Preference: Does anyone actually even want "perfect" linearity?

I have ADD and playing the theremin helps me focus on one thing, which is very relaxing for me in some ways...

"I learned from this that I should express (as long as I have such) complex thoughts also in a more elaborate manner." - Thierry

I dont know how it is with French, But for me, with English, I find that in order to be unambiguous one does need to write quite a lot!

I REALLY hate to write anything where I leave the possibility open that someone will get the wrong idea about what I am saying.. Sometimes one must - but in general I write a lot more than I "need" to, and this "extra" probably only serves less than 10% of the readers who might otherwise have misunderstood.

One tip - If you dont have the time to be precise, prefixing what you say with "I think that.." or "I hypothesise.." or even "IMO" takes some of the "force" away from any following statement.

If you had stated "IMO even the best engineer without being at the same time a trained musician (preferably a string instrument) Is unlikely to be able to design a very good theremin." then no insult would have been conveyed and no offence could have been taken.. -

I could have disagreed, and said so, and expressed my arguments to counter your hypothesis, but I dont think I would have bothered to do so.. You see, by "padding" or "weakening" your statement, you also give it a greater "bandwidth" .. It allows you to "tune" the meaning - for example to cover the idea that there is advantage in musical training if one is developing theremins..

But by making the statement "sharp" as it originally was, the "bandwidth" was so narrow that it only covered one individual (Lev) and therebye excluded Bob Moog, George Pavlov and others who had designed good theremins... And by doing this you destroyed any and every possible "truth" in your statement.

It is only when someone is unscientific and expresses something as a "fact" or an "absolute" when it is clearly nonsense (and which "pushes my buttons"), that I am likely to object..  There is no "crime" or "offence" in presenting a hypothesis, no matter how idiotic the hypothesis may be!

Use IMO and wishy-washy words like "maybe" "perhaps" "possibly" to weaken your assertions unless you are really sure you are damn right!

... And even if you know you are damn right, understating or "weakening" your declaration often conveys the idea more convincingly - often "less is more" - A lesson I have not yet learned! LOL

;-)

Fred.

Most people are on autopilot so it doesn't matter how much you write, how thorough you are in your descriptions, or how exhaustive in your explanations - THEY STILL WON'T GET IT. Attention spans are miniscule and few people know how to focus for more than just a few seconds. 

Others are so self-involved that everything you say is taken personally, and objectivity is impossible. 

One of the things I love about the obsessive/compulsive type is the sheer intensity of their commitment to whatever it is they are fixating on. I tend to overlook the madness of tilting at windmills and simple enjoy the beauty of the storm.

 THE FOLLOWING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEREMINS OR THE ACTUAL TOPIC OF THIS THREAD -

"I tend to overlook the madness of tilting at windmills and simple enjoy the beauty of the storm." - Coalport

"I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless."

"What giants?" asked Sancho Panza.

"Those you see over there," replied his master, "with their long arms. Some of them have arms well nigh two leagues in length."

"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills. Those things that seem to be their arms are sails which, when they are whirled around by the wind, turn the millstone."

—Part 1, Chapter VIII. Of the valourous Don Quixote's success in the dreadful and never before imagined Adventure of the Windmills, with other events worthy of happy record.

- Nah! .. the madness of tilting at windmills is just as entertaining as the beauty of the storm, IMO ;-).

"THEY STILL WON'T GET IT."

Yeah, I know that.. But (a) Some of "it" must sink in to some level, (b) my matrix of causal determinants means that I have no choice but to do whatever I do (c) There is nothing I can do to alter any of the 'cogs' or the forces acting on them

Its real funny actually - I know that the whole script of every posting at TW was created the moment time began, that the motion of every atom in the universe is utterly and absolutely predetermined..

