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

[WezV]

Its not really about whether old violins sound similar to new ones or replicas. Its about expectations and biases influencing perceptions. i.e. the point isnt that so many got it wrong, its that they thought they got it right.

This time last year i was doing an open day in a school and we decided to make stroop effect jelly.   Jelly where the flavour and colour did not match.   It was fun watching people struggle to name the flavour, but the best one came up saying she was a professional wine taster.   obviously she didnt have a clue either

I am not trying to dispute the tricks our brain plays on us

   unfortunately there is a growing trend on guitar forums  to reduce everything down to psychoacoustics - its like a specific Godwins law for guitar forums.

but as a guitar builder my main focus is trying to control tone and occasionally discuss my views on it.  just a shame it generally takes 5 minutes before someone says its all cr@p as your brain is playing tricks on you. 


The main thing i take from the violin comparisons is that there is obviously now someone able to copy a strad very well - good advert for him/her.

[Twinfan]

The main thing i take from the violin comparisons is that there is obviously now someone able to copy a strad very well - good advert for him/her.

Definitely Wez - I'm with you there.

unfortunately there is a growing trend on guitar forums  to reduce everything down to psychoacoustics - its like a specific Godwins law for guitar forums.

Yep, a lot of discussions end that way which is a shame.  The fact that every blank of wood is different and that there are subtle species variations seems to get forgotten an awful lot too.  When you've played enough guitars/violins/whatever you realise that the wood is EVERYTHING.  Type, use, stability, how it's been dried, density etc all affect the finished product.  Hearing Paul (Reed) Smith talk on the subject is fascinating.

[Andrew W]

I am not trying to dispute the tricks our brain plays on us

   unfortunately there is a growing trend on guitar forums  to reduce everything down to psychoacoustics - its like a specific Godwins law for guitar forums.

but as a guitar builder my main focus is trying to control tone and occasionally discuss my views on it.  just a shame it generally takes 5 minutes before someone says its all cr@p as your brain is playing tricks on you. 

I thought it was interesting that the authors of the violin study were very keen to point out early on that they weren't comparing any old rubbish to a Strad but the very best that instrument builders could make in the modern era.

I would hope that no-one with sense would argue that there aren't good and bad instruments out there and further, that a skilled professional can, with experience and talent, control that tone to a great extent. The results of the violin test mostly suggest to me that one individual's instruments aren't actually magically better than the best that others could make at any given time.

That said, I would have thought that as knowledge of acoustics and manufacturing techniques improve it ought to be possible to build a better violin now than in Stradivarius' day, assuming that the same quality of raw materials is still available. Or has the design of the instrument remained so static that there has been no real change in design since the 18th Century?

I did think that the critique of the study by the violinist who pointed out that a Strad was designed to fill a larger arena was very interesting. It makes me wonder how violinists demo a new instrument and how a maker can do the same. Is it just experience that enables them to hear certain qualties in the tone that may not sound great in a small room or workshop but they know will blossom in a concert hall?

Whilst, as nfe points out, the results of the test aren't a huge surprise, the conversation here and the article itself has made me think a lot more about tone shaping for certain environments and made me understand and appreciate the instrument maker's craft a lot more. So thanks for that everyone, it's been stimulating.

[nfe]

Whilst, as nfe points out, the results of the test aren't a huge surprise, the conversation here and the article itself has made me think a lot more about tone shaping for certain environments and made me understand and appreciate the instrument maker's craft a lot more. So thanks for that everyone, it's been stimulating.

This is a good point, and is really important. I suppose it hadn't really occurred to me regarding orchestral instruments. Most of us understand that what sounds good at home is very different to what sounds good loud on stage, and that what sounds good practicing by yourself is very different to what sounds good in a band. But with orchestral instruments, I mean, you can't soundcheck and hear that so easily. I can soundcheck at a gig (though lets be honest, I almost never bother :lol:) and stand where the audience will stand play my guitar and hear what they'll hear (barring the full place taking some top end off and so on, but you get the idea) whereas a violinist can't exactly play their violin and hear what someone in the balcony will hear 100 feet away from the instrument.

Also, whilst we obviously have instruments designed for different applications - in the same way as a folky's fiddle and a classical players violin may differ - but we don't really have guitars and basses specifically designed for certain types of venue (other than dreadnoughts coming about for country guys playing bigger and bigger halls or things suited to louder amplification).

[Twinfan]

But we have guitars designed for certain applications - hollowbodies for Jazz, baritones etc - so that would be our equivalent?

[Chris]

   unfortunately there is a growing trend on guitar forums  to reduce everything down to psychoacoustics - its like a specific Godwins law for guitar forums.

but as a guitar builder my main focus is trying to control tone and occasionally discuss my views on it.  just a shame it generally takes 5 minutes before someone says its all cr@p as your brain is playing tricks on you. 

I'm not sure that anyone is going quite as far as to say it is all down to psychological effects, well I know that I'm not going quite that far anyway, I'm sure that wood choice, construction, etc. does affect the sound quite a lot, but I just wonder how much of it is also influenced by expectation - surely it has some effect?

The one I'm really curious about now personally is the neck joint construction of a guitar, because I've convinced myself that I need a neck-through guitar in my collection for the extra sustain and the different sound, but that article that I posted earlier actually suggests that the neck through guitar sustained less than the other two (albeit the difference was very minor), and that test did not not rely solely on perception, so no psychoacoustics were involved.  Being a guitar builder I'd be really interested to hear your views on that one.

[nfe]

But we have guitars designed for certain applications - hollowbodies for Jazz, baritones etc - so that would be our equivalent?

