General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

Return to General Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments

198.162.100.79
Posted on April 7, 2014 at 10:43:24
newdreams
Audiophile

Posts: 1897
Location: West Coast
Joined: April 9, 2007
 This reminds me a little of people who criticize double-blind testing of audio gear as somehow being unfair or biased. Here is an extensive test where top-level violinists get to choose their listening conditions of instruments and still cannot identify the Strads.

It may also demonstrate that some modern luthiers are getting it right...

Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming (1900 - 1993)

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Isn't this just like testing audio gear, posted on April 7, 2014 at 11:14:39
audiozorro
Audiophile

Posts: 628
Location: VA-MD-DC
Joined: January 9, 2007
 Where the best is usually not the most expensive. I course I could say the same thing about wine, art or women.

 

This is competing with the tube motherboard.., posted on April 7, 2014 at 11:21:26
Iron Knee
Audiophile

Posts: 955
Location: Middle Florida
Joined: May 17, 2009
 ..with old worn out threads regaining another breath of life.

 

It says that they were comparing "tonal qualities", and if so..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 11:55:10
genungo
 "Tonal quality" is only one of the important characteristics that violin virtuosos look for in an instrument. So, if this test was about tonal quality alone then it might say little about the ultimate worth of the "winners".

Strads and other violins earn "high value" status because responsiveness, dynamic capability, and tonality are well combined. Age and history can also affect price.

 

RE: It says that they were comparing "tonal qualities", and if so..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 12:16:46
middleground
 Yeah, sure, those violinists were of inferior quality, bloody deaf and silly they were.

 

RE: "...bloody deaf and silly they were.", posted on April 7, 2014 at 12:55:39
genungo
 Depending on the type of test being performed, different instruments will seem to fare better than others. For a big time concert soloist, the "most valuable" violin is the one that produces the biggest and best sound with the least amount of effort. The "less valuable" violin might sound great and be just fine for small venue performances but without the dynamic capability of the more valuable instrument it may not ever be considered as a versatile, money-making machine. Strads are valued for their powerful sound, not just their "tonal qualities".

Because the article does not state that every important factor and/or performance parameter was taken into account, it could be that "tonal qualities" alone were the primary focus of the test. More info is needed. It also seems as if the test might have been flawed in a number of ways...

 

We've talked about this before, posted on April 7, 2014 at 12:59:40
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37666
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 back in February with this post and there's a different side to the *unable to tell* claim.

What Really Happened...

"I was not asked to identify specifically which was the modern violin and which was the old violin; only which I preferred. If people are concluding from this study that "professional violinists can't tell the difference between modern violinist and old Italians," then I think we need a different study in which violinists are actually asked to identify that. "

 

Been Posted, Discussed Extensively, posted on April 7, 2014 at 13:12:13
Inmate51
 See E-Stat's reference to the previous thread discussing this, and continue that thread. It'll make life simpler for all of us.

:)

 

You've got to read more carefully, posted on April 7, 2014 at 13:17:39
Cpk
Audiophile

Posts: 1518
Location: PA
Joined: May 13, 2005
 The players were told to judge each violin as if they were looking for an instrument that could best replace their own for an upcoming concert tour.

The violinist in the room next to mine at Berklee had amazing ears. We were doing some work with a keyboardist's down the hall when she said you're playing the wrong note even though his finger was on the right key. Turns out there was an adjustment on the back that allowed for the keyboard to be shifted up or down up to a whole step, in this case it was down a half.

I don't think you could get a more qualified group of people to do this.

Awesome.

 

RE: Read more carefully, posted on April 7, 2014 at 13:31:41
genungo
 The test seems flawed and the article does not provide enough info. I wish that there was more for me to read, carefully.

Check out E Stat's link, posted above... ^

 

RE: Don't think it was flawed, posted on April 7, 2014 at 13:45:58
Cpk
Audiophile

Posts: 1518
Location: PA
Joined: May 13, 2005
 just that the piece wasn't written for a peer review. The mention of judging tonality was one of the criticisms laid to the previous test in that only a top rank player could do that accurately, not that the current participants were asked to judge solely on that one factor but which violin would they choose for their own....

 

RE: Don't think, posted on April 7, 2014 at 13:52:43
genungo
 Read the article linked in E-Stat's reply (above). Doesn't it seem to you that the cards may have been inadvertently stacked, in favor of the modern violins used for that test?

Additionally, not enough info has been provided.

