Real Stradivarius VS Exact Copy! Can You Hear The Difference?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Thanks for watching! Don't forget to put a thumb up if you enjoyed the video and subscribe to my RUclips Channel not to miss future videos: / estherabrami
_
Connect with me:
/ estherabrami
www.estherabra...
/ estherabrami
Pianist: Alison Rhind
Filmed by Wright Music Media
I guessed wrong. I did like no.2 slightly more than the first . Incredible workmanship with the copy though.
I guessed it right but i'm hearing it from professional recording studio equipment.
Me too!!
Me too I liked number two more it sound more deep and rich for me
I agree....The copy sounded slightly better...but No 1 was more worn...and you could see the age on the backside
The original stradivarius is warmer and sound more harmonious than the copy. The copy is not bad, it's just different, it has a clearer and brighter sound, it's a balanced violin.
A double-blind study from 2017 showed that neither the musician playing or the audience could tell the difference between a strad and a copy. It is simply because people automatically perceive something as better because of history, price, etc.
From scishow?
I can tell. Even if I like violin 2 more, But the first one is more richer like dark coffee.
Oh please. The audience. The audience is stupid 99% of the times.
@@isabellagoogleaccount8418 yeah, but, "...showed that neither the >>!musician playing!
@@natam1616 The musician playing is too close to hear the difference
I have no idea which is which, but I feel like i prefer the sound of No.2.
me too,
I thought it was the stradivarius
Me too. #2 sounded warmer to me. But then again, you could take what I know about violins and write it in a book and still have enough blank pages leftover to make a very nice paper-violin from. :-)
I did too but then I noticed that she would play the same notes on a lower string for violin 2, which inherently creates a warmer sound.
Yeah, these Stradivari sound bad.
me too!!!!!
I prefered the copy, number 2 !!! It sounded crispier in high registrer and deeper in low register. Very clean and pure sound. Good to know we still have incredible violin makers nowadays too :-)
I expected the copy to have a muffled or "green" tone, as mine did when it was new.
crips, creamy, deep jeez people there are only 4 ways to define sound. Bright - dark, Fat - thin.
I absolutely agree. I liked the copy way more, seems like nowadays they can do something better than Stradivarius!
Same!
Bullshit@rickyanthony
I thought Strad was #1 mostly because of wood color, but I prefered the sound of #2, for being much warmer at lower frequency harmonics.
SergioGrandi agree
She played in the higher positions on lower notes instead of playing open notes for some reason which automatically makes those notes warmer
it also had a certain richness to it, and loads of small details probably got lost due to RUclips‘s horrendous compression.
Looking at the comments it seems that im the odd man out. I like the first one better. Idk the sound feels warmer and more pure. The second sounded more bold. Both sounded excellent of course. Who knows maybe im overthinking it
I like it too
You're not overthinking
Hell no, you're not overthinking. I listened closely to them both - not paying attention to the way she played - and picked the first one. You can certainly hear the warmth and purity, the richness and melodiousness that can only come from a Strad. It's like listening to a Yamaha grand piano vs a Steinway or Bosendorfer. If you know what you're listening to and how it should sound, you can hear it.
Uhm same here lol
Same here
Welp...i was thinking 2nd one was stradivari 😂
It's a relief knowing that the newer copy sounds better.
Yea also liked that one better
They are engineered.
Same here
Same, I thought the real one is the copy for its shallower "squeak".
I'm a violinist, I guess right and i could hear a really distinct difference, I've played with really old and new violins and i find that old violins absorb a lot of oils/greases etc and actually lays on a heavier lacquer or wood which gives it almost deeper and mellowy sound. The new violin sounded really buzzy and doesn't have that tone. You can really hear the difference when she plays low and soft frequencies.
But I liked this buzzyness and therefore founfd nr 2 the best.
@@knutholt3486This is what I've been trying to point out--- personal preference. Now days that's usually all it is.
