The Absolute Sound vs Pleasing Sound


I have changed my mind about this over the years. The absolute sound (closest to real live music) just can't be accomplished even though I have heard some spectacular systems that get close on some music. So years ago I changed my system to give me the sound I wanted. I'm much happier now and all my music collection can be enjoyed for what it is: Recorded music.  
russ69
"...I spent so much time in them that my wife swore I was seeing another woman."

We feel sorry for your lost opportunity.
Post removed 
Can we continue with logical fallacies and slide into Barbara and her boys? I am quite good at them. It may not be for an audio website, but so aren't logical fallacies either.
Apology if anyone is offended that after writing that I would “leave the thread” I should post again. The most recent comments re “Strads vs new” is a little too close to home to ignore; and prompted me to comment and add to mahgister’s excellent comments.

“Reviews” and related commentary such as on the linked blind test proclaiming the supposed superiority of modern instruments are maddening in their lack of depth and, as usual, ignorance of what superiority in an instrument truly means to a musician. Any accomplished musician will tell you that very often for a superior instrument to reveal its superiority the player needs to spend a considerable amount of time with it; not just minutes or even hours. Often, the instrument that is easier to play when first picked up, as is often the case with new instruments, will reveal itself to have limitations in complexity of timbre and will, long term, limit the player’s expressivity. The lack of innate complexity of timbre in many new instruments doesn’t offer the player as much potential to shape a very personalized tone. Conversely, instruments such as a great Strad or Guarneri will often feel far more resistant and constrained when the player first makes the acquaintance and the player (even world class) needs time to learn how that particular instrument likes to be played before it will open up and reveal its superiority in the areas that matter to a great player. Often, it is a matter of, instead of forcing the instrument to respond, of relaxing one’s technique and getting out of the way of the instrument. Initial impressions of tonal qualities of instruments in a blind tests consisting of little playing time with the instruments mean little and it is not surprising that some of the musicians taking part in the blind test would “prefer” the modern instruments.

As an aside, I have had extensive playing experience (I am not a string player) with a major East coast symphony orchestra which through a highly publicized arrangement with some benefactors was able to procure a collection of thirty (!) antique Italian string instruments (not only violins) including several Strads, Guarneri’s, del Gesu and Amatis for use by the players in the orchestra. All the players in the orchestra are first rate players with very fine, mostly modern, personal instruments. The impact on the sound of the string section as a result of the inclusion of the antique instruments was remarkable and transformative.

Yes, some modern luthiers are making fine string instruments today, but there are very real and legitimate reasons why Strads and Guarneri’s fetch the prices that they do. For many accomplished players they remain unsurpassed; and not because of expectation bias.


Thanks frogman these precisions about blind test improvisation and timbre perception had to come from a professional musician to correct hasty conclusions about the real value and limitations of blind test especially in this case...

There is not doubts that there is luthier genius today and the test has the merit to reveal one, but like you said it is IMPOSSIBLE to assess an instrument value in this kind of test and justifying irrational opinion like stradivarius reputation are ONLY biases....




My deepest regards....