What happens when a maker tries to put their perception into words?

[Don Noon]

42 minutes ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

That's really fascinating,Don.

is this really translation of what a player perceives, or something closer to reconstruction of that perception in the maker’s mind?

At best, I just make a guess about what the meaning for me in what the player says.  I don't even know if players can communicate the same thing between themselves, if there's a "player's language" or if everybody has their own terms for things.  I think Michael Darnton has the best view of this.  His post rings true, although we probably take different meanings out at the end.

[martin swan]

Interesting discussion.

I would just throw into the mix that modern philosophy has concerned itself hugely with this question - whether the use of language and the act of naming comes after perception or before it or both. My belief is that perception is always to some extent conditioned by language - emotion and taste find themselves channeled through restricted means of communication. Some things can only be perceived once there is language to articulate it.

(Philosophers have written many lengthy, erudite and often incomprehensible books about this)

So we could posit the existence of a "pure state" perception or feeling that exists before (untainted by) language, but it is de facto impossible to communicate or share such perceptions, therefore they are irrelevant to social behaviour and to the world outside our head.

The arguments can become very circular - for instance, would the colour Yves Klein Blue exist without its name? To some degree the colour must have existed in the abstract before being named - or did it?

 

[MANFIO]

8 hours ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

Thank you, MANFIO.

Traditional craftspeople are continuously declining in Japan, so it genuinely means a lot to me to hear those words from a maker like you.

Thanks! When your Crown Prince Naruhito visited my city he played a viola made by me in a string quartet. 

[Yoshiharu Ito]

6 hours ago, martin swan said:

Interesting discussion.

I would just throw into the mix that modern philosophy has concerned itself hugely with this question - whether the use of language and the act of naming comes after perception or before it or both. My belief is that perception is always to some extent conditioned by language - emotion and taste find themselves channeled through restricted means of communication. Some things can only be perceived once there is language to articulate it.

(Philosophers have written many lengthy, erudite and often incomprehensible books about this)

So we could posit the existence of a "pure state" perception or feeling that exists before (untainted by) language, but it is de facto impossible to communicate or share such perceptions, therefore they are irrelevant to social behaviour and to the world outside our head.

The arguments can become very circular - for instance, would the colour Yves Klein Blue exist without its name? To some degree the colour must have existed in the abstract before being named - or did it?

 

Thank you, Martin. This resonates with me.

I've heard that perception is partly shaped by anticipation in the brain. With smell, for example, there's research showing that if you present lemon-scented material while telling someone it's yuzu (a Japanese citrus), they perceive yuzu. The brain leads, not the nose.

If that's the case, the gap between makers and players may not arise from language alone, but from the brain actively constructing different perceptions from the same sensation.

 

[MANFIO]

2 hours ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

If that's the case, the gap between makers and players might not be a failure of language — but the brain actively constructing different perceptions from the same sensation.

 

The gap between makers and players can be reduced a lot if the maker is a player too. 

[martin swan]

8 hours ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

 

I've heard that perception is partly shaped by anticipation in the brain. With smell, for example, there's research showing that if you present lemon-scented material while telling someone it's yuzu (a Japanese citrus), they perceive yuzu. The brain leads, not the nose.

 

 

This is a phenomenon that has been studied, analyzed and documented in academic circles (mainly linguistics and philosophy) for decades.

I suppose Chomsky is the best known scholar of this - the concept that the brain is inherently linguistic, and that many perceptions are impossible without language, or at least that they actually result from our ability to name/articulate.

It's an interesting and fundamental 'chicken and egg' question which can be posed in a lot of situations. And in the context of music it's particularly interesting, in that we can have deep emotional responses which are clearly the result of  education and conditioning.

[Yoshiharu Ito]

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

This is a phenomenon that has been studied, analyzed and documented in academic circles (mainly linguistics and philosophy) for decades.

I suppose Chomsky is the best known scholar of this - the concept that the brain is inherently linguistic, and that many perceptions are impossible without language, or at least that they actually result from our ability to name/articulate.

It's an interesting and fundamental 'chicken and egg' question which can be posed in a lot of situations. And in the context of music it's particularly interesting, in that we can have deep emotional responses which are clearly the result of  education and conditioning.