With certainty.... 😌😌😌
Violin #1 sounds classic, gentle and mature
Violin #2 sounds young, aggressive and playful
aoxilus What she/he meant by young was how the violin sounded, how it was much more newer compared to the Stradivari's sound, correct me if I'm wrong. Old violins can be special for us violinist.
aoxilus All violins has a different wide range of spectrum sounds and sound properties isn't necessary to be used as a reference towards an instrumental sound production in frequencies indifference of our hair cell bundles that drops ions or chemicals and neurotransmitters, which creates a ripple of waves that sends signals into our brains which helps us identity to what that sound is, in which is produced by the violin.
Unless you have a spectrum analyzer which is entirely not necessary, we humans can use our ears, that is all the way to our hair cell bundles inside our ear cochlea that helps us understand and to neutralize that ability of ours. Foremost saying that it isn't necessary either if you have a high pitch or loud volume generating violin, it will all depend on how much force you put into the violin.
But I don't think all violins would sound that low in pitch if it did then the sound would be false unison, but if it still isn't generating enough sound for the audience to hear, then tune it into a more tighter positions of the string if you're a professional tuner or someone you know is. But it isn't recommended to do that because it will only affect the stable sound, in which the violin produces, if you're still not satisfied with 400+ hertz then just buy a damn electric violin, which connects to the speakers or something else, in which amplifies the sound into a more easing sound so that the audiences can hear from afar. But the only thing you should be worried about, is if the sound is stable so that it may not create those squeaky sounds or scratchy just a reference that I'm using.
it made me so nervous when you hold both violins in the hand and waving them around nearly touching them at 2:30. I am sure both are great violins. I liked the 2. one much better, but knowing that the other one is the original makes me think, if the setup of the violins was different. The strings for example are different, as I see on the strad are dark sounding obligatos and the other violin is strung with evah golds I believe
@Simon Streuff Violin-Education • I do think she is more careful and not careless dude.
o.k. I didn't say she is careless!
@Simon Streuff Violin-Education • if you are nervous it’s cause you don’t trust her to be careful, or you would not have said something about her holding them as she did
Elijah Leon ok, I would put it this way: I said what I said, not what you said I said.
@Simon Streuff Violin-Education • you said something and that meant something about yourself and her. Deny it all you u want, but truth is truth.
I thought #1 was the real strad. To my ears it had more depth and warmth. But holy cow - that is a dang good copy. I bet it will age like the original.
Age? That would imply that Stradivariuses weren't "Stradivariuses" when Stradivarius made them...which is obviously B.S.
@elpe estrobo ... The point may be over your head, but I'll try. David is saying that with time the copy will "age" and become as good as the original. That would imply that when Stradivarius made his instruments, they were only mediocre, but now that they have "aged" WE are enjoying superior instruments...To be clear, I am implying that this "ageing" theory of improving violins is nonsense.
Having never played violin, but having watched a lot of Twoset videos in the past few days, I tend to agree. The copy sounded better to my highly untrained ears. Almost how I would expect the real strad to sound when it was new. The real strad sounded a little muted and worn. Which, I assume with no foundation, would result in a different set of characteristics a musician could capitalize on in a performance.
The copy had a sweeter sound. The Strad had a blunt harshness in comparison and scratched easily. Personally if I was given the choice and I was a young rising soloist, I would pick the new $60K violin because it would be my chance to share with the world a unique tone and sound. I would be able to make the first mark on the violin and it would feel more like it was "made for me".
Correct
I guessed #2. There's an extra dimension of depth especially going down on the G and D strings. To be honest, even with infinite money I'd take #2. It felt more "complex" in the way a fine wine has many different flavor notes. #1 has a slightly superior tone but is nearly indistinguishable, but the tone feels so focused as to be monochromatic. It's notable that there is a wide range of tonality amongst all Strads, and it takes a player quite some time to bond with a specific Strad to really get that last 10% out of it.
I would agree, I was not able to fully appreciate my grandfather's Cremona copy untill I had repaired its one and only bow. I used natural black horse tail hair 288 strands. Then she perked up!
Listening on studio monitors here! After going through the examples for a while I could perceive that Violin 2 actually has a subtle amount of extra overtones+resonance and some kind of lively vibe to it! kinda hard to explain. Somehow, it does sound "bigger" but when compared carefully, Violin 1 sounds way more clean, solid, un-adulterated. At first I picked the 2nd though!
