Perception of violin soundpost tightness through playing and listening tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study involved playing and listening (using recorded sounds) experiments to investigate how changes in soundpost length (for a fixed soundpost position) affect the perceptual qualities of the violin and what the threshold of change is below which players and luthiers do not perceive differences. A length-adjustable carbon fiber soundpost was employed. During the playing experiment, subjects played a provided violin on which the soundpost length was modified by the experimenter to find their optimal soundpost lengths. Then the experimenter varied the soundpost length randomly in ten trials within ±0.11 mm around their optimal lengths and asked subjects to always compare with the previous setting. The results showed that subjects' optimal soundpost lengths varied from 0.132 to 0.616 mm relative to the original length (53 mm), but subjects could not recognize length variation of 0.11 mm or less at above chance levels. During the listening experiment, subjects listened to 16 pairs of recordings through a computer interface and were asked, for each pair, whether the violin setup was the same or different. The results showed that subjects could differentiate soundpost lengths with a difference of about 0.198 mm at better than chance level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".