 

So.. You think this shows double blind testing is valid? Or that the parameters realy matter?, posted on April 7, 2014 at 14:51:56
Elizabeth
 So you r statement seems to indicate yor preference for 'Double blind testing is valid in all ways'
So you really trying to 'stir the pot' on an old boring question..
I guess some folks just want to start something.
And as others have written this has been discussed before.

 

Thanks for posting this..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 15:00:17
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...some people blindly believe these tests are definitive just because they're conducted blind.

The details they don't tell you about are usually the most important.

 

All violins sound the same! Moving on ... Nt, posted on April 7, 2014 at 15:06:45
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 .


 

It's always about the details..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 15:15:36
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37666
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 Did you read this particular constraint?

"These violins were loaned with the stipulation that they remain in the condition in which we received them -- precluding any tonal adjustments or even changing the strings." That means that, whatever happened to the old violins during their trip -- if they got jostled on the airplane, etc. -- there was no soundpost adjustment, no bridge adjustment, no check for open seams. If the strings were a little older, they were a little older. "

Parlor tricks are real crowd pleasers!

 

Read the link in E-Stat's post..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 15:15:47
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...it explains what really went on in the test.

 

Too funny yet..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 15:17:15
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...a definitive test to some.

Must have been, after all it was done blind...

 

RE: Read the link in OP, posted on April 7, 2014 at 15:56:00
Cpk
Audiophile

Posts: 1518
Location: PA
Joined: May 13, 2005
 The test E-Stat's link refers to is from a few years ago, the OP's just happened under differing conditions.

BUT further investigation shows that two of the participants in the most recent test play Curtin made violins which invalidates the test for me. The test also has nothing to do with differentiating which is old and which is new but what are the players personal preferences. If you play an instrument and it has a familiarity then it may bias your choice.

So I redact my prior post, the test it flawed

 

Am I misunderstanding this..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 16:02:52
welly
Audiophile

Posts: 1648
Location: QLD
Joined: January 22, 2001
 I may be reading this out of context, but the following paragraph makes absolutely no sense to me:

"In one test the participants were asked to reject instruments they didn’t like and rank their four favourites in order, with the researchers awarding four points to each player’s top instrument."

Surely, this doesn't mean that they couldn't tell the difference between a Stradivari and a.n. other violin, merely that they had a preference for some violins over others...

Also:
"The players were told to judge each violin as if they were looking for an instrument that could best replace their own for an upcoming concert tour."

So, they weren't trying to judge which was a stradivari and which was brand x, they were asked to select an instrument to "replace their own for an upcoming concert tour." This is not the same thing...

Cheers

Welly
He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife.
- Douglas Adams


 

+1 /-t\, posted on April 7, 2014 at 16:28:44
jusbe
Audiophile

Posts: 5950
Location: North Island
Joined: April 4, 2000
Big J

"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."


 

Happy to kill this thread, posted on April 7, 2014 at 16:48:18
newdreams
Audiophile

Posts: 1897
Location: West Coast
Joined: April 9, 2007
 but it seesm I can't. I thought it was recent news and hadn't been covered already.

Re discussion so far;

1. Yes it does bring out comparisons to the DBT religious arguments, but
2. This is about professional musicians with presumably great ears not being able to tell the supposedly superior instruments from new ones, which may indeed meant that some modern luthiers have got it right. (So the headline is indeed misleading.)

CBC's headline today on this story is
"Stradivarius violins lose in blind test against new ones -
Antique Italian violins may not deserve their legendary reputation"
which may be more accurate.

My first comment was meant to point out that we assume our ears are "golden" and yet so often they are not. DBT seems to me the only scientific way of finding out whether we really can detect differences without seeing the hardware. If we don't trust our unbiased ears, what is left?

FWIW, I've worked as a professional musician and in audio for much of my life, and am close to two professional classical violinists (partner and sister-in-law). Thus I've heard a lot of the arguments and issues re finding the right instruments and getting sound out of it.

Clearly DBT is a religious argument here so I'm happy to stop. How do we kill this monster?

Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming (1900 - 1993)

 

RE: Read the link in OP, posted on April 7, 2014 at 16:59:31
genungo
 After the first flawed test, it should have been obvious that a number of rules and procedures needed to be revised or changed. However, there is no indication that basic procedures ever were revised for this latest test. I'm going to ignore the results of both tests, at least until more detailed info is made available.

