Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

violinist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 94 posts

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#31

Post by vilda »

pazimzadeh wrote: post #25

Because the violinists were only allowed to try the violins for one minute, this study has the same flaw that the Pepsi Challenge had in 1975: "In his book, Blink, author Malcolm Gladwell presents evidence that suggests Pepsi's success over Coca-Cola in the "Pepsi Challenge" is a result of the flawed nature of the "sip test" method. His research shows that tasters will generally prefer the sweeter of two beverages ba…

You can find similar issues with loudspeaks (those overly enhancing basses sounds better, but perform worse) and TV displays (overly saturated colors).

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#32

Post by abalone »

I would love to see a study like this done with vinyl vs. digital.

1. Put some vinyl-loving DJs in a hotel room.

2. To factor out identifying pops & scratches, pre-record a vinyl song onto digital. Record it several times and use each digital recording only once.

3. Cover their eyes and randomly switch between vinyl & digital.

See if they can tell the difference.

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#33

Post by rquantz »

ricardobeat wrote: post #17
russelluresti wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't even say the study proved that point. The fact that the older fiddles couldn't be adjusted for sound optimizations while the new ones could makes a huge impact on the study - it invariably unlevels the playing field.

I believe rare instruments like those are always kept in pristine conditions, and nowhere it is mentioned that the new ones had adjustments done, you can assume they all were received in 'normal playing condition' from their owners.

You believe wrong. Also, even if they are, traveling with an instrument, especially and old finicky one (and they do get finicky when they get old) can throw it out of adjustment, a seam can pop open, a string can go false, etc.

The new ones, on the other hand, since they were actually new, were probably being maintained by their makers, who undoubtedly made sure they were in top condition when they went into competition with a strad.

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#34

Post by rasz_pl »

GhotiFish wrote: post #20
andybak wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did a rather poor job of expressing himself in a sensible manner but I must admit I had the same takeaway from the article.

pick best does not mean pick oldest, news articles said study was identification, study subject says study was preference, study says study was preference. How you could possible reach the grand parents takeaway is seriously concerning. explain.

Yes. Im sure this is why she herself uses 200 year old violin instead of the modern one.

> for the last five years, a mid-1800s Italian.

Whole article is a result of authors cognitive dissonance.

I dont see much difference between her and people arguing for $1K speaker cables and later failing to distinguish them from coat hangars.

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#35

Post by the_cat_kittles »

What would have been really interesting is if they had also conducted the test with another group of participants who were all informed about what each violin was. Then we could see how much influence lore and history have on what people like, by comparing the scores between groups.

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#36

Post by rasz_pl »

GhotiFish wrote: post #11
rasz_pl wrote: post #9

TLDR: "Im an audiophool. I know whats great by the price stick^^^I could totally pick Strad blindfolded, I just didnt feel like it that day."

read again.

What for?

Author owns old violin, author does the test, author picks modern violin over $10 million ones, author tries to defend herself post facto (bad test, not tuned, blabla), then some audiobabble (sweet sound, personality, other nonsense).

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#37

Post by analog31 »

vilda wrote: post #31
pazimzadeh wrote: post #25

Because the violinists were only allowed to try the violins for one minute, this study has the same flaw that the Pepsi Challenge had in 1975: "In his book, Blink, author Malcolm Gladwell presents evidence that suggests Pepsi's success over Coca-Cola in the "Pepsi Challenge" is a result of the flawed nature of the "sip test" method. His research shows that tasters will generally prefer the sweeter of two beverages ba…

You can find similar issues with loudspeaks (those overly enhancing basses sounds better, but perform worse) and TV displays (overly saturated colors).

Indeed, one of the challenges of comparing audio systems is that -- rule of thumb -- louder sounds better. To have any hope of exposing effects other than overall loudness, systems under test have to be matched for gain.

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#38

Post by jeroen »

abalone wrote: post #29

Wait a minute. She claims: "Now a lot of you found it easy to pick the Strad... But it wasn't actually our task to pick the Italian in this study -- it was to pick our preference." But NPR directly quotes the guy who ran the study: "JOYCE: Curtin says of the 17 players who were asked to choose which were the old Italians... CURTIN: Seven said they couldn't. Seven got it wrong, and only three got it right." [1] Maybe…

The abstract [1] says:

"We asked 21 experienced violinists to compare violins by Stradivari and Guarneri del Gesu with high-quality new instruments. The resulting preferences were …"

It then goes on about preferences and says nothing about identifying them.

So it's the abstract of the study, written (I assume) by the researchers, and one of the participants vs a journalist "quoting" one of the researchers.

[1] http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/02/1114999109.abst...

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#39

Post by antihero »

abalone wrote: post #32

I would love to see a study like this done with vinyl vs. digital. 1. Put some vinyl-loving DJs in a hotel room. 2. To factor out identifying pops & scratches, pre-record a vinyl song onto digital. Record it several times and use each digital recording only once. 3. Cover their eyes and randomly switch between vinyl & digital. See if they can tell the difference.

I think your test actually factors in one of the reasons people like vinyl - it's not that the sound is necessarily better, but with analogue, there's a uniqueness factor because it's a physical needle hitting a physical groove.

Re: What Really Happened in that Double-Blind Violin Sound Test

#40

Post by WalterBright »

pazimzadeh wrote: post #25

Because the violinists were only allowed to try the violins for one minute, this study has the same flaw that the Pepsi Challenge had in 1975: "In his book, Blink, author Malcolm Gladwell presents evidence that suggests Pepsi's success over Coca-Cola in the "Pepsi Challenge" is a result of the flawed nature of the "sip test" method. His research shows that tasters will generally prefer the sweeter of two beverages ba…

I took the Pepsi Challenge at a trade fair in the 70's, and had no trouble distinguishing the Coke. I preferred the Coke, said so, and the Pepsi spokesman's response was:

  "Next!"
I figured I wasn't getting on camera.
Post reply on HN