• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Fodera Club Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
#883
I hear you.

On a more generic note, though.....I understand you can't prove a negative. But if you compare the outputs of two "things" which are identical except for one fundamental difference in their construction, and the output of the two things is identical given the same input, is it not reasonable to say that you've proven that the difference in construction between the two has no effect on the output? Or does that kind of experiment fall outside the parameters of a good scientific experiment?

I ask because I'm not sure I know.
 
#884
It's a bad medium, in this case. The materials used are too inconsistent not to consider them variables in the system- in which case you couldn't just compare the direct outputs. There are too many other variables that need to have their dependence understood before you want weight the effects of each variable to decide how each affected any change in output.

So you could test that one fundamental difference, but doing so on a bass is a poor scientific medium.
 
#885
I was really speaking generically. Just in terms of valid comparisons, NO change due to a difference (assuming it is predictably the ONLY difference) is as definitive as SOME change. Yes? No?

Out of curiosity, what if you strung just the B string to the farthest tuner, and listened to it by itself...maybe measured the output...like a spectral analysis....and maybe a sustain measurement...provided you could excite the string in the same way every time. Then restrung it to the closest tuner and took the same measurements. How controlled would we be then?
 
#886
Oh, I agree entirely that, in general, a statistically significant lack of change is as definitive as a change, if the trial is set up properly. No doubt.

I still wouldn't consider the latter part to be a great setup, because you are still changing more than the length (ie, break angle in two dimensions, etc). Honestly though I don't think you'd see much in the spectra, and even if you did, much of it would be dependent on factors like how the string is struck. It might show some significant difference with certain parameters and none with others. I honestly think there are too many variables to pin one down, and even if you did, it might make a difference on one instrument and not on another.

Hence, to each his own. Musical instruments are not great scientific models in practice. But of course a lot of generalities can be made with scientific basis- just that most real study has been done on violins and pianos, which are both completely different mediums with very different striking methods (which have a rather profound effect). But I knew you've read plenty on that and it's come up before, so it's sort of moot.

If a particular device gives someone more confidence of providing/emphasizing a particular characteristic on an instrument, whether it is well-based or not, it's probably better for them to have it and trust it than to listen to people like me and wonder forever what it would've been like the other way. In this particular case, I don't think the extended-B does any harm to the sound, either, so for me it doesn't really matter. But if someone thinks it might, they should probably get it and soothe their mind. We're a picky and peculiar bunch, so sometimes it's worth doing something that engenders confidence even if there is questionable "proof".
 
#887
Here here.

I'm sitting here putting together an outline for a little presentation I have to give at Johns Hopkins this week. If you don't already know, Charles Limb (known here on TB as "climb"), is in fact a world class surgeon in the field of otolaryngology. Because he is also a talented musician, he got started doing some research on musicians by scanning the brains of improvising musicians using an fMRI machine. He has the musician play a variety of different kinds of music from prepared music to improvised and he collects data on bloodflow to various parts of the brain under the various different conditions. Anyway, related to that, there is a conference at Johns Hopkins Brain Institute and Charles (I have to call him Dr. Limb for the next few days, I think) has assembled a panel to discuss creativity and the nuts and bolts of the brain, on which I am sitting along with him Marin Alsop (Musical Director of the Baltimore Symphony) and Pat Metheny. I have to speak intelligently and I won't have a spellcheck or edit button, so I'm organizing my thoughts now. It's a huge thrill but it's kind of scary. There will be some heavy people there. My thoughts are pretty well organized and I think I have some succinct and maybe even profound things to say. I just hope I don't go all "Flowers for Algernon" and forget everything.
 
#888
thepontif said:
Here here.

I'm sitting here putting together an outline for a little presentation I have to give at Johns Hopkins this week. If you don't already know, Charles Limb (known here on TB as "climb"), is in fact a world class surgeon in the field of otolaryngology. Because he is also a talented musician, he got started doing some research on musicians by scanning the brains of improvising musicians using an fMRI machine. He has the musician play a variety of different kinds of music from prepared music to improvised and he collects data on bloodflow to various parts of the brain under the various different conditions. Anyway, related to that, there is a conference at Johns Hopkins Brain Institute and Charles (I have to call him Dr. Limb for the next few days, I think) has assembled a panel to discuss creativity and the nuts and bolts of the brain, on which I am sitting along with him Marin Alsop (Musical Director of the Baltimore Symphony) and Pat Metheny. I have to speak intelligently and I won't have a spellcheck or edit button, so I'm organizing my thoughts now. It's a huge thrill but it's kind of scary. There will be some heavy people there. My thoughts are pretty well organized and I think I have some succinct and maybe even profound things to say. I just hope I don't go all "Flowers for Algernon" and forget everything.
Click to expand...

That is really interesting. I would like to read about his results. Will this information be available anywhere? I did a paper and a speech in college on the Mozart Effect, so I'd love to learn more on this subject.
 
#889
I don't know what will be available where or when, although at least one of Charles' studies has been published. I'm not sure where, though. Hopefully he'll chime in at some point. I'll be seeing him so I can ask him to point you in the right direction.
 
#891
thepontif said:
I don't know what will be available where or when, although at least one of Charles' studies has been published. I'm not sure where, though. Hopefully he'll chime in at some point. I'll be seeing him so I can ask him to point you in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Wow! I would love to hear your feedback after this event. Please, keep us informed if you are willing and able. Fascinating.
 
#893
thepontif said:
I hear you.

On a more generic note, though.....I understand you can't prove a negative. But if you compare the outputs of two "things" which are identical except for one fundamental difference in their construction, and the output of the two things is identical given the same input, is it not reasonable to say that you've proven that the difference in construction between the two has no effect on the output? Or does that kind of experiment fall outside the parameters of a good scientific experiment?

I ask because I'm not sure I know.
Click to expand...
That might be a valid experiment if you could actually account for all the other variables. For instance, how could you have two basses made of identical wood? Are the pickups truly identical?

You do have a point, though. I've never done an experiment with basses strung both ways. Then again, I've never heard of any supportable evidence that extending the B string does anything for the tone, especially since the tension in the string is dependent on the distance between the witness points, and remains constant regardless of the length of the string beyond the nut or bridge. But I'm sure you've heard it all before.

And here's where you didn't want to go in the first place. Sorry. Let's go back on topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back