3 ms·

I was composing this while limmeau replied, so some overlap. We would initially need to calibrate the mechanism and microphones against expert violin players t

by by 17y ago

I was composing this while limmeau replied, so some overlap. We would initially need to calibrate the mechanism and microphones against expert violin players to ensure they pick up all the same nuances of sound. This is because experts hear more than non-experts. "Two groups of expert instrumentalists (violinists and flutists) listened to matched musical excerpts played on the two instruments (J.S. Bach Partitas for solo violin and flute) while their cerebral hemodynamic responses were measured using fMRI. ... We found an extensive cerebral network of expertise, which implicates increased sensitivity to musical syntax (BA 44), timbre (auditory association cortex), and sound-motor interactions (precentral gyrus) when listening to music played on the instrument of expertise ..." http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=20951540 http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=20951540 So if the experts could demonstrate any statistically significant ability to hear certain aspects of the sound, such as being able to distinguish between different instruments, this would have to be replicated by the mechanism and microphone technique. We would have to try to test a fair range of aspects of the sound. We would then need a reasonably large sample of similar violins, of a quality for which we might expect the effect to occur, half of which would be put away and the other half played for our test period. The mechanism could then be rerun and get a fairly good result.

jacquesm 17y ago
Q: What is the difference between a viola and a violin ? A: The viola burns longer... If Hermann Helmholtz could be wrong about some of this stuff then I have no doubt that people are capable of deluding themselves in to having the ability to hear things that aren't there. From "The Acoustical Foundations of Music" by John Backus, page 207: For example, the excellent quality of Stradivarius violins has been attributed to a varnish of almost magical properties used by the old instrument makers, whose secret has been lost. However, resonance curves made on instruments in the varnished and unvarnished condition show that as normally used, the varnish itself has rather little effect on the tone. What effect it has is more likely than not to make the instrument worse.
- by 17y ago
  "people are capable of deluding themselves in to having the ability to hear things that aren't there". I agree totally. I was assuming a mechanistic way of testing for sound similarity attached to the microphone that would give an objective result. This mechanism needs to be calibrated against human experts.
- mechanical_fish 17y ago
  That "varnish" theory of the Stradivarius isn't current, by the way, perhaps because of the very results you refer to. The most recent research I've heard of is focused on the treatment that was applied to the wood: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090122141228.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090122141228.ht...
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    I know, but even though it has been disproven ages ago this stuff gets repeated ad nauseum. Being able to hear sounds that can't be verified by instruments is not very scientific imo. That said, there is a lot of stuff going on outside of the range of 'normal' recording and playback equipment, which is why a live performance of a church organ (for instance) is on a completely different level than the best recording of the same. Violins however fall nicely in the range of modern recording equipment and if you can't record a sound from a violin it probably isn't there.

by by 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago

Q: What is the difference between a viola and a violin ? A: The viola burns longer... If Hermann Helmholtz could be wrong about some of this stuff then I have no doubt that people are capable of deluding themselves in to having the ability to hear things that aren't there. From "The Acoustical Foundations of Music" by John Backus, page 207: For example, the excellent quality of Stradivarius violins has been attributed to a varnish of almost magical properties used by the old instrument makers, whose secret has been lost. However, resonance curves made on instruments in the varnished and unvarnished condition show that as normally used, the varnish itself has rather little effect on the tone. What effect it has is more likely than not to make the instrument worse.

by 17y ago
"people are capable of deluding themselves in to having the ability to hear things that aren't there". I agree totally. I was assuming a mechanistic way of testing for sound similarity attached to the microphone that would give an objective result. This mechanism needs to be calibrated against human experts.
mechanical_fish 17y ago
That "varnish" theory of the Stradivarius isn't current, by the way, perhaps because of the very results you refer to. The most recent research I've heard of is focused on the treatment that was applied to the wood: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090122141228.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090122141228.ht...
- jacquesm 17y ago
  I know, but even though it has been disproven ages ago this stuff gets repeated ad nauseum. Being able to hear sounds that can't be verified by instruments is not very scientific imo. That said, there is a lot of stuff going on outside of the range of 'normal' recording and playback equipment, which is why a live performance of a church organ (for instance) is on a completely different level than the best recording of the same. Violins however fall nicely in the range of modern recording equipment and if you can't record a sound from a violin it probably isn't there.