Wki Theremin Pg 4 Second Gen / Modern Thereminists - PART 2

Eliot Fintushel wrote:

Oh my God!

We've turned into LEVNET!

**********************

Shit!

That probably true, Eliot and, if it is, it's probably my fault! Sorry everybody.

I do try to restrain myself a little when I am posting to Theremin World but the Wikipedia topic got me all carried away.

The Theremin World philosophy is "I'm O.K., You're O.K."

The Levnet philosophy is "I'm O.K., You're Screwed!"

LOL

Indeed, Thomas. I have learned some interesting things.

I have learned that to have one of my favourite thereminists mentioned in Wikipedia and remain there, I need to find some mention of them in a respectable newspaper (if ever such a thing existed) so that they fulfil the criteria.

I have learned that some people do not like the criteria. Uh, tough. Don't play if you don't want to.

I have learned that an article about a musical instrument is not the right place for an extensive list of players of the instrument.

(And I have found the right place. It would be on a page called List of Thereminists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_musicians#By_instrument))

The notability criterion applies on such lists.

I have learned that the Theremin article is not very good, and that from this one might conclude that all wikipedia articles are similar.

Here is one of Wikipedia's "featured articles" - i.e. one which Wikipedians regard as very good - for comparison.

Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyotr_Ilyich_Tchaikovsky)

I guess there is someone around here knows a bit about Tchaikovsky can share an opinion of the article.

I have learned there are people like you who want to improve the theremin article and are doing something about it, and there are those who think it is a waste of time.

I've been kicking around the idea of breaking the main theremin article into two, "Theremin" and "Thereminists".

What I'm proposing (in the TALK section of the article) is breaking out the entire "Uses" section of the main article as it stands now and using that as a starting point of the "Thereminsts" sub-article.

I'm currently using my User Page at Wiki to play around with the articles. (It's what Wiki calls "sandboxes".) Anyone here on TW is welcome to go have a look and suggest changes in the "TALK" sections of the pages.

My idea for a "Theremin" article is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JMax555/Sandbox

And the idea for the "Thereminist" article is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JMax555/Sandbox_2

Have a look and make suggestions, folks!

I know I'm just a theremin "noob", but that may make me a more palatable choice to do the editing. I know just enough to be dangerous (heh) but not so much that I've got passionate feelings about particular players or styles. I also have a few other Wiki articles under my belt, so I'm not a "single-issue" editor - the kind of person who only edits ONE article becuase it's the only thing they are interested in - which are discouraged by Wiki admins, because it tends to be the way the more "biased" contributors operate.

FredM wrote:

Playing "On key" is not a matter of opinion -

The importance of playing "on key" is a matter of opinion...

*************************

This is true!

But I would like to point out as a singer and multi-instrumentalist who has participated in more groups, conventions, conferences and musical events than I care to admit, that I have never heard anyone outside the theremin community ever suggest that being "on key" is (or ought to be) of little or no importance.

I think my insistence that the same standards be applied to precision theremin playing as are applied to singing and the playing of traditional instruments, is just upsetting people so I shall cease and desist!

Fred puts his hand down on the volume antenna, and says "Shhhhh...."

[i]"I think my insistence that the same standards be applied to precision theremin playing as are applied to singing and the playing of traditional instruments, is just upsetting people so I shall cease and desist!"[/i]

Please don't! I think it is a very important point. Like you, I have worked my whole life as a professional musician. Someone here recently challenged me as to why I didn't have any youtube videos posted. My reply was that I do not have enough mastery (in my opinion) to post something of quality. This despite the fact that my playing is much better than most of what I have seen on youtube.

I think that some people simply cannot tell when they are not playing in tune, and they happily post their theremin videos on youtube and think it is wonderful. A ThereminWorld member posted a link to a concert he did a few months ago, and I was suprised that someone with poor intonation would perform publicly. As a trained musician, it is my opinion that intonation is the first thing that should be worked on - without accurate pitch, how can one move on to work on phrasing, articulation, etc?

If a singer posted youtube videos where she was singing out of tune, most folks would not be impressed. I think the lack of appreciation for good intonation among theremin community has gotten so out of control that it has caused the theremin to be generally viewed as an instrument that is played out of tune. At least that is the impression that many of my musician friends have of the instrument.

Keep spreading the word, Peter - the bar needs to be set a little higher to the fundamental level of competent intonation.

[i]Keep spreading the word, Peter - the bar needs to be set a little higher to the fundamental level of competent intonation.[/i]

Thierry underwrites that!

Etherspiel wrote: [i]I think it is a very important point[/i]

Nonetheless it is off-topic to this thread. Please continue your discussion in a new thread.

[i]"Nonetheless it is off-topic to this thread. Please continue your discussion in a new thread."[/i]

Yes Sir! Thank you Sir!

Criteria shall be the lowest common denominator which is what the masses and mass media accepts as the mean or average.

Thus, it hsall be whoever plays the Swan the sweetest to the great unwashed majority who may puff themselves up as being refined and classical.