This post reminded me of something I thought might be pertinent and knowing no other post upon which to hang it I chose this one. You mentioned the Ancients and this brought to memory something I saw demonstrated on a documentary concerning the Parthenon in Greece. It seems this building is not symmetrical mathematically, some of the elements are designed out of align so that they appear as behind symmetrical when viewed from below, specifically the taper and shape of the columns. I wish I could remember the exact details but it is there none the less. The point here is that the use of asymmetry was to create the illusion of symmetry. How this relates to the discussion on Lutes is of little more importance than to demonstrate that the use of asymmetry is not uncommon even in places where you would consider symmetry to be important.
Vance Wood. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jon Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "guy_and_liz Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "LUTELIST" <[email protected]>; "Manolo Laguillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 10:22 AM Subject: Re: symm/asymm & perfect/imperfect > A friend of mine who works at Sandia Labs tried to explain Quantum Physics > to me over a couple bottles of wine one evening, unfortunately if I can't > apply it in my daily life, it goes in one ear, and out the other. > Concerning perfection, I guess it's a state of mind, as Dr. Emoto has > documented, ones thoughts can have an influence on ones environment. > Although, the Ancients have know this for eons. > One can perceive a lute as symmetrical, however, after a couple bottles > of wine, or beer in Jon's case, it begins to take on a non symmetrical > shape, along with everything else. The exception to this rule, is found in > historical lutes, which appear non symmetrical, prior to the consumption of > your favorite intoxicant, then afterwards actually appears perfectly > symmetrical. > > Concerning the lute I was speaking more about the physical shape of the > belly, and not the actual sound it makes. > You can apply the concept of imperfection ( Wabe Sabe) to many things, > but not the conception of musical instruments. The concept is always > perfect, but man's execution of it is imperfect. > Sometimes I think lutes, guitars are like people. The really good > looking ones (people) are rather shallow sounding, and the not so perfect > ones, are more interesting to listen to. > This is my second, naturally occurring law as applied to musical > instruments. The first being the rule of relative perception. > Michael Thames > www.ThamesClassicalGuitars.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jon Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "guy_and_liz Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "LUTELIST" > <[email protected]>; "Manolo Laguillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > "Michael Thames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 4:13 PM > Subject: Re: symm/asymm & perfect/imperfect > > > > Michael, > > > > I thought I'd covered my views on this topic, but I have to add my > comment. > > > > > Is it wrong for humans to try to achieve perfect symmetry? It seems > > nature is trying. > > > > Nature is trying, very trying (I hope you know that English trope). Can we > > know perfection? No. Can we aspire to it? Yes. Perfection is a goal, even > in > > nature. Einstein rejected Bohr's thoughts on Quanta, saying God doesn't > play > > dice. (the quote may be aprochryphal). Bringing it back to the lute, your > > ear is the best tuning device. Even the paired courses have a diffence in > > tonality. Nothing is perfect, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't aspire to > > perfection. > > > > Best, Jon > > > > > > > > > To get on or off this list see list information at > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >
