18 ms·

What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

177 points by yonibot 13y ago

parfe 13y ago
From the study's abstract: Differences in taste among individual players, along with differences in playing qualities among individual instruments, appear more important than any general differences between new and old violins. Another case of science reporting failing miserably at understanding and conveying the results of studies. The three articles all come up short at even reading the abstract: Daily Mail "Concert violinists can't identify the sound of a multi-million-pound Stradivarius" Phys.org "Study shows even professional musicians can't tell old master violins from new" Npr.org - Doesn't even come close to the same universe as the study in the submitted article to the point I wonder if the npr article covered something else entirely?
- herge 13y ago
  It's the Daily Mail; we should be just happy they aren't claiming playing a Stradivarius causes cancer.
  - Centigonal 13y ago
    Have you seen http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/ http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/ ? I think you might get a kick out of it.
    - golergka 13y ago
      It is awesome. At least they don't claim that vaccines are causing cancer.
      - avaku 13y ago
        Some other people do!
    - Tyrannosaurs 13y ago
      They've said coffee causes cancer which is worrying. To counter this I drink coffee in a 1:1 ration which they say cures cancer so I reckon I'm good.
  - brianmcc 13y ago
    perhaps it's on the "cures" side...
- cmsmith 13y ago
  I didn't read the original study, but based on your quotes it seems like you could append (p>0.95) to any of those headlines and have a meaningful statement which is supported by the data.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- mason240 13y ago
  Daily Mail, Phys.org, and NPR all mess up, DM get singled out.
  - phaemon 13y ago
    I know. It's very easy to mock the Daily Mail...so that's what we should do.
- Fishkins 13y ago
  I wouldn't call it "failing miserably." Although it doesn't appear to have been the main focus of the study, the antepenultimate paragraph of the results section does say most violinists couldn't identify whether their violin was new or old (3 got it right, 7 got it wrong, 7 said they didn't know) [0]. There aren't p-values provided for that result, though. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full edit: Also, you criticize the publications for not reading the abstract, but I wonder if you read it closely. It says "most players seemed unable to tell whether their most-preferred instrument was new or old," which seems right in line with those headlines to me.
  - saurik 13y ago
    There is a fundamental difference between being unable to tell the difference between two things, and having a difference of opinion on which is better; the article titles seem to claim the former, while the paper's abstract only states the latter.
coldtea 13y ago
>This study certainly doesn't tell us what happens between a player and a fiddle over a long-term relationship, and this is an important factor. No, it's not, because the same long-term relationship can happen between a player and a modern violin as well.
- davmre 13y ago
  The article explained how the long-term relationship with an older violin, which is more 'broken in' but temperamental day-to-day, might be different than with a modern violin, which is more 'dependable' day-to-day but can experience significant shifts in tone as it ages.
  - bsder 13y ago
    Wood also seems to change depending upon how it is used. Conventional wisdom is that a guitar gets "used to" how it is being played. I do like the comments about finding the unique characteristics because every instrument has a personality. Conventional wisdom in classical guitars ALSO says the guitars have a lifetime. The wood is tight, then it opens up, and then it breaks down gradually over time--roughly 15-20 years for cedar tops and 40 years for spruce tops. If that is actually true, I suspect that feeds into this study. The Stradivaris, while phenomenal, are long past their peak and are now at the point where they are breaking down from playing and are likely only being preserved by the rarity with which they are being played. I wonder if the "moderns" used in the study actually had some mileage on them. It would be interesting to see if a 20 years old "modern" with heavy use actually scores better than a 5 year old "modern". Overall, it's actually good news. I suspect that this is like modern classical musicians, the geniuses are as rare as ever, but the average level of achievement across all classical musicians is WAY higher now than it was even 100 years ago, and certainly moreso than 200-300 years ago. It means that those of us who can't afford Stradvaris can still get excellent instruments.
    - marincounty 13y ago
      I forget the guitarists name, but as a joke his band mates went to a pawn shop and bought him a used guitar. That gig he played so well it became a tradition. Every new gig he demanded a used guitar. The name will come to me. I do know there are a few horrid guitars out there though--the one at costco--the Yamaha, I can't keep it from buzzing though.
raverbashing 13y ago
The objective of this tests seems to be more to prove a point than to be fair, I'm not surprised. And the test looks like it's blind, but not double blind. It seems all rigour goes out of the window in order for the researchers to prove their point And of course taste is subjective, but a misadjusted violin will not sound great even if it's a good violin. (Same with a bad violin, modern or old) > "professional violinists can't tell the difference between modern violinist and old Italians," then I think we need a > different study in which violinists are actually asked to identify that Of course.
- ricardobeat 13y ago
  I'm not convinced there is much interference from the conductors to warrant a double-blind study. Either way, I believe the original paper never claimed that "professional violinists can't tell the difference", that's the media twist. It proved beyond reasonable doubt that professional musicians do not prefer the antique models based on any objective qualities.
  - russelluresti 13y ago
    I wouldn't even say the study proved that point. The fact that the older fiddles couldn't be adjusted for sound optimizations while the new ones could makes a huge impact on the study - it invariably unlevels the playing field.
    - rquantz 13y ago
      Normals don't understand the difference an adjustment can make. You can tap the sound post half a millimeter and feel like you're playing on a completely different instrument.
    - ricardobeat 13y ago
      I believe rare instruments like those are always kept in pristine conditions, and nowhere it is mentioned that the new ones had adjustments done, you can assume they all were received in 'normal playing condition' from their owners.
rasz_pl 13y ago
TLDR: "Im an audiophool. I know whats great by the price stick^^^I could totally pick Strad blindfolded, I just didnt feel like it that day."
- GhotiFish 13y ago
  read again.
  - andybak 13y ago
    He did a rather poor job of expressing himself in a sensible manner but I must admit I had the same takeaway from the article.
    - GhotiFish 13y ago
      pick best does not mean pick oldest, news articles said study was identification, study subject says study was preference, study says study was preference. How you could possible reach the grand parents takeaway is seriously concerning. explain.
      - rasz_pl 13y ago
        Yes. Im sure this is why she herself uses 200 year old violin instead of the modern one. > for the last five years, a mid-1800s Italian. Whole article is a result of authors cognitive dissonance. I dont see much difference between her and people arguing for $1K speaker cables and later failing to distinguish them from coat hangars.
        rquantz 13y ago
        Her mid-1800s Italian has completely different characteristics from a 17th century Italian. A string player spends months or years trying many instruments before deciding on one. I've never known a professional musician who cares whether they're playing on a modern or an older instrument, they care whether they have the right instrument for them. You have no idea what you're talking about. Please just stop.
na85 13y ago
tl;dr: Study seeks to determine if Old Master violins actually sound "better", media reports misleading headlines (shocker), musicians are angryface. I remember when this study was first concluded and reported on. The CBC had a woman who participated in the study (maybe this very woman) on the program and it was so extremely obvious that her professional pride was wounded, and she really wanted to make herself feel better by telling the world that she really could pick out the Stradivarius. I have no reason to doubt her; she's a professional violinist. But it seems to me that the study was actually very effective at showing that masterwork violins do not necessarily sound better than modern violins, contrary to the regurgitated opinions of hundreds of thousands of novice violinists out there.
- fleitz 13y ago
  'I have no reason to doubt her; she's a professional violinist.' You know that claiming to be a professional violinist is an appeal to authority rather than a logical argument, right? That said the study does seem to be massively misreported.
  - devindotcom 13y ago
    It may not logically follow, but in the real world it is not a strange thing to trust an actual expert on these topics over, say, a writer at the Daily Mail. Why object?
    - fleitz 13y ago
      It's even better to examine their argument sans credentials.
      - calinet6 13y ago
        It's even better to do both, and embrace a complete and holistic argument.
  - na85 13y ago
    >You know that claiming to be a professional violinist is an appeal to authority rather than a logical argument, right? Am I on reddit or something? You know that starting a statement with "you know that..." sounds pretentious as fuck, right?
devindotcom 13y ago
This post was regarding a test conducted in 2012. I'm not saying it isn't relevant or that the reporting around the new one is good, but the study she was a part of is a different one from the study making the rounds today: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/04/03/1323367111.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/04/03/1323367111.abst...
- masklinn 13y ago
  Yep, the one she was part of was basically a "pre-run", which allowed the run of a new, better and extended study. Here's Ed Yong's reporting on the new one, gives most of the meat and introduces the old one (and criticisms to it): http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/07/stradivarius-violins-arent-better-than-new-ones-round-two/ http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/07/stradivar...
pazimzadeh 13y ago
Because the violinists were only allowed to try the violins for one minute, this study has the same flaw that the Pepsi Challenge had in 1975: "In his book, Blink, author Malcolm Gladwell presents evidence that suggests Pepsi's success over Coca-Cola in the "Pepsi Challenge" is a result of the flawed nature of the "sip test" method. His research shows that tasters will generally prefer the sweeter of two beverages based on a single sip, even if they prefer a less sweet beverage over the course of an entire can." In other words, a saturated sound could initially be more attractive but not as good for an actual concert. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi_Challenge#Criticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi_Challenge#Criticism
- calinet6 13y ago
  I've had this same criticism of audio A/B tests: 30 second clips are just not decent to get a sense of the feeling a particular setup or recording imbues; only its quantitative momentarily detectable constructs. And only the ones the puny human brain and ear can discretely identify and remember, at that.
- analog31 13y ago
  That's a serious issue. I play a stringed instrument, and purchased a "professional" model a few years ago. Among the instruments that I was trying out, some of the physical differences were sufficient that there would have been little expectation of identical sound, so the game was to discover the differences and then make a choice. There were instruments that I rejected within seconds, but others that took me upwards of 1/2 hour to figure out how to adapt my playing to the characteristics of the instrument. There were issues that might have been unnoticeable to an audience member, but that would have affected my ability to play with good technique over the duration of a performance. Some of the instruments, including the one I ended up buying, changed my opinion of how I wanted to develop my tone and playing style. Granted, I was always faced with a slight doubt about whether any of it was real, but without any good way of settling that issue. Also, a virtuoso might have been able to make all of the instruments sound the same with much less effort. Oh, and don't get me started about bows.
  - 13y ago
abalone 13y ago
Wait a minute. She claims: "Now a lot of you found it easy to pick the Strad... But it wasn't actually our task to pick the Italian in this study -- it was to pick our preference." But NPR directly quotes the guy who ran the study: "JOYCE: Curtin says of the 17 players who were asked to choose which were the old Italians... CURTIN: Seven said they couldn't. Seven got it wrong, and only three got it right." [1] Maybe she wasn't one of the 17 asked, but it definitely was studied. [1] http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=144482863 http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?story...
- jeroen 13y ago
  The abstract [1] says: "We asked 21 experienced violinists to compare violins by Stradivari and Guarneri del Gesu with high-quality new instruments. The resulting preferences were …" It then goes on about preferences and says nothing about identifying them. So it's the abstract of the study, written (I assume) by the researchers, and one of the participants vs a journalist "quoting" one of the researchers. [1] http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/02/1114999109.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/02/1114999109.abst...
  - Fishkins 13y ago
    The abstract you linked does say something about identifying them: "most players seemed unable to tell whether their most-preferred instrument was new or old." And in the full text of the study: "Asked about the making-school of their take-home instruments, 17 subjects responded: 7 said they had no idea, 7 guessed wrongly (i.e., that a new violin was old or vice-versa), and just 3 guessed correctly" edit: the link to the full study is http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full in case anyone was having trouble finding it from the abstract.
    - abalone 13y ago
      Yup. Maybe what happened is, since only 17 of 21 responded to that question, perhaps she was one of the 4 that didn't. It is a pretty damning study: Few could identify the old, expensive violins AND most preferred newer, cheaper violins. It means that the tradition of loaning Strats to top violinists may actually make for (slightly) worse performances. I love blind studies.
abalone 13y ago
I would love to see a study like this done with vinyl vs. digital. 1. Put some vinyl-loving DJs in a hotel room. 2. To factor out identifying pops & scratches, pre-record a vinyl song onto digital. Record it several times and use each digital recording only once. 3. Cover their eyes and randomly switch between vinyl & digital. See if they can tell the difference.
- antihero 13y ago
  I think your test actually factors in one of the reasons people like vinyl - it's not that the sound is necessarily better, but with analogue, there's a uniqueness factor because it's a physical needle hitting a physical groove.
  - 72deluxe 13y ago
    And the fact that there aren't small samples of audio being played back at high frequency that rely on the quality of the digital to analogue converters, as well as the other systems in line such as the type of amplifier (class A, A/B, D), the circuitry it goes through (is it solid state or is there a valve somewhere in there?) as well as the speakers used (are they balanced and not too bass/treble heavy and do they reproduce the sound in a consistent way taking into consideration speaker box resonances, room set up and proximity effects next to walls and reflections, and can they reproduce proper bass note fundamentals or are they only producing harmonics of the fundamental?). There is a lot to compare really. But most people think entirely vinyl vs MP3s (!) where MP3s have parts of the audio spectrum cut out in order to facilitate better compression; they typically cut out very high peaks and basses, but you need those high peaks and transients to reproduce snare drum cracks and cymbals (eg. listen to a 128kbps MP3 and see how RUBBISH the cymbals sound). Even if you are feeding digital audio into a system, the speakers and room set up makes a COLOSSAL difference so it isn't fair for people to dismiss "analogue" vs "digital" arguments; it should be "good sound system" vs "bad sound system" arguments.
- noonespecial 13y ago
  To factor out identifying pops & scratches, pre-record a vinyl song onto digital... This would simply be a digital reproduction of a vinyl recording. (Something I quite like BTW). Vinyl is a "thing" because the process plays a part in creating that sound people love and not just reproducing it.
the_cat_kittles 13y ago
What would have been really interesting is if they had also conducted the test with another group of participants who were all informed about what each violin was. Then we could see how much influence lore and history have on what people like, by comparing the scores between groups.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
zw123456 13y ago
This reminds me very much of some studies where audiophiles did double blind tests of various solid state amps against tube amps. Some audiophiles say that the tube amps sound "warmer", maybe they like 60hz hum. Whatever. Tube amps look cool and that is what is really important to them I think much in the same way that it is a huge status symbol to have an old violin. Same thing I think. Not that there is anything wrong with that, you get your inspiration in whatever way works I think.
- userbinator 13y ago
  The difference between tubes and basic transistor amps is very noticeable if you know what to listen for, especially when they're used at volumes loud enough to cause distortion, and this is definitely measurable scientifically. Some people do like the fuzzier, "warmer" sound (the hum is part of that) that tubes have.
- praptak 13y ago
  The "warmer" effect is not the hum. I have read it's how the amps process harmonics (odd ones vs even ones) and that this effect is actually measurable through testing equipment.
  - 72deluxe 13y ago
    It's the fifth harmonic isn't it? I would disagree with zw123456's "whatever" with regard to analogue systems. (It isn't just the look of valves - they keep your room warm too!)
    - praptak 13y ago
      Well, uh, it seems much more complicated than I remembered: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_sound#Harmonic_content_and_distortion http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_sound#Harmonic_content_a...
mathattack 13y ago
Perhaps not with violins, but blind wine tasting is very hard to tell differences... http://www.liquidasset.com/WEILVDQS.PDF http://www.liquidasset.com/WEILVDQS.PDF
peeters 13y ago
I'm not a violin player, but to me the allure of hearing a violinist play on a 300 year old violin isn't that it's the best sounding violin on the planet. It's an opportunity to witness a small part of the history of an incredible piece of craftsmanship. I mean, how cool is it to hear music come out of an instrument that spanned the lives of Bach, Mozart, Haydn, and Paganini?
amalag 13y ago
They couldn't even tune the old ones or change the strings, looks like a useless study.

177 points by yonibot 13y ago

parfe 13y ago

From the study's abstract: Differences in taste among individual players, along with differences in playing qualities among individual instruments, appear more important than any general differences between new and old violins. Another case of science reporting failing miserably at understanding and conveying the results of studies. The three articles all come up short at even reading the abstract: Daily Mail "Concert violinists can't identify the sound of a multi-million-pound Stradivarius" Phys.org "Study shows even professional musicians can't tell old master violins from new" Npr.org - Doesn't even come close to the same universe as the study in the submitted article to the point I wonder if the npr article covered something else entirely?

herge 13y ago
It's the Daily Mail; we should be just happy they aren't claiming playing a Stradivarius causes cancer.
- Centigonal 13y ago
  Have you seen http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/ http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/ ? I think you might get a kick out of it.
  - golergka 13y ago
    It is awesome. At least they don't claim that vaccines are causing cancer.
    - avaku 13y ago
      Some other people do!
  - Tyrannosaurs 13y ago
    They've said coffee causes cancer which is worrying. To counter this I drink coffee in a 1:1 ration which they say cures cancer so I reckon I'm good.
- brianmcc 13y ago
  perhaps it's on the "cures" side...
cmsmith 13y ago
I didn't read the original study, but based on your quotes it seems like you could append (p>0.95) to any of those headlines and have a meaningful statement which is supported by the data.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
mason240 13y ago
Daily Mail, Phys.org, and NPR all mess up, DM get singled out.
- phaemon 13y ago
  I know. It's very easy to mock the Daily Mail...so that's what we should do.
Fishkins 13y ago
I wouldn't call it "failing miserably." Although it doesn't appear to have been the main focus of the study, the antepenultimate paragraph of the results section does say most violinists couldn't identify whether their violin was new or old (3 got it right, 7 got it wrong, 7 said they didn't know) [0]. There aren't p-values provided for that result, though. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full edit: Also, you criticize the publications for not reading the abstract, but I wonder if you read it closely. It says "most players seemed unable to tell whether their most-preferred instrument was new or old," which seems right in line with those headlines to me.
- saurik 13y ago
  There is a fundamental difference between being unable to tell the difference between two things, and having a difference of opinion on which is better; the article titles seem to claim the former, while the paper's abstract only states the latter.

coldtea 13y ago

>This study certainly doesn't tell us what happens between a player and a fiddle over a long-term relationship, and this is an important factor. No, it's not, because the same long-term relationship can happen between a player and a modern violin as well.

davmre 13y ago
The article explained how the long-term relationship with an older violin, which is more 'broken in' but temperamental day-to-day, might be different than with a modern violin, which is more 'dependable' day-to-day but can experience significant shifts in tone as it ages.
- bsder 13y ago
  Wood also seems to change depending upon how it is used. Conventional wisdom is that a guitar gets "used to" how it is being played. I do like the comments about finding the unique characteristics because every instrument has a personality. Conventional wisdom in classical guitars ALSO says the guitars have a lifetime. The wood is tight, then it opens up, and then it breaks down gradually over time--roughly 15-20 years for cedar tops and 40 years for spruce tops. If that is actually true, I suspect that feeds into this study. The Stradivaris, while phenomenal, are long past their peak and are now at the point where they are breaking down from playing and are likely only being preserved by the rarity with which they are being played. I wonder if the "moderns" used in the study actually had some mileage on them. It would be interesting to see if a 20 years old "modern" with heavy use actually scores better than a 5 year old "modern". Overall, it's actually good news. I suspect that this is like modern classical musicians, the geniuses are as rare as ever, but the average level of achievement across all classical musicians is WAY higher now than it was even 100 years ago, and certainly moreso than 200-300 years ago. It means that those of us who can't afford Stradvaris can still get excellent instruments.
  - marincounty 13y ago
    I forget the guitarists name, but as a joke his band mates went to a pawn shop and bought him a used guitar. That gig he played so well it became a tradition. Every new gig he demanded a used guitar. The name will come to me. I do know there are a few horrid guitars out there though--the one at costco--the Yamaha, I can't keep it from buzzing though.

raverbashing 13y ago

The objective of this tests seems to be more to prove a point than to be fair, I'm not surprised. And the test looks like it's blind, but not double blind. It seems all rigour goes out of the window in order for the researchers to prove their point And of course taste is subjective, but a misadjusted violin will not sound great even if it's a good violin. (Same with a bad violin, modern or old) > "professional violinists can't tell the difference between modern violinist and old Italians," then I think we need a > different study in which violinists are actually asked to identify that Of course.

ricardobeat 13y ago
I'm not convinced there is much interference from the conductors to warrant a double-blind study. Either way, I believe the original paper never claimed that "professional violinists can't tell the difference", that's the media twist. It proved beyond reasonable doubt that professional musicians do not prefer the antique models based on any objective qualities.
- russelluresti 13y ago
  I wouldn't even say the study proved that point. The fact that the older fiddles couldn't be adjusted for sound optimizations while the new ones could makes a huge impact on the study - it invariably unlevels the playing field.
  - rquantz 13y ago
    Normals don't understand the difference an adjustment can make. You can tap the sound post half a millimeter and feel like you're playing on a completely different instrument.
  - ricardobeat 13y ago
    I believe rare instruments like those are always kept in pristine conditions, and nowhere it is mentioned that the new ones had adjustments done, you can assume they all were received in 'normal playing condition' from their owners.

rasz_pl 13y ago

TLDR: "Im an audiophool. I know whats great by the price stick^^^I could totally pick Strad blindfolded, I just didnt feel like it that day."

GhotiFish 13y ago
read again.
- andybak 13y ago
  He did a rather poor job of expressing himself in a sensible manner but I must admit I had the same takeaway from the article.
  - GhotiFish 13y ago
    pick best does not mean pick oldest, news articles said study was identification, study subject says study was preference, study says study was preference. How you could possible reach the grand parents takeaway is seriously concerning. explain.
    - rasz_pl 13y ago
      Yes. Im sure this is why she herself uses 200 year old violin instead of the modern one. > for the last five years, a mid-1800s Italian. Whole article is a result of authors cognitive dissonance. I dont see much difference between her and people arguing for $1K speaker cables and later failing to distinguish them from coat hangars.
      - rquantz 13y ago
        Her mid-1800s Italian has completely different characteristics from a 17th century Italian. A string player spends months or years trying many instruments before deciding on one. I've never known a professional musician who cares whether they're playing on a modern or an older instrument, they care whether they have the right instrument for them. You have no idea what you're talking about. Please just stop.

na85 13y ago

tl;dr: Study seeks to determine if Old Master violins actually sound "better", media reports misleading headlines (shocker), musicians are angryface. I remember when this study was first concluded and reported on. The CBC had a woman who participated in the study (maybe this very woman) on the program and it was so extremely obvious that her professional pride was wounded, and she really wanted to make herself feel better by telling the world that she really could pick out the Stradivarius. I have no reason to doubt her; she's a professional violinist. But it seems to me that the study was actually very effective at showing that masterwork violins do not necessarily sound better than modern violins, contrary to the regurgitated opinions of hundreds of thousands of novice violinists out there.

fleitz 13y ago
'I have no reason to doubt her; she's a professional violinist.' You know that claiming to be a professional violinist is an appeal to authority rather than a logical argument, right? That said the study does seem to be massively misreported.
- devindotcom 13y ago
  It may not logically follow, but in the real world it is not a strange thing to trust an actual expert on these topics over, say, a writer at the Daily Mail. Why object?
  - fleitz 13y ago
    It's even better to examine their argument sans credentials.
    - calinet6 13y ago
      It's even better to do both, and embrace a complete and holistic argument.
- na85 13y ago
  >You know that claiming to be a professional violinist is an appeal to authority rather than a logical argument, right? Am I on reddit or something? You know that starting a statement with "you know that..." sounds pretentious as fuck, right?

