Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wood Density May Explain Stradivarius Secret

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the don't-sit-on-it dept.

Whorhay writes "A Dutch doctor and a violin maker from Arkansas have compared five classical and eight modern violins in a computed tomography (CT) scanner. Apparently the 300-year-old violins are made of wood with a more consistent density than the modern violins. They aren't saying for sure that this is what gives the Stradivarius violins their unique sound, but it's the first scientific explanation I've heard for it that seems to have merit." Unfortunately science has yet to explain how how all three chords I know ROCK on my SG.

9 of 318 comments (clear)

  1. Harmonics by Bandman · · Score: 5, Funny

    It might go a log way to preventing them from producing undesirable harmonics.

    Anyone know of any studies which looked at the waveforms to find unique qualities?

    --
    Check out my sysadmin blog!
    1. Re:Harmonics by bigtomrodney · · Score: 5, Informative

      I wouldn't be all that surprised. Wood quality has always been a key factor in instruments. Even with electric guitars weight and density are considered a good thing. You'll find people complaining how heavy their Les Paul Custom is yet still play it for the sustain the extra weight provides. And Swamp Ash is a preferred material for Stratocasters and Telecasters because it is very hard while not being as heavy. High density again would provide for more fidelity in sound transfer.But hey, don't expect the science to devalue the old instruments. A '59 'Burst can still cost you $250,000.

      --
      I never get used to these constant resurrections
  2. This has been known for years by CXI · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's an article from 2004 about the fact that the Little Ice Age was most likely responsible for slowing tree growth and creating perfect wood for violins: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/01/0107_040107_violin.html

    1. Re:This has been known for years by b4upoo · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is much confusion among musicians as to what causes tone qualities in various instruments. Violins may well be locked to resonance
      more than other instruments. But for brass and woodwinds the hardness of the material is overwhelming as an influence. What is not clear in any instrument is to what degree the hardness of the surface coatings are vital as opposed to the hardness of the material underneath the coatings. Dr. Adolf Sax from whom the saxophone gets its name was the genius who discovered the importance of surface coatings.

    2. Re:This has been known for years by Slashidiot · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, one of my uncles (the rich one) is a violin collector. He has several antique violines, most of them italian. He actually owns a Guarneri, which are regarded as the best violins, second only to the Stradivarius. It is a wonderful instrument, but the difference with other much less appreciated violins is quite small. It does have a "wider" sound, but you can only tell if you listen carefully, and repeatedly, comparing with another violin. I can hardly tell apart a 10.000$ violin from a 1.000.000$ violin.

      When you get to a certain quality, you start getting diminishing returns, and there is really no difference from a certain point on.

      It's like encoding music. You can easily tell a 32kbps file from a 128kbps file, but it's harder to tell a 160kbps from a 256kbps. And anything over that is just a waste of bits. A Stradivarius might sound as good as an uncompressed WAV file, but there are many violins that sound as good as a 320kbps mp3. (What a great analogy, better than cars).

      --
      Tis women makes us love, Tis Love that makes us sad, Tis sadness makes us drink, And drinking makes us mad.
  3. In past it was chemical treatments and soaked wood by blahbooboo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, perhaps this is the final verdict? However, in the past the claim was the wood was from logs that were at the bottom of a swamp or something. Also, it was thought to be the chemical treatment. I suspect this is just the latest theory.

    http://news.softpedia.com/news/Stradivarius-Violins-Mystery-Solved-41462.shtml

  4. The physics of violins by swm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was a TV show some years back about a physicist who tried to figure out what makes violins sound good. He found a few interesting things.

    High-frequency response depends on the shape of the bridge. All those curly-cues cut into it control the transfer function from the strings to the body.

    Mid-range response depends on the shape of the f-holes in the body. In this range, the bridge is rigid. The strings push on the bridge, and the bridge rocks the portion of the top plate between the f-holes back and fourth so that it radiates sound.

