|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
208.127.44.247
In Reply to: RE: Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments posted by newdreams on April 07, 2014 at 10:43:24
Violinists were able to distinguish different instruments very easily blindly by sound and feel.However there was not a consistent preference for old over new. Which is completely different.
What this says is that he best modern luthiers have now equaled the old Masters. This wasn't the case 50 years ago, modern practices and technology and experience helps.
Also they compared the best of the modern instruments to whatever old instruments they could acquire, not the best of the Strads or Guarnerius extant. There is an enormous difference between a $50000 modern instrument and a $500 one.
The musicians have a much more rational reaction to the results, I read about a teacher who said that he can now assure his rising students that they don't need a fantastically expensive violin to get to the top, unlike how it used to be.
Edits: 04/07/14Follow Ups:
I'm left thankful that guitarists can get great instruments for much less money. I'm an amateur finger-style guitarist (when I'm not drumming) and know that there are some fine acoustic guitars in the $2000 and up price range from the likes of Martin, Gibson, Larrivee, Santa Cruz, Morgan and others. Of course you can spend $30k on a Manzer or other hand-built units, but the lesser priced ones are pretty fine.
I recently bought a used Martin HD-28V for $2K and it is the guitar of my dreams. I've sat in shops and played pretty much everything over the years, and this one just spoke to me (it said "Buy me now or you'll forever regret missing the chance"). Even, clear sound across the strings, superb action, easy to play all the way up the neck, and very rewarding to the ear. My girl friend is a classical violinist, and she can spend more than that on a cheap bow...
Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming (1900 - 1993)
.
Never trust an Atom, they Make Up everything!
Well done! You got me. Hmm, think I'll go home and try a blindfold test.
Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming (1900 - 1993)
The hostility to the idea that a new violin can sound as good as an old one surprises and mystifies me. Apparently we still like to believe in magic, or something close to it. A preference for magic over--I won't say science, but common sense and good craft--has a long, undistinguished history.
And yet--are the old violins better? Of course they are, because they're old. Objects take on meaning with time. That's a big part of why I listen to a TD-124 turntable, to which I have a (distant) historical connection. It matters and enhances the experience. I can easily imagine that playing a famous instrument could enhance a musical performance--not because of the sound waves that emanate from it, but because of this emotional connection.
Get used to it folks: You hear with your BRAIN. Your ears are just a piece of it. So what you hear is linked to what you think and feel, how much you focus, and many other things.
Which all adds up to an obvious conclusion, which the more thoughtful audiophiles came to long ago: Blind testing is the only way to achieve any kind of objectivity. But it's also almost entirely irrelevant to the experience of hearing music.
Jim Austin
> > > Which all adds up to an obvious conclusion, which the more thoughtful audiophiles came to long ago: Blind testing is the only way to achieve any kind of objectivity. But it's also almost entirely irrelevant to the experience of hearing music. < < <
There are also myriad effects associated with DB testing - do we we listen the same way when involved in DB experimentation as when relaxing on the sofa at home, possibly kicking back friends, listening to music at home?
Those espousing DB ABX testing as a gold standard are displaying the limited understanding of research principles. It is the researchers conundrum of internal versus external validity.
Cheers.
“As long as we have any intention to be right… we should be wary. So long as words have the slightest ego attachment, they are dishonest.” Charlotte Joko Beck
I suggest those who love DBTs aren't interested in the " experience of hearing music ".
Regards,
Andy
You really make me laugh ....
"The hostility to the idea that a new violin can sound as good as an old one surprises and mystifies me."
This really had dick all to do with violins.
"Which all adds up to an obvious conclusion, which the more thoughtful audiophiles came to long ago: Blind testing is the only way to achieve any kind of objectivity."
There! You clever boy, you nailed it ... That's what it's all about.
The sad thing is that DBT clowns will drag in just about anything however tenuous (or otherwise) the connection just to scratch that pesky DBT itch ... perhaps you should try rubbing some of that Peter Belt Creme on it, who know it just might be good for something after all!
LOL
Never trust an Atom, they Make Up everything!
"Which all adds up to an obvious conclusion, which the more thoughtful audiophiles came to long ago: Blind testing is the only way to achieve any kind of objectivity. But it's also almost entirely irrelevant to the experience of hearing music. "
Exactly.
So I defend DBT, but understand that part of the joy might be in owning fine equipment that pleases the eye (and the appreciation of fine audio engineering) as well as the ear. It's all part of the overall experience of a listening session.
Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming (1900 - 1993)
...you have it wrong.
Hearing, listening, enjoying music is what we do.
Owning equipment which pleases the eye has no more to do "with the experience of hearing music" than audio DBTs.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: