I think I've seen two other reports of thefts involving this particular make of violin here in London in the past year or so. It really is a very high profile instrument.
They are very high profile. And the fact that they get moved around, used,and loaned out probably makes them a much more tempting target compared to a painting or sculpture that, for the most part, stays in one museum.
EDIT2: "just" was the wrong word. Obviously they're fabulous pieces of art in themselves, and doubtless beautiful to play. But like other art, they aren't valued based on how good they sound/look. I'd like to point out that I care about this a lot less than the tone of my original comment might imply.
Audiophiles are people who are willing to pay absurd prices to "high end" audio equipment (like speaker cables for $10k and more) which they claim to be clearly superior in sound quality, while the technical explanations fo the equipment's superiority are often nonsensical and the sound quality is not in fact distinguishable in blind tests.
The grandparents is implying that the price of Stradivarius violins is also based on assumed rather than proven quality.
I didn't say they were nothing special. Those $15,000 dollar headphones sound amazing. It's that the price is way out of proportion to the quality.
It would be fine if people admitted that strads are great largely because they're old and historically important, but they insist that they're superior violins.
(Of course, that's still fine. Whatever.)
I suspect that violinists are actually able to play to a higher standard on a strad, just because they're so thrilled to be doing so and this makes them focus more/less. This then feeds back into the idea that they sound better.
Getting the chance to play a Stradivarius instrument is a distinctive honor. You're at least going to be listening to a very well regarded musician. This isn't a bose vs beats kinda thing. This is a centuries old tradition.
Stealing a 6 million dollar stradivarius is an incredibly stupid idea, really. With only about 650 surviving Stradivari instruments around, this is about more than just the sound. Its the same reason I bought a Martin over a 100 dollar import acoustic guitar. The Martin has a flawless 3 piece rosewood back and the construction quality is pretty much impecable. I know I could play just as well on a cheap guitar, but the aesthetics of my guitar make me want to play it more often, take better care of it and I do think there is a negligible sound quality difference vs something cheaper.
Maybe there isn't, but I know that 40 years from now when my kids inherit this guitar they will have something that has retained its value and will be treated like a keepsake instead of relegated to a landfill as "junk".
Its just like any hobby or discipline, when you are interested in it, you want to have great hardware/software to participate.
> It's the same reason I bought a Martin over a 100 dollar import acoustic guitar.
The difference between the $99 (or even $199) plywood special and even an entry-level solid-wood guitar (starting closer to $500) is much more than just aesthetic. There are obviously exceptions but as a rule, the playability difference is profound.
There is another increase in quality/playability as you get into the mid-range offerings. Fit and finish are just a little bit better, tolerances are tighter, materials are of higher quality.
> Maybe there isn't, but I know that 40 years from now when my kids inherit this guitar they will have something that has retained its value and will be treated like a keepsake instead of relegated to a landfill as "junk".
I cheated on this count by buying a guitar made in 1974, so my kids will get a 75 year old guitar.
12 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 41.7 ms ] threadEDIT: yeah, pretty much: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stradavarius#Comparisons_in_so...
EDIT2: "just" was the wrong word. Obviously they're fabulous pieces of art in themselves, and doubtless beautiful to play. But like other art, they aren't valued based on how good they sound/look. I'd like to point out that I care about this a lot less than the tone of my original comment might imply.
Edit: oh I see, you think strads are nothing special. Too bad for you.
The grandparents is implying that the price of Stradivarius violins is also based on assumed rather than proven quality.
It would be fine if people admitted that strads are great largely because they're old and historically important, but they insist that they're superior violins.
(Of course, that's still fine. Whatever.)
I suspect that violinists are actually able to play to a higher standard on a strad, just because they're so thrilled to be doing so and this makes them focus more/less. This then feeds back into the idea that they sound better.
Maybe there isn't, but I know that 40 years from now when my kids inherit this guitar they will have something that has retained its value and will be treated like a keepsake instead of relegated to a landfill as "junk".
Its just like any hobby or discipline, when you are interested in it, you want to have great hardware/software to participate.
The difference between the $99 (or even $199) plywood special and even an entry-level solid-wood guitar (starting closer to $500) is much more than just aesthetic. There are obviously exceptions but as a rule, the playability difference is profound.
There is another increase in quality/playability as you get into the mid-range offerings. Fit and finish are just a little bit better, tolerances are tighter, materials are of higher quality.
> Maybe there isn't, but I know that 40 years from now when my kids inherit this guitar they will have something that has retained its value and will be treated like a keepsake instead of relegated to a landfill as "junk".
I cheated on this count by buying a guitar made in 1974, so my kids will get a 75 year old guitar.