The 2nd violin is noticeably louder and more responsive. The G string sounds great, but the E string is borderline abrasive. The 1st violin is not as loud, but clearly has more complexity and roundness to the sound.
see I genuinely thought number 2 had more complexity in its sound, i was dumb founded when she said it was the copy
Exactly.
So you thought the 2nd was the better violin but found out at the end that the 1st was the Strad.
I felt as though you were putting more effort into playing violin 2, stronger crescendos, more vibrato &etc. It made violin 1 sound flat and boring where as violin 2 sounded slightly brighter but much more alive.
It made it difficult to judge the difference, but factoring that fact in, I still think violin 2 sounds better, even if I do feel it received preferential treatment in this blind test.
I thought this as well and I can't play a 🎻
I think #1 still had more body, and I was interpreting things as #2 needed more effort to sound (the sound seemed more equal than the effort)
@Star Sea Not the only take away. 1. It is very difficult to play two different instruments "the same" 2. The Strad was showing signs of the other described power of some Strads, that is, the easy projection with little effort that the other violin could not match. It is obvious that she tried to match the result (output), with the control input being different (putting my engineer hat on).
@Star Sea there you go 👌
yess
I knew it from the first notes, the number 1, and i confirm it with the wood details on the violin, the sound in both is really different, but you should use the same accesories and strings for both instruments for a real sound test, using different accesories and strings can give to the sound a broad difference to eachother :-) btw, GREAT PERFORMANCE! BRAVO!
The second is the sound of the violin itself, so pure and loud and fine-tuned.
The first is old, slightly imprecise, that wants you to put more emphasis on the expression since it lacks of depth. If you know it's a Stradivari, you actually prefer the first emotionally wise. The second sound wise.
The stradivari sounds so much like something human with a soul, and imperfections make it special somehow.
bro call a stradivarus imprecise
I guessed right. Somehow #1 sounded more mature, as if the wood was older - maybe more complex? The second one sounded a bit brighter.
Likely had to do with the different strings
That's what I thought too!
Exactly. More sustain. A slightly richer fuller sound to #1.
If how silk feels on your skin can be translated into a sound, that's the sound the Strad makes. It's just... silky.
@Kelly Fischer lmao preach
I definitely liked the 2nd violin more. It "sang" more beautifully and had warm lower tones. The first violin sounded a bit thin to me especially in the high register. I suspected the 1st violin was the strad even though I liked the 2nd better because I've found that many strads have that thinner higher register which many people (except me) prefer. Nice playing BTW.
I thought No. 2 sounded more alive, so I thought it was the newer one... And it was.
It is not like that that newer violins normally sound Better or more alive how you called
Well, I think original Stradivarius violins were created for different strings with much lower tension, soft tone and maybe the wood was much thicker on the plates then on modern violins today. But as Stradivarius violins were played by many players (and consequently repaired and tuned-up) the luthiers unfortunatelly removed some material from the plates and reinforced bass bar and make original Stradivarius violins much louder and deeper. Modern violins have even thinner plates to have the same amount of vibrations as matured 400 hundred old originals so they tend to have a more "brass like" sound. But some people like it this way. Loud and shiny. But old violins have more often very round and deeper voice with a lot of velvet on it.
Me a violinist somehow thought #2 was the original like it’s impressive on how close they were I literally had to choose #2 because of the nicer bolder sound. I am amazed
I only correctly guessed because of the darker wood tones. The quality copy sounds great. Would like to hear comparisons between a wide price range of violins.
Guessed it right! Strads have this smooth, silky sound, but at the same time, are able to hit hard when performing some fortissimo. I feel like that’s the reason that sets them apart and why no one can figure out how a sound can be so soft yet so filling.
The copy violin sounded more crisp and sharp... which is what is expected in modern violins. People like this sound more than the Strad, but personally, I feel that it lacks that soft sound that is heard on the Strad. It’s as if the Strad is a perfect blend between modern and classical sounding violins... truly one of a kind!
Idk to me the strad sounds kinda hard while the 2nd one is smoother(?) and more expressive
I agree with @frostee that to me the second one sounded smoother and richer.