    Bass goes from the strings, through the bridge, down through the sound post to the back panel, and is radiated by the back panel. Stradivarius shaped the back panel of his violins asymmetrically, so that the center of percussion was right where the sound post pushes on the back panel. IIRC, getting the center of percussion under the sound post was a distinguishing characteristic of Stradivarius violins.

  5. The Stradivarius Myth by fm6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, there's some big mystery about Strads that makes them sound better than other violins? Or do people just think they sound better, because a single Strad goes for millions of dollars? Jon Rose adheres to the second theory:

    As any honest violin dealer will tell you (and there are a few) the sound of a violin can be priced in a range from $50 (bad, but playable), to $10,000 (good-sounding) to $20,000 (extremely good tone and projection) to $100,000 (simply over-priced). The rest is snotty-nosed hubris. As has been proven on a number of occasions, most notably by the BBC in 1975, a well-made, top modern violin can sound just as good if not better than the prized golden age models. In a recording studio, behind a screen, the violins of Isaac Stern, Pinchas Zukerman and Charles Beare were played back to them. The instruments were a Strad, a Guarneri del Gesu, a Vuillaume, and a Ronald Praill (a modern instrument less than a year old). None of the esteemed violin experts really had a clue which violin was which. Furthermore, two of them couldn't even tell which was their own instrument. They were left mumbling platitudes about the personal relationship between fiddle and player — bloody obvious if you spend most years of your life playing the violin.

    His full rant here.

  6. Define the terms.. by mtconnol · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I agree with some previous posters that the question isn't "What made Stradivarius instruments so great" as much as "how are we defining 'great' in this context?"

    I have played fiddle for 10 years, mostly bluegrass and Irish music. I've also spent time in an orchestra as a clarinet player, as well as a smattering of other instruments. The world of bowed strings and the prices associated with Strad-grade instruments has always astonished me. I can't name another type of musical instrument people are willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for, and I think there are a couple of factors behind it:

    1. Most classical violinists play in the company of others, i.e. in an orchestra, where 'one-upmanship' can play a big role. If your instrument isn't as expensive as your stand partner's, you might fear the perception that you value your craft less highly! In fact, I'm told some orchestras won't audition players unless their instrument cost a certain (quite high) dollar amount.

    2. I can say as a violin player that the instruments are basically impossible to perform systematic A/B tests with. For example, I can't A/B two different brands of string on my instrument, because changing the strings takes at least 5-10 minutes, by which point my short-term aural memory is already gone. Furthermore, it's next to impossible to change strings without shifting bridge and tailpiece position, both of which affect tone as well. Need some more nails in the coffin? Rosin buildup on the strings and string age also affect the tone _more_ than different brands of strings do. It's a different picture than, for example, factory built electric guitars, where you could set up two identically built solidbody guitars with your A and B stringsets, and (at least within a first order) you could claim equivalence between your two string-testing platforms.

    In the absence of the ability to perform systematic tests, it seems like string players go for a lot of "magic" - $90 sets of strings, rosin with gold flecks in it for "warmer, richer tone" - and a lot of other bullshit, including price-performance equivalence. Like Lotus owners, violinists are usually limited far more by their technique than their instrument (once you get into the 10-20K range), and yet there is still a push to buy the 100K instrument!

    As for the Strad instruments: scientific inquiry into things like wood density, varnish, etc, seems pretty disingenuous if no one can reliably detect the qualities the instruments are supposed to have. If, as the earlier posters mention, Strads can't be reliably detected in double-blind conditions, it seems obvious that any investigation into their unique properties would be chasing one's own tail. Even if there is an amazing, one of a kind Little Ice Age, shipwreck-sunk virgin blood Stradivarius, none of those attributes are relevant if they don't impact the sound. And if "what makes Strads so great" isn't about the sound, then WTF is the point of the investigation? Dense wood really isn't great for its own sake.

    Whew. rant over.

    Find a music teacher. http://www.learningmusician.com/