7 ms·

I suspect there was a period when the older ones were better, even if this was mostly a matter of taste and survivorship bias. Bad violins and bad violin makers

by glenra 9y ago

I suspect there was a period when the older ones were better, even if this was mostly a matter of taste and survivorship bias. Bad violins and bad violin makers are forgotten to history while the very best ones (as judged by the very best players and orchestras) gradually gained stature and people exposed to those instruments decided the way they happened to sound was how fine violins are supposed to sound. The trouble is, new violins kept getting better. A more interesting question might be when the quality of the new ones surpassed that of the older ones. I'd like to see a blind test rating that included new violins from 1990, 2000, 2010... Was there one particular step-change in quality that made a big difference, or was it just lots of mundane little changes?

Consultant32452 9y ago
I'd be surprised if there was ever a period where blind testers could tell the difference. This stuff is right up there with wine tasting.
- Libturd 9y ago
  holy shit you're dumb, kid.
- rabbadabba_00 9y ago
  This isn't meant to be elitist or condescending in any way, but whenever I hear this comment it makes me sad. It makes me sad because it means the commenter has never had a truly good bottle of wine. Most wine isn't that good actually. There is wide range of price / marketing / effort where the chances of getting a really enjoyable bottle of wine is more luck than anything. But if you go towards the top of the market, there is a profound difference in quality. If you ever want to know the truth, go buy a bottle of JL Chave Hermitage (the Syrah). There are some truly legendary vintages of this wine but in my experience you can pick any vintage and be blown away. You can probably find it for as low as $2XX. I don't want to dox myself here, otherwise I'd offer to pick up the bill if the experience didn't change your mind. Taste that wine and you'll know. It's an expensive habit and I rarely indulge myself, but "fine wine" is a real, if very rare, thing.
  - bsder 9y ago
    > But if you go towards the top of the market, there is a profound difference in quality. Define "quality". Wine taste, like most food, is both very subjective and very personalized. I dislike most wines. Price doesn't matter. However, there are specific wines that I like very very much--if you put a right-bank wine in front of me, I'm probably going to like it--price also doesn't seem to matter unless it's very cheap. What I would suggest to the original poster is that if you don't like a lot of wines, find a high-end wine tasting and go--the goal is simply to try to decrease your probability of encountering an actually bad wine. Try the different wines, and try to isolate which ones you like more and which ones you like less even if you dislike them all. Then you can go talk to the sommelier/buyer and give him some parameters in which to help you search. Otherwise, "Find me a wine I like" is much like "My computer is broken. Fix it."--if you don't give someone any information to work with, they can't do anything to help you.
    - TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
      Here’s a nice summary of some studies: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-ta...
      - bsder 9y ago
        There is a big difference between being consistent with "This wine has a 92 rating and notes of <foo>, <bar>, <baz>" and "I don't like wines from syrah grapes." What's a "92 rating" even supposed mean? From food: What good is a "92 rating" on a Peking Duck dish, for example, if you don't like duck? The big problem is that "wine rating" has no relevance to me, the buyer, as to whether or not I'm going to like a wine. It took me years to figure out what the commonality was between wines I liked. If the wine industry figure out how to fix that, they'd probably sell a lot more wine. Or, maybe they wouldn't, lots of areas already seem to produce wines that lots of people like for very reasonable prices.
    - kmonsen 9y ago
      Wine, at least to me and more with some grapes then others, tastes much better if stored for a few years in barrels. This is expensive and drives up the price a bit. But it is not the only thing that fine up the price so just because the price is higher doesn't mean it will be better.
- kurthr 9y ago
