Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
If they can't tell the difference, you probably can't either...
- Thread starter Dark Horse
- Start date
- Feb 16, 2008
- 21,240
- 23,638
- Disclosures
- John K Custom Basses
that doesn't surprise me. 1952 Les Pauls are NOT the desirable vintage LP model (they had a floating trapeze bridge, a shallow neck angle and P90's. it's the 58's with humbuckers that are the ones that are sought after, and besides their age and pickups, the longer tenon in their neck mount contributes partially to their sound. the historic RI's have duplicated that in many of them and can also sound great, as do some of the lighterweight chambered ones.
I have to say I liked the Stradivarius better. It has a bit smoother sound to it, to my ear, with my Sennheiser phones and coming through my sound card. But they both sound very much like violins.
Exactly. Hey, I saw a demo once of one of the big name soloists with a Strad and a student violin. The difference was so obvious (and playability wasn't even involved...he played the butt of BOTH violins) and even through my crappy TV speaker I hear an obvious difference. And THAT was enough information for me to tell the difference in the smoothness between a better quality modern violin and the Strad through the internet and my computer and head phones and easily get it right.
It's the tonewood thing all over again. If I'm sitting in a concert hall and the soloist steps up am I going to say "Oh, he's not playing the strad, tonight!"? Without anything to compare to, anyone would be hard pressed if not impossible to figure that out unless it's an "entry level violin". But I'll bet you the PLAYER could easily tell the difference. Hey I've got two nearly identical Jazz basses: One in Ash and one in Alder. and *I* can easily tell the difference. But then they are mine, and I've lived with them for a long time. But if anyone noticed the difference on the gig, I'd have to start expecting reports of something frozen over.
But I find the whole premise (that expert violinists can't tell a strad even if they play it) to be totally bogus, if I can easily hear it through my computer without even touching them. But are people hosed? Yes they are. Cripes most everyone (including bassists) don't even notice that I'm playing fretless if I use a lined fretless! And you expect them to notice the subtle tone difference in a Strad?
My son's school orchestra leader (a violinist and violin instructor) was very surprised how good my son's violin sounded. I bought it for him from ebay because he wanted a violin finished in black. It cost me the princely sum of $60 new.
My son's...it's black.
Are we really surprised that three instruments that are built the same way with the same construction, wood, etc sound the same way with very little recognizable differences?
Honestly, I'm not.
Perhaps you can hear something with the instrument soloed in a quiet room. But then in an orchestra or band context, you are really going to hear a difference?
Come on.
We have all been drinking the marketing Kool aid too long, my friends.
John
Honestly, I'm not.
Perhaps you can hear something with the instrument soloed in a quiet room. But then in an orchestra or band context, you are really going to hear a difference?
Come on.
We have all been drinking the marketing Kool aid too long, my friends.
John
I don't know what he said exactly, do you? Someone produce the article!
Sure, PM me your email address, I just need to look for it...
I hear this a lot, but I'm skeptical. First of all, there have been no follow-on tests to these isolated tests to demonstrate these differences. Secondly, why would differences between instruments become MORE audible when the waveform tested is suddenly complicated by a thousand other sounds, let alone whatever coloring or time-delay effects an auditorium would introduce?
I'm by no means putting these words in your mouth, but it's also a common "expert" move to repeatedly move the goalposts of a test until the test environment is either impossible to replicate or no longer resembles any practical real world environment.
On the other hand, there are plenty of people who can't tell the difference between McDonald's and food.
if you were to play 2 basses blindfolded for me i wouldnt be able to tell you which brand is which, but i would definately be able to hear a difference between the 2 and tell you which i prefer. just because they couldnt say this one was the strad doesnt mean that they didnt hear differences. if someone were to blindly listen to all 4 of my upright basses they would have to be pretty deaf not to hear a huge difference in the tone, but i really doubt that they could name the brand based on the tone unless they were really familiar with my basses. they could however, tell me which one they liked best, and that may or may not be the most expensive one. that's a matter of taste, but if they couldnt hear a huge difference in tone, then they would really have to have bad ears.
This. You think you can hear it easier when theres 5 or more other violins playing at the same time? Give me a break. This is textbook placebo effect.
The article doesn't say how expensive the "modern" violin was... They just say both are "fine".... This leads me to believe the modern violin is an expensive violin in its own right.
