Scientific experiment with old violins (2 Stradivari) - another myth destroyed

[Alex]

Scientists from the University of Paris have compared 3 old violins to 3 new violins with 21 professional players. All violins were "good" ones, no lemons. Interestingly enough, the "old" ones did not win the competition, instead the experiment showed results to be quite random. Players had two opportunities to play the instruments with dark glasses on (so they could'nt see them) and perfume on the chin rest (to disguise the smell). In the first set of experiments players were given instruments to play blindfolded, in some cases they were given the same instrument more than once (to show the disparity). In the second test players could choose instruments and play for up to 20 minutes whatever they wanted. The results: Highly inconclusive, if not to say almost random.

I would love to see some experiments like this with guitar stuff, such as different tubes, different cables, different PAF pickups, different tubescreamers. I think it would dispel a lot of myths as well.

Text unfortunately in German, I couldn't access the English version.

http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/technik/0,1518,806748,00.html

[dave_mc]

nice

not to say that some expensive stuff isn't good, and that some cheap stuff isn't cr@p, but i always like to see myths like this get busted. prejudice is very annoying. what's even more annoying is that the prejudiced ones seem to be more likely to throw round accusations that everyone else is biased (you know, insert-guitar-brand-here fanboy who claims that everyone who doesn't like his/her favourite brand is a hater). :lol:

[Ian Price]

That's a good experiment with interesting results. I've never really played a vintage instrument (1975 is the closest I have got) but have often wondered if "feeling the mojo" is more to do with knowing when the instrument is from rather than actually how it feels and plays.

On a similar topic I'm still not convinced about the Eric Johnson story of him being able to tell different brands of batteries being used in his pedals. Maybe it was an April fools joke.

[Andrew W]

It doesn't surprise me that the results are random. I know that I favour each of my guitars more on certain days than others even though they haven't changed at all. There's so much psychology tied up in what sounds and feels good to a player on a particular day that objectivity must almost go out of the window. Once you've got to a certain quality threshold in the instrument (no lemons) everything after that is subject to the vagaries of the musician at that moment in time.

One extra thing that occurs is that if the player knew the violin was a Stradavarius would they be inspired to play better and thus produce better music with that instrument than any other? If so, does that make the instrument better? Can you divorce the lump of wood that is the instrument from the psychology of it? I suspect not but it does make for an interesting thought experiment, unless you have a Strad in which case you can test it for yourself. :)

[Twinfan]

I don't think you can remove the emotion from the instrument.  Music isn't scientific, it's all about feel and emotion.  The mind is a powerful thing and if knowing you're playing a Strad or '59 Les Paul gives you THAT emotion when you play and you hit nirvana, then that's all that matters...

[Chris]

Music isn't scientific, it's all about feel and emotion.

Music IS largely scientific, although it can be very difficult to understand it from a scientific perspective, to the point that it can seem as if it is not scientific.  I agree with you in principle though, because it is very difficult to test every last difference between a vintage instrument and another instrument, and because there is so much going on psychologically, all that really matters is what instrument you play best with, whether it is a vintage treasure, or a nice example of a modern instrument.

[djl]

It is an interesting study - one thing to point out though, they're not comparing cheap to expensive violins, even the new ones that were the comparitor were very expensive by the looks of it. It doesn't explicitly say how much, but it suggests that the 3 new ones that were compared were worth about 100000 quid.

[darkbluemurder]

Great article.

Cheers Stephan

[Chris]

It is an interesting study - one thing to point out though, they're not comparing cheap to expensive violins, even the new ones that were the comparitor were very expensive by the looks of it. It doesn't explicitly say how much, but it suggests that the 3 new ones that were compared were worth about 100000 quid.

That's amazing - I always think of guitars as expensive, but £100,000 for a new violin? I can't actually understand what could separate a £50,000 instrument from a £100,000 one... fair enough I don't know anything about violins, but surely when you're paying £50,000 there is enough time and workmanship going into the instrument to make it perfect? (obviously perfect to the customer's spec...)