  Well, if it's at all like wine tasting then I have to suspect a significant group of people can tell the difference. It's just not me. With wine tasting I agree that 90%+ can't detect most differences, but there are plenty of people who could accurately guess varietals, often regions (because they grow their grapes and make their wine differently), and certainly age (because oak and oxidation have very obvious effects). Whenever I hear that someone couldn't tell the difference between red wine and died white wine I have to laugh... it's not that I could really tell you what exact type of white some thing was, but that the wine making styles (even fermentation yeast) are so different along with the use of oak and lack of tannins that it's hilarious to make the mistake. On the other hand, cheap bad wine could taste like any damn thing other than (probably) good wine. Have I blind tasted? Yes, and I couldn't tell you the dollar value of wine between $10-100 because people will charge what the market will bear. However, if you can't taste the difference between a decent Red Burgundy, California Zinfandel, and a Merlot-Cab or between a decent Chablis and a Sav Blanc then you probably just don't care. They smell very different, have different acidity and sugar levels, bitterness, oak vanillins... In a blind test I've seen 8/10 amateurs get every one of 4 wine varietals correct (the others were 2/4) based on a short description, which is well beyond chance.
  - jonnybgood 9y ago
    The differences to kinds of wines is not what’s being referred to. As you’ve also stated, the claim is that there’s no difference in the dollar value. A $10 Pinot is no different than a $100 Pinot. So, it’s just like the Strads.
    - kmonsen 9y ago
      This is not true, at least a$10 and $50 Chianti is very easy to taste the difference since the more expensive is stored longer and much 'easier' to drink. I'm not sure about a $50 and a $150.
      - lazerpants 9y ago
        Usually the difference from $50 to $150+ has a lot to do with aging too. You're essentially paying someone to store a high priced item for you for [x] years in appropriate conditions. Depending on your tastes and the wine it can be a huge difference whether or not its worth it. There are also some pretty big differences in agricultural techniques applied to different wineries. The first growth Bordeaux guys are employing experienced growers at the top of their fields to consider things like harvest time, planting conditions, soil maintenance, etc., these costs do get passed along.
- autokad 9y ago
  one key thing to keep in mind is that blind tests aren't the end all and be all. remember coke kept finding that people who drank coke preferred pepsi in a blind taste test. It turned out because Pepsi was sweater, but people's enjoyment of a beverage goes further than just sitting down taking a few sips of a drink. Relying on data like that lead to one of the greatest follys in business history: New Coke. Many people when put on the spot get it wrong what they like, as they often focus on something very trivial. In coke, it was sweetness, and in these violins, loudness. To me, its evidence the new ones sound better, but its not definitive.
- glenra 9y ago
  > I'd be surprised if there was ever a period where blind testers could tell the difference. If you read the study which OP summarizes, it claims to show that blind testers NOW definitely CAN tell the difference. The best "new" violins of today are better than old strads, where "better" is defined as any of: (1) objectively produces more sound volume for a given level of bow pressure as measured via a db meter at a specific location (2) subjectively "projects better" (either alone or against an orchestra) as judged by listeners (3) "is preferred" as judged by listeners. The people judging in the tests for (2) and (3) have included the performers themselves, skilled listeners, and unskilled interested observers. The results seem to be really consistent - most listeners unambiguously judge the newer instruments better. So no, it's not like wine tasting. At least, not anymore.
leggomylibro 9y ago
You can see the same sort of thing with other instruments of creative professions, too. Like, look at machine tools. Modern lathes are made tough, well, and often with features like CNC attachments. But the 'old iron' behemoths produced by South Bend in the 1920s are also still running and performing precise work day-in, day-out. They'll probably continue to do so for a very long time, and they'll still blow a modern introductory benchtop model out of the water. Is it really that the old models were in some way 'perfect', or is it just that we tend to be impressed by bespoke works which continue to perform outstandingly over the ravages of time? Maybe it appeals to a sense that we could someday overcome the transience of our possessions. I guess that's sort of an existentially futile goal to chase, but it would be nice in the context of things like batteries and plastic junk.
ams6110 9y ago
> new violins keep getting better Indeed -- https://luisandclark.com/ https://luisandclark.com/ I was wondering if anyone was making them out of carbon-fiber these days, and yes they are!

