Can You Hear the Difference Between One Million Dollar & $5000 Cello? | Bach Cello Suite No. 1
- Thread starter joeinid
- Start date
Hi Joe,
Thanks for posting this. I was a pretty good Cellist back in my younger days.
I thought the $5,000 cello sounded terrible. No resonance, nasal tone and muted volume. Couldn’t live with it.
The $180,000 cello was by far the best value and in many ways, the best sounding. Wonderful resonance in the bottom register, extraordinarily open top register, beautiful tone and amazing projection. I would take this cello any day of the week.
The $1.0 million cello was a disappointment. While there was a certain control and refinement to its sound, it lacked evenness across the entire register. Resonance, especially in the bottom register, and projection were disappointing. It does not hold a candle compared to a Stradivarius, which I heard close up played at a private home by the late great Paul Tobias. That instrument had gorgeous tonality and refinement, and amazing resonance across the entire register. It would make you weep.
Ken
Thanks for posting this. I was a pretty good Cellist back in my younger days.
I thought the $5,000 cello sounded terrible. No resonance, nasal tone and muted volume. Couldn’t live with it.
The $180,000 cello was by far the best value and in many ways, the best sounding. Wonderful resonance in the bottom register, extraordinarily open top register, beautiful tone and amazing projection. I would take this cello any day of the week.
The $1.0 million cello was a disappointment. While there was a certain control and refinement to its sound, it lacked evenness across the entire register. Resonance, especially in the bottom register, and projection were disappointing. It does not hold a candle compared to a Stradivarius, which I heard close up played at a private home by the late great Paul Tobias. That instrument had gorgeous tonality and refinement, and amazing resonance across the entire register. It would make you weep.
Ken
I listened a second time and rewrote some of my comments. I love the $180,000 cello. I want it!
Ken
- Thread Author
- #5
I definitely thought the 180K cello was really nice sounding too.
The bottom line for me, past any analysis of the sound, is I felt much more of an emotional connection to the Bach Suite on the $180,000 cello than the others.
UltraFast69
New member
I wouldn’t say any of them was bad, and she was a good musician.
I agree the $180K was the better sounding of the three.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I agree the $180K was the better sounding of the three.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
TheOctopus
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2013
- Messages
- 1,622
The $180,000 cello sounded much closer in tone to the $1M cello. I am not a musician so I have no idea what a musician would prefer but the $5k cello sounded much brighter and more resonant but not nearly as refined as the other two.
Besides the obvious tone differences, to my musical instrument untrained ears, I thought the biggest difference was in the harmonics.
By comparison only, the $5k cello tended to have a very peaky, dominant frequency response. The fundamental tone overpowered the rest of the harmonics due to a very resonant body.
I did pick up on the wider harmonic envelope of the $180k and $1M cello.
The $1M cello, at least to my ears, had the most exquisite and expressive primary/fundamental tones and a very wide harmonic envelope that was able to bloom due no doubt to the choice of wood and construction of the instrument. All of the harmonics were better balanced and existed on the same plane without being overpowered. I thought I was getting at least 30%-50% more musical information and engagement by that particular instrument with the $180k cello and perhaps another 10-15% on top of that with the $1M
I am sure the law of diminishing returns is alive and well with musical instruments as it is with audio components.
Besides the obvious tone differences, to my musical instrument untrained ears, I thought the biggest difference was in the harmonics.
By comparison only, the $5k cello tended to have a very peaky, dominant frequency response. The fundamental tone overpowered the rest of the harmonics due to a very resonant body.
I did pick up on the wider harmonic envelope of the $180k and $1M cello.
The $1M cello, at least to my ears, had the most exquisite and expressive primary/fundamental tones and a very wide harmonic envelope that was able to bloom due no doubt to the choice of wood and construction of the instrument. All of the harmonics were better balanced and existed on the same plane without being overpowered. I thought I was getting at least 30%-50% more musical information and engagement by that particular instrument with the $180k cello and perhaps another 10-15% on top of that with the $1M
I am sure the law of diminishing returns is alive and well with musical instruments as it is with audio components.
TheOctopus
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2013
- Messages
- 1,622
Speaking of which... I have yet to hear a more beautiful cello but even more specifically violin reproduction (for a two way monitor) than what Franco Serblin designs and Sonus Faber speakers used to do. Perhaps it is just my memory of such but none of the at least a half dozen of speakers that I went through since, have sounded quite that intoxicating on those two instruments.
No doubt it had to do with the fact that Franco Serblin treated speakers like a musical instrument and it was built as such with kiln dried planks. Some sympathetic resonance was unavoidable with such a speaker cabinet construction. Maple, Spruce, Red Spruce, Walnut, each has its own tone. No doubt the thousands of hours of listening to music inspired by the famous violin makers of that region, Stradivari, Guarneri, Amati, through their speakers and fine tuning them, resulted in a very well accomplished goal. Sure, other speakers do a great job but that last ounce of incredible emotional beauty and that which is impossible to put into words magic... Well, I have yet to find it again. I doubt I ever will.
No doubt it had to do with the fact that Franco Serblin treated speakers like a musical instrument and it was built as such with kiln dried planks. Some sympathetic resonance was unavoidable with such a speaker cabinet construction. Maple, Spruce, Red Spruce, Walnut, each has its own tone. No doubt the thousands of hours of listening to music inspired by the famous violin makers of that region, Stradivari, Guarneri, Amati, through their speakers and fine tuning them, resulted in a very well accomplished goal. Sure, other speakers do a great job but that last ounce of incredible emotional beauty and that which is impossible to put into words magic... Well, I have yet to find it again. I doubt I ever will.
TheOctopus
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2013
- Messages
- 1,622
Look for "Academy for Ancient Music" on Tidal/Qobuz. The orchestra uses Baroque period instruments to play Baroque period music. Then realize what we are listening to today, performed by modern orchestra with modern instruments is not even close to what people heard in the 1600-1750 of the Baroque era. The instruments sounded distinctly different then. That's not to even mention the harpsichord vs the pianoforte, vs the modern piano.