I have to admit I thought Chomsky was an economist — I didn't realize he was a linguist!

Your point about conditioning is fascinating. It makes me wonder whether our perception of violins is also shaped by cultural and economic narratives. In some cases, we may not only hear an instrument, but also hear its reputation, history, and market value.

[martin swan]

22 minutes ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

I have to admit I thought Chomsky was an economist — I didn't realize he was a linguist!

Your point about conditioning is fascinating. It makes me wonder whether our perception of violins is also shaped by cultural and economic narratives. In some cases, we may not only hear an instrument, but also hear its reputation, history, and market value.

Or as a famous dealer friend of mine says "everybody loves the sound of a Strad" ... 

 

[Davide Sora]

23 minutes ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

I have to admit I thought Chomsky was an economist — I didn't realize he was a linguist!

Your point about conditioning is fascinating. It makes me wonder whether our perception of violins is also shaped by cultural and economic narratives. In some cases, we may not only hear an instrument, but also hear its reputation, history, and market value.

This is certain. Even if we believe we can be objective, this is inevitable, which is why blinded testing is essential.

[Yoshiharu Ito]

21 minutes ago, Davide Sora said:

This is certain. Even if we believe we can be objective, this is inevitable, which is why blinded testing is essential.

I agree. Blinded testing seems essential.

[Dr. Mark]

14 hours ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

I've heard that perception is partly shaped by anticipation in the brain. With smell, for example, there's research showing that if you present lemon-scented material while telling someone it's yuzu (a Japanese citrus), they perceive yuzu. The brain leads, not the nose.

If that's the case, the gap between makers and players may not arise from language alone, but from the brain actively constructing different perceptions from the same sensation.

I'm curious - did this research differentiate between the brain constructing different perceptions to the same sensation, and the brain applying different labels to the same sensation and perceptions?  What you're describing, in a somewhat more diabolical context, was once called 'brain washing'.  I'd give the brain more credit for changing it's labels and narrative (essentially, as a survival response) than for changing it's physiology.

I will take the position that the effect of labels on perception is insignificant...

5 hours ago, martin swan said:

I suppose Chomsky is the best known scholar of this - the concept that the brain is inherently linguistic, and that many perceptions are impossible without language, or at least that they actually result from our ability to name/articulate.

...and in conjunction with the insignificance of labels on perception, that the brain is inherently emotional rather than linguistic.  Language and labels are a higher brain function - the most abstract in fact and above even visualization.  I'm not a trained expert in this field - I came to this position at first from considering dreams, which seem to be the response of the brain awakening to (i.e. becoming conscious of) emotional states.  It's interesting that, in this condition, external inputs can be ascribed to sources which are incorrect but consistent with the images and narrative the semi-conscious brain evokes from it's emotional state.

[Yoshiharu Ito]

9 hours ago, Dr. Mark said:

I'm curious - did this research differentiate between the brain constructing different perceptions to the same sensation, and the brain applying different labels to the same sensation and perceptions?  What you're describing, in a somewhat more diabolical context, was once called 'brain washing'.  I'd give the brain more credit for changing it's labels and narrative (essentially, as a survival response) than for changing it's physiology.

I will take the position that the effect of labels on perception is insignificant...

...

That's an interesting distinction. Some recent olfactory research suggests that words and memory can influence how odor information is processed in the brain, including how pleasant or unpleasant a smell is perceived to be. For example, the same compound (sotolon) may be described as smelling like curry ,  maple syrup or caramel dessert depending on the context provided. Whether that reflects a change in perception itself or a change in interpretation is exactly the question I find fascinating.

[Marty Kasprzyk]

On 6/6/2026 at 6:42 AM, Yoshiharu Ito said:

I agree. Blinded testing seems essential.

I just was part of a blind listener testing yesterday at the American Viola Society Festival  which involved 18 violas evaluated by about 50 listeners which voted on which violas sounded the best.

Nobody thought to ask the player which ones he liked the best and why.

 

[martin swan]

10 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

I just was part of a blind listener testing yesterday at the American Viola Society Festival  which involved 18 violas evaluated by about 50 listeners which voted on which violas sounded the best.

Nobody thought to ask the player which ones he liked the best and why.

 

I'm also not much of a believer in blind testing. 