devindotcom 13y ago

This post was regarding a test conducted in 2012. I'm not saying it isn't relevant or that the reporting around the new one is good, but the study she was a part of is a different one from the study making the rounds today: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/04/03/1323367111.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/04/03/1323367111.abst...

masklinn 13y ago
Yep, the one she was part of was basically a "pre-run", which allowed the run of a new, better and extended study. Here's Ed Yong's reporting on the new one, gives most of the meat and introduces the old one (and criticisms to it): http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/07/stradivarius-violins-arent-better-than-new-ones-round-two/ http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/04/07/stradivar...

pazimzadeh 13y ago

Because the violinists were only allowed to try the violins for one minute, this study has the same flaw that the Pepsi Challenge had in 1975: "In his book, Blink, author Malcolm Gladwell presents evidence that suggests Pepsi's success over Coca-Cola in the "Pepsi Challenge" is a result of the flawed nature of the "sip test" method. His research shows that tasters will generally prefer the sweeter of two beverages based on a single sip, even if they prefer a less sweet beverage over the course of an entire can." In other words, a saturated sound could initially be more attractive but not as good for an actual concert. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi_Challenge#Criticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi_Challenge#Criticism

calinet6 13y ago
I've had this same criticism of audio A/B tests: 30 second clips are just not decent to get a sense of the feeling a particular setup or recording imbues; only its quantitative momentarily detectable constructs. And only the ones the puny human brain and ear can discretely identify and remember, at that.
analog31 13y ago
That's a serious issue. I play a stringed instrument, and purchased a "professional" model a few years ago. Among the instruments that I was trying out, some of the physical differences were sufficient that there would have been little expectation of identical sound, so the game was to discover the differences and then make a choice. There were instruments that I rejected within seconds, but others that took me upwards of 1/2 hour to figure out how to adapt my playing to the characteristics of the instrument. There were issues that might have been unnoticeable to an audience member, but that would have affected my ability to play with good technique over the duration of a performance. Some of the instruments, including the one I ended up buying, changed my opinion of how I wanted to develop my tone and playing style. Granted, I was always faced with a slight doubt about whether any of it was real, but without any good way of settling that issue. Also, a virtuoso might have been able to make all of the instruments sound the same with much less effort. Oh, and don't get me started about bows.
- 13y ago

abalone 13y ago

Wait a minute. She claims: "Now a lot of you found it easy to pick the Strad... But it wasn't actually our task to pick the Italian in this study -- it was to pick our preference." But NPR directly quotes the guy who ran the study: "JOYCE: Curtin says of the 17 players who were asked to choose which were the old Italians... CURTIN: Seven said they couldn't. Seven got it wrong, and only three got it right." [1] Maybe she wasn't one of the 17 asked, but it definitely was studied. [1] http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=144482863 http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?story...

jeroen 13y ago
The abstract [1] says: "We asked 21 experienced violinists to compare violins by Stradivari and Guarneri del Gesu with high-quality new instruments. The resulting preferences were …" It then goes on about preferences and says nothing about identifying them. So it's the abstract of the study, written (I assume) by the researchers, and one of the participants vs a journalist "quoting" one of the researchers. [1] http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/02/1114999109.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/02/1114999109.abst...
- Fishkins 13y ago
  The abstract you linked does say something about identifying them: "most players seemed unable to tell whether their most-preferred instrument was new or old." And in the full text of the study: "Asked about the making-school of their take-home instruments, 17 subjects responded: 7 said they had no idea, 7 guessed wrongly (i.e., that a new violin was old or vice-versa), and just 3 guessed correctly" edit: the link to the full study is http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full http://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760.full in case anyone was having trouble finding it from the abstract.
  - abalone 13y ago
    Yup. Maybe what happened is, since only 17 of 21 responded to that question, perhaps she was one of the 4 that didn't. It is a pretty damning study: Few could identify the old, expensive violins AND most preferred newer, cheaper violins. It means that the tradition of loaning Strats to top violinists may actually make for (slightly) worse performances. I love blind studies.

abalone 13y ago

I would love to see a study like this done with vinyl vs. digital. 1. Put some vinyl-loving DJs in a hotel room. 2. To factor out identifying pops & scratches, pre-record a vinyl song onto digital. Record it several times and use each digital recording only once. 3. Cover their eyes and randomly switch between vinyl & digital. See if they can tell the difference.

antihero 13y ago
I think your test actually factors in one of the reasons people like vinyl - it's not that the sound is necessarily better, but with analogue, there's a uniqueness factor because it's a physical needle hitting a physical groove.
- 72deluxe 13y ago
  And the fact that there aren't small samples of audio being played back at high frequency that rely on the quality of the digital to analogue converters, as well as the other systems in line such as the type of amplifier (class A, A/B, D), the circuitry it goes through (is it solid state or is there a valve somewhere in there?) as well as the speakers used (are they balanced and not too bass/treble heavy and do they reproduce the sound in a consistent way taking into consideration speaker box resonances, room set up and proximity effects next to walls and reflections, and can they reproduce proper bass note fundamentals or are they only producing harmonics of the fundamental?). There is a lot to compare really. But most people think entirely vinyl vs MP3s (!) where MP3s have parts of the audio spectrum cut out in order to facilitate better compression; they typically cut out very high peaks and basses, but you need those high peaks and transients to reproduce snare drum cracks and cymbals (eg. listen to a 128kbps MP3 and see how RUBBISH the cymbals sound). Even if you are feeding digital audio into a system, the speakers and room set up makes a COLOSSAL difference so it isn't fair for people to dismiss "analogue" vs "digital" arguments; it should be "good sound system" vs "bad sound system" arguments.
noonespecial 13y ago
To factor out identifying pops & scratches, pre-record a vinyl song onto digital... This would simply be a digital reproduction of a vinyl recording. (Something I quite like BTW). Vinyl is a "thing" because the process plays a part in creating that sound people love and not just reproducing it.

the_cat_kittles 13y ago

What would have been really interesting is if they had also conducted the test with another group of participants who were all informed about what each violin was. Then we could see how much influence lore and history have on what people like, by comparing the scores between groups.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

zw123456 13y ago

This reminds me very much of some studies where audiophiles did double blind tests of various solid state amps against tube amps. Some audiophiles say that the tube amps sound "warmer", maybe they like 60hz hum. Whatever. Tube amps look cool and that is what is really important to them I think much in the same way that it is a huge status symbol to have an old violin. Same thing I think. Not that there is anything wrong with that, you get your inspiration in whatever way works I think.

userbinator 13y ago
The difference between tubes and basic transistor amps is very noticeable if you know what to listen for, especially when they're used at volumes loud enough to cause distortion, and this is definitely measurable scientifically. Some people do like the fuzzier, "warmer" sound (the hum is part of that) that tubes have.
praptak 13y ago
The "warmer" effect is not the hum. I have read it's how the amps process harmonics (odd ones vs even ones) and that this effect is actually measurable through testing equipment.
- 72deluxe 13y ago
  It's the fifth harmonic isn't it? I would disagree with zw123456's "whatever" with regard to analogue systems. (It isn't just the look of valves - they keep your room warm too!)
  - praptak 13y ago
    Well, uh, it seems much more complicated than I remembered: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_sound#Harmonic_content_and_distortion http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_sound#Harmonic_content_a...

mathattack 13y ago

Perhaps not with violins, but blind wine tasting is very hard to tell differences... http://www.liquidasset.com/WEILVDQS.PDF http://www.liquidasset.com/WEILVDQS.PDF

peeters 13y ago

I'm not a violin player, but to me the allure of hearing a violinist play on a 300 year old violin isn't that it's the best sounding violin on the planet. It's an opportunity to witness a small part of the history of an incredible piece of craftsmanship. I mean, how cool is it to hear music come out of an instrument that spanned the lives of Bach, Mozart, Haydn, and Paganini?

amalag 13y ago

They couldn't even tune the old ones or change the strings, looks like a useless study.