4 ms·

These studies are flawed in ways that every experienced musician recognizes they are: context. It's _common_ that instruments that sound amazing in a solo cont

by casion 6y ago

These studies are flawed in ways that every experienced musician recognizes they are: context. It's _common_ that instruments that sound amazing in a solo context will sound poor in a larger ensemble, or might sound great in one ensemble but not another. Personal context factors in: how does it feel, how stable is the neck, is it work in commonly stressed spots (usually good), is the design kind to your habits, etc... Business context: prestige, visual impact, lineage, historical accuracy, marketability etc... I could go on, but I don't think it's controversial to say that an instrument's sonic qualities alone, in a solo context, are NOT what drives value. I know that, as of this comment, nobody has made the claim or implied it yet, but it's important not to draw conclusions about one instrument being better than another based on studies like this. Imagine if someone went around comparing generics syntax across languages to 'experts and laypeople', and the comments filled with praise for the scrappy underdog. I think the average HN commenter would spot the BS right away. For music though? It's simply not what music is about.

tyleo 6y ago
I don’t know if I understand your point about generics syntax and a scrappy underdog. Are you trying to imply that a group of experts is better than the group of experts and laypeople at judging things? If so, I’m not sure that’s true.
- casion 6y ago
  No, I'm saying that generics syntax doesn't express the value of a language.
TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
Stradivarius violins are invariably played and sometimes owned by soloists, who either literally play solo, lead a concerto, or occasionally play with a pianist or as part of a small ensemble. First violin in an orchestra will usually have a more modest instrument. Edit to add: of course there's a lot of Veblenisation in music, and this gets silly when people who are really collectors try to do music and end up being just a more extreme kind of consumer. Hifi, guitars, synthesizers, and recording equipment are full of this - plenty of moderately wealthy doctors, lawyers, financiers and such of low-to-average talent buying vintage or custom signature whatevers and displaying them proudly on social media. But there are also professionals who are super-sensitive to tone and expression and have a (literal) track record of making choices that audiences respond to. Some of them have impressive collections too, but they're able to justify them for specific creative ends. The difference is that if you take an expert and give them an average instrument they'll do miracles with it. If you take a collector and give them a room full of classics they'll produce mediocre mush. But give an expert the classics and they'll wring an extra level of musical credibility and interest out of them. That zone is out of reach of the collectors, but audiences still appreciate it and pay for it when they hear it.
- casion 6y ago
  I find your response somewhat strange. I'm saying that context matters, and your response is that... context matters? It would appear that I'm being misread to defend a specific instrument. I'm saying that there's more value to an instrument than simply a 1:n listening test. That goes for ANY instrument. Regarding people spending money on things they can't fully use (or sometimes appreciate), of course. That happens with everything.
  - im3w1l 6y ago
    I think he is saying that they are used by soloists which is also how they are compared. So the context is the same. Before going on a huge (but interesting) tangent.
    - casion 6y ago
      Sure, but thats not the only contingent of context. Location, piece, player, specific instrument, time of year etc... I'm in no way saying that this means a specific instrument is better, but specifically that we can't draw that conclusion from these types of studies. (I understand that you're not the parent, but it's still an interesting discussion)

by casion 6y ago

tyleo 6y ago

I don’t know if I understand your point about generics syntax and a scrappy underdog. Are you trying to imply that a group of experts is better than the group of experts and laypeople at judging things? If so, I’m not sure that’s true.

casion 6y ago
No, I'm saying that generics syntax doesn't express the value of a language.

TheOtherHobbes 6y ago

Stradivarius violins are invariably played and sometimes owned by soloists, who either literally play solo, lead a concerto, or occasionally play with a pianist or as part of a small ensemble. First violin in an orchestra will usually have a more modest instrument. Edit to add: of course there's a lot of Veblenisation in music, and this gets silly when people who are really collectors try to do music and end up being just a more extreme kind of consumer. Hifi, guitars, synthesizers, and recording equipment are full of this - plenty of moderately wealthy doctors, lawyers, financiers and such of low-to-average talent buying vintage or custom signature whatevers and displaying them proudly on social media. But there are also professionals who are super-sensitive to tone and expression and have a (literal) track record of making choices that audiences respond to. Some of them have impressive collections too, but they're able to justify them for specific creative ends. The difference is that if you take an expert and give them an average instrument they'll do miracles with it. If you take a collector and give them a room full of classics they'll produce mediocre mush. But give an expert the classics and they'll wring an extra level of musical credibility and interest out of them. That zone is out of reach of the collectors, but audiences still appreciate it and pay for it when they hear it.

casion 6y ago
I find your response somewhat strange. I'm saying that context matters, and your response is that... context matters? It would appear that I'm being misread to defend a specific instrument. I'm saying that there's more value to an instrument than simply a 1:n listening test. That goes for ANY instrument. Regarding people spending money on things they can't fully use (or sometimes appreciate), of course. That happens with everything.
- im3w1l 6y ago
  I think he is saying that they are used by soloists which is also how they are compared. So the context is the same. Before going on a huge (but interesting) tangent.
  - casion 6y ago
    Sure, but thats not the only contingent of context. Location, piece, player, specific instrument, time of year etc... I'm in no way saying that this means a specific instrument is better, but specifically that we can't draw that conclusion from these types of studies. (I understand that you're not the parent, but it's still an interesting discussion)