Crystals are only symmetrical to a point. It's a convenient and reasonably good
approximation, but perfect symmetry runs afoul of the second law of
thermodynamics, leading to things like point defects and dislocations.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Thames<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LUTELIST<mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu> ; Manolo Laguillo<mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: symm/asymm & perfect/imperfect
>b. Symmetry is one of the least interesting forms of >composition. It is
>a cheap trick, and it is wise to avoid it. BTW, the nazi >architects
>(Albert Speer...) used it a lot
Interesting to note, the best lutemakers of the ren. were Germans.
> Actually symmetry does not exist in nature, but >something much more
>exciting: the appearance of it, without really being it
I'm not sure, but would venture to say, symmetry exists in ice crystal,
and crystal formations?
Michael Thames
www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com<http://www.thamesclassicalguitars.com/>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Manolo Laguillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
To: "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>; "LUTELIST"
<lute@cs.dartmouth.edu<mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:38 AM
Subject: was: Stradivari lute? now: symm/asymm & perfect/imperfect
> Sorry, but I can't agree with the two ideas expressed below by Michael
> Thames:
>
> 1. poor workmanship on the part of old lutemakers
>
> 2. symmetry equals to perfection, therefore asymmetry = imperfection.
>
> Because:
>
> a. They had a superior craftmanship level, and could have done the lutes
> perfectly symmetrical if they would have the desire and need to do so.
> We only have to look at the perfectly spherical stone "balls" present in
> so many buildings of the Renaissance. The sphere is, by the way, the
> representation of absolute symmetry...
>
> b. Symmetry is one of the least interesting forms of composition. It is
> a cheap trick, and it is wise to avoid it. BTW, the nazi architects
> (Albert Speer...) used it a lot.
> Actually symmetry does not exist in nature, but something much more
> exciting: the appearance of it, without really being it.
> In the japanese aesthetic there is a word I can't remember now for this
> idea of being perfect precisely through imperfection.
>
> All this relates with something of paramount importance in the
> interpretation of early music, that we all know, and that I am going to
> express with an example: if we have a measure with 4 /\ /\ , each one
> has to be played with a different accent, stressed differently. This is
> difficult for us because we were born in an epoch where everything is
> mechanic, and handmade objects are luxury... Remember William Morris?
>
> I will dare to recommend you a book, Michael, that you could enjoy a
> lot: Lewis Mumford, Technics and Civilization.
>
> Saludos,
>
> Manolo Laguillo
>
>
>
> Michael Thames wrote:
>
> >>Lundberg did not say that lute bellies weren't symmetrical, >just that
the
> >>
> >>
> >lute
> >
> >
> >>as a whole doesn't have a clear center line.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Without getting lundbergs book out, he says something to the
> >effect that there isn't a straight line on the lute except the strings.
> > I guess it depends on how you look at it. I prefer to think in
terms
> >that the lute has a center line and the neck is tilted.
> > From my experience with the few different lutes I've made, the
> >originals are not perfectly symmetrical. For many reasons age, stress
etc.
> >poor workmanship. For this reason alone, coming across Stadivari's
template,
> >and seeing first hand that lutes were conceived from the beginning to be
> >perfectly symmetrical cleared up at least for me some of the mystery.
> > I know many makers will copy a lute with every distortion, and
> >imperfection, it seems for me that this might not be the way to do it.
> > I wonder if these early makers had some mind set to stop just short
of
> >perfection?
> >Michael Thames
> >www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Garry Bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
> >To: "lute list" <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu<mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>>
> >Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 5:54 AM
> >Subject: RE: Stradivari lute?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Michael Thames [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 10:55 AM
> >>>To: Lute net
> >>>Subject: Stradivari lute?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I noticed a lute template of the belly ( 11 course French lute) made
> >>>
> >>>
> >from
> >
> >
> >>>thick paper, folded down the middle to from the centre line,
indicating
> >>>
> >>>
> >to
> >
> >
> >>>me, that lutes were originally conceived to be symmetrically prefect,
> >>>
> >>>
> >and do
> >
> >
> >>>in fact have a clear centre line, contrary to what Lundberg says.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>[GB>]
> >>
> >>Lundberg did not say that lute bellies weren't symmetrical, just that
the
> >>
> >>
> >lute
> >
> >
> >>as a whole doesn't have a clear center line.
> >>
> >>If you'll look at page 76 ( Practicum One: Making the Form ) in
> >>
> >>
> >"Historical Lute
> >
> >
> >>Construction", you'll notice that Lundberg's instructions coincide with
> >>
> >>
> >what you
> >
> >
> >>describe above.
> >>
> >>I'm sure that Martin Shepherd (first name out of the brain this
morning.)
> >>
> >>
> >or
> >
> >
> >>someone else can probably give a concise description of the "asymmetry"
of
> >>
> >>
> >the
> >
> >
> >>lute. It's too early for me; I need more coffee >:)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>To get on or off this list see list information at
> >>http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
--