I think I might smell a marketing scheme...

I predict that "new" and "definitive" test results will continue to appear throughout the next 20 years or so to "prove" (of course) that modern instruments can sound just as good as the old antique ones that we will soon be forced to shelve (The older ones might be nearing the end of their usable lifespan!).

 

Use the "Alert Moderator" link at the top of the page..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:10:42
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12383
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 ...and send a note with your request. Mods might oblige you, send it to someplace like "Whiners Woad" where it's less readily accessible or let it be in all its predictable glory.

If you're in a devious mood you could also edit your posts to content totally unrelated to your original subject. This would have future viewers scratching their heads. However, there would be evidence of the edit and I assume all AA activity is archived somewhere just in case the past has to be recreated in the future.

 

RE: Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments, posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:12:29
SgreenP@MSN.com
Audiophile

Posts: 3538
Joined: April 23, 2007
 There is a mystique playing a Strad, - I have and found the one I played was dry, and thin...though it did have great power. I prefer a del Jesus I played...warm, and sweet. Every violin sounds and plays differently. ...not that it is a Strad or a del J....

 

... if you don't have in you to stop yourself. LOL nt, posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:21:20
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 .


 

How long did they "break-in" their handkerchiefs? nt, posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:26:49
tinear
Audiophile

Posts: 65782
Location: Kansas City, KS
Joined: April 9, 2006
 df

 

Perhaps they had them cryo-ed first... (nt), posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:30:56
newdreams
Audiophile

Posts: 1897
Location: West Coast
Joined: April 9, 2007
 nt

Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming (1900 - 1993)

 

RE: Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments, posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:33:28
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 "It may also demonstrate that some modern luthiers are getting it right..."

Third place went to a Strad beating 4 out of 6 moderns, or beating almost 70% of the moderns ... guess the progress over the last 200 odd years has been, ah, hmmm ... modest?

--

In any case the last time this topic made the rounds it came out that most old instruments have almost invariably been modified to play as loud and to project like modern ones ... so it's arguable if any significantly untouched old instrument was involved, period.




 

Even out of tune..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:45:13
Ozzie
Audiophile

Posts: 3817
Joined: August 1, 2002
 someone familiar with such a prized instrument should readily recognize it's inherent special qualities. Ditto for reviewers with overhyped claims of huge differenced between 40 k amplifiers and 5 k amplifiers.

With wine there are people so astute that they not only know the brand, they also tell the vintage. And human taste is not nearly as acute as human hearing.

Keep fighting the good fight DBT deniers. I didn't read the article, but knew the usual suspects that would show up.

 

No Surprise, posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:46:21
Awe-d-o-file
Dealer

Posts: 21037
Location: 50 miles west of DC
Joined: January 10, 2004
 Even if we said great musicians that can PLAY well also hear better than the general population it isn't saying they have the great ear required to hear these differences.

Just because they play well in the top one percent say doesn't mean they even hear in the top twenty five percent as I see it. Sure it's their craft and they certainly hear lots of violins one would assume.


A violinist in the national symphony came in my store and preferred Legacy Focus 2020 with an SS amp over tubes (both CJ amps) and Quads with a better source to boot.


ET


ET

"If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking till you do suck seed" - Curly Howard 1936

 

RE: Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments, posted on April 7, 2014 at 17:47:34
fantja
Audiophile

Posts: 15524
Location: Alabama
Joined: September 11, 2010
 Laughing...

 

RE: Am I misunderstanding this..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 18:08:31
Ozzie
Audiophile

Posts: 3817
Joined: August 1, 2002
 I fail to see the difference. Since it is universally accepted that the Strad is the best, what difference does it make how they worded it?

Ferrari is supposedly superior to Chevy. If 8 race drivers out of 10 prefered the new Vette over the latest Ferrari, without knowing which was which, does that invalidate their opinions?

 

RE: Read the link in OP, posted on April 7, 2014 at 18:17:50
Ozzie
Audiophile

Posts: 3817
Joined: August 1, 2002
 "If you play an instrument..."

That in and of itself shoots down arguments against dbt. Reviewers have literally weeks, if not months to familiarize themselves with, and write of their findings. Why can't the same person use his / her own notes and be able to identify what amp is driving a certain speaker under a future test, site unseen?

 

RE: Read the link in OP, posted on April 7, 2014 at 18:19:48
Cpk
Audiophile

Posts: 1518
Location: PA
Joined: May 13, 2005
 I think I might smell a marketing scheme...

Wouldn't it be nicer to get 400k rather then 40k for a violin ;-)

 

RE: Don't play an instrument do you...../t, posted on April 7, 2014 at 18:26:31
Cpk
Audiophile

Posts: 1518
Location: PA
Joined: May 13, 2005
 z

 

Overall Strads sound better because (overall) the better players get them. Is that so hard to understand? LOL, posted on April 7, 2014 at 19:00:24
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 And if they do, ya know like 'really' do, got nothing to do with it! And it don't matter squat how many tests the violin maker (involved in both those test) performs.

Mind he's seems to be doing a great service for the wanna-talk-DBT-crowd here, not that he'd know, or care.

LOL


 

Haha, cute., posted on April 7, 2014 at 19:27:09
Ozzie
Audiophile

Posts: 3817
Joined: August 1, 2002
 I recall an article about a certain Strad that mentioned that one of the strings was bad. That if it wasn't played a certain way, it would let you know it. As a self proclaimed F1 guy you must admit that a late model Vette just might outperform that persnickety 2 million dollar early 60s Ferrari.

 

RE: Overall Strads sound better because (overall) the better players get them. Is that so hard to understand? LOL, posted on April 7, 2014 at 19:42:30
middleground
 Must be strange viewing the world from your reversed perspective.

 

Sounds like a cop-out to me, posted on April 7, 2014 at 20:23:23
Feanor
Audiophile

Posts: 9873
Location: London, Ontario
Joined: June 17, 2003
Contributor
  Since: March 12, 2004
 "Oh, you wanted me to tell the difference. Gosh, I thought you meant which I prefer. If only I'd known".

Anyway, if people don't prefer these old instruments, what justifies their price? This was the real point of the exercise.


Dmitri Shostakovich

 

The test was..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 20:31:41
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...not to recognize it but to chose the one you would most like to play.

 

I believe virgin Pima cotton, organic and un-dyed, is more "Strad." Cashmere sounds more, "Guar-like." nt, posted on April 7, 2014 at 20:36:55
tinear
Audiophile

Posts: 65782
Location: Kansas City, KS
Joined: April 9, 2006
 d

 

And who says audiophiles' hearing is better than average, too? nt, posted on April 7, 2014 at 20:38:55
tinear
Audiophile

Posts: 65782
Location: Kansas City, KS
Joined: April 9, 2006
 d

 

Well, at some point, why don't DBT tests have results doubters expect?, posted on April 7, 2014 at 20:52:01
tinear
Audiophile

Posts: 65782
Location: Kansas City, KS
Joined: April 9, 2006
 It appears the problem is with you, not those that tend to believe scientific tests.
Further, no matter the procedures, you still will claim the human ear and audiophiles are a separate category and not bound by usual results.

 

RE: Well, at some point, why don't DBT tests have results doubters expect?, posted on April 7, 2014 at 21:58:37
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...if you think audio DBTs are scientific, you don't understand what the word means.

 

Wrong conclusion., posted on April 7, 2014 at 22:12:44
DrChaos
Audiophile

Posts: 2063
Location: San Diego
Joined: July 13, 2009
 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.

 

RE: Am I misunderstanding this..., posted on April 7, 2014 at 22:12:48
welly
Audiophile

Posts: 1648
Location: QLD
Joined: January 22, 2001
 Big difference in my opinion.

If a person was asked "identify the Strad" (which my quoted questions did not), they will look for what they believe to be the key characteristics of a Strad while forming their opinion and choose based solely on that factor.

If they are asked to choose the one they "like", they will evaluate the sound of all instruments and choose what they "consider" to be the best. If they are a fan of Sttads then they will (probably) pick the Strad. However, if they are not a fan of Strads, they will not pick the Strad.

This is why, in many walks of life people have, for example, different cars, Hi-Fis or Boats. They choose based on what they "Like" not necessarily what is the "Best".

Similarly, if they were asked to evaluate the violin that they would take on their next tour (Which was one the questions), It is possible that they could identify the strad via the blind test and make a conscious decision to choose another one that sounds similar but would be more suitable for the rigours of life on the road (i.e. if it ain't a Strad, it's probably cheaper).

If the point of the test was to identify which one of a batch of violins is a Strad, then ask the question "which one is the strad". The questions I highlighted did not not do that. They asked "Which one do you like?" and "which one is suitable to take on tour?"

