except that sometimes they might be fooling themselves about the sound
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25371-pro-violinists-fail-to-spot-stradivarius-in-blind-test/
When does art become science?
- Thread starter Gregadd
- Start date
except that sometimes they might be fooling themselves about the sound
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25371-pro-violinists-fail-to-spot-stradivarius-in-blind-test/
except that a master tuner at Steinway can always pick out his piano when he hears it.
There are givens to this scenario:
1) Not every violinist is intimately familiar with the sound of a particular Stradivarius violin, and not all samples sound the same.
2) A master tuner from Steinway is intimately familiar with the way he tunes a piano. Each one carries his signature.
3) Being able to play a violin, or tune a piano, does not in and of itself guarantee that one has perfect hearing. We don't question Beethoven's genius, but his greatest work was composed when he was deaf.
Last edited:
Any idea how the experiment was done? A Harman-style piano shuffler behind a curtain?
Once again they assume the null hypothesis from an inconclusive result. Maybe it will help then sell me more violins. In order tell the difference you have to know what a the instruments tonal quality is. I keep repeating this . Just putting out a bunch of violins to pick your favorite amounts to little more than a popularity contest. I am not saying a fair contest could not be designed or that I know what the results would be. There was no indication that any of the participants had a prior expereince with a Stradivarius.
If you get my point. The author of the study is totally satisified with hte ability of the participants ability to select the new violins. Apparently those violins can be identified and the participants made an excellent choice.:b
Having said all that I would imagine there is a tremendous snob appeal associated with owning such a violin.
It’s unlikely to be the final word. Joseph Nagyvary, a professor emeritus at Texas A&M University in College Station who studies the chemistry of violins, isn’t convinced. He says that players need to play a violin for weeks to evaluate it fully, and that the study did not take into account that Stradivariuses vary in tone. “Experts know well that the 600 or so extant Strads vary vastly in their tone quality due to their playing and preservation history,” says Nagyvary, who is also a maker of modern-day recreations of Stradivarius and Guarnerius violins.
However, Giora Schmidt, one of the musicians who took part in the study, says he doesn’t believe it was biased. “One can argue that the old instruments selected were intentionally ‘weaker’ than the new ones chosen, or that the new instruments were set up optimally versus the old, which were ‘tired’,” he says. “But I think these are elements that players face each time they walk into a violin shop.”
Fritz says some soloists were frustrated that they did not get to see the violins at the end of the study, and were surprised to learn that their favourite violins were new ones.
Journal reference: PNAS, DOI: 10.1073
Moreover what wad the question asked, Identify the Strad or other vintage violin or Pick ypur favorute?
No, I am pointing out that "Experts know well that..." is not in any way a statement worthy of science. If there was real research backing up his claim he could have said "Research has shown that..." or similar. His statement is just the same as "Everyone knows that...".
It is no more than argumentum ad populum. If you can't cite any research to back up your claim, it is not worthy of being called science.
Everyone knows if you step off the edge of that building you will plummet to your death. We do not need to consult Sir Issac Newton on that one.(Smile) Certain scientific truths are self-evident. I suppose as an expert in the field he could prove that if necessary. Or he maybe already provided the proof. Who knows what else he said in that interview.
Argumentum ad populum-I continue to learn things from you guys Did you know there was such a thing as the "Skeptics Dictionary."
Last edited:
The way it looks to me is that some research suggests that the supposed self-evident difference between the sound of violins could be a myth. It is also entirely possible that another researcher's entire career could be founded upon a non-existent difference (but which he thought was a self-evident huge difference "All the experts know...").
But perhaps this goes back to what I said a few posts ago: science cannot (or should not be) concerned with aesthetic judgement. Investigating the "chemistry of violins" could be an interesting hobby for someone, or a commercial venture, but is not 'proper' science because ultimately its results cannot be validated objectively. Sure, the chemical composition of the varnish can be analysed and the waveform from bowing the string can be measured, but what does that prove? There is no way to say what makes one violin better than another without a person giving a subjective opinion, therefore the science goes out of the window.
Well if you are hell bent on proof you coulld always jump, However that make st would make it difficult to participate in the subsequent discussion. OTOH from a marketing perspective you want to sell violins. That is difficult to do if everyone wants a Strad. In order to to compete you need to knock the Strad of its perch.This a certainly a good place to start.
Stradivarius Violins Aren't Better than new Ones:Round 2 Ed Yong
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic...violins-arent-better-than-new-ones-round-two/
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic...violins-arent-better-than-new-ones-round-two/
http://www.npr.org/sections/decepti...uble-blind-violin-test-can-you-pick-the-strad
Double -Blind Test: Can You pick The Strad?
Double -Blind Test: Can You pick The Strad?
You have to show that the test was rigged to generate the sales results one wanted in blind tests. Do you know how that was accomplished?
I don't agree with your premise. It does not have to be rigged, just inconclusive as this one is. Teresa Goodwin is right. That means the buyer makes his own choice. Let Madison Avenue work its magic.
To answer your question though I have no proof it was rigged. Predisposed, maybe.Biased, maybe. As far as I was able to determine she is a researcher . What I assume is the acknowledged sponsor runs violin player and builder competitions.
"This experiment was made possible by the generosity and open-mindedness of Glen Kwok of the IVCI, our 21 subjects, and the owners and makers of the test violins. We are grateful also to Yung Chin, and to Gabriel Weinreich for his helpful suggestions We thank two anonymous reviewers for their detailed and constructive comments."From the Claudia Fritz websitehttp://www.lam.jussieu.fr/Membres/Fritz/HomePage/Indianapolis_pa
Similar threads