I picked #1 for the strad. Listening through my studio monitors, I thought #1 sounded bigger, more harmonic content then #2 on each note. Also seemed she had to work more to get the volume form #2. Seems like #2 needs to be played more and open up. I was very impressed with Leonard's though. Both sounded great as does the soloist!
Bullshit
@@siddharthsharma8940 can you explain to me what is bullshit about this comment? (I find bullshit quite a harsh way of putting it either way but I would rly like to know)
@@whatisthis6590 RUclips audio is highly compressed, and it's impossible to hear finer nuances of the audio from RUclips, unlike what this guy is claiming.
Complete bs.
@@siddharthsharma8940 there definitely is a difference in the audio but both are really similar. But like you said in order to hear the "nuance" you need to listen to the violin in person. For youtube #2 is probably better.
I thought the first sounded ever so slightly softer, but barely even noticeable. I think it's excellent that they can copy them so well so that such beautiful music can continue to be made for so hundreds and hundreds MORE years.
I thought the second one sounded fuller and better, but it could have had something to do with the mic position because I've never missed one of these guess-the-Strad videos before.
But there are some REALLY shitty sounding Strads out there that are just not good enough for performing at a high level. There's one at the Ashmolean that just sounds ugh. But still, considering the legend of his name, and the age of the instruments and relatively few numbers of them, each and every one of them would have been considered for performing at a high level, even though the exact same violin wouldn't even have been considered for such use if it had been made by any modern luthier. He made some really nice sounding instruments, but this one was just an unusually thin and dead sounding violin. I would still want one, just for the age and history alone, but I would probably want a nicer sounding instrument for actual playing. But there is so much romanticising, belief in actual real life magic somehow, and worship on almost a religious level regarding these instruments, so it's rare that people manage to approach Stradivari's instruments in a rational way. I personally think the worship of Strad's and certain other maker's works as something special that cannot be matched today stems from the same reason people believe in a higher power and mythology.
the best new violins are better than strads.
It’s crazy how subtle the sounds vary from each other. I have never heard a Stradivarius before so I didn’t make a guess but both sounded beautiful
#1 sounded much more intimate to me and my wife listening on a macbook. I was hoping the modern violin had surpassed the strad (which I think is possible) but I was wrong. Maybe "trying to make something better" is better than mere copying. The older wood makes a huge difference.
Stop spouting bullshit. You remind me of Apple users
that #2 is good. not a musician here but i love listening to classic.
#2 switch from note to note perfectly while #1 is a bit rougher.
it is like #2 turn corners gracefully while #1 turns edgely.
I was right. I chose no. 1 as the stradivarius. My reason was, the sound came out so easily, more than no. 2. It also has more clarity than no. 2. Perhaps it because of the maturity of the wood. So, that's my humble opinion, since I'm majoring in piano, not violin 😄😄😄
I agree about the sound coming out more easily. But that's more of a visual thing. If I was blindfolded, I don't think that part would make no difference haha. I thought the copy had a more "hollow" sound on the G-string, and I preferred the Strad because of that.
I guess It!! One thing i've always noticed in the sound of Stradivarius is that it's less strong compared to other High quality violins, it's like if Stradivarius doesn't dare (or doesn't care of daring) as much as other violins, but what they "lack" in strength, compensates with a peculiar and silver sound, they aren't sweet to make you sleep, instead they provoke in you a tipe of reaction, you like It or not. Ofcourse it's only my opinion.
1 has a softer glowing sound, 2 is louder and brasher, imo.
I think #2 has a bit more dynamics, but it could be the play, yet #1 feels easier to hear.
2:30 I thought she was going to clumsily collide the two violins.
Yes
I like the sound if number 1 more and my guess was right.For me, it’s better than number 2 because number 1 sounds polished rather than the bursting sound that is coming out of the number 2.But I still quite enjoy the number 2.
I don’t play or know anything about the violin. Just kinda stumbled upon the topic. I liked violin 2 the most though
The Strad has such a smooth and gorgeous tone. Very close for me though. I’d die to play either!
1st Violin had much more color to the tone, whereas the 2nd violin had less color and more tin sound. Both are great sounding instruments, but the 1st one reigns supreme!
If not mistaken violin no.1 is the 1724 Arbegavenny previously owned by the great Violinist Leonidas Kavakos, really miss those times when he played on this violin🥲
Something about the Stradivarius sounds sweeter and more mellow to me.
I know diddly-squat about violins but my nerves were in panic mode watching her at the end dangerously coming close to bumping those violins into each other 🤣
Nailed it! The original was more balanced in tone where as the copy had several frequencies that really stood out powerfully. I guess give it a century and the copy will definitely mature.
I guessed right. Though I was confused till she started to play the lower notes. That's when the #1 showed it's quality. It sounded steady, no unwanted vibration, and it sounded crystal clear than #2.
By just listening to the audio, I too could not hear the difference between the two. But then I never paid more than $75 (US) for a new violin including the case, bow and a cake of rosin. The last violin I purchased cost me $39 (US) - and that one came with an extra set of steel core strings and an electric tuner along with the case, bow and a small cake of rosin. When I’m not playing my violins, they do make for nice decorative wall hangers. Both of my violins, by the way, were made in China. But I'm sure that didn't come as a revelation to anyone. 😉 🎻♫
Christopher Tsiliacos , wow, you'll be a great viola player!
Hi Black_Kitten, thanks for the nice comment. I'm sure the viola is a great instrument. I play many instruments (brass, strings, and woodwinds) but the viola is not one of them.
I have only two requisites when it comes to playing musical instruments: I only play treble clef instruments, and I play them in only two octaves. That's why, for example, I play the violin and neither the viola nor the cello. And why I play the Bb trumpet (my first instrument) and flugelhorn, and neither the trombone nor the tuba. An even though the concert flute has a full three octave range, I only play it in the first two octaves.
I have accolades for those musicians who play instruments in more than one clef, especially piano, organ and harp players who are required to play two lines of music - at the same time - the bass clef and treble clef. 😊 🎼 ♫ 🎸 🎺 🎻 🎷
Christopher Tsiliacos Cool! I only have a cheap Chinese violin ... Btw how is that she has a Stradivarius one????!!!
Christopher Tsiliacos The viola is a meme :P
when your insult backfires
i guessed that 1 was the strad as it sounded more even at the lower dynamics but honestly i prefer violin 2 overall, it had a much smoother and richer sound.
I listened without video at first. I can't even tell you're changing them.
@Fuzz Muff Same.
I guessed right and enjoyed the warm tonal quality of #1 while #2 tonally sounded sharper. But its all about preference and there's no "wrong" answer.
Violin 1 was much more FOCUSED and CLEAR, which is the trend in virtually all high-end violins. Tone isn't the issue. It's CLARITY. Clarity helps the PLAYER play in-tune and find the correct pitch when playing 9th position and higher. Higher quality violins help the PLAYER be a better player. It's not about the listener, it's about the player. The player can hear more subtle differences.
Want violin 2 to sound clearer? Try changing out the tailpiece. More mass or stiffer. You have ebony on it now. Try pernambuco or snakewood. Your family has money, so try a pernambuco tailpiece by Les Bois d' Harmonie. It'll make your Florian sound clearer and prettier.
For some reason I got it right as my old music teacher had told me tales about old violins and how modern violin maker are great with their trade and technology ... but sadly I will go with #2, It has the quality I am looking for from a violin.
Both are very good and would love to have them together on my arsenal. Also, an excellent performance.
Whats the name if that piece she Is playing?
Classical Piano Franck Sonata
César Franck's Violin Sonata, end of 3rd movement
I cranked it up with high quality headphones and though they both sounded tremendous, I honestly thought #2 sounded slightly better. A little more clarity, resonance and warmth. Fantastic engineering on the homage model.
Holy smokes! I liked no. 2 better
You can actually hear the difference at 1:42 to 1:53 , (pp) for the same amount of force applied violin 1 holds it perfectly, the other one suffers. I think in real life experience you will notice the power of the Stradivarius well above the other violin the souls of the violin are also different, violin 1 (colorful and dramatic) violin 2 (thin and gentle). In addition she is changing the position so is more difficult
That's my opinion
I prefer violin nr 2. Sorry stradivarius
#1 is better
Brilliant playing! Both sound fantastic. Thanks for posting. 👍
I picked Violin 1. It was mainly on the higher notes that I could hear the difference. The higher notes just had a clarity and richness to them and structure that number 2 didn't quite have. In my opinion.
I guessed ok. I feel that the instrument respond better in all of the nuances . All is perfect, is much warmer, but it is also brilliant when it is required. And for last, in the pianissimo notes the sound is much more clear than the other. I feel a very big diference and im happy to discover it!
Preferred #1 for the upper register, but felt #2 had a warmer and richer tone on the g and d strings. Figured #1 was the strad, but they truly do sound comparable on video...not sure if it's the same in person.
I actually guessed right, the strad sounded much silkier and smoother than the copy and I honestly preferred the strad more but the copy did sound really good but just not quite as good, would still listen to the copy if i had to. btw i'm a clarinet player take it as you will.
I guess right. the Strad has "old" feeling, you know if material get aging, it has some imperfection tone, but has seamless tone/note/ sound frequency... the copy has strong tone, I can perfectly hear from this recorded sound which has high pitch that can broke my ear. aging material doesn't have that capability. thats why Strad is favorite while playing powerful music.
edit : you know wood is still "alive" (breath) even you cut it.
Yay I'd guessed right
I liked the first one better, because it felt like it was conveying more emotion.
The second one, also really really nice, sounded a bit too "sharp" for my taste. Sounded newer, because of that overall slightly higher pitch.
I could not really tell between them except when you hit that low cord on the no. 2 it's voice was so rich it made my hair stand up, litterally.
I guessed #2, because it seemed to project a bit more in certain parts, but it may have just come down to your handling, and the technique required in certain parts of the arrangement. Either way I was pleasantly surprised. Another reason why I picked #2 is because it looked like it was more aged.
I guessed that #1 was Stradivarius because in the higher and lower notes it sounded smoother, the 2nd violin sounded nasally on the higher notes and duck like sound on the lower notes. I knew that #2 still needed time to fully open up. But they both sound amazing. #1 just has a more refined sound throughout.
I picked number one over two but I found it hard to choose! I kept going back and forth but I finally decided that one had a more mature sound that I found pleasing to my ear. I am not an expert by any means, especially since I am a brass player..
I actually guessed correctly. I have been playing the viola & the violin since I was 7 (Im 33) & though they sound very similar, there is a subtle & VERY hard to describe yet discernible difference between the two. The best (although corny) explanation I can come up with, is that the strad has a bit more "soul", depth, & warmth resonating from it, actually it sounds like the Strad is creating the sounds from WITHIN, while the copy is lacking that sense of "soul" & "warmth". I dunno....it may be hogwash to some, but to me it sounds like it has a soul & the copy does not (though it is still an amazing violin). It's subtle but to experienced musicians it CAN be (though not always) discerned. #2 was brighter, it sounded younger but #1 sounded like it was more mature, most understated & "wiser". It's like it had nothing to prove, it didn't sound technically perfect but from a humanist point of view, it was perfect indeed. It touched that part of our heart or soul or whatever you prefer to call it that we all share in common.
First of all, great playing! Awesome feel and tone. Secondly, I liked the first violin better although I suspected the second was the strad. The first one just had a tighter tonal focus. The second one didn't feel so laser focused, and was noticeably darker and raspier sounding to my ears.
I could tell the difference even on my tv speakers, been playing violin for 32 years and own a recording studio
I was actually looking at the appearance of the two violins and looking at the 2nd violin, it looks so much more fresh and polished compared to the strand, which the strand has a more vintage look than the new one, but the color and texture of the wood gave it away for me. They’re pretty hard to tell the difference if the two but I can say that the sound of the 2nd violin was brighter than the strand, which the strand’s tone is richer in the lower register. As far as the preference is concerned, it depends what you like to hear more of, the warmth of the resonant lows or the bright tones of the higher register. My preference would be the darker, richer resonant violin which is more comforting to my ear.