Phrasing the questions in that manner could conceivably weight the answers, as the player could subconsciously use other factors in making his final choices.

Just because a strad is universally accepted as the best, it does not mean that a particular individual will:
A.) Like the Strad or
B.) Consider suitable for their next tour.

At the end of the day, my point is that you can affect the results of any test by phrasing the questions to suit your own ends.



Cheers

Welly
He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife.
- Douglas Adams


 

Love you too, Sweetie! nt, posted on April 7, 2014 at 22:45:53
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 .


 

RE: Well, at some point, why don't DBT tests have results doubters expect?, posted on April 7, 2014 at 22:50:51
middleground
 Beliefs are a tough nut to crack.

 

RE: Well, at some point, why don't DBT tests have results doubters expect?, posted on April 7, 2014 at 22:52:56
DrChaos
Audiophile

Posts: 2063
Location: San Diego
Joined: July 13, 2009
 I subdued my ego and I found my perception of in audibility of perceptual Iof perceptual codecs about matched the scientific empirical results from populations. I. am not a special snowflake, and I'm ok.

 

I wonder where they found all those blind violinists?, posted on April 8, 2014 at 02:04:27
FenderLover
 What? Oh! The tests were blinded.

Never-mind...


8^)

 

RE: Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments, posted on April 8, 2014 at 04:12:25
middleground
 Why?

Can't you be serious just this once?

 

RE: Don't think, posted on April 8, 2014 at 04:15:55
middleground
 Why do you feel threatened by this?

 

RE: Am I misunderstanding this..., posted on April 8, 2014 at 04:18:30
middleground
 Yeah I like the different "Boats" argument the best...

 

RE: Read the link in OP, posted on April 8, 2014 at 04:20:55
middleground
 Nothing can be tested, nothing...

No wonder we find ourselves in a society with a great number of people refusing to get their children vaccinated.

 

RE: All violins sound the same! Moving on ... Nt, posted on April 8, 2014 at 04:23:20
middleground
 All subjectivists sound the same! Moving on...

 

An innocent question, posted on April 8, 2014 at 05:17:35
geoffkait
 Do musicians wear earplugs during performances? Just curious. If not, I think I might have broken the case wide open.

 

Would you pay, posted on April 8, 2014 at 05:41:10
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37666
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 $36 million for this "chicken cup"?

Bowl recently auctioned

 

Threatened? All I know is that it tickles..., posted on April 8, 2014 at 05:57:27
genungo
 ... when your nose is up my ass.

 

I didn't nor will I, posted on April 8, 2014 at 06:25:21
Awe-d-o-file
Dealer

Posts: 21037
Location: 50 miles west of DC
Joined: January 10, 2004
 ET
ET

"If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking till you do suck seed" - Curly Howard 1936

 

RE: Am I misunderstanding this..., posted on April 8, 2014 at 06:32:57
welly
Audiophile

Posts: 1648
Location: QLD
Joined: January 22, 2001
 There is a saying that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit...but frequently the funniest.

Unfortunately, only the first half of this saying is correct in the case of your reply.

The original respondent to my post used cars as an example,so I figured boats wasn't too much of a stretch as an EXAMPLE.


Cheers

Welly
He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife.
- Douglas Adams


 

Yes, that was the definitive paragraph, posted on April 8, 2014 at 06:55:22
rickmcinnis@dogwoodfabrics.com
Audiophile

Posts: 3040
Location: Atlanta
Joined: December 15, 2003
 I know next to nothing about violins but these two articles do illustrate how hard it is to get at the truth (about anything) and how many will latch on to a lame "proof" if it suits their purposes.

Thanks,

 

Well worded, posted on April 8, 2014 at 07:10:29
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37666
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 Julian (as in FVA) would likely have a funny take on this. :)

 

Well, that's convincing. Let's all just anoint you as the ARBITER OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING. , posted on April 8, 2014 at 08:00:34
tinear
Audiophile

Posts: 65782
Location: Kansas City, KS
Joined: April 9, 2006
 Try addressing a criticism head on, MK.
Why do DBT tests NEVER reinforce your position?
Hint: you're wrong.
You remind me of the guys who (shills for oil companies) denounced tobacco testing because none of the tests were perfect.
A damn bit more perfect than pure opinion, of course.