Yet, even knowing this, I cannot stop myself from behaving like what I do / say / think / write is of some 'relevance' or 'importance' - LOL .. the "madness of tilting at windmills" seems quite sane by comparison! ;-)

Anyway - I REALLY am saying bye this time.. Sorry bout this minor hijack folks.. but it was that member of the TW staff who is REALLY to blame!! ;-) .. and even he wasnt to blame - the universe made him what he is ;-)

Fred

------------------------------------------------------

Postscript:

------------------------------------------------------

>> I dont want to continue this "hijack" so am replying to Peter's following post  here:

" But that is not the true picture. In fact, those things that seem predetermined have already happened and the belief that they have not is an illusion created by the absurdly limited nature of our perception. " - Coalport (in following post)

I agree - or at least I agree that the above is possible, perhaps even likely..

But it is hard enough (probably impossible) to embrace the ideas related to determinism , even within the framework of the flow of time (which I regard as a useful model or analogy) ..  To try to embrace the idea (possible truth) that there is literally only "the moment" and that all concepts of time and even "the moment" are illusory brings us right back to our prior discussion about "being" and "the one" and advaitism.

For me, the time/space "physical" model is usable within my perceptions.. Always trying to keep open to any "new enlightenment" but I suppose I am not really looking for any ("enlightenment" seems to bring more unhappyness than delusions do - being "disillusioned" does not, in my expierience, confer any benefit).

These sort of discussions are great - but far better when sharing a few bottles of good French (or South African) wine with fellow obsessives! .. Alas, the only place I ever get into this kind of discussion these days seems to be on-line :-(

If I could, I wish I was able to actually believe some of the absurd delusions which bring people happyness - I was far happier when I believed there was purpose and meaning to it all. Seeking for the "truth" is great, as long as you dont find it! ;-)

I think this sums it up: "Once you go through the gate, you find there was no gate to go through, and no You to go through the gate." ... Trouble is that one cannot do a lot with this concept, LOL ;-) ... Whatever the "truth" is, in order to "live", the delusion (if it is a delusion) of "reality" needs to be maintained - So I suppose one can be aware of the delusion (or its possibility) - but one cannot (in "life" anyway) escape it. (other than temporarily by consumption of large quantities of wine or other perception changing activities / substances.. or occasionally by visiting TW ;-)

Fred: Its real funny actually - I know that the whole script of every posting at TW was created the moment time began, that the motion of every atom in the universe is utterly and absolutely predetermined..

You're right, Fred. It does appear that way from the standpoint of the flow of time, as we see it. It is the only logical conclusion from our limited perspective. But that is not the true picture. In fact, those things that seem predetermined have already happened and the belief that they have not is an illusion created by the absurdly limited nature of our perception. 

We can't help that. We are what we are...or are we....... 

The note spacing has a tendency to shrink as one approaches the rod.  As the note spacing decreases the difficulty to play pitches accurately increases.  We tend to adjust to this and the definition of "too closely spaced" would vary with the thereminist.

The intervals on the Epro maintain excellent spacing clear to the rod whereas the Standard's note-spacing is noticably crunched within about 1' of the rod.

Another factor that is not-often discussed is the rod's sensitivity to vertical motion.  That is, when one moves one's hand up and down a well-designed theremin will exhibit a minimal amount of pitch change.  One of the problems with the Theremax is that, with the stock antenna, it is very sensitive to vertical motion -- so much so that it is hard to play it with precision.  When I replaced the stock antenna with a longer (and thicker) antenna, the vertical sensitivity was greatly reduced (along with a reduction in the horizontal sensitivity).

I have not spent a lot of time with the Theremax, though -- doesn't seem worth the effort to me at this point.

Intonation is of primary importance on any instrument. 

There is a temptation to think that  "fire and passion" can miraculously overcome intonation problems.  It doesn't.

"Fire and passion" in the absence of good intonation come off as reckless and messy. Accurate intonation is essential for playing any instrument, or singing, at the professional level.

We in the theremin community tend to be much too forgiving of poor intonation because we know how difficult accuracy is to achieve.