|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.219.220.228
Read the link below regarding Stradivarius violins. Then this:http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/13/4/8
Seems that violinists think that they can hear things that can't be measured. While I come down squarely against "obvious" snake oil, I have to believe that the musicians may know whereof they speak. Two anecdotes are of interest: When I was beginning my career as a physicist (long since over) I worked for Kaman Sciences. It was owned by Kaman corporation, a major manufacturer of helicopters. The founder, Charles Kaman was an engineer and guitar aficionado. He decided that his flutter and vibration engineers could surely build as good a guitar as any of the luthiers. He set them about measuring and duplicating the finest acoustic guitars available. The outcome was the the Ovation roundback. Only problem was that they simply couldn't sell them until they paid Glen Campbell to play them on his TV show. Seems that the engineers had done all of their acoustic measurements along an axis perpendicular to the face of the guitar, i.e. of the forward lobe, while the guitarists listen to a sidelobe. What the guitarists heard simply didn't sound right to them.
Second anecdote: Some years ago there was a segment on the CBS evening news about Stradivarius violins vs. new instruments. Featured Samuel Zygmuntowicz and his modern instruments. One of the musicians interviewed was Isaac Stern, who related a story of his "backup" violin, made by Zygmuntowicz. Stern, Izthak Perlman and YoYo Ma were practicing for some upcoming chamber recording..........neither Perlman nor Ma noticed that Stern was not playing his Stradivarius. Stern was then asked if Sam's violin was as good as the Strad. Stern's reply was (to the effect) that "it certainly sounds as good, but we won't know if it is as good until we see how it ages. Another 300 years or so and we will know."
Enjoy
Roger Hill
Follow Ups:
Hi.I happend to possess some audio test CDs produced by the same lab employing same recording gadgets, recordings of the same orchestral music with violin solos using non-Strads & one with a Strad (can't tell its model off my head).
I do hear the sonic of the recording with Strad sound rich & full & more engaging, repeatingly via my humble gears.
c-J
PS: sorry, only sight auditions, no DBTs.
You are right, they do sound better...at least the ones that are in good working order. That being said there are strads and then there are STRADS! Just like everything that is handmade, no two are exactly alike and no two sound exactly alike. I would wager though that they are similar enough that if you came up with a quantitative method to assess them that they would all fall into more or less the same grouping and another violin (like a guarneri) would likewise end up in a separate grouping.
> I would wager though that they are similar enough that if you came up with a quantitative method to assess them that they would all fall into more or less the same grouping <
Well I hope Mr. Stradivari was careful about the instruments that left his shop but perhaps a few "stinkers" made their way out (perhaps a customer they didn't particularly like). After all, they made I believe well over 1000 instruments (as a family) over a quite long career of the maestro. Of course I am sure they were lacking the QC of say, Yamaha but then if they all sounded the same but like crap would you want to play on one?
> if they all sounded the same but like crap would you want to play on one? <I would if I were an objectivist and couldn't measure any difference. Then I'd simply assume they sounded the same, even if they didn't, and I'd be happy with my piece of crap. :)
Hi,Really intersting stuff!
Obviously, two effects happening here.
1) How does the instrument sound to a listener.
2) How does the instrument sound and "feel" to the artist.
That NPR piece (no politics intended) followed a classical guitarist on his search for a new guitar.
At one point, after he had played it, he made a point of having a comrade play it while he went and sat in different parts of the hall to see how it would sound to a listener.
Very interesting guy, and aware of the different ways his instrument could affect both himself and his audience.
I bet it's very similar to the violin story - Isaac Stern may get more internal feedback from playing the Stradivarius than we can by merely listening to it. In turn, this may effect his artistry, which will then, finally, lead to a difference we can appreciate!
Great link, thanks!
"Science has not provided any convincing evidence for the existence . . . of any measurable property that would set the Cremonese instruments apart from the finest violins made by skilled craftsman today."Nor is "science" about to!
First, where's the money in it?
Second, who cares?
Third, they wouldn't know how to do it anyway: look at audio!
"Science has not provided any convincing evidence for the existence . . . of any measurable property that would set the Cremonese instruments apart from the finest violins made by skilled craftsman today.""That's interesting Clark because I have measured Three such instruments with a simple microphone (but good one) into a 1/6th octave spectrum analyzer and LO and behold all three gave a different harmonic spectrum. So at least the output can be seen graphically to be different. Now what I was not able to do was to compare TWO Stradivari violins to see how similar their harmonic spectra are. Unfortunately, I had only one Strad, one Guarneri and one Guad (not from cremona but similar time period...early 1700s). We also didn't have a modern one handy but my guess is that it would also measure quite differently.
My approach to this problem would be as follows:
1)Assemble many examples of several types of violins (the bigger the database the better)
2)Have the same person play each one with a single note or two and collect a high resolution harmonic spectrum.
3) Repeat this with each violin several times to account for slight variations due to how the instrument is being played.