An important factor I have not seen mentioned in these comments is how long it takes to get used to a violin to get the most from it. Esther Abrami probably had no more than an hour or two with each instrument and maybe much less. Concert violinist Ivry Gitlis said that it took him 1-1.5 years to get used to his Strad because it is not easy to play a Strad with its many possibilities (ruclips.net/video/yLlz3CuNACY/видео.html ). In about 1973 when I was in college, I had a chance to play a Strad for 1-2 minutes. I did a really lousy job playing that instrument because I am a lowly violinist used to my lowly violin and that Strad felt and sounded so different from what I was used to. I doubt that even someone who plays as well as Esther Abrami can bring out the most from either violin in the limited time she had. Nonetheless, she played both instruments very well.
At first I thought it was number two but changed my mind towards the end when I heard that really high note. The replica has a more mellow sound to it than the original. They both sound wonderful, but the actual strad sounded like the tone was slightly higher pitched.
I chose no 1 because I felt it had more of a silvery sound to it (typical of a strad). I knew it wasn't no 2 when you played that long note on the G string at the end, because it just didn't sound as bright as what a strad should.
I guessed right. But it's about so many factors - for instance I thought bow pressure was heavier on second, so more likely the new violin. It's lower end may develop to give more richness and mellower "aged" tone in time.
I thought violin# 2 was the real stradivarious! The high frequency was more delicate and the bottom floor was mellower. Thank you Esther! Very enlightening! I look forward to more tests of violins from you. Your playing is eloquent!❤
I guessed 1, and I was correct. All new violins tend to be very loud, but lack that richness and complexity that comes with old violins. The strad can only be described to be balanced, silky, clear, yet having that warmness while being strikingly direct, but the copy only sounded loud, clogged, yet very bright.
The giveaway was the volume while on the lower strings. The newer violins tend to be ridiculously loud. I’m not sure if this is because of a “healthier” bass-bar, but the strad has this amazing complexity that can’t be described with words. The copy however, does not.
It is also important to mention that violins are sensitive instruments. No exact copies, even if they are made of the same wood, by the same maker, in the same dimensions, in the same exact method, they will inevitably sound different. That’s just the way it is.
Exactly what I felt from violin # 1 was much better in sound. And then it was found to be real Stradivarius. It does not need to hear more than 10 seconds for me. It may thank to my experience in playing piano and preference of listening classical music.
I guessed right. There’s a difference in focus of the sound. Later period strads sound way more clear and direct in tone and because of that have better projection. This is at a slight cost to the warmth and sweetness but that’s up to preference. The copy was definitely sweeter but also slightly quieter like you’d expect in an earlier period strad. Both sound very good but it’s hard for me to justify a modern violin being tens of thousands as a copy of a strad when I don’t feel it was a copy at all.
The Strad #1 had a fuller spectrum of sound and overtones. The copy #2 though good, was thinner sounding, somewhat pinched. My two cents...
I thought #1 was the Strad because it sounds sharper, clearer. There's more resolution to the sound. I AM NOT a violinist, or even trained in classical music, I play guitar by ear. The difference in sound is slight but noticeable to me.
Hi Esther, the first one is warmer and purer as taste of old wine and the second is brighter so I choose the first is real, and it's just as what I guess.
Wow. I agree with the comments. I thought the second one was the Stradivari. Its sound was more resonant and even more in tune. The first one sounded thinner, which is usually not the case for a Stradivari. I bet there are better sounding Stradivaris out there. But if I were looking to buy, I'd settle for this more affordable replica any day!
I guessed right. Hard to explain but one sounds like it held the tone better via resonance and dampened quicker after each note played. The second sounded dry, more like it was sharply blasting out tones rather than flowing out.
The moment she drew the bow across Violin #1 I knew it was the Strad. There's a seasoned maturity, a refined dimensional depth and consistency to the tone qualities of a strad no matter which string or where you play it. The copy sounded very good, but it was less mature, less refined. It had more energy to the tonal qualities which I would attribute to the materials it's made of. It's a fresher, newer sound. It doesn't have the sense of dimensionality that the Strad has. I was listening on headphones so that may have helped to tell the difference.
