Jump to content

new vs old research Claudia Fritz, Curtin, Fan Tao et. al.


violins88
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi dan_s

What do you mean by bio? My CV?

 

No, we're not planning to repeat the test. We find our results convincing enough to move on! And I don't think I'll have the energy to redo such a test: roughly 8 months on it almost full time, 3 hour sleep only every night for the last three weeks before as well as for the week during the experiment, pressures from all side ... I'm not ready to go through this again, even if in the end, it was tremendous fun!

CV, yes. Do you have a link ?

I understand this was very hard work and we all owe you a debt for your efforts. You've tackled and accomplished a formidable task ! Please do not let dissenting opinions here bother you too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 313
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Claudia,

 

You said that the solists wanted to know who the maker(s) were and it remains confidential, but the maker do know!?

That's even more valuable information and would give a huge benefit to the maker.

 

Peter

 

 

Of course the makers do not know!!! They don't even know whether their violins were used in the end, as we collected 15 new violins and only used 6 of them!

That was the point: it's a scientific study, not a marketing one neither a competition between makers.

 

Great!

 

I was afraid you had a leak there ;)

Hope you will continue your work and find more and more innovative ways to study this (before all Cremonese violins are behind glass)

 

My believe is that Amatis/Strads/DGs where even better when they were new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the study produced results useful to violin makers ?

Maybe,not exactly "useful" in the traditional scene, 

I do find the results from this and the indie study extreeeemly encouraging, To know that it is at least possible to compete. Before the studies, there was a lot of speculation that it might be done ,now we have the proof, this new way of thought will raise the bar for every conscientious maker , eliminating any feeling of "why try?" pushing the envelope of tone, forcing makers to shoulder any shortcoming in tone,and to be assume responsibility  for outcomes.....can't just kick the can down the road anymore..... It will also raise expectations in players minds and encourage them to take a good look at all the fiddles available,not just old ones, this will in turn help to turn up the pressure on makers to not  simply tow the line.

     I expect that when the bridge tap to preference stats are made available....essentially a quantifiable target  ..... I think that there are many makers who will find it very directly useful ,essentially as a way of comparing known qualities of successful violins to their own work, something most makers have little access to.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see a 'reverse' test where violin 'enthusiasts', violin makers, amateurs, etc, pick the best instrument for a player. Then explain why this instrument is best suited for this player, why it sounds the way it does, their method of selecting, etc.

 

Then to find out how wrong they were. :D

 

Will you allow for the possibility they might be right ? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a lot of discussion for an article that a lot of people probably haven't even read yet.  I usually don't waste time reading a reporter's interpretation of research.   As a Peabody Prep parent I will be using my hour of hallway time tonight reading Dr Fritz's paper.  If the Authors or Jeffery think it's inappropriate to post the pdf here I'll be happy to delete it.  So down load it quick before the copyright police come knocking. B)

 

Happy reading,

Jim

FritzEtAl_PNAS_public.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe,not exactly "useful" in the traditional scene, 

.... Before the studies, there was a lot of speculation that it might be done ,now we have the proof,

What we have is a nice study. But I wouldn't call it proof. The study needs to be seriously scrutinized for inadequacies and/or eventual improvements by all interested parties and repeated. The real test is on re-takes. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Claudia,

 

You said that the solists wanted to know who the maker(s) were and it remains confidential, but the maker do know!?

That's even more valuable information and would give a huge benefit to the maker.

 

Peter

 

 

Of course the makers do not know!!! They don't even know whether their violins were used in the end, as we collected 15 new violins and only used 6 of them!

That was the point: it's a scientific study, not a marketing one neither a competition between makers.

 

 

Great!

 

I was afraid you had a leak there ;)

Hope you will continue your work and find more and more innovative ways to study this (before all Cremonese violins are behind glass)

 

My believe is that Amatis/Strads/DGs where even better when they were new.

 

Claudia,

 

I watched the Youtube video and read more about the study. One maker collected signature data on every violin. That meens that one maker has all the data and information on all instruments!

 

I would pay a lot for that information!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a lot of discussion for an article that a lot of people probably haven't even read yet.  I usually don't waste time reading a reporter's interpretation of research.   As a Peabody Prep parent I will be using my hour of hallway time tonight reading Dr Fritz's paper.  If the Author's or Jeffery think it's inappropriate to post the pdf here I'll be happy to delete it.  So down load it quick before the copyright police come knocking. B)

 

Happy reading,

Jim

Thanks Jim..Just read through it and....It's.proof enough for me. I'm looking forward to reading the second paper with the bridge tap /player preference analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Claudia,

 

I watched the Youtube video and read more about the study. One maker collected signature data on every violin. That meens that one maker has all the data and information on all instruments!

 

I would pay a lot for that information!

Peter K-G Violins

___________________________________________

Reproducing The Strad Sound

Violin plate and mode tuning

 

Well, one suspects who didn't make one....................... :lol::ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G'day Claudia,

 

Your study's hit the big time!  Fred Child's just described it glowingly on his Performance Today show on National Public Media [NPR's classical associate] and has postings about it on their Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/pages/Performance-Today/157141518844.  Now that's recognition :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Claudia,

 

Really appreciate the hard work you and Joseph Curtin (+ the rest of your team) have put into this. Has this paper been submitted for peer review yet? And assuming there will be follow-up research to be done, is there anything you can divulge regarding future plans?

 

EDIT: I somehow missed the fact that the paper has already been published in PNAS, which I'm assuming means the paper was reviewed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no lack of interesting and amazing things to contemplate in this field we have chosen to engage in, that is, violin making. That opinions are often directly opposing, regarding the various details of this endeavor, isn't ever surprising to me - in particular, as I get older, and see for myself that life in general (and in virtually every particular therein) is like this, in every aspect.

From religion, or lack thereof, to politics, or disgust for political thinking, to, well, everything - every subject in life.

That there will be people here who agree on certain things, and those here who will dis-agree, and that there will be a certain amount of hmmm, shall I say, animosity, develop between "camps" is also not surprising to me.

So it does not surprise, nor does it bother me to read and participate in discussions where these things come head to head. It is, I find, normal - both here and elsewhere. So be it.

Interestingly enough I really am re-reading Albert Einstein's book "Relativity - the special and the general theory" a simpletons (not Albert, mind you, I am referring to the reader... me) explanation about his great historical scientific theory. In this book, he takes the stance that many of the things learned in school, as (for example) the basic laws in physics, are incorrect. Or perhaps it is more correct to say, that such thinking is a very limited view or assumption about the universe or reality and how things really work.

He gives simple understandable explanations why this is so. He then builds his own simple understanding of "reality" and why Relativity is a fact or facet of reality, that should be taken into consideration.

The reason why I often read such material, is that is gets my head out of being stuck in violin making - to the point where I become mired in my own point of view - to the point where I stop thinking anything new or original. And stuck in one unswerving point of view is not really where I want to be.

Does this post have anything to do with violin making? Well, maybe not. But then again, perhaps it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peer review is generally a good thing, but the quality depends on the reviewers, and the guidelines of the journal. Plenty of good research is rejected because one reviewer has an agenda, and a certain amount of rubbish slips by...

I’m currently reading Lamb’s Reeling in the Strathspey, ( comment edited, after several conversations with the author).

Good research speaks for itself. I enjoyed this paper, and the video especially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of us don't need another "test". ;)

 

I am of the same mind, unless we can get a double-blind test of the Kreisler, Soil, Vieuxtemps, Cannon, and a bunch of moderns, including one of mine, with all makers results published.  That would be fun. but never gonna happen.

 

I am quite interested in what Curtin's paper will show about spectral response and preferences, although I kinda think I know already what it's going to show, in a general sense (good HF output, decent LF output, and nothing too strong or peaky in the middle).  Some of the specifics may be enlightening, though.  Even if there's a "goal" response that is most preferred, there are a couple of big issues:  1) achieving it, and  2) even if you CAN achieve the desired impact response, there are important differences between what the spectrum shows and how it behaves under the bow.

 

Interestingly enough I really am re-reading Albert Einstein's book "Relativity - the special and the general theory"

Does this post have anything to do with violin making? Well, maybe not. But then again, perhaps it does.

 

I think it does have some connection, in that the absolute precise physics of relativity don't matter for any practical purposes.  As an aerospace engineer for nearly 30 years, Newton's simple (and incorrect) laws worked well enough.  Perhaps if I worked in trajectory and navigation I might have had to make minor corrections to account for relativistic effects.

 

Likewise in violinmaking, ultimate precision is probably not important, and one just needs to be close enough for practical purposes using simpler solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think it does have some connection, in that the absolute precise physics of relativity don't matter for any practical purposes.  As an aerospace engineer for nearly 30 years, Newton's simple (and incorrect) laws worked well enough.  Perhaps if I worked in trajectory and navigation I might have had to make minor corrections to account for relativistic effects.

 

 

I was under the impression that GPS satellite clocks move faster being in a weaker field and they need correction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...