Dear
@frogman : """
This kind of test proves very little other than the fact that, yes, there are good modern instruments being crafted today. """
I think that proves more than that because some of those new instruments outperforms the old very well regarded ones.
"""
the reason that these tests are pretty pointless, is that finding that "sweet spot" does not happen in minutes or even hours """
why pointless?, the tests goes in both directions: new ones and old ones and in exactly the same enviroment with no advantage to either instrument.
In the other side a more in deep test, this is more time is not possible to do it because the tests can takes over a year and impossible that over the time the players moods stay the same.
As a fact the tester leaders ask to the first rate soloist how much time they think will need it and they coincided that 50 minutes. The tests took two 75 minutes sessions.
Here are some high ligths about:
""" SignificanceSome studies open new fields for investigation; this study attempts to close a perennially fruitless one—the search for the “secrets of Stradivari.” Great efforts have been made to explain why instruments by Stradivari and other Old Italian makers sound better than high-quality new violins, but without providing scientific evidence that this is in fact the case. Doing so requires that experienced violinists demonstrate (under double-blind conditions) both a general preference for Old Italian violins and the ability to reliably distinguish them from new ones. The current study, the second of its kind, again shows that first-rate soloists tend to prefer new instruments and are unable to distinguish old from new at better than chance levels.
AbstractMany researchers have sought explanations for the purported tonal superiority of Old Italian violins by investigating varnish and wood properties, plate tuning systems, and the spectral balance of the radiated sound. Nevertheless, the fundamental premise of tonal superiority has been investigated scientifically only once very recently, and results showed a general preference for new violins and that players were unable to reliably distinguish new violins from old. The study was, however, relatively small in terms of the number of violins tested (six), the time allotted to each player (an hour), and the size of the test space (a hotel room). In this study, 10 renowned soloists each blind-tested six Old Italian violins (including five by Stradivari) and six new during two 75-min sessions—the first in a rehearsal room, the second in a 300-seat concert hall. When asked to choose a violin to replace their own for a hypothetical concert tour, 6 of the 10 soloists chose a new instrument. A single new violin was easily the most-preferred of the 12. On average, soloists rated their favorite new violins more highly than their favorite old for playability, articulation, and projection, and at least equal to old in terms of timbre. Soloists failed to distinguish new from old at better than chance levels. These results confirm and extend those of the earlier study and present a striking challenge to near-canonical beliefs about Old Italian violins. """
Those result over more than one study are really interesting and maybe unexpected. The facts are there, any other conclusions from our part is a theoretical and pointless because you was not one of those players and never pass through thse tests.
Of course no one likes that a 2KK dolar instrument suddenly was outperformed for a " penautus " instrument and if I'm the owner of that 2KK instrument I can't accept the results of those tests. The proud feelings that has a Stradivarius owner does not counts in those tests and has no value at all.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC not DISTORTIONS,
R.
