Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 22:23:08 -0500

Oh GMAB Ludo. It's easy to hear the difference between good violins and bad
violins. It's easy to hear the difference between two different good
violins.

It is not necessarily true that a Stradivarius is any better, sonically
or otherwise, than any other well-constructed violin.

Status, rarity, investment purposes, and other reasons, make them
desirable to the musicians that play them (and that can afford them).

I would imagine that if you plotted all the various Stradivarius
violins on a bell curve for any given parameter (playability, sonic
performance, quality of construction, condition, etc.) some would be a
couple of standard deviations to the right, most would be in the
middle, and that some would be a couple of standard deviations to the
left.

Would those on the left of the Stradivarius bell be any better for that
given parameter than another manufacturer's models that were a couple
of standard deviations to the right on their own bell curve? Probably
not, but the Stradivarius would still cost millions, or likely several
times whatever the other make costs. And if you asked the owner, I'd
imagine that they'd say it was still worth it.

There is also