A very wide span does not establish equally clear words, sustained dynamics or repeatability across every intervening pitch. A total alone cannot describe those qualities.
It also should not become a universal training target. A rare reported event can be interesting without prescribing what every singer should attempt.
The bass range guide gives a conventional musical reference with a different purpose. E2-to-E4 is not a world-record claim or a universal human minimum.
Keep ordinary repertoire decisions separate from exceptional periodicity reports.
Automatic pitch readings have limits
A detector can follow a harmonic, noise or another source, particularly when sounds are irregular or extreme. A surprising low display needs confirmation.
The voice frequency test provides a limited acoustic observation from supplied audio. It cannot independently reproduce record-certification procedures or diagnose a formal category.
A note finder can help with clear isolated pitches you sing. It does not turn an uncertain waveform into a certified personal record.
Do not infer that a routine device has measured an exceptional frequency accurately simply because it displayed a number.
What this means for your own singing
Begin with clear manageable notes and record complete names with octave numbers. Label different coordinations and uncertain effects separately.
A vocal range test can organize that current observation. It is not a laboratory report, a career forecast or a genetic ceiling.
Then test a short phrase with words. A low vowel that appears in an estimate may not be equally clear as text with accompaniment.
The tessitura explanation helps describe where repeated musical work is dependable. That can matter more than a one-off extreme event.
Choose repertoire from actual tasks
The song-selection guide helps compare melody, key, repetition and phrase length. A song does not need to display your widest span to be meaningful.
Write the version, key and one specific result. Clearer diction, a dependable entry or an intentional release is useful progress without a new record.
Stop if imitation causes pain, hoarseness or abnormal change in normal voice function. Exceptional reports are not individualized exercise instructions.
These are general rehearsal considerations, not a claim that the website has tested Storms or can teach readers to reproduce the reported achievements.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Guinness describe the range as ten octaves?
The published account used here does. Its printed frequency pair is retained separately from the independent arithmetic.
Do the printed frequencies form an exact ten-octave ratio?
No. They calculate to approximately 9.98377 octaves.
Can the 0.189 Hz low event replace the printed low boundary?
Not as a newly certified range. It belongs to a separate reported achievement.
Does a record span prove equal control on every note?
No. Range width does not establish every phrase, dynamic or text task throughout the span.
Should I compare my app result with this record?
Treat an app result as a limited observation, not an equivalent certification procedure or a compulsory training target.