People who participate as listeners seem to focus on abstract qualities rather than how well the player expresses the music.

Specifically the audience tends to prefer the louder instrument even if the quieter instrument is plenty loud enough and allows for a more nuanced performance.

 

[GeorgeH]

15 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

18 violas evaluated by about 50 listeners which voted on which violas sounded the best.

Was there any kind of consensus?

[Marty Kasprzyk]

5 minutes ago, GeorgeH said:

Was there any kind of consensus?

The testing of the 18 violas was done with 9 combinations of playing two violas A/B which the audiance voted on.

The 9 winners went on to semi round A/B which had some voting ties so the next round used 6 violas which left 3 for final round of A/B tests from which the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place winners were selected from the group's final voting.

The blind testing took about two hours and the player played exactly the same music passage over and over again 36 times which drove me nuts.

Unfortunately the player was so good that he made all 18 violas sound wonderful.  I suspect that if this blind test was repeated with different A/B viola combinations the final 1,2,3 award results might be different which suggests the entire test should be repeated many times to be statistically valid. But this would lead to an armed rebellion.

[Violadamore]

8 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

.........................

Unfortunately the player was so good that he made all 18 violas sound wonderful.  I suspect that if this blind test was repeated with different A/B viola combinations the final 1,2,3 award results might be different which suggests the entire test should be repeated many times to be statistically valid. But this would lead to an armed rebellion.

Sounds like a great reason to do it.  Consider the increased attendance, media revenue, and merchandising opportunities it could generate for your organization.  Compare the public notice attracted by incidents of "vigorous debate" in the Japanese Parliament.  https://nypost.com/2023/06/08/chaos-erupts-inside-japans-parliament-as-lawmakers-brawl-over-refugee-bill/  I mean, if they riot occasionally, it must be respectable, right?   

And then, with the prospect that one might witness a spirited dustup at one, viola festivals and conventions might become as popular as hockey games.     

[Pluto Vermin]

4 hours ago, Violadamore said:

Sounds like a great reason to do it.  Consider the increased attendance, media revenue, and merchandising opportunities 

Amazon will put anything on a t-shirt

[Yoshiharu Ito]

8 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

The testing of the 18 violas was done with 9 combinations of playing two violas A/B which the audiance voted on.

The 9 winners went on to semi round A/B which had some voting ties so the next round used 6 violas which left 3 for final round of A/B tests from which the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place winners were selected from the group's final voting.

The blind testing took about two hours and the player played exactly the same music passage over and over again 36 times which drove me nuts.

Unfortunately the player was so good that he made all 18 violas sound wonderful.  I suspect that if this blind test was repeated with different A/B viola combinations the final 1,2,3 award results might be different which suggests the entire test should be repeated many times to be statistically valid. But this would lead to an armed rebellion.

That's a fascinating observation. If the player was so good that all 18 violas sounded wonderful, then we were really testing the player, not the instruments.

[Yoshiharu Ito]

On 6/8/2026 at 8:04 AM, martin swan said:

I'm also not much of a believer in blind testing. 

People who participate as listeners seem to focus on abstract qualities rather than how well the player expresses the music.

Specifically the audience tends to prefer the louder instrument even if the quieter instrument is plenty loud enough and allows for a more nuanced performance.

 

Even participating in a blind test creates its own context and expectations. True objectivity may be impossible — the framing itself shapes perception.

[martin swan]

The problem with blind testing is ... what are people listening for?

It's a misguided attempt to make an objective judgment about something which should not be objective.

In these tests, everyone evaluates sound not music - the musical element is rendered meaningless. And yet in performing music, sound is always secondary to expression.

 

 

[Yoshiharu Ito]

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

The problem with blind testing is ... what are people listening for?

It's a misguided attempt to make an objective judgment about something which should not be objective.

In these tests, everyone evaluates sound not music - the musical element is rendered meaningless. And yet in performing music, sound is always secondary to expression.

 

 

Indeed, blind testing was designed to control perception, not to define value. But the results have started to function as the kind of authority Chomsky criticized.

[Dr. Mark]

13 hours ago, Yoshiharu Ito said:

Even participating in a blind test creates its own context and expectations. True objectivity may be impossible — the framing itself shapes perception.

A more-or-less benign application of AI...?