If they can't tell the difference, you probably can't either...

[Funkinthetrunk]

I promise you this: If all human beings were blind - we wouldn't be playing and 'needing' that $5,000 bass.

If we were all blind, our sense of hearing would dramatically improve. And this thread may not ever have existed....because we'd know.

 

[bass12]

Interestingly, I played both clips for a friend who is classically trained and has what I would consider a very good ear. She said with absolute confidence that the second clip was the Strad and that, to her, it sounded much better than the first (non Strad) clip. I had to listen several times to be sure myself but she knew right away.

 

[F-Clef-Jef]

Does anyone know what type of sound files those are? For all you know you may be basing your opinion on an .mp3. Or is it a lossless wav? What sample rate? What about the strings on the violins? Old? New? Different types? Same bow? There are still a lot of variables.
I couldn't tell you which was which, they did sound slightly different to me, but I have no way of telling which was the Strad.

I have done some fun tests on my kids when they were young. I'd give them a cup of Kool-Aid, but not let them see what color it was (sippy-cups). They could never tell me what flavor it was until they could see what color it was. Try it on yourself sometime.

 

[champbassist]

Does anyone know what type of sound files those are? For all you know you may be basing your opinion on an .mp3. Or is it a lossless wav? What sample rate? What about the strings on the violins? Old? New? Different types? Same bow? There are still a lot of variables.
I couldn't tell you which was which, they did sound slightly different to me, but I have no way of telling which was the Strad.

Both of the files in the link are mp3s. At 64kbps.

 

[eqvolvorama]

Both of the files in the link are mp3s. At 64kbps.

I think the takeaway from the actual test was that the people unable to tell the difference were the ones not only hearing the actual instrument, but feeling it under their chins. This is rare in that it's not only a listening test, it's a playing test.

IMO the idea that lossy compression could eliminate the differences between two instruments kind of drives home the possibility that the differences aren't that notable to begin with. People routinely overestimate their ability to differentiate lossy from lossless audio, especially given the quality of the encoders these days.

 

[mongo2]

IMO the idea that lossy compression could eliminate the differences between two instruments kind of drives home the possibility that the differences aren't that notable to begin with. People routinely overestimate their ability to differentiate lossy from lossless audio, especially given the quality of the encoders these days.

If both samples are processed the same way then it's a valid test and any result can be considered an accurate assessment of the listener's ability to detect differences within the context of the processing and the listener's sound system used to play it. Obviously the samples won't sound the same through my laptop speakers as they do through my Bose setup.

 

[Handyman]

If the test subjects weren't able to tell the difference between the instruments used in the test, one would expect all the instruments to have received roughly the same number of votes. But this didn't happen.

The fact that a newer instrument was the favorite, it tells me that:
- Being rare and valuable doesn't mean that an instrument will be a fit for a given player's tastes
- Its possible that violin makers have come with with an improvement or two in the past couple centuries.

 

[seamonkey]

I doubt the clips were accurately recorded, one being a little louder, a little closer to the mic, can throw off the listening results. They were probably played by someone who is seeing what they are playing.

I've seen other gear where the person doing the demo knows what they are playing and plays differently. They may not even know it. The ideomotor effect.

The clips were not part of the double blind test anyhow.

This test is actually making it out to quite a few news services. Which makes me think it might be a stunt for some announcement from one of the violin makers.

 

[HolmeBass]

It's important to realize a few things:
- The experiment shows that most of those professional violinists could not tell the difference. That is really all.
- What were the "modern" violins? How expensive were they, and how were they constructed? Aren't modern hand-made violins of the highest calibre just attempts to copy Strads? Should we be surprised that they sound the same?

What would be interesting is if they now took the 3 who picked the "old Italians" correctly and had them perform many other double-blind trials to see how consistently accurate they are - or aren't.

Basically one flaw of this experiment is that I do not see any guarantee that merely being a professional violinist means you can tell a Strad from another violin- merely that you would know what you personally like.

Still a fascinating result, but more research is needed. And it was only 17 violinists. Let's try 100's and see how it pans out.

 

[MEKer]

Glad they don't do such tests on poo (using university volunteers of course).

Just thought I'd drop that in.

 

[bass12]

Glad they don't do such tests on poo (using university volunteers of course).

If you only knew...

 

[MEKer]

If you only knew...

 

[Funkinthetrunk]

I don't know what he said exactly, do you? Someone produce the article!

OK...found it. It's from "International Musician" April 1978. 4 pages to Leo's story/interview scanned as a pdf. Anyone wants it, PM me with your email address.