 

RE: Read the link in OP, posted on April 8, 2014 at 08:24:39
Cpk
Audiophile

Posts: 1518
Location: PA
Joined: May 13, 2005
 Nothing can be tested, nothing...

Gee, I guess you've just invalidated my Science degree, I'll send notice to PSU.

And now for something completely different.....

No wonder we find ourselves in a society with a great number of people refusing to get their children vaccinated.

Those people are as stupid as that non sequitur.

 

YES! THANK YOU!, posted on April 8, 2014 at 08:32:26
Jim Austin
 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

 

RE: Not might, will, posted on April 8, 2014 at 08:38:37
Cpk
Audiophile

Posts: 1518
Location: PA
Joined: May 13, 2005
 your example is extraneous.

My GTI outperforms my uncle's 308
A digital Timex is more accurate then a vintage Rolex
$400 technics sp10 circa 1980 crushes the 10x$ VPI it replaced (sorry Mat) both subjectively and objectively

And just for the F1 ref.

Bahrain 2004 fast lap 1:30.252 ten years later 1:37.020

It's like comparing apples to penguins.....

 

RE: Wrong conclusion., posted on April 8, 2014 at 10:00:25
newdreams
Audiophile

Posts: 1897
Location: West Coast
Joined: April 9, 2007
 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)

 

RE: YES! THANK YOU!, posted on April 8, 2014 at 10:08:52
newdreams
Audiophile

Posts: 1897
Location: West Coast
Joined: April 9, 2007
 "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)

 

Blinded by SCIENCE..., posted on April 8, 2014 at 10:10:02
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...I have a degree in science - in a field where DBTs were first designed to be used and I have participated in them professionally.

And you?

I would be happy to debate this with you offline.

Hint: audio DBTs are a parlor trick regardless of your mistaken beliefs.

 

RE: YES! THANK YOU!, posted on April 8, 2014 at 11:44:15
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 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




 

You gotta pay $2000 for a decent acoustic guitars! Let's see that demonstrated in a blind test. LOL nt, posted on April 8, 2014 at 11:47:04
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 .


 

RE: All violins sound the same! Moving on ... Nt, posted on April 8, 2014 at 12:12:35
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 "Moving on..."

Oh yes! Please do!


 

RE: You gotta pay $2000 for a decent acoustic guitars! Let's see that demonstrated in a blind test. LOL nt, posted on April 8, 2014 at 13:15:12
newdreams
Audiophile

Posts: 1897
Location: West Coast
Joined: April 9, 2007
 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)

 

Hear hear! :-)) But ...., posted on April 8, 2014 at 13:25:31
andyr
Manufacturer

Posts: 12551
Location: Melbourne
Joined: September 2, 2000
 I suggest those who love DBTs aren't interested in the "experience of hearing music".


Regards,

Andy

 

So what?, posted on April 8, 2014 at 15:02:49
Frihed89
Audiophile

Posts: 15703
Location: Copenhagen
Joined: March 21, 2005
 I guess it only matters if one is pimping "modern violins".

What is, is.

 

RE: We've talked about this before, posted on April 8, 2014 at 17:41:17
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 12506
Location: Fredericton NB
Joined: June 20, 2000
 You linked to a participant's account of a blind audition done in 2010 in Indianapolis.

The OP linked to a blind audition done in Paris in 2012.

As with speakers, I imagine that in a blind test, many people would be able to tell the difference between the violins, but that was not really tested.

Both tests seem to have been preference tests. Both tests produced data. People seem to draw a lot of conclusions from it.

I suppose many expected the Stradivarius violins to wipe the floor with the others, and that expectation was not supported.

However, there are too many variables to determine why that is. As was pointed out, maybe with a little tweaking which is done regularly by violinist (one of my best friends is a professional violinist), and the strings were different and perhaps no optimized. So with slight adjustments, the results might have been different. With different players, the results might have been different. On a different day, the results might have been different.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser

 

RE: Read the link in OP, posted on April 8, 2014 at 17:48:25
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 12506
Location: Fredericton NB
Joined: June 20, 2000
 Different tests? Details, details to mkuller.

Both tests were preference tests and produced data. However, there are many uncontrolled variables. The test did not support the expectation that Stradivarius sound better, but it does not actually disprove it, either.

-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser

 

RE: YES! THANK YOU!, posted on April 8, 2014 at 20:44:51
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...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.



 

RE: Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments, posted on April 8, 2014 at 22:17:15
c1ferrari
Audiophile

Posts: 640
Location: Southern California
Joined: March 16, 2001
 Haven't perused the posts; however, I wonder whether the violinists can identify differences when the instruments are actually being played by them. The 'feel' of the instrument as it were.

Vbr,
Sam

 

" when the instruments are actually being played by them ", posted on April 9, 2014 at 00:33:02
FenderLover
 I guess you mean in real time. Dunno about violinists, but with guitars you "feel" the instrument more on sustain notes. Bends or vibrato stuff. Held notes. Lots of the time is spent figuring out what chord you are heading to and how to accent it, within the feel of the song.

Fun stuff, really...

8^)

 

RE: Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments, posted on April 9, 2014 at 13:21:28
Ozzie
Audiophile

Posts: 3817
Joined: August 1, 2002
 The subjectivists here seem to be doing their best to tie themselves in knots by shooting down the validity of the test, when in fact people were merely asked which violin would musicians preferred. Isn’t that what anyone’s next hi fi purchase should be about? If it really improves how your rig sounds, buy it. If not, don’t. Or is it really more about faceplates and status among a bunch of geeks looking to be cool? Maybe even myself included.

One guy here inferred that unless something is in perfect tune, people are not able to hear it’s true qualities? Monk always seemed to play out of tune, but got his message through. Ditto for Billie, and Sinatra as he aged. They may have had their flaws, but they got their points across. IMHO, Wynton Marsalis fails to do this. The more someone knows
how something sounds, be it instrument or audio component, the more they should be able to pick it out in a crowd. Even under bad conditions, they should be able to recognize it’s inherent qualities. Even if it is slightly out of tune. And don’t give me that long listening sessions over time bunk. Provided things are up to proper operating temp, within moments people can generally tell if an amp sounds better, or does not. If this is not true, then why are audio shows so good at increasing sales? Do we audio geeks only then trust our short term audio acumen while at shows? Or does the mob rule thing and irrational decision making just take over? I recall one show when they had an all Jadis system, with the Yosemity Sam looking speakers playing. The crowd was in awe. The only thing missing was incense burning. My woman at the time made note how she could hear the sound jump from one driver to another. She voiced her valid opinion out loud. Gasps from the crowd. She was a tad embarrassed, but only one of two objective people in the room.

Blanket statements are often made, but never backed up. For instance, one guy mentioned how a customer of his, that played for the symphony, preferred what he claims to be an inferior set of speakers and sand amp, to what he considers as superior products. He’ll most likely be the
first one to not allow products to be put behind a curtain, and explain the virtues of amp A vs amp B’s. Even after having spent literally months with both. If nothing else, that test that Carver did with his amp vs a highly touted tube amp showed that the differences were so minute, that even a critic just might prefer the sound of his low budget creation over the tube god amp. At least the reviewer at the time was being honest, and dare I say objective in his findings.

Flame on.

 

NO, they could tell the difference. They just liked one of the new ones best, posted on April 9, 2014 at 14:23:59
richardl
Audiophile

Posts: 3555
Joined: September 5, 2002
 read your article again. They heard a difference. They were just surprised that the best violin by their choice was in fact one of the new ones. They did not like the other new ones as much as that one or the older violins.

 

As I have said before, it is very easy to hear the difference in tonality..., posted on April 9, 2014 at 14:59:07
Steve Parry
Audiophile

Posts: 2470
Location: No. California
Joined: August 19, 2002
 between a Yamaha and Steinway piano. They are both in tune. But to believe, for a moment, that nearly everyone would prefer the sound of one over the other is silly. And that is what is crazy about the Strad mystique. The desire for a Strad is not about the sound. The book "Grand Obsession: A Piano Odyssey" is interesting reading. Thinking there is one perfect and best instrument out there is like thinking there is one best stereo system. The quest will keep you busy, but it is a fool's game. Even a Strad, like a stereo, can be "voiced"...

Steve

 

You were being sarcastic, weren't you?, posted on April 10, 2014 at 00:56:35
jusbe
Audiophile

Posts: 5950
Location: North Island
Joined: April 4, 2000
 Otherwise I withdraw my support for your contribution!


Big J

"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."


 

Nicely put., posted on April 11, 2014 at 16:51:03
RC Daniel
Audiophile

Posts: 1922
Location: Brisbane
Joined: November 3, 2002
 >>> 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.

"In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, in the expert's mind there are few." Shunryo Suzuki

 

Page processed in 0.065 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]