Removing instruments fromk backing tracks - Crazy technical idea floating...

Just to clarify, when I referred to a "pre-recorded music situation" my intention was not to suggest that recording music would become a thing of the past. My thought was of people gathering in a social context to share their music, be it taking your harmonica to the pub, or the modern equivalent; uploading a homemade recording to soundcloud and posting a link on Facebook.

Fred: My opinion is that the theremin is technically a "synthesiser".

In the opinion of an increasing number of people, the opposite is also true: the synthesizer, provided it has a "theremin" program, is a theremin, . This is something I have pointed out before - the definition of THEREMIN is changing. These days, in the minds of many, it applies to a sound and not to the means by which that sound is produced.

This shouldn't be surprising since it seems to be what has happened with other instruments as well. If it sounds like a sax, people will call it a sax even though the sound they're hearing may well have been created with an EWI.

In his book - MAURICE MARTENOT, LUTHIER DE L'ELECTRONIQUE - biographer Jean Laurendeau says that the ondes martenot is not a synthesizer. The reason he gives for this may well have been true thirty years ago, but I'm not sure it's true today. What he says is that the sound of the ondes is shaped and sculpted by the ondiste right down to the most subtle shadings of pitch and vibrato and is not "predigested" or programmed the way the sound is on a synthesizer. 

In the years since the book was written, the synthesizer has evolved tremendously and instruments like the continuum have come along (definitely a synthesizer) which can do even more than the ondes, in the hands of a skilled player. 

One of the goals of builders of synthesizers seems to have been to put sounds that sometimes require years of study to learn to produce, into the hands of everyone. Today there are synthesizers (such as the EWI) that may be versatile, but they are as hard to play as the acoustic instruments they emulate. 

The theremin is arguably the most difficult musical instrument to master that has ever been conceived! We must get rid of the notion that "synthesizer" somehow implies a kind of musical cop out, an easy way to make music.

"People think they can just go up to the theremin and say, 'Open Sesame' and it plays! They think it's easy. It's not easy!" Clara Rockmore

"In the opinion of an increasing number of people, the opposite is also true: the synthesizer, provided it has a "theremin" program, is a theremin" - Coalport

I never intended to reopen this particular hornets nest, LOL ;-) .. Bob Moog apparently declared that the theremin was not a synthesiser - and who am I to argue with him!

A pointless ramble now follows!  ;-) - for geeks and nerds only!

To me, a synthesiser is anything which synthesises something else, and more specifically, any electronic thing which synthesises a non-electronic thing.. An analogue computer (and perhaps even a digital computer if synthesising an analogue function and outputting an analogue result) can be a synthesiser.. whether this is for sound / music generation (Bob Moogs Voltage controlled modules and connection topology employed in his analogue synthesisers was, in effect, an application specific analogue computer) or for computing the trajectory of projectiles.. it is "synthesising" some analogue function.

And here, to me, is perhaps the strangest irony in the whole question regarding what "is" and what "isnt" a synthesiser.. IMO, the more accurately something synthesises a "natural" sound or phenomena, the "truer" a synthesiser it is - This would make many of the home keyboards (particularly those using computation like FM, rather than sample playback - not sure if playing back a recording of a "natural" sound is really "synthesis") which produce "better" simulation of many instruments than even a large analogue modular, are "truer" synthesisers than the Modular!

As for the theremin - the method used to control the sound produced (pitch, volume) is, IMO, irrelevant with regard to whether it is a synthesiser or not.. In its most basic, it is a sound generator followed by a VCA, the fact that this sound generator uses heterodyning rather than being a VCO is irrelevant IMO, just as (from a synthesis perspective) it is irrelevant whether the oscillator is an analogue VCO or a FM operation or anything else except sample playback.

The ability to control pitch and volume (envelope) by hand movement gives the theremin greater control over these parameters and allows easier "synthesis" of instruments where these parameters are not constrained by their construction / physics... It would be impossible to synthesise a piano with a theremin, just as it is impossible to synthesise a theremin with an electronic piano - but a non-sampled electronic piano is, in effect, a piano synthesiser - and when playing a string type sound, the theremin is "being" a string synthesiser.

And it gets more complex.. A synthesiser synthesising a theremin is, in effect IMO, a synthesiser synthesising another synthesiser - Just as a FM keyboard synthesising a Hammond B3 is a synthesiser synthesising (usually quite badly)  a synthesiser.. (the B3 was possibly a bad example, as I am not sure whether the tone-wheel generation used in the B3 could be regarded as synthesis or waveform "sample" or what.. perhaps the B3 cannot be regarded as a synthesiser, perhaps its mechanical sound generation moves it into a class of its own)

And when playing a Moog Modular patched to produce sounds which are impossible in nature, one may not actually be "synthesising" anything - (?) - if "synthesising" means replication of natural instruments or variations thereof... And if creating a "new" electronic sound with electronics is "synthesising" then every electronic instrument which is not a sample playback machine is a synthesiser - and therefore, as I see it, there is no escape from the conclusion that technically, either way, the theremin must be a synthesiser.

Not that any of the above matters one iota, LOL ;-)

Fred.

"As for the theremin <snip> it is irrelevant whether the oscillator is an analogue VCO or a FM operation or anything else except sample playback."  - FredM

I was thinking of doing wavetable stuff in mine, which is kind of sample playback but not quite.

"... perhaps the B3 cannot be regarded as a synthesiser, perhaps its mechanical sound generation moves it into a class of its own..."  - FredM

I'd put the B3 firmly in the additive synthesis category.

This is becoming one of those classic threads that are the reason I love this forum so much!

The B3's tone wheels and pickups use exactly the same method as do the strings and pickups on my Stratocaster.

I don't think my Fender can be called a synthesizer, but I'm sure there are classical guitar fans that will dispute this.

Even though they use the same method, my guitars could never be mistaken for a Hammond.

On a side note, I was attempting to synthesize the "Fender sound" with my Gibson so I installed a Fender pickup at the bridge, and slanted it just like a Fender.

It still sounded like a Les Paul.

Synthesizer and theremin seem to mean different things to different people. To me an optical instrument is not a theremin, and I even have issues with the model 91.

I guess I'm just old school.

"The B3's tone wheels and pickups use exactly the same method as do the strings and pickups on my Stratocaster.I don't think my Fender can be called a synthesizer, but I'm sure there are classical guitar fans that will dispute this" - W0ttm

Yeah - that was my line of thinking when I questioned the validity of calling a B3 a "synthesiser" - it is perhaps more in the "elect-acoustic" domain than in the "synthesis" domain..

Not really sure whether an "elect-acoustic" instrument can ever be a "synthesiser" - but I suppose it can - strictly, "synthesis" is not exclusively in the domain of electronics.

Fred.

When I was about 18, I bought a huge (3 manual + pedal-board) Wurlitser theatre organ when a local theatre was demolished (in fact it was virtually given to me, the bigger cost was to get it transported to my garage - which it fully occupied!) - I had no idea what a monster I was buying! - But the thing which surprised me was when I discovered how it worked - it was air deriven with a compressor and the keys directed the air through reeds (activated solenoids) - these reeds were magnetically coupled to pickups coils - which were summed / processed by a bank of tube pre-amps (with timbre filters, spring reverbs and loads of other stuff whos functions I never fully got to grips with) before being taken to a monster tube power amp and monster speakers.

Having only been into electronic sound generation before, it took me a long time to get to grips with this "strange" technology - Organs I had played with before had 12 master oscillators and octave deviders - but with this damn instrument, every reed needed to be tuned (or replaced) - I spent 6 months slaving over the instrument and was forced to sell it (had to move, and it was too big to take to gigs, LOL) a couple of months after I got it fully functioning - at a price which would have caused my execution if I had been on the Ferengi home planet.. But I learneed a lot -

Perhaps the difference between the Wurlitser and the electronic synthesis stuff I was used to is a reason I am a bit pedantic (and probably wrong, LOL) about what "is" and what "isnt" a synthesiser.

"This is becoming one of those classic threads that are the reason I love this forum so much!" - w0ttm

LOL ;-) ... Perhaps what makes a "classic thread" is when it wanders about in a drunken stupor with no clear direction - and when its content is completely unrelated to its "title", and it is absolutely impossible to find again when it has eventually moved off the "front page" ....

Hijacking and going off-topic is probably one of the things which makes TW such fun! - At least this time its in the "of topic" topic.....

