2. analog
  3. 129764-1647

Audiophiles are not alone

In the current (May 13th-19th, 2017) edition of the Economist there is a short piece entitled "Violins" that I want to bring to your attention.  It is about new violins and old violins, specifically Cremonese (Guarneri, Stradivari, Amati) vs. Joseph Curtin (modern violin maker in Michigan).  With Dr. Claudia Fritz of the University of Paris, presiding, experiments were held in Paris and New York that proved to the majority of both musicians and listeners (other musicians, critics, composers etc.) that new fiddles out performed old ones.  There were some sort of goggles used so that the players could not tell what instrument they were playing.  The audience was also prevented from seeing the instruments somehow.  All this done without inhibiting sound transmission.  Both solo and orchestrated works were performed.  You can read the whole story in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.  And this is only the latest evidence of this apparent reality, as according to the article, similar experiments have reached similar conclusions prior to this.  The article concluded with the observation that these results notwithstanding, world class players are not about to give up their preference for their Cremonese fiddles.

This reminds me very much of some of our dilemmas and debates such as the ever popular: analog vs. digital, tube vs. transistor, and subjective listening vs. measured performance parameters.  If it has taken a couple of hundred years and counting for the debate on fiddles to remain unresolved, what hope have we to ever reach resolutions to some of our most cherished and strongly held preferences?  This is asked while hugging my turntables and tube electronics.
billstevenson
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @frogman : """  tests and in the reporting of the methadology and results there are other issues that are often not reported.... """

other that the players that were in all those tests no one can say what you posted. You are only assuming that with out any single prove other that your words that for me in this case has a little minor level that the ones coming from the players/soloists.

For your post is clear you are " biased " through what you name " magic ".

Results says other things and NO a kind of tests like this can't be takes months or weeks to do it because is a double-blind test where those players just do not know which violin are playing. Even the tests were with ligth at very low shine effect to impede identification.

I respect your opinion but mine is diferent, You say that " mood " moment in a player does not affects the player performance, well that's what you said where I think that some way or the other it affects. You can't prove your opinion only because you are a violin player. No, I can't prove my opinion neither.

There are other similar tests in that site and I choose this one because in my opinion was the more complete that under the tests scenario conditions exist no " magic " but preference for the new instruments with no-biased soloists/players.

Have you many doubts about?, ask them through the tests leaders. These people seems/look to me are non-biased through the new or old instruments. Why should them be that way? and I'm refering to the National Academy of Sciences USA.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

@lewm : hard data?  which one are you looking for?, come  on.
rcprince
3,083 posts
 
Schubert, the Guarneri del Jesu that I did the deal on had previously been owned by a man who sold it to a dealer because it had too big a sound for the string quartet in which he played--he needed an instrument that would blend better with those of his compatriots.  I had a similar experience hearing Sarah Chang play the Bach concerto for two violins with a smaller local orchestra, her violin (also a Guarneri del Jesu) made the concertmaster's (the other soloist) violin sound weak and anemic in comparison, though it too was a fine instrument.
schubert
7,386 posts
 
rcprince, I have heard that more than once.
In my case the other players were not drowned out at all, her husband, a Dane, played a fine Steinway, her sister, the the cello player and another Korean tiger, had a great sound as well. I think I was just closer to the violinist .
It must be something in the water in Korea , we have 3-4 Korean players
in our world-class St. Paul CO and they are beyond good.
Gil the Great played the Mendelssohn here and as soon as it ended he made a bee-line straight to the Korean violist and shook her hand like crazy .

I did have a similar thing happen a few years ago down in Rochester(MN) with local talent playing Brahms .
All the Quartet players were up to it but the cello played has such a fine instrument it made the whole very hard to listen to . Talked to her for a minute after, didn't ask about the instrument. but learned she was a Eastman grad, turned Doc at Mayo .

Post removed 
frogman
7,509 posts
 
Raul, I am not a violinist; but, that is not important.  What is important is that, from my vantage point, you seem to be choosing to argue points that are not really the key points here.  No time right now to address some of your retorts, and frankly I'm not sure that it would be productive to do so.  In the meantime, and the reason that I wonder if it would be productive is, for starters. that there is such a wide gap in our respective understanding of what "the magic" means IN THIS CONTEXT.  Regards.
More to discover