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.
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 :-)
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. :-)
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.
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 • 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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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".
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.
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.
@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).
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!
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
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.
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!
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 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.
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.
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!
@@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 UA-cam audio is highly compressed, and it's impossible to hear finer nuances of the audio from UA-cam, 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.
#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.
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.
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!
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 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 🤣
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.
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
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!
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.
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. 😉 🎻♫
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. 😊 🎼 ♫ 🎸 🎺 🎻 🎷
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.
I also liked #2 more - the sound was less straightforward but richer, a different type of resonance. Who is the copy by and how much was it going for? Also, I got super nervous when she had one in each hand and there was a moment it looked like they were going to hit each other...
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 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.
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.
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 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.
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!
I guessed correctly. The sound is more delicate with the Stradivari violin. Very nice copy of violin #2 I must say. Thanks for your post that was wonderful to hear the comparison.
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.
@@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.
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🥲
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.
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!
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.
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.
Which was easier to play? Which one stayed in tune longer? It doesn't matter how good a violin sounds it it goes out of tune after a minute of playing.
I believe I have audiophile ears and listened using very expensive headphones. I made a mistake, went for #2! The copy is really really good! Thanks for this video! Was fun!
I haven't finished the video, but the difference was immediately noticeable to me, I preferred violin 2. 1 is certainly smoother, but I'd wager no.2 will become smoother with age.
@@samanthony8121 Hearing is subjective. It could be entirely possible that people with minor hearing damage could prefer 2. Guitar amps did my ears in years ago.
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..
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.
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!
I guessed #1 because of the clarity of sound. Although #2 seems a bit more full, i can’t tell if it’s because of the sound quality. Nonetheless, great video!!
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!
Youre so beeautiful and the passion you play with, and how you play is excellent. True class is hard to come by nowadays, and you have it. Your videos are an absolute pleasure to view
To me sound was almost indistinguishible, however on lower tones strad did seem to have "velvety" vibe to it, no idea how else to describe it. If not for side-by-side comparison however, it would be impossible to tell which one's which.
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.
Violin no. 2 sounded more resonant to my untrained ears and was surprised to learn that #1 was the strad. Either way, the way you played was magnificent!
I picked no. 1. The first one to me had more a airey sound that projected more in the bottom end and the top end. Just my opinion. You played both masterfully!!
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.
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!
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!!!!!
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 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 UA-cam‘s horrendous compression.
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".
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.
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 😂
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.
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
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 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!
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 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
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 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!
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 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.
Brilliant playing! Both sound fantastic. Thanks for posting. 👍
2:30 I thought she was going to clumsily collide the two violins.
Yes
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.
1 has a softer glowing sound, 2 is louder and brasher, imo.
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
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 UA-cam audio is highly compressed, and it's impossible to hear finer nuances of the audio from UA-cam, 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.
#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.
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.
The Strad has such a smooth and gorgeous tone. Very close for me though. I’d die to play either!
I think #2 has a bit more dynamics, but it could be the play, yet #1 feels easier to hear.
I preferred the copy. It seemed to have more depth to the sound - but I appreciate that the sound on a laptop is not really up to conveying nuances.
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 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 🤣
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.
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
Whats the name if that piece she Is playing?
Classical Piano Franck Sonata
César Franck's Violin Sonata, end of 3rd movement
I guessed right. And your sound is so good that my eyeballs pop out of my head!!!
Something about the Stradivarius sounds sweeter and more mellow to me.
They both sound great. Kudos to you for the excellent playing.
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!
I guessed right. The difference is obvious even from the first note! Thanks that you made me have this experience!
I don’t play or know anything about the violin. Just kinda stumbled upon the topic. I liked violin 2 the most though
What piece was played in the video?
I listened without video at first. I can't even tell you're changing them.
@Fuzz Muff Same.
When you play all of them sounds perfect! Love from Turkey.. ❤️
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 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.
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
What would they do to you if you took violin #1 and stepped on it?
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.
I also liked #2 more - the sound was less straightforward but richer, a different type of resonance. Who is the copy by and how much was it going for?
Also, I got super nervous when she had one in each hand and there was a moment it looked like they were going to hit each other...
Holy smokes! I liked no. 2 better
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 prefer violin nr 2. Sorry stradivarius
#1 is better
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
The sound of number 2 was fuller so should it be so much for the old one when we can make better sounds with a modern copy?
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!
Easiest way to tell would have been to smash both on the ground and see which one the owner started crying over.
I guessed correctly. The sound is more delicate with the Stradivari violin. Very nice copy of violin #2 I must say.
Thanks for your post that was wonderful to hear the comparison.
Definitely number 2. It’s a bit livelier, sharper and more crispier than 1724 version. Thank you for playing, your are wonderful 🌺
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.
I liked #2 better. But have those been recorded with the same microphone positioning? The camera angle sure was different.
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🥲
I made the right guess. Violin 2 sounds a little rougher. Thank you so much for sharing! What a treasure to play with the real stradivarius violin.
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.
The last and slow part ( 1:41 ) clearly dintinguish between both violins on resonance, clearly the first one have to be the Stradivarius
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!
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.
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.
Which was easier to play? Which one stayed in tune longer? It doesn't matter how good a violin sounds it it goes out of tune after a minute of playing.
I believe I have audiophile ears and listened using very expensive headphones. I made a mistake, went for #2! The copy is really really good! Thanks for this video! Was fun!
I haven't finished the video, but the difference was immediately noticeable to me, I preferred violin 2.
1 is certainly smoother, but I'd wager no.2 will become smoother with age.
Im suprised how many people preferred the copy. I disnt like it at all compared to the real deal.
@@samanthony8121 Hearing is subjective. It could be entirely possible that people with minor hearing damage could prefer 2. Guitar amps did my ears in years ago.
I didn’t watch you play, just listened and I believed 2 was better. Cleaner, clearer and had a better tone.
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..
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 could tell the difference even on my tv speakers, been playing violin for 32 years and own a recording studio
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!
I was off the mark. I guessed #2. Just sounded like it had a richer tone to it. Love your accent by the way, I could listen to you talk for hours.
I knew it. The first violin's sound is deep, clear and warm. Nowadays it's better when violin sounds brightly. I love the first sound.
I guessed #1 because of the clarity of sound. Although #2 seems a bit more full, i can’t tell if it’s because of the sound quality. Nonetheless, great video!!
I am sure mine is a copy all I know that it was bought in a second hand shop in1880 in Australia where do you take it to for valuation
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.
0:48-01:38 what is the name of this piece?
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!
Youre so beeautiful and the passion you play with, and how you play is excellent. True class is hard to come by nowadays, and you have it. Your videos are an absolute pleasure to view
To me sound was almost indistinguishible, however on lower tones strad did seem to have "velvety" vibe to it, no idea how else to describe it. If not for side-by-side comparison however, it would be impossible to tell which one's which.
My God, I actually felt that #2 had more resonance and had guessed it to be the real Strad. Wow. Brilliant luthier to make such a wonderful copy!
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.
What the name of pieces that you played in this vidio ?
Violin no. 2 sounded more resonant to my untrained ears and was surprised to learn that #1 was the strad. Either way, the way you played was magnificent!
I picked no. 1. The first one to me had more a airey sound that projected more in the bottom end and the top end. Just my opinion. You played both masterfully!!