;-)

Fred

"Synthesizer and theremin seem to mean different things to different people. To me an optical instrument is not a theremin, and I even have issues with the model 91." - W0ttm

this is a classic example - the 91 is a synthesiser without any possible doubt, and I would say that it is an analogue synthesiser synthesising a classic heterodyning theremin (which I believe is itself a synthesiser - the only difference between the 91 and the heterodyning theremin being its "sound engine" - and if a machine using a FM "sound engine" and a machine using a analogue "sound engine" can both be "synthesisers" then using heterodyning or VCO "sound engines" should likewise mean that both are "synthesisers" and both are "theremins" and therefore the "theremin" must also be a "synthesiser").

As for whether an optical gestural interface connected to a synthesiser forms a theremin, or whether only a capacitive gestural inteface connected to a synthesiser forms a theremin, or whether only a capacitive gestural inteface connected to a synthesiser employing a heterodyning "sound engine" forms a "true" theremin, or whether anything which sounds like (synthesises) a theremin is a theremin............................. @?

Perhaps we can now move this thread in a new direction..

I hypothesise that we have it all wrong - that, in fact, the theremin is an electro-acoustic instrument.. I think Lydia Kavina is close when she talks about the "unvisual string" ..

Is it possible that there is, "radiating" from the pitch antenna, a "cobweb" of invisible strings - that as we move our hand we rub against these strings causing them to vibrate - that the "tuning" control on the theremin is actually a "tension" adjuster and that the oscillator isnt actually an oscillator at all - its an amplifier!

The antenna acts as a pickup of minute vibrations - I once saw someone place a microphone close to a pitch antenna to amplify the theremins sound - they were told that the sound didnt come from the antenna - but who knows... perhaps instinctively that person really understood what was going on!

And perhaps, without knowing why, those who say that the theremin isnt a synthesiser have it right - All this "heterodyning" mumbo-jumbo is just a smoke screen - the "trade secret" known only by a few wizards, is that the action of the beating oscillators actually enhances the quality of the cobweb, making it more responsive.

Fred: And perhaps, without knowing why, those who say that the theremin isnt a synthesiser have it right - All this "heterodyning" mumbo-jumbo is just a smoke screen - the "trade secret" known only by a few wizards, is that the action of the beating oscillators actually enhances the quality of the cobweb, making it more responsive.

The cosmos is permeated with an "ether", a universal substance, and when we gesture in proximity to the theremin's antennas, we cause a disturbance in this substance similar to waves on a pond which, in turn, causes the cobweb to vibrate and "sing". This is why Bob Moog gave the names "etherwave" and "ethervox" to his instruments, and why Leon Theremin's first prototypes were called "etherphones".

The glass harmonica can also cause disturbances in the ether and if it is listened to in excess it can cause insanity and even death.

Whether or not the theremin can cause insanity is still hotly disputed by scholars. It is very hard to tell because most of us are nuts to begin with or we would never have undertaken the task of learning to play the theremin in the first place!

One other little understood fact about this "cobweb" is how strong it is (and how sticky it can be).

The more one exposes oneself to a 'refined' web, the more it clings to you - unseen - invisible - it builds up into a massive cosmic "mesh" which distorts space and time.

Every time one comes close to a theremin, the mesh which you are "wrapped" in resonates with the new cobwebs which are "brought into being" by the beating oscillators - likewise, every time you are exposed to the sound of a theremin (whether from a recording or whatever) the mesh you are encased in resonates - it becomes impossible (even if you are aware of it) to differentiate yourself from the mesh - it envelops you and eventuly 'morphs' with you untill you and it become one.

There is no known cure or means of escape.. But usually you wont mind this - it is quite a comfortable mesh, and rich in (invisible) endorphines.

Fred.

"most of us are nuts" - Coalport.

I disagree!  ;-)   ALL of us are nuts!!

"it is very disapointing that my latest release it available as illegal downloads on sharing sites..."  - Amethyste

Not trying to down-play your anguish Amethyste, but I'd be kind of proud and excited to have a musical creation worth stealing!  :-)

And not to put too fine a point on it, but file sharing might actually be helping your sales.  It seems to have produced an explosion of interest in music, perhaps raising all ships.  It's a great time to be a music or movie aficionado, there is so much content out there to peruse.  Though most of the stuff I'm interested in isn't even available through normal channels (old made for TV movies, crappy SF & horror I watched in my youth, obscure documentaries, etc.).  There's a lot of content being kept alive solely by the people who care about it.  A generation ago only fairly rich well-connected people with their own 16mm collection and home theater could see the immense fare available to the average Joe with a DSL connection today.