On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 10:13:02 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Warp wrote:
>>   Made a couple of new videos:
>> 
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG7gUo5v2K0
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ-hOV3cW2g
>> 
>> 
> Nice. I've always liked greensleeves, and that was a nice version.
> 
> I'm a little surprised you can do tremolo that way on an instrument with
> frets.  Only a little surprised, mind, but I thought the idea of the
> frets was to make sure the string length was always the same even if
> your finger was a bit off.

Both are very good recordings - really liked them both.  Technically, 
though, what Warp was doing wasn't a tremolo, but was vibrato (a slight 
vibration in pitch). :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> what Warp was doing wasn't a tremolo, but was vibrato (a slight 
> vibration in pitch). :-)

TIL...

Don't blame me, I play percussion. ;-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 15:22:49 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> what Warp was doing wasn't a tremolo, but was vibrato (a slight
>> vibration in pitch). :-)
> 
> TIL...
> 
> Don't blame me, I play percussion. ;-)

LOL

Post a reply to this message

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).

  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.)

  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.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

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.


I understood it to mean that tremolo is playing two different notes in quick 
succession, while vibrato is changing the pitch of one note. So you 
technically wouldn't be able to do "vibrato" on a clarinet, but you could do 
tremolo with fast fingers.

If an instrument doesn't have a digital pitch (i.e., trombone vs tuba, 
violen vs clarinet, etc) then distinguishing the two can be confusing, I'd 
guess.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

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

Darren New wrote:
> I understood it to mean that tremolo is playing two different notes in 
> quick succession, 

Isn't tremolo a type of trilling, or am I misunderstanding again?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:15:46 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Darren New wrote:
>> I understood it to mean that tremolo is playing two different notes in
>> quick succession,
> 
> Isn't tremolo a type of trilling, or am I misunderstanding again?

It can be, but usually it's just the repetition of the same note, but it 
can be two notes in a double-stop (whereas a trill is just between a note 
and the note above/below it).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Nice guitar work there. Particularly enjoyed Greensleeves (because I'm more
familiar with it.) And the CGI looks so REAL  ;-P

I've played electric guitar in bands for more years than I care to remember, but
classical acoustic guitar still gives me difficulty--mainly because I never
learned to pick correctly with my fingers (and fingernails.) So I...uh...avoid
it. You do it well.

Electric guitars are easier to play, too! (That's IMHO, of course.) Because of
lower 'action', in most cases.

Curiously, I've always thought of 'tremolo' as simply a sinusoidal volume
change, effected by my guitar amp's 'tremolo' electronics. Yet, when trying to
discuss  string bending/finger vibrating with fellow guitarists, I also use that
word (or 'trill', which is probably incorrect.) When it comes to using the
whammy bar on my electric guitar to get a 'warbling' pitch, I never think of it
as 'tremolo', just pitch change. Never heard any of my musician friends use
'tremolo' in that context either. But then again, I'm self-taught (i.e., by
ear)--so I never really learned ANY of the proper guitar or music nomenclature.

BTW (a small musicical detail): I always thought that the 'lead' line in
Greensleeves (when played in your Am key) went like this:

A..C.....D..E....F#E..D.....B..G etc.

In other words, an F# note rather than an F. But that could be my own faulty
memory of the song.

Ken

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> BTW (a small musicical detail): I always thought that the 'lead' line in
> Greensleeves (when played in your Am key) went like this:

> A..C.....D..E....F#E..D.....B..G etc.

> In other words, an F# note rather than an F. But that could be my own faulty
> memory of the song.

  You hear both versions. I don't know which one is the correct. I like
the version using F because it sounds a bit sadder.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message