Guessed right but really preferred the second, the Strad has more layers but it's more harsh to my ear. There are so many variables though from the style of the song, the player, the recording apparatus, my home speakers. It's really just a matter of personal preference.
I genuinely guessed right that it was number one, but most of it sounded VERY close. I’m not sure what the right word is but on certain notes it felt like the Stradivari held the note a little longer and sounded a touch smoother or warmer.
It was quite easy for me, maybe because I am myself a violinist.
The Strad has more warmth and profundity, and you can hear the history condensing into a magnificent sound, it reminds me of someone old and with an intriguing story to tell, while the copy sounded quite new and naive, which naturally lacks depth, but it is indeed more vigorous and we can perceive more vivacity, I can picture a young person filled with strength and felicity.
I believe that the violinist was also able to express her emotions better with the Stradivarius.
"you can hear the history condensing..." bullshit
@@Prooblemm I believe that you should read it completely: “and you can hear the history condensing into a magnificent sound,…” that means that time makes a violin sound better, that is a fact.
@@xiaotaozhou8662 No, it's not a fact. But you can think it, not a problem.
Having no experience in violins whatsoever, but there was this certain tone in the Violin 1 that made it sound like it was older, I am not sure how to explain it, like a little bit darker tone texture compared to violin 2 which sounded a little brighter, but I liked the sound of violin 2 more than 1 in the piece you played
Both sounded good, but the first violin sounded more mellow and the second sounded a brighter. I wasn't sure at first which was the Stradivarius, but after listening a little more, I felt like the first one sounded mellow, because of the age of the wood and the brighter tone of the second violin sounded newer to me. I wonder if the second violin might sound more like the first when it gets to the same age?
Violin#1 tune was soft and light, where Violin#2 is a bit loud in every curve. So got it in first step. You played both violins beautifully (Y).
Definitely number 2. It’s a bit livelier, sharper and more crispier than 1724 version. Thank you for playing, your are wonderful 🌺
I guessed correctly. Only reason I got it correct was of the polished finish of them each. The Stradivarius V1 had a more semigloss French polish while V2 was just a bit more smooth in the gloss finish. Sound wise I couldn’t tell.......but I’m a guitarist.
Impressive editing between the two violins. This is a great exercise in aural training! My thoughts are they had the same sound profile but violin 1 sounded ‘easier’ somehow, that esoteric property that after hundreds of years it knows what it’s doing. The copy however is VERY new and will likely sound identical or maybe even better after a few years of playing? (unless of course it doesn’t, which can sometimes happen with new instruments) It’s a beautifully crafted instrument which should develop its own individual sound over the years. I’d happily buy it if I could afford it!
As an audiophile I have trained my ears over the years, I listen to music through a top end hifi system, I channelled this through my system and extracted the best sound I could be it on RUclips and there was a massive difference between the two violins, but I have no idea which one was which until the lady said at the end.......
I also preferred the seemingly richer sound of violin number 2 But it’s important to remember that this is basically a commercial for the modern luthier. I could be wrong, but it appears as if most passages on violin 2 were closer to the mike and therefore louder. In many loudspeaker tests, at least, the louder speaker almost always wins.
Still, no question that the modern guy builds an amazingly fine instrument.
I guessed No. 1. I think the sound is fuller. It's resonant and powerful. The other one has brighter notes, but the sound is a bit weaker, like its missing something.
Copy has a much richer resounding and reverberating awesome sound! Stradivari regretably here has a very very thin and linear sound! this video can even be put to the test on an oscilloscope, and or some audio software to make proof of this!
On my mediocre Bluetooth headphones Violin 1 had a bigger, fuller rounder tone. The overtones weren't audible on my headphones but I imagine they're amazing. Violin 2 was thinner and lighter/buzzier sounding, but not necessarily in a bad way. Without proper speakers or actually being there I assume it's impossible to hear them properly. Maybe y'all with high end speakers can hear all the harmonics and overtones and whatnot.
Number one had a higher pitch. Number to had a deeper resonating sound. I like the number to better slightly.
the strad was subtle and has firmer sound which I think is better than the more resonating exact copy