How objective is projection?

[Rue]

[A432]

Debate is a spectator sport  ? ! ?

 

[A432]

Assuming we've gotten the venom out of the systems of the faction that either refuses to comprehend what it reads or refuses to, a couple loose ends.

Quote

The only performer I know of who was ever meticulous with bow placement was Mischa Elman

Quote

But the ONLY performer with meticulous bow placement?

Quote

I didn't realize Mischa Elman also played the cello. But since you want to change the topic from violinist bowing to cello . . . 

Nobody specified violinist. What you've done is illustrated a Straw Man Argument -- attacking a point that wasn't raised. And made yourself look silly doing it.

Quote

Thats because he is the alpha male here.

And this (and its many tangents)  has what bearing on comprehending the nature of transcendental projection ?  I pointed out the social dynamic involved in this only because it kept intruding into the discussion, de-railing it. Since it was going unrecognized, I recognized it. Assuming, in doing that, that people would understand its irrelevance to the topic.

Quote

You have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a rip, grasshopper

And that's why you can't just accept that there might be more to it than you are willing to admit ?

Absent serious response. I'm done with this, noting in closing that, re. modern violins, at least one other person agrees with me :

Quote

 "A fine Scarampella is perhaps the youngest instrument to meet a soloist’s demand for a projecting yet noble tone." -- Dimitry Gindin

https://tarisio.com/cozio-archive/cozio-carteggio/stefano-scarampella/

 

 

[A432]

Computer interface malfunction -- impossible to erase.

Quote

 

[ctanzio]

3 hours ago, A432 said:

Nobody specified violinist. What you've done is illustrated a Straw Man Argument -- attacking a point that wasn't raised. And made yourself look silly doing it.

So to be clear, out of all the world class performers of both violin AND cello, only Mischa Elman has ascended to your pinnacle of "meticulous" bow placement? Since Elman died in 1967, that is at least 50+ years worth of performers of both violin and cello, and at least another 50+ years worth of Elman's contemporaries. Does the emptiness of such a claim still escape you?

There is a significant difference between a cello and violin bow, and the physical demands each places upon the performer, so it is on-point to mention the difference between your claim and your example.

What has become obvious in this thread is your willingness to respond to disagreement with insult rather than discussion. I try very hard to check my malice at the forum door. You might consider a similar approach, or at least tone it down to an occasional witty taunt.

[Delabo]

18 hours ago, A432 said:

Debate is a spectator sport  ? ! ?

Its not a debating forum.

Its a discussion forum which is quite different.

[David Burgess]

7 hours ago, A432 said:

 

Nobody specified violinist. What you've done is illustrated a Straw Man Argument -- attacking a point that wasn't raised. And made yourself look silly doing it.

Nope. ctanzio has a strong history of well-thought-out posts. It is you who have taken looking silly to a new level.

If you're a conflict addict looking for a fix, one problem is that you're several years late to the party. Old vs new has been a hot topic in the past. Just about every conceivable claim and question (including yours) have already been asked, argued and answered, and now many of us are bored with it. You might need to try a different topic or a different forum if conflict and argument are what you are seeking.

It's like a party where the first two hours are spent discussing last night's big game, and then they move on to other things. During hour four, you arrive and say, “Hey, how about that game last night?" 

Do your homework. Study some of these old threads, and see if you have anything new to offer which hasn't already been said. Grasshopper.

I have, and still will bend over backwards for people who show a serious desire to learn. Your pompousness, in an attempt to imitate knowledge, is nothing more than old and boring.

 

7 hours ago, A432 said:

"I'm done with this, ..."

_______________________________________________

A432, I certainly hope so, since your recent posts have been an embarrassing stain on the generally high quality of the Maestronet forums.

[martin swan]

29 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

 

 Old vs new has been a hot topic in the past. Just about every conceivable claim and question (including yours) has already been asked, argued and answered, and now many of us are bored with it. You might need to try a different topic or a different forum if conflict and argument are what you're seeking.

 

I think that's the main problem. A432, every aspect of what you are claiming has been advocated, debated, scrutinised from every possible angle, and while Maestronet stalwarts don't necessarily agree with each other, we have discussed it to death and found a way of co-existing. Yours is an extreme position which doesn't take on board any of the extremely well reasoned points that very serious people have made in the past.

[Violadamore]

20 hours ago, A432 said:

Debate is a spectator sport  ? ! ?

 

[Yawns and stretches languorously.]  As David and Martin have pointed out, the serious debate on this (as on many another) matter closed long since.  What's left is of the "nya-nyah-nya-nya-nyah", and "yo' mamma" level of discourse, the participants in which make a distressing spectacle of themselves.  Spectacles attract spectators.  QED. 

Now, please, can the chatter and pass the popcorn. 

[David Burgess]

30 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

[Yawns and stretches languorously.] 

Oh my!

[A432]

Quote

Clara-Jumi Kang, the German-born Korean violinist who won the prestigious Sendai International Violin Music Competition and International Violin Competition of Indianapolis, was recently chosen to model for a domestic cosmetics brand.

The 24-year old said she accepted the offer in order to "purchase a new bow."

Kang, who spoke with the Chosun Ilbo in downtown Seoul on Wednesday, said, "But my real concern is to get my hands on a top-quality Stradivarius or a Guarneri within three years."

Kang currently uses a 1683 Stradivarius formerly owned by renowned violinist Joseph Gingold, who died in 1995. Gingold, who created the quadrennial International Violin Competition of Indianapolis in 1982, allowed the winner of the competition to use his prized violin for a period of four years.

The instrument costs W3.5 billion and Kang must return it in three years' time. It is not easy for a musician in their 20s to afford a violin that costs millions of dollars, which is a major concern for young violinists worldwide.

For many, the only realistic alternative is to borrow one. In Korea, the Kumho Asiana Cultural Foundation and the Samsung Foundation of Culture rent out instruments to rising talents. Kang won the Indianapolis competition using a Guadagnini loaned out by the Kumho Asiana Cultural Foundation. She returned it after winning the contest. [/quote]

Funny how so many people still haven't gotten the message yet. 

I mean, what to people like her know /  Thy only play the things. 

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/12/09/2011120900483.html

(Good news : she's now playing a 1725 del Gesu. )

[A432]

Obviously what DO people like her know.

Idiot word program not only screws up quote separation, but imposes its choice of words & is un-editable.

[Marty Kasprzyk]

12 minutes ago, A432 said:

Quote

Clara-Jumi Kang, the German-born Korean violinist who won the prestigious Sendai International Violin Music Competition and International Violin Competition of Indianapolis, was recently chosen to model for a domestic cosmetics brand.

The 24-year old said she accepted the offer in order to "purchase a new bow."

Kang, who spoke with the Chosun Ilbo in downtown Seoul on Wednesday, said, "But my real concern is to get my hands on a top-quality Stradivarius or a Guarneri within three years."

Kang currently uses a 1683 Stradivarius formerly owned by renowned violinist Joseph Gingold, who died in 1995. Gingold, who created the quadrennial International Violin Competition of Indianapolis in 1982, allowed the winner of the competition to use his prized violin for a period of four years.

The instrument costs W3.5 billion and Kang must return it in three years' time. It is not easy for a musician in their 20s to afford a violin that costs millions of dollars, which is a major concern for young violinists worldwide.

For many, the only realistic alternative is to borrow one. In Korea, the Kumho Asiana Cultural Foundation and the Samsung Foundation of Culture rent out instruments to rising talents. Kang won the Indianapolis competition using a Guadagnini loaned out by the Kumho Asiana Cultural Foundation. She returned it after winning the contest. [/quote]

Funny how so many people still haven't gotten the message yet. 

I mean, what to people like her know /  Thy only play the things. 

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/12/09/2011120900483.html

(Good news : she's now playing a 1725 del Gesu. )

I believe all the contestants in last year's Indianapolis competition used borrowed old Italian violins.  I took part in a violin selection competition to find new violins to purchased and to loan out to the winners in addition to the Gingold Strad.

The contestant players were  involved in the double blind violin testing (about 40 violins) and I had heard that many players were very surprised that some of the newly made violins were so good (mine wasn't one of them).

Apparently many people still haven't gotten the message yet.

[Porteroso]

By the way A432, your point that the great violins care less about contact point than others is yet another variable, and one you ignore when you say what you're saying about Elman's bow control. You'd have to know each instrument well to understand how much attention to give to contact point. 

Someone else brought up Yo Yo Ma, and I have to say, if his bow is skating around, it's because he's not havi g to pay as much attention. Probably if forced to, by a lesser instrument, he would focus more on it. 

As valid as blind listening is, also valuable is noticing what great players, who can spend years getting to know an instrument, gravitate towards, and it's not new instruments. 

It could be that old and new great instruments all sound comparable, and the old ones just have a little something else in them for the player who can get to know the instrument, something I haven't seen brought up yet, but pretty obvious. 

It's a debate nobody will win. So no reason to take it seriously. If I had posted like several if you, I'd be a little embarrassed to read my post again a week later. Normally I avoid doing just that lol. 

[Marty Kasprzyk]

I met a player who owned a Stradivari violin who told me that it was very difficult to play and that it took him seven years before he began to like it.

I asked him why he put so much effort into it and he said " because it forced me to become a better player".  I said if your goal is to become a better player you should use one of my violins.

 

[martin swan]

I know a very fine soloist who as a young prodigy was loaned a legendary Strad by the Nippon Foundation. She didn't really like it, but how could she possibly say no ... after all, it's a Strad. Isn't that what everyone in her position dreams of?

[martin swan]

1 minute ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

I met a player who owned a Stradivari violin who told me that it was very difficult to play and that it took him seven years before he began to like it.

I asked him why he put so much effort into it and he said " because it forced me to become a better player".  I said if your goal is to become a better player you should use one of my violins.

 

 

[Porteroso]

I think there is half and half value in playing difficult instruments, and easy instruments. They both teach you how to be better. Difficult instruments force good technique on you, or else you sound bad, and easy instruments reward relaxed playing without tension, or else you sound bad. 

I've often thought the really messy soloists that people love are probably messy because they are playing difficult instruments, with little reward for a lack of tension, and lots of reward for get'er done, as they say.

Or maybe they're just messy, hard to say. Messiness can certainly be exciting. 

All of this is beside the point; quantifying projection, as hard as it is, is way easier than the side-debate of old v. new instruments that is apparently worthy of so much emotion and text. 

[martin swan]

I find quantifying projection almost impossible!

For one thing, we need to define what we mean, whether it's audibility against an orchestra, size of performance space etc.

Then we need to make comparative assessments with our eyes closed (to avoid visual cues), using a guinea pig orchestra and a soloist who can immediately get the best out of any particular instrument they have just picked up.

And of course the panel of judges need to have full frequency hearing - or maybe they should be elderly with a lot of HF hearing loss since most violin concerto audience members are elderly.

So it's already a nightmare ...

But I agree it's easier than old vs. new.

[David Burgess]

7 hours ago, Porteroso said:

I think there is half and half value in playing difficult instruments, and easy instruments. They both teach you how to be better. Difficult instruments force good technique on you, or else you sound bad, and easy instruments reward relaxed playing without tension, or else you sound bad. 

I've often thought the really messy soloists that people love are probably messy because they are playing difficult instruments, with little reward for a lack of tension, and lots of reward for get'er done, as they say.

Which soloists do you consider to be "messy"?

[David Burgess]

8 hours ago, Porteroso said:

As valid as blind listening is, also valuable is noticing what great players, who can spend years getting to know an instrument, gravitate towards, and it's not new instruments. 
 

Blind tests have not just been done with listening, but with player impressions as well.

As far as what soloists gravitate toward, how do you know whether the instrument used in a particular performance is old or new? There are some stunningly convincing modern copies, you know. Or more likely, you didn't.

[A432]

 Always the relentless sales pitch via suggestion. Reminds me of violin dealers' ad copy that sets up a reverential picture of Cremona and then associates their offering with it, creating an association in the customer's mind that closes the deal. Commonly known as "selling the sizzle -- not the steak."  They technically avoid outright fraud by explicitly claiming that their Ceruti or Vuillaume is the equal of a Guarneri, but do everything possible to instill the belief by suggestion that they're in the same class. Same deal here. "Hey -- I can't come right out and tell you that many famous soloists are secretly playing my instruments (or Zyg's, or whoever's), but, you know, they just might be ! (wink wink, nudge nudge).

Sure. And maybe there even are some. And you just might find a Strad for $20 at a yard sale. And there just might be liberty and justice for all, starting tomorrow.

What I DO know about blind fiddle tests is that Gemunder's always beat out Strads . . . as did, apparently, everyone else's.

 

 

[A432]

Martin --

You can size up most fiddles inside of a few seconds (or less) because your mind can integrate visual awareness of probably more details than you can consciously identify into one coherent conclusion. Spontaneously (albeit this takes training and practice).

Why not trust your ears the same way ?

You don't ordinarily feel any need to play "How do we know that we know what we know ?" with visual perception. What's different about aural perception ?

You study living things by direct, unmediated perception. Not by dissecting them.

Lao Tse : "When you cut it [up], you kill it."

The parade of soloists carrying Strads & GdGs started around Tartini's time and has continued ever since, without missing a beat. If you can't trust any conclusion that doesn't rest on math, there are your numbers. Need to rely on the consensus of the most highly qualified judges ? There they are.

Whatever projection may or may not be, it's obviously a facet of the totality of whatever the factors in an instrument's voice are -- not one identifiable, measurable-in-isolation component. If it were that, Don would have run it down by now. You can only approach it in the "totality of everything" context. Directly. By (informed) experience.

[Porteroso]

2 hours ago, David Burgess said:

Blind tests have not just been done with listening, but with player impressions as well.

As far as what soloists gravitate toward, how do you know whether the instrument used in a particular performance is old or new? There are some stunningly convincing modern copies, you know. Or more likely, you didn't.

I think most people have heard about good modern violins by now, but thanks... And great players are pretty up front about the instruments they play...

There's no point in starting another side debate about who is a messy soloist or not, but we all get to have our opinions on that. Some of the best playing I've ever heard was pretty messy, with the bowing. I've also heard great playing that was elegant. Many ways to skin the pig, or whatever.

[David Burgess]

6 hours ago, Porteroso said:

 And great players are pretty up front about the instruments they play...

 

Are they? Often only their luthier knows for sure. For example, the luthier who happens to have their Strad in the shop while they are performing.

David Soyer (Guarneri Quartet) toured for a while using a Suzuki cello.   Why? He got tired and frustrated with people coming up after a performance and saying, "What a wonderful sounding cello. What is it?" (implying that the credit went to the cello). So he decided to have some fun with it.

Sorry, but there are some things which only those who are "behind the scenes" know.