Exploring the perception of violin qualities: student- vs. performance-level instruments, strings and soundpost height
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The violin has reached its current, highly refined form over centuries through empirical methods, with some of the most valuable instruments being made more than 300 years ago.It is thus perhaps remarkable that very little is understood about violin quality and what particular aspects of the instrument are most important in the perception of violin qualities.This thesis reports three perceptual experiments that were designed to help better understand the relationship between a violin's perceived qualities and its physical structure.Previous studies [Saitis et al., 2012; Fritz et al., 2012bFritz et al., , 2014] ] have shown a general lack of agreement among players in terms of violin preference when evaluating instruments intended for intermediate to advanced players ($1300 CAD and higher).The first experiment of this thesis explored whether there would be greater perceptual agreement when comparing violins meant for entry-level vs. advanced players, whether there would be significant perceptual differences between these two categories of violins and whether some structural vibration characteristics could be found to explain these differences.The results showed that performance violins were on average rated significantly higher than student violins in terms of preference and the three attribute criteria clarity, richness and balance.The second and third studies of this thesis investigated the origin of the disagreement among players through two specific modifications to the violin.The second study investigated how different strings affect the perception of violin qualities.Two violins of the same make with similar sound quality and playability were employed.They were both strung with Dominant strings initially.Subjects played the violins, described and rated the difference (on eight criteriaresponsiveness, power, resonance, brightness, clarity, richness, balance and overall quality) between the two violins during a session labeled D1-D2.Subsequently, the strings of violin 2 were changed to a different brand (Kaplan or Pro-Art), unbeknownst to the players, and players had to re-evaluate the differences between the two violins (session D1-K2 or D1-P2).Results showed no significant differences between the experimental conditions except that the brightness difference ratings obtained in D1-D2 were found to be significantly higher than those in D1-P2.The third study involved both playing and listening (using recorded sounds) experiments to investigate how changes in soundpost height (for a fixed soundpost position) affect the perceptual qualities of the violin and what is the threshold of change below which players and
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».