Interesting bilind testing of Stradivarius Violin

Like any other listening test. Totally subjective!

It's a bit of a Strawman argument, this whole thing with the Stradavarius, you know assuming from the get go that musicians have infallible ears. You know, I wouldn't be surprised at all if most of them were deaf, quite frankly.

I don't think this will be the longest thread - for those who agree with the conclusions there's little to be gained by posting affirmation, and for those who are in any way offended by the underlying assumptions....well we know how they feel about this.
But, really it's all pretty harmless: should you actually hear with your eyes and/or wallet, whom are you harming? And if it gives you pleasure, likewise. I drink cheap wine (but expensive whiskey), drive a cheap car, and use very inexpensive cables. My audio system sounds pretty fabulous, Scotch imbibed or not, and I feel no real need to convince others of its qualities.
The 'debate' that the Strad article refers to is ultimately made of straw: the Romantics will never convince the Realists, and vice versa. We know just who we are, and argument is futile. One might just as well try to convince Byron to become an accountant....
But all great fun to read!

"05-19-14: Rodman99999
Like any other listening test. Totally subjective!"

Not true.

These stories are so tiresome. Every few years the same "test"
is conducted; with the same or similar problems of methodology and biases
that render the results nothing more than bullshit. First of all, it should be
noted that there are, in fact, fine modern instruments, but any experienced
player knows that the very special qualities that make some of these old
(Strad) instruments special cannot be revealed in a minutes-long playing
session; they also require very careful set-up. The link below is a rebuttal
by a truly first-class player to a similar "test" done a couple of
years before this latest one, and his comments expound on the above
points.

Let's look at the problems with this particular "test":

Did anyone notice that Joseph Curtain the "researcher" is a
modern instrument maker? Conflict of interest perhaps?

The article mentions that the players who participated in the test were
competitors in an international competition. Why is the competition not
named? Who are these players? Do you know how many competitors in
many of these competitions are nothing more than young, inexperienced,
and often mediocre players?

Who the hell is John Soloninka, the only player named; and quoted? I
never heard of him, so I poked around. The only reference I could find is in
a personal profile in which he is described as "an advanced
amateur"....Uh huh. And guess what his other career is: luthier.
Interesting, no?

In a different article about the same "test", Joseph Curtain
seeks to gain credibility by claiming to have made instruments for players
such as YoYo Ma. Well, that may be true; players have many instruments
for different occasions. But, guess what YoYo plays on when he gives
recitals or solo performances?: his 1712 Davidoff. Perhaps the Curtain is
saved for those outdoor gigs on days with possible rain showers.

me-with-science/>http://www.insidethearts.com/nondivisi/they-blinded-me-
with-science/