Well yeah, that's what I said in the first half of the first sentence in that last paragraph. But that's quite different from specifically setting out to make a Les Paul std that suits a pub and a Les Paul std that suits Wembley, which is more what is being suggested. The instrument isn't being changed to suit the genre, but the venue it'll be played in. That's something interestingly specific, and presumably, outrageously hard to achieve - certainly at the turn of the 18th century.

I suppose the point is that the nature of modern instruments is that we make them massively different to achieve different things, so they'll always be easier to tell apart than classical ones.

[MDV]

Its not really about whether old violins sound similar to new ones or replicas. Its about expectations and biases influencing perceptions. i.e. the point isnt that so many got it wrong, its that they thought they got it right.

This time last year i was doing an open day in a school and we decided to make stroop effect jelly.   Jelly where the flavour and colour did not match.   It was fun watching people struggle to name the flavour, but the best one came up saying she was a professional wine taster.   obviously she didnt have a clue either

I am not trying to dispute the tricks our brain plays on us

   unfortunately there is a growing trend on guitar forums  to reduce everything down to psychoacoustics - its like a specific Godwins law for guitar forums.

but as a guitar builder my main focus is trying to control tone and occasionally discuss my views on it.  just a shame it generally takes 5 minutes before someone says its all cr@p as your brain is playing tricks on you. 


The main thing i take from the violin comparisons is that there is obviously now someone able to copy a strad very well - good advert for him/her.

Fair enough.

I dont think anyones offering 'your brain tricked you' as an explanation for most things. It comes up here and there, usually where theres little actual difference (if any at all) but lots of percieved or presentational difference (or price difference, of course :)).

[Twinfan]

Well yeah, that's what I said in the first half of the first sentence in that last paragraph. But that's quite different from specifically setting out to make a Les Paul std that suits a pub and a Les Paul std that suits Wembley, which is more what is being suggested.

Is it?  I don't think anyone would say that's a worthwhile investigation.  We have amps and pedals with EQs and volume controls to do that job.

[nfe]

Well yeah, that's what I said in the first half of the first sentence in that last paragraph. But that's quite different from specifically setting out to make a Les Paul std that suits a pub and a Les Paul std that suits Wembley, which is more what is being suggested.

Is it?  I don't think anyone would say that's a worthwhile investigation.  We have amps and pedals with EQs and volume controls to do that job.

Err...yes, we do. Which is why it's interesting - it's a very different approach with modern instruments. That's what I was saying when you replied that it's the same idea as "hollowbodies for jazz, baritones, etc" - because it isn't. It's a completely different way of approaching things for quite different reasons. I didn't suggest that it was something worth investigating or pursuing for guitars.

I'm not sure exactly what you think I was saying, but I doesn't seem to be what I intended :lol:

[Twinfan]

I thought you were on about guitars - sorry!

[WezV]

That said, I would have thought that as knowledge of acoustics and manufacturing techniques improve it ought to be possible to build a better violin now than in Stradivarius' day, assuming that the same quality of raw materials is still available. Or has the design of the instrument remained so static that there has been no real change in design since the 18th Century?

people have spent a very long time copying strads - the goal always seems to be 'as good as a strad'.  Maybe they should focus on making them better, and i am sure some do.   but then you have the problem that 'better than a strad' is also 'different from a strad' which to some is automatically always going to be 'worse than a strad'

I dont think anyones offering 'your brain tricked you' as an explanation for most things. It comes up here and there, usually where theres little actual difference (if any at all) but lots of percieved or presentational difference (or price difference, of course ).

I know i was exaggerating, in truth its nowhere near as bad on this forum, obviously because most of us are happy to spend money on refining our tone.  But it does annoy me greatly on other (less enlightened ;) ) forums.

[WezV]

The one I'm really curious about now personally is the neck joint construction of a guitar, because I've convinced myself that I need a neck-through guitar in my collection for the extra sustain and the different sound, but that article that I posted earlier actually suggests that the neck through guitar sustained less than the other two (albeit the difference was very minor), and that test did not not rely solely on perception, so no psychoacoustics were involved.  Being a guitar builder I'd be really interested to hear your views on that one.

its a difficult one because for me it always depends on the woods used and the quality of the join.   Neck throughs dont really sustain more, but you can see why people assumed that making a guitar with less joins would sustain more... if you take an oversimplified 80's guitar shop view of teh instrument.

I di think they sustain differently, whilst i have made many of each type of neck join i do not have a definitive answer as there have always been other differences.

I mainly like neck throughs for extra stiffness and a comfy/aesthetically pleasing neck join. mine are usually laminated necks, which i do believe makes a difference to tone as the extra stiffness reduces wasted string energy  that can come from a neck/headstock flapping about.   

I generally approach any claims of increased sustain with a bit of caution - who really cares.  The average guitar, well set-up, should have more than enough sustain for most things.   

[Philly Q]

I mainly like neck throughs for extra stiffness and a comfy/aesthetically pleasing neck join. mine are usually laminated necks, which i do believe makes a difference to tone as the extra stiffness reduces wasted string energy  that can come from a neck/headstock flapping about.   

I've never owned a neck through, but the improved neck join (or neck to body transition) is certainly appealing - especially on something like an SG, where you can totally eliminate that notorious weak spot!

I can see the sense of laminated necks too - I'm surprised Gibson and (especially) PRS haven't tried them for efficient use of timber resources and improved stiffness/stability.  I know Hamer have always used three-piece necks.

[Twinfan]

Gibson had a laminate necks in the Norlin era, which is generally seen as a bad time for guitar building, so I would guess the stigma of that has stuck a little?

I can't see PRS using laminated necks if they have a good supply of quality neck blanks.