[djl]

My wife plays the violin. Expensive game indeed. We recently bought her a new one. Basically, anything under about 10 grand in the violin world is considered "ok for a student", serious instruments are more. If you buy a new one from a relatively unknown luthier, you would expect to pay 3-4 grand. If you go for a big name, like one of the Cremona makers, its easily more than a car. Guitars are dirt cheap by comparison. The only roughly equivalent ones price wise are the hand made archtop guitars.

[Roobubba]

My sister is a violin and viola maker/restorer in Devon. She's currently got my viola and keeps it played. It took her some time to get used to it, after discovering that her viola (which she'd played throughout college) wasn't as good as she thought.
I've not read the study, and can't possibly comment on its quality or scientific validity, but I found personally that certain instruments are suited to you, and others aren't. The same is demonstrably true of guitars, though in theory there is far less variation, at least in style and wood choice (they're all maple as far as I'm aware...) within the violin/viola/cello world.

I presume all of the instruments were played in - that makes a massive difference to a violin. Certainly my viola sounded thin and scratchy after it hadn't been played for a few months. Once I'd played it back in over a period of a month or two, it was back to its warm, rich sound.

The last point I'd want to make is that just because an instrument is made by a 'big name', or because it has a ridiculous price (we've all seen some of those absurdly priced special editions, or Dumbles/Trainwrecks etc...), doesn't make it better than another (although it might be).

Roo

[Andrew W]

There's a recent study on how the brain perceives art and how it behaves when being shown a real Rembrandt and a fake.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/12/how-does-the-brain-perceive-art/

I think there's some analogy with what's being discussed here.

As I mentioned before as well as the "this instrument is a blah blah and worth x" type of psychological shenanigan there's also the emotional way you respond on a given day to a given instrument whether you know what it's worth or not.

I imagine that most of use who have a few guitars that are, as far as you can judge, well made will find that on some days one guitar feels right and is the "best" and on other days it's another. Having not played my Strat for a while I fell back in love with it over the holiday. It's no different to when I wasn't feeling the love for it, nor I have just discovered that it was hand made by John English but there's something about the way I'm hearing things at the moment that is Strat-centric. I am guessing (and I'm sure Roo can offer informed insight on this) that violinists probably go through similar phases.

[gordiji]

very interesting and for me unsurprising. i'm familiar with the same myths being busted with champagne.
even very fine instruments newly made have a subjective aspect.how many poeple would really appreciate a very fine
strat say if they hadn't 'learned' what to look for.same with wine;you need to be shown how to appreciate the finer ones.(which is kind of daft,isnt it ?)
i understand the emotion thing(of playing an old'n) but for me the sound coming out of the speaker is what does or doesn't exite you into playing well.
i've never 'bought' the vintage instrument thing, not because fine ones don't exist but because fine new ones exist
and the premium over a new one is now more than ever absurd.equally there's plenty of vintage rubbish that was made
and the 2 vintage strats (early 60's) that i tried both fell into this categority.
i too would love to see this test with strats, teles & lp's

[Chris]

My wife plays the violin. Expensive game indeed. We recently bought her a new one. Basically, anything under about 10 grand in the violin world is considered "ok for a student", serious instruments are more.

Wow - I can understand those kind of prices for a grand piano, as it is made of a lot of metal and wood and has many precision parts, but is a violin really that much different from an acoustic guitar?  I'm not saying that the 10K+ price tags for a decent instrument are not worth it (I really wouldn't know), but I'd love to know WHY they are priced that high.

[Chris]

Here's another one, although the original results are not quoted, but it basically suggests that in a test of three guitars which were identical other than neck-joint type, the bolt-on sustained better than the other types of construction, and listeners could not distinguish between notes played on each instrument:

http://www.guitar-list.com/guitar-science/set-neck-better-sustain-myth

He basically says that rather than comparing, say, a les paul to a strat for sustain to differentiate between set neck and bolt on, people should compare a set neck les paul with a bolt on les paul.

It would be interesting to hear what some of our resident luthiers think about this.