4) Analyze the spectra using PCA (principle component analysis), cluster analysis and/or a neural network algorithm. These are computational tools for taking complex data sets and finding distinctive features in them. An example of what these tools can do would be to determine what region in the world marijuana is grown based on GCMS (gas chromatography mass spectrometry) of extracts from various known plants and then classifying an unknown.
5) Classify instruments based on these results (ie. new, old, cremona etc.)
6) Bring in a new instrument and an old one that were not part of the "training" sets.
7) See if the computer can correctly determine if it is "old" or "new" or if it can perhaps determine the make (this would require a pretty large database).8) Use the database and computational tools in conjunction with violin makers to make modern violins that result in spectra that mimic classic old violins. Run the new spectra through the tools to see if the new violin matches "new" or "old". Repeat until satisfied.
neither of your anacdotes supports your contention that musicians hear things that can't be measured. In the first instance, you even prescribed the correct measurement: Measure the instrument's response both perpendicular to the f-hole and a couple of feet from the side of the instrument.In the second case, you also gave a partial solution: We're comparing an aged instrument with a brand new one. I have little doubt that the Strad and the new instrument would measure different. And I would hypothesize that every Strad would have a unique signature, as well.
As a trained physicist, I would hope that your approach would be that while it is possible that musicians (and others) can hear things we can't yet measure, we need to work on determining what those things are so that we CAN measure them.
merely the observation that some of the discussions in the world of musicians are very similar to those that go on here.All I tried to illustrate is that musicians feel the same way that many audiophiles do about sound and audibility of certain, as yet, undefined qualities. If you read the Physicsweb article, you would have noted that a physicist commented that we don't yet know what to measure. Where have you heard that? And the articles stated exactly what you said, not all Strads are created equal. I just found it interesting that considerations similar to those discussed here are also common to the world of performers. The Ovation anecdote illustrates (to me) that even "off the street" guitar players may hear a deficiency. The Stern anecdote illustrates to me that some modern luthiers may provide a product which, in the right hands, may produce musical sounds that include all of those undefined qualities that the highest levels of violinists find desirable. And, I have no reason to believe that they cannot hear those differences when they say that they can. Neither, in and of itself, proves anything except that they are of enough interest to me to post them. If things that interest me are not of interest to you, fine, don't bother reading any more of my posts.
I just do not appreciate someone being critical of me, my approach as a physicist, my "partial" solutions, etc. when all I offered was some interesting links, and some information from personal experiences. Certainly no conclusions, only the statement that I have no reason to believe that violinists at the highest levels can't hear the difference in various violins. Criticizing my approach as a physicist is coping an attitude that I don't choose to bother with. If you want to criticize someone's approach to physics based on their offering of some interesting reading, don't bother reading my posts.
a
> The outcome was the the Ovation roundback....What the guitarists heard simply didn't sound right to them. <While the Ovation projects nicely which makes it a recording engineers dream, they just don't sound as full as an old Martin or Gibson. I would imagine that from a measurement standpoint, Mr Kamen was trying to accomplish both feats i.e have a guitar that projected like the old D'angelico's and had a full sound like the old Martins. The problem (for me, anyway) is that the Ovation compromised both designs. A lot of people swear by them, however. I don't think they are "bad" guitars - I just prefer others. If someone records a lot or plays in a loud venue (rock concert) they cut through the sound like no other. On one notable occasion, I played in an acoustic guitar duo setting and the other guy played an Ovation. It was sort of like some old blues guy with a Fender Stratocaster (say, Hubert Sumlin) jamming with BB King, the latter playing his more full-voiced Gibson ES-355. Different sound, both a matter of taste.
Hello Kerr,Are you now criticising my Ovation Celebrity Deluxe? Damn first it was the objectivists attacking my Mastersound and now you're attacking my Ovation???? I just can't win.... :^ D Ok who's going to start criticing my wife? < < < < said tongue-in-cheek.
Still cannot wait for you to visit Ovation er, I mean Orlando, Fla sometime.
> Are you now criticising my Ovation Celebrity Deluxe? <Not at all. Like some audio gear, it's fine but just not for me. I should instead say "it's just not my sound".
> Ok who's going to start criticing my wife? <
Nobody. She's gotta be a saint to live with you! Kidding...kidding! And if you're going to hit me for that crack, I'm NEVER coming to Orlando. LOL! Funny thing is, my kids were just there last week with their mother. Mom got the 2 week timeshare in the divorce. We both made out like bandits - I got rid of her and she got the vacation condo AND got rid of me! :)
Truth to tell, I want to get down to Orlando anyway so I can go hear Sam Rivers play again before he gets too old to blow. Probably November. I'll let you know. Looking forward to hearing the Mastersound.
Hi Buddy,Trust me you're 100% correct she is a saint to live with me. As far as the Ovation goes I'm giving it to my son-in-law anyway. I'll be looking forward to meeting you in November then...
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: