jezzupe Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 It just occurred to me, um, we often speak of "tone" and a little of "loudness" {velocity} but not much about it. It does seem to me that most agree that "loudness" is important and generally desired as long as it's not "shrill" and I believe that's why the "nice" term "projection" was coined, somewhat as if "how far the sound carried" sometimes "magically" {psycho-acoustic phenomenon} was really just "how loud is it", and um again I think that it has been discussed and that "projection" was in fact just "loudness" That being said I am somewhat puzzled why in this day and age with "space age" decibel readers available for super cheap that it is not common for "us" to be posting our decibel readings at exact fixed distances? I got one awhile ago for my air rifles and have yet to "bother" with checking some of my instruments yet, but the curiosity is starting to get to me Just wondering, anyone else own a decibel reader? and why aren't we posting those "numbers" they seem quite important....nice tone is nice, nice loud tone is better or?
Dr. Mark Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 28 minutes ago, jezzupe said: nice tone is nice, nice loud tone is better Is it?
jezzupe Posted December 1, 2023 Author Report Posted December 1, 2023 18 minutes ago, Dr. Mark said: Is it? or? well I think most people would say yes as long as its not "shrill loud as a maker/player I would say yes, assuming were talking about a soloist instrument intended to "lead the pack"
Mark Norfleet Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 51 minutes ago, jezzupe said: .nice tone is nice, nice loud tone is better Perhaps, but only if the instrument can be played softly as well. Achieving that seems to be beyond many.
jezzupe Posted December 1, 2023 Author Report Posted December 1, 2023 6 minutes ago, Mark Norfleet said: Perhaps, but only if the instrument can be played softly as well. Achieving that seems to be beyond many. Yes agreed, I think that is "assumed" , lets put it this way, say there were 3 great instruments that had really nice tone, but one was clearly louder at peak and you're a soloist taking the lead over an orchestra
jezzupe Posted December 1, 2023 Author Report Posted December 1, 2023 I think one thing I'm getting at is that unless one plays an instrument there is no way to tell what it can do for "you" BUT assuming some things about playability and tone are there VOLUME is the one "thing" that "one" could "prove" theirs is "louder" than....that guy's violin, I think what I'm reallyreally getting at is that we need to start pissing contests with volume because it's the one "thing" we can easily prove as long as the equipment is "sound" ... Most violins are 75-95 decibels {according to google} at what distance I don't know, but all I know is that decibel readers are very cheap , and well mine goes to 100....and 11
matesic Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 Loudness and sound pressure level aren't the same thing. A decibel meter measures SPL, whereas loudness is the intensity of sound as heard by the listener. I've recorded myself using many violins and the average SPLs come out remarkably similar, in the same music at the same distance with the same bow strokes differing I should guess by no more than 2-3dB on the A string. Subjective judgements that may get called "projection" or "penetration" are likely to be influenced by the spectral composition as well as the sound pressure level.
Andreas Preuss Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 4 hours ago, jezzupe said: nice tone is nice, nice loud tone is better or? I see the basic problem in the bowing to measure the loudness. Pro players can ‘squeeze’ much more sound out of a violin than normal players. And this is perceived as loudness. When it comes to loudness I am asking a totally different question. Didn’t we reach the possible limit for the Stradivari or Guarneri type of instrument? Logically there must be a possible limit for a reason which is probably too complicated to explain because pure loudness is not all what matters and ‘louder’ can have undesirable side effects. In those terms I am convinced that if we really want to build louder instruments with the same playing qualities as the best concert instruments in existence, we have to abandon some major aspects of the Stradivari-Guarneri construction principles. One of them is symmetry.
baroquecello Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 I don't think I agree. Instruments can sound radically different depending on where you stand (player or audience, latge or small hall etc etc). I know Instruments that are loud under the ear, but sound normal or even small far away, and vice versa. Sound color also widely varies under the ear and in the audience. In cellos, this can be very extreme. I've also played a couple of cheap rental violins with such loud e strings under the ear, that no sane person would want to bow them properly. Loudness, as in a boomy, full sound, as opposed to a brilliant (not shrill), slender sound, I think, is a bad trait if you want to play professionally. Of course, shrillness is also negative, but what is too shrill depends on the skill of the player also. Bad bowing can turn brilliance into shrillness easily. Too much room for subjectivity here. A good instrument is one that satisfies its player, and each player has different wishes.
Casey Jefferson Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 My recent experience was that loudness is subjective, but objective at the same time. Louder is louder, that's a given, but to my ears there are more factors like focus of tone, frequency range, and last but also the most eye (ear) opening - volume under ear vs audience. I tried a relatively new violin recently that sounded just meh under the ear, but it has the most focused and rich tone of a violin I've tried that's within affordable range (for the public). In fact none of the new violins from Italy (plenty of famed makers) were close. Under the ear it sounded thin although clear, and not particularly loud or powerful. Since earlier this year I record all my test playing, side by side with other fine contemporary violins, every note sounded focused and rich with no apparent weak spot, it's at once rich in mid/high overtones as well as lower ones (but not boomy), which I would describe it as projecting tone without a doubt, not just being purely loud or piercing. More than anything the tone was actually responding to my bow command that wasn't all that apparent under the ear, the most versatile one I've tried up to date (excluding high priced old Italian of course). I no longer trust my ears anymore now when I'm trying out violin, always record my playing at a distance. It's very revealing, a lot more objective and easy to judge. 29 minutes ago, Andreas Preuss said: When it comes to loudness I am asking a totally different question. Didn’t we reach the possible limit for the Stradivari or Guarneri type of instrument? Curtin's ultralight violin seems to be the answer.
Andreas Preuss Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 17 minutes ago, Casey Jefferson said: Curtin's ultralight violin seems to be the answer. One answer. I would be still curious how light his ultralight model is. I am working currently on a different asymmetric solution.
fscotte Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 Tone is a mix of amplitude of frequencies. It's literally like an EQ on an old stereo. Loudness is the volume button that turns up all the frequencies equally.
Don Noon Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 Loudness measured how? Bowed across the full range, and averaged SPL? Adjusted for ear sensitivity curve? Calibrated impact at the bridge? In any case, a single loudness value would necessarily lose any information about tone; a loud tubby fiddle and a shrill student instrument could well have the same loudness. Frequency distribution matters. A lot. One way to get loud is to have a low impedance (low weight, usually), with the side effect that the player needs to use more bow speed, difficulty of playing quietly, and higher likelihood of wolf notes. While I am a measurement and numbers guy, I wouldn't put much effort or trust in a single value for loudness, as there are too many other important aspects to tone and playability that get erased.
David Burgess Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 Perceived loudness will also have a lot to do with whatever the background noise is, whether that be an orchestra or a loud fan. In many cases, a distinctive sound will cut through even sounds which are much louder.
Dr. Mark Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 Also, what may be a comparatively louder instrument when measured may not be a louder instrument to a listener unless the measurement takes into account the listener's equal-loudness contour. In my case I have hearing loss above about 2 kHz due to age on top of the normal curve. So listeners may not agree with measurements. Older and younger listeners may have a different impression due to physiology. Correct?
Dwight Brown Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 Wouldn't loudness be amplitude and not velocity ? The velocity of sound would not change if the acoustic source became louder or softer. 5 hours ago, Andreas Preuss said: One answer. I would be still curious how light his ultralight model is. I am working currently on a different asymmetric solution. Conveniently I have an ultralight viola right next to me. It's lighter, but not monumentally. I can see if my scale could go that high as I bought it for massing bows. I don't know what viola to compare it to. Ultralights do come with a series of micro mutes that screw on to the bridge to adjust the sound to the player's preference or the particular musical situation's needs. Joseph Curtin has made quite a number of videos and papers available. He has put a great deal of time in on trying to make violin acoustics quantifiable. All that said It's a very good viola and I am privileged to play on it. Some kid at Interlochen is going to really love it some day. DLB
matesic Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 1 hour ago, David Burgess said: Perceived loudness will also have a lot to do with whatever the background noise is, whether that be an orchestra or a loud fan. In many cases, a distinctive sound will cut through even sounds which are much louder. Quite right. I cite wikipedia: Loudness, a subjective measure, is often confused with physical measures of sound strength such as sound pressure, sound pressure level (in decibels), sound intensity or sound power. I dimly remember one of my last studies as a neurophysiologist. When a tone is presented binaurally its threshold of perception is dependent not only on the intensity of background nose but also whether that noise is in-phase or out of phase at the two ears. This phenomenon helps a solo violin to cut through the sound of an orchestra (as heard by a listener with 2 ears!) although the sound intensity of the latter may be considerably greater.
nathan slobodkin Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 10 hours ago, Mark Norfleet said: Perhaps, but only if the instrument can be played softly as well. Achieving that seems to be beyond many. I have never really understood this. At my best I played at an advanced student level but cannot really say that I have ever played a violin that could not be played softly by varying bow pressure, speed and placement. Perhaps someone playing more challenging music than I have might object to the effort required to modulate tone at low volumes but are there really instruments which sound loud regardless of bow control? I do feel that dynamic options are extremely important in an instrument and expect that good instruments will have a certain resistance which has to be overcome by player effort or technique to get them to speak. I think it is easier for me to play louder when I want rather than having to baby an over eager violin but with an instrument which starts to choke or squawk when pushed there just isn't much to be done.
Don Noon Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 5 hours ago, Andreas Preuss said: One answer. I would be still curious how light his ultralight model is. 25 minutes ago, Dwight Brown said: I have an ultralight viola ... It's a very good viola What's a good tone on a viola I don't think would be a good tone for a violin. I save my lowest density wood for use on violas, where I think it works better. My viola that won a VSA tone certificate had .308 density spruce and .489 density maple. I wouldn't use that on a violin. I tried one of Curtin's ultralight violins, and didn't like it. Flat tone is the best way I can describe it. That was a long time ago, and I'm not sure what iteration of the design it was. I would expect later ones to be better. 3 minutes ago, nathan slobodkin said: I have never really understood this. At my best I played at an advanced student level but cannot really say that I have ever played a violin that cannot be played softly by varying bow pressure, speed and placement. Perhaps someone playing more challenging music than I have might object to the effort required to modulate tone at low volumes but are there really instruments which sound loud regardless of bow control? The issue for me is maintaining a regular Helmholtz string vibration. Often, "loud" instruments take energy out of the string faster, and you can't maintain a clean note at low volume.
Zeissica Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 2 hours ago, fscotte said: Tone is a mix of amplitude of frequencies. It's literally like an EQ on an old stereo. Loudness is the volume button that turns up all the frequencies equally. The loudness button on old stereos turns up the bass and the treble frequencies, or a "smiley face curve" if you will, to give the perception of a "fuller sound" and to compensate for the differences of perception of frequencies at lower volumes. Take a look at the studies on "Equal Loudness" contours at Bell Labs by Fletcher and Munson. I agree, though, about instruments not seeming loud up close, and have experienced it myself. A recent example for me was when playing a Mozart oboe quartet, and I kept asking the cellist to play out more, as there didn't seem to be enough bass "support" on stage. Well, I walked out into the hall for a second, and the cello was quite solid out there. It came across that way in the recording, too. And, the opposite can be true of course - instruments that sound loud under the ear but don't project. I disagree, though, that the louder (or, perhaps those that project better) instruments are only required for soloists or concertmasters. Certainly in playing chamber music, each of the instruments should "hold up" against the others and allow for a wide range of dynamic expression. Having enough "power on tap" while of course keeping a good tone when playing more softly is really important, IMO.
Muswell Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 A very good book which goes into this is Acoustics and Psychoacoustics by Howard and Angus publisher Routledge. Psychoacoustics is to do with the perception of sound and not the idea that someone can fool you by pretending to move your soundpost
nathan slobodkin Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 37 minutes ago, Don Noon said: What's a good tone on a viola I don't think would be a good tone for a violin. I save my lowest density wood for use on violas, where I think it works better. My viola that won a VSA tone certificate had .308 density spruce and .489 density maple. I wouldn't use that on a violin. I tried one of Curtin's ultralight violins, and didn't like it. Flat tone is the best way I can describe it. That was a long time ago, and I'm not sure what iteration of the design it was. I would expect later ones to be better. The issue for me is maintaining a regular Helmholtz string vibration. Often, "loud" instrum ents take energy out of the string faster, and you can't maintain a clean note at low volume. Don, What is the high school science explanation for "can't maintain a clean note"? While different violins work differently I repeat that I have never found a violin which I could not play softly but sounded really good at higher volume. I have played plenty which were thin or strident at higher volumes and were similar when trying to whisper.
Andreas Preuss Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 1 hour ago, Don Noon said: I tried one of Curtin's ultralight violins, and didn't like it. Flat tone is the best way I can describe it. That was a long time ago, and I'm not sure what iteration of the design it was. I would expect later ones to be better. My general guess is that if you try to make a Strad type of violin very light, you have to sacrifice sound quality. This fuels my conviction that ‘ultra light‘ must break with some classical construction rules. How light felt Joe Curtins violin? Just lighter or really jaw dropping light?
Don Noon Posted December 1, 2023 Report Posted December 1, 2023 1 hour ago, nathan slobodkin said: Don, What is the high school science explanation for "can't maintain a clean note"? It takes some minimum power to keep a string vibrating in the Helmholtz/ travelling kink movement where bowed instruments operate. If the instrument takes energy out at a relatively high rate, then the player needs to put in more energy (bow pressure and/or speed) to avoid chaotic string motion... which means play louder. Think of a wolf note... is it easier to play that note softly? To a lesser extent (and slightly different physics), that's what you can (but not always) get with a light instrument. 1 hour ago, Andreas Preuss said: How light felt Joe Curtins violin? Just lighter or really jaw dropping light? That was many years ago, before I had a calibrated jaw... but it was definitely lighter than anything else in the "normal" range.
David Burgess Posted December 2, 2023 Report Posted December 2, 2023 10 hours ago, Andreas Preuss said: My general guess is that if you try to make a Strad type of violin very light, you have to sacrifice sound quality. This fuels my conviction that ‘ultra light‘ must break with some classical construction rules. My impression, upon playing a number of ultralight instruments, was that I was unable to focus on how they sounded, because I was too distracted by the lack of the normal tactile and audible feedback to the player which I am accustomed to getting from really good instruments. But I will also acknowledge that this might be my problem.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now