This doesn't really prove anything about cheap being the same as expensive, just that well-made old and well-made new are closer than most people realize.
I may not be able to hear a difference between a 4,000+ dollar bass and a SX with the same pickups in, but I will be able to feel the difference in playability. I truly believe there are many factors that take into account hearing (same with touch, smell and taste). Example: when you taste food, 60-70% of what you taste is actually from how it smells; temperature also plays a big role (i.e. cold coffee vs. hot coffee).
So, it isn’t shocking to me if we perceive different sounds from instruments by how they look/price etc. For the record: I liked the second violin sound better.
This doesn't really prove anything about cheap being the same as expensive, just that well-made old and well-made new are closer than most people realize.
I may not be able to hear a difference between a 4,000+ dollar bass and a SX with the same pickups in, but I will be able to feel the difference in playability. I truly believe there are many factors that take into account hearing (same with touch, smell and taste). Example: when you taste food, 60-70% of what you taste is actually from how it smells; temperature also plays a big role (i.e. cold coffee vs. hot coffee).
So, it isn’t shocking to me if we perceive different sounds from instruments by how they look/price etc. For the record: I liked the second violin sound better.
I think the argument has never been "all violins and/or basses sound exactly the same" but rather that there are no qualitative differences that can reliably and accurately be used to identify which bass is which.
JimmyM's sound test from a few years back comes to mind. He recorded a late 70s Fender P and a brand new SX. The clips sounded similar, but one clearly sounded better (at least in the subjective opinion of most listeners.) THAT bass was the SX. While this outcome gave people an out by letting them claim to have heard the difference, the real finding was that few had expressed a preference for the vintage instrument.
i guess that also depends on what one considers "better". my friend prefers a different one of my basses than i do. he's a great and very experienced bass player, he just wants to hear a different sound than i do
Oh, completely. Taste buds aren't transferrable but for really expensive and painful surgery.
ok without cheating, I listened to both the samples.
and I have a feeling they are trying to trick me/us.
Both of them good to me, but the first sample is louder and seems to have more string detail. Its really obvious at first listen.
I can only guess the first one is the newer violin and the second is the strat.
Why? i just have a feeling its a trick to bias us towards the first sample because it sounds brighter and louder.
Most likely new strings could fool most, like if you had blind test with a vintage bass with crap strings, and then compared it to a Squier bass with really snappy new strings.
whatever....blind tests can still be biased.
Just like a 300$ boutique fuzz pedal can still sound like a 30$ used one......because they are all just fuzz face copys or plain jane transistors getting splattered with gain. Wow
.
and I have a feeling they are trying to trick me/us.
Both of them good to me, but the first sample is louder and seems to have more string detail. Its really obvious at first listen.
I can only guess the first one is the newer violin and the second is the strat.
Why? i just have a feeling its a trick to bias us towards the first sample because it sounds brighter and louder.
Most likely new strings could fool most, like if you had blind test with a vintage bass with crap strings, and then compared it to a Squier bass with really snappy new strings.
whatever....blind tests can still be biased.
Just like a 300$ boutique fuzz pedal can still sound like a 30$ used one......because they are all just fuzz face copys or plain jane transistors getting splattered with gain. Wow
.
The only way to properly conduct that test is to remove the human element from all of these tests: invent a robot that plays the instruments the same way every time because attack, finger pressure, and will to play can change in thirty seconds in a human while a machine can be programmed to do it EXACTLY the same every time, regardless of instrument.
Other than that, I have nothing to say
Peace,
Greg
Other than that, I have nothing to say
Peace,
Greg
No, in fact that is a completely unbiased experiment. If someone can truly judge wines by taste the color of the sample would have no effect and the judge would declare them to be the same. He/she would be very puzzled by this and comment on that but would correctly declare them to be identical in taste. Now the dye itself could change the taste and a true judge would comment on that too. It is very unlikely that a red dye would impart exactly the flavor of a fine red wine though. The truth is that if you cannot determine that two samples are the same (whether one is mis-colored or not) you are not judging the wines strictly on taste. It would be interesting to know the results of the same test when the same judges were blindfolded and given no information on the samples. Or perhaps color one blue and the other green. Would they then declare them to be the same?
Ken