by glenra 9y ago

Consultant32452 9y ago

I'd be surprised if there was ever a period where blind testers could tell the difference. This stuff is right up there with wine tasting.

Libturd 9y ago
holy shit you're dumb, kid.
rabbadabba_00 9y ago
This isn't meant to be elitist or condescending in any way, but whenever I hear this comment it makes me sad. It makes me sad because it means the commenter has never had a truly good bottle of wine. Most wine isn't that good actually. There is wide range of price / marketing / effort where the chances of getting a really enjoyable bottle of wine is more luck than anything. But if you go towards the top of the market, there is a profound difference in quality. If you ever want to know the truth, go buy a bottle of JL Chave Hermitage (the Syrah). There are some truly legendary vintages of this wine but in my experience you can pick any vintage and be blown away. You can probably find it for as low as $2XX. I don't want to dox myself here, otherwise I'd offer to pick up the bill if the experience didn't change your mind. Taste that wine and you'll know. It's an expensive habit and I rarely indulge myself, but "fine wine" is a real, if very rare, thing.
- bsder 9y ago
  > But if you go towards the top of the market, there is a profound difference in quality. Define "quality". Wine taste, like most food, is both very subjective and very personalized. I dislike most wines. Price doesn't matter. However, there are specific wines that I like very very much--if you put a right-bank wine in front of me, I'm probably going to like it--price also doesn't seem to matter unless it's very cheap. What I would suggest to the original poster is that if you don't like a lot of wines, find a high-end wine tasting and go--the goal is simply to try to decrease your probability of encountering an actually bad wine. Try the different wines, and try to isolate which ones you like more and which ones you like less even if you dislike them all. Then you can go talk to the sommelier/buyer and give him some parameters in which to help you search. Otherwise, "Find me a wine I like" is much like "My computer is broken. Fix it."--if you don't give someone any information to work with, they can't do anything to help you.
  - TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
    Here’s a nice summary of some studies: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-tasting-junk-science-analysis https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/jun/23/wine-ta...
    - bsder 9y ago
      There is a big difference between being consistent with "This wine has a 92 rating and notes of <foo>, <bar>, <baz>" and "I don't like wines from syrah grapes." What's a "92 rating" even supposed mean? From food: What good is a "92 rating" on a Peking Duck dish, for example, if you don't like duck? The big problem is that "wine rating" has no relevance to me, the buyer, as to whether or not I'm going to like a wine. It took me years to figure out what the commonality was between wines I liked. If the wine industry figure out how to fix that, they'd probably sell a lot more wine. Or, maybe they wouldn't, lots of areas already seem to produce wines that lots of people like for very reasonable prices.
  - kmonsen 9y ago
    Wine, at least to me and more with some grapes then others, tastes much better if stored for a few years in barrels. This is expensive and drives up the price a bit. But it is not the only thing that fine up the price so just because the price is higher doesn't mean it will be better.
kurthr 9y ago
Well, if it's at all like wine tasting then I have to suspect a significant group of people can tell the difference. It's just not me. With wine tasting I agree that 90%+ can't detect most differences, but there are plenty of people who could accurately guess varietals, often regions (because they grow their grapes and make their wine differently), and certainly age (because oak and oxidation have very obvious effects). Whenever I hear that someone couldn't tell the difference between red wine and died white wine I have to laugh... it's not that I could really tell you what exact type of white some thing was, but that the wine making styles (even fermentation yeast) are so different along with the use of oak and lack of tannins that it's hilarious to make the mistake. On the other hand, cheap bad wine could taste like any damn thing other than (probably) good wine. Have I blind tasted? Yes, and I couldn't tell you the dollar value of wine between $10-100 because people will charge what the market will bear. However, if you can't taste the difference between a decent Red Burgundy, California Zinfandel, and a Merlot-Cab or between a decent Chablis and a Sav Blanc then you probably just don't care. They smell very different, have different acidity and sugar levels, bitterness, oak vanillins... In a blind test I've seen 8/10 amateurs get every one of 4 wine varietals correct (the others were 2/4) based on a short description, which is well beyond chance.
- jonnybgood 9y ago
  The differences to kinds of wines is not what’s being referred to. As you’ve also stated, the claim is that there’s no difference in the dollar value. A $10 Pinot is no different than a $100 Pinot. So, it’s just like the Strads.
  - kmonsen 9y ago
    This is not true, at least a$10 and $50 Chianti is very easy to taste the difference since the more expensive is stored longer and much 'easier' to drink. I'm not sure about a $50 and a $150.
    - lazerpants 9y ago
      Usually the difference from $50 to $150+ has a lot to do with aging too. You're essentially paying someone to store a high priced item for you for [x] years in appropriate conditions. Depending on your tastes and the wine it can be a huge difference whether or not its worth it. There are also some pretty big differences in agricultural techniques applied to different wineries. The first growth Bordeaux guys are employing experienced growers at the top of their fields to consider things like harvest time, planting conditions, soil maintenance, etc., these costs do get passed along.
autokad 9y ago
one key thing to keep in mind is that blind tests aren't the end all and be all. remember coke kept finding that people who drank coke preferred pepsi in a blind taste test. It turned out because Pepsi was sweater, but people's enjoyment of a beverage goes further than just sitting down taking a few sips of a drink. Relying on data like that lead to one of the greatest follys in business history: New Coke. Many people when put on the spot get it wrong what they like, as they often focus on something very trivial. In coke, it was sweetness, and in these violins, loudness. To me, its evidence the new ones sound better, but its not definitive.
glenra 9y ago
> I'd be surprised if there was ever a period where blind testers could tell the difference. If you read the study which OP summarizes, it claims to show that blind testers NOW definitely CAN tell the difference. The best "new" violins of today are better than old strads, where "better" is defined as any of: (1) objectively produces more sound volume for a given level of bow pressure as measured via a db meter at a specific location (2) subjectively "projects better" (either alone or against an orchestra) as judged by listeners (3) "is preferred" as judged by listeners. The people judging in the tests for (2) and (3) have included the performers themselves, skilled listeners, and unskilled interested observers. The results seem to be really consistent - most listeners unambiguously judge the newer instruments better. So no, it's not like wine tasting. At least, not anymore.

leggomylibro 9y ago

You can see the same sort of thing with other instruments of creative professions, too. Like, look at machine tools. Modern lathes are made tough, well, and often with features like CNC attachments. But the 'old iron' behemoths produced by South Bend in the 1920s are also still running and performing precise work day-in, day-out. They'll probably continue to do so for a very long time, and they'll still blow a modern introductory benchtop model out of the water. Is it really that the old models were in some way 'perfect', or is it just that we tend to be impressed by bespoke works which continue to perform outstandingly over the ravages of time? Maybe it appeals to a sense that we could someday overcome the transience of our possessions. I guess that's sort of an existentially futile goal to chase, but it would be nice in the context of things like batteries and plastic junk.

ams6110 9y ago

> new violins keep getting better Indeed -- https://luisandclark.com/ https://luisandclark.com/ I was wondering if anyone was making them out of carbon-fiber these days, and yes they are!