“Human ears are better than measurements!” / “Humans can hear things we can’t even measure!”

[uliwer]

Listeners had the same preference for modern violins as the players, so no, you don't need any of this; you only need the sound. And as @rjp mentions, you can likely even train a model on it to distinguish a Stradivari from a plain violin with high confidence and accuracy.

Just imagine a so called „Stradivari“ on auction. And the people with measuring tools say: „Well, the tree grew in the 20th century anywhere in Northern Europe, the painting has modern components unknown in the beginning of the 18th century - so it can‘t be a real Stradivari“. And the participant of your listening test says: „It‘s a real Stradivari! I heard it! Human ears are better than measurements!“ How much would anyone spend for the violin in the auction?
You may look around Wikipedia or elswhere which modern musicians played or still play Stradivaris. Gidon Kremer did as well as David Garret. I am sure I can find out who plays just by listening, not because my ears are so good, but just because they play in totally different styles. Though I am also sure I shall never find out by listening whether one of them plays a Stradivari or any other violin. It just doesn‘t really matter.

 

[ahofer]

How an instrument *feels* and *responds* is extremely relevant to a musician. That includes the psychological effect of playing a well-known Stradivarius that was played by famous musicians of old. Most Amati or Stradivari, or Guarneri have an artist provenance, not just an ownership provenance.

This has no bearing at all on the accuracy of reproduction through audio equipment of Joshua Bell playing and enjoying the “Gibson ex-Huberman” Strad.

 

[Tell]

How an instrument *feels* and *responds* is extremely relevant to a musician. That includes the psychological effect of playing a well-known Stradivarius that was played by famous musicians of old. Most Amati or Stradivari, or Guarneri have an artist provenance, not just an ownership provenance.

This has no bearing at all on the accuracy of reproduction through audio equipment of Joshua Bell playing and enjoying the “Gibson ex-Huberman” Strad.

I guess that's the next thing to blindtest, the same person plays the same piece on a Stradivarius and on a modern violin and people have to judge what sounds best.

Though I'm not sure how this whole thing relates to measurement mics and ears?

 

[voodooless]

Though I'm not sure how this whole thing relates to measurement mics and ears?

“Human ears are better than measurements!” / “Humans can hear things we can’t even measure!”

Before @amirm's concert ... After @amirm's concert.

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[mpw]

Professional musicians choose an instrument a violin,guitar,etc, because they like the sound of the instrument for recording or live playing. Playing a 50's fender telecaster should sound better then playing a modern squire tele which is going to be recorded for the listener. A solid state fender amp is going to sound quite different then tube fender amp which the listener should enjoy more. If the listener couldn't detect a good guitar or violin from a cheap one then why not just record the cheapest instrument because the listener can't tell the different ? Glenn Gould tried out many Steinways to get the sound that he wanted to record his music for the listener. Musicians could care less about how an instrument is measurements or O'tools graphs,etc. they are concerned about making a great recording for us to enjoy, in turn we the listener listen with our ears not vague measurements by academics. Anyway I sure whatever system you listen to you must enjoy it for whatever reason, that's all good !

 

[Mart68]

Playing a 50's fender telecaster should sound better then playing a modern squire tele which is going to be recorded for the listener.

There's a lot more to it than that.

 

[mpw]

There's a lot more to it than that.

Like what ? I just did a summarization not dissertation .

 

[IPunchCholla]

Professional musicians choose an instrument a violin,guitar,etc, because they like the sound of the instrument for recording or live playing. Playing a 50's fender telecaster should sound better then playing a modern squire tele which is going to be recorded for the listener. A solid state fender amp is going to sound quite different then tube fender amp which the listener should enjoy more. If the listener couldn't detect a good guitar or violin from a cheap one then why not just record the cheapest instrument because the listener can't tell the different ? Glenn Gould tried out many Steinways to get the sound that he wanted to record his music for the listener. Musicians could care less about how an instrument is measurements or O'tools graphs,etc. they are concerned about making a great recording for us to enjoy, in turn we the listener listen with our ears not vague measurements by academics. Anyway I sure whatever system you listen to you must enjoy it for whatever reason, that's all good !

I take musicians equipment choices just as seriously as I do baseball players batting rituals. It doesn’t matter what the choices/rituals are, just that the participants believe in them.

 

[voodooless]

I take musicians equipment choices just as seriously as I do baseball players batting rituals. It doesn’t matter what the choices/rituals are, just that the participants believe in them.

It would be an interesting extension to the Stradivarius experiments: Let the listeners be double blind, but the players not, and see if that changes the preference of the listeners. If so, that would mean that the players actually play "better", only because they know that they play a Stradivarius

 

[mpw]

I take musicians equipment choices just as seriously as I do baseball players batting rituals. It doesn’t matter what the choices/rituals are, just that the participants believe in them.

You don't think equipment makes a difference in the sound that a musician wants to get in a recording ?? Anyway baseball player batting rituals are more in the past with the pitch clock.

 

[mpw]

It would be an interesting extension to the Stradivarius experiments: Let the listeners be double blind, but the players not, and see if that changes the preference of the listeners. If so, that would mean that the players actually play "better", only because they know that they play a Stradivarius

Great players can play great on a cheap violin or a strad as they are experts/elite. I could give Jimmy Page anyone of my guitars and he would make it 'sing ! Of course expert musicians know which instruments to pick for playability and sound that they desire.

 

[voodooless]

Great players can play great on a cheap violin or a strad as they are experts/elite. I could give Jimmy Page anyone of my guitars and he would make it 'sing !

All of that is beside the point…

Of course expert musicians know which instruments to pick for playability and sound that they desire.

But the point is: how much of that is bias, and how much is actually the instrument?

Ultimately it doesn’t matter at all. It’s artistic expression, so whatever the artist does, goes. It doesn’t matter if it’s a real effect or not.

 

[mpw]

It's both. The musician in the studio know what instrument to pick and sound he wants to get for the track. What kind of bias are you talking about ? The point is that from the studio to us measurements to don't mean much but Ears matter. Measurements matter more to be people like O'toole and others doing sound research in an academic way.

All of that is beside the point…

But the point is: how much of that is bias, and how much is actually the instrument?

Ultimately it doesn’t matter at all. It’s artistic expression, so whatever the artist does, goes. It doesn’t matter if it’s a real effect or not.

 

[Redacted]

Aargh! My tin foil hat is stuck onto my scalp.
At least I'm 0.0000001% safer from cosmic rays!

 

[IPunchCholla]

You don't think equipment makes a difference in the sound that a musician wants to get in a recording ?? Anyway baseball player batting rituals are more in the past with the pitch clock.

As a musician myself, I think the instrument matters in a very general sort of way. Different pickups sound different. Tape wound vs round wound is a thing they sound different. But the differences are smaller than most think and easily overcome in the editing process. It matters far more how those differences feel to the musician psychologically. It matters more the worse the musician is.

There are differences between shoes. None will make me Usain Bolt.

 

[mpw]

As a musician myself, I think the instrument matters in a very general sort of way. Different pickups sound different. Tape wound vs round wound is a thing they sound different. But the differences are smaller than most think and easily overcome in the editing process. It matters far more how those differences feel to the musician psychologically. It matters more the worse the musician is.

There are differences between shoes. None will make me Usain Bolt.

Everything is a small difference but professional musicians know that those small differences make a difference in the track.

 

[IPunchCholla]

Everything is a small difference but professional musicians know that those small differences make a difference in the track.

Some. Some also know that much of it is in peoples’ heads.

Nowadays the world and its sales rep want Sklar to endorse their products, including German-based manufacturer Warwick, who built him one of their Star Basses, but with a one-off custom switch. “I call it my producer’s switch,” explains Lee. “If I’m on a session and the producer asks me to get a different sound, I make sure he sees me flip this switch and then I just change my hand position a bit. There are no wires of anything that go to this switch. It's a placebo, but it’s saved me a lot of grief in the studio.”

 

[mpw]

Why would an acoustic guitar player at a session bring along 6 different acoustic martins to use for tracking when one would do as it more in his 'head then actual need ?

Some. Some also know that much of it is in peoples’ heads

 

[voodooless]

What kind of bias are you talking about ?

Anything that makes the performer more comfortable playing the instrument. Maybe they like always being on the right side of the stage; maybe they like their always-blue guitar pick. Maybe they need their special necklace, their trusted drumsticks, their favourite violin. Just the feeling of comfort and familiarity alone will make you perform better.

 

[KSTR]

Everything is a small difference but professional musicians know that those small differences make a difference in the track.

Exactly..... or not. For example, with electric guitars it makes a huge difference to player whether he/she uses a Les Paul or a Telecaster, neck or bridge pickups, single coil or humbuckers.
But when listening to the final track after some time, even the player sometimes can hardly tell the exact setup, let alone the audience.

We all know David Gilmore's solo on "Another brick in the Wall" and because he's strongly associated with having the Stratocaster sound everybody thinks a Strat was used but in fact it was a Les Paul.