On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:41:31 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Technically,
>> though, what Warp was doing wasn't a tremolo, but was vibrato (a slight
>> vibration in pitch). :-)
> 
>   It seems that "tremolo" has wildly varying meanings depending on the
> context, the instrument and even different versions of the same
> instrument. For example "tremolo" on classical guitar means a completely
> different thing than "tremolo" on an electric guitar (at least when
> talking about the so-called tremolo arm).

Yeah, the so-called "whammy bar" on a guitar is sometimes called a 
tremolo arm/bar, but it causes a fluctuation in amplitude rather than in 
pitch.  The Wikipedia page does make mention of that as a not-entirely-
accurate usage.

>   Curiously, if you look at the wikipedia page for "tremolo", it utterly
> fails to explain what it means, in a way that is easily understood. (It
> also utterly fails to explain that it means completely different things
> for different instruments.)

I understood it pretty well, and it seemed consistent to me - though the 
implementation on different instruments would be different - different on 
a violin than on a marimba, for example.

>   Even when "tremolo" is used as a form of vibrato, there's still
> disagreement on what their difference is. Some argue that "vibrato" is a
> variation of frequency, while "tremolo" is a variation of amplitude. (In
> the case of a guitar vibrato, it's actually both: Increasing the tension
> of the string increases the frequency and decreases amplitude because of
> conservation of energy, and vice-versa.)

Hadn't thought about it that way, but yes, I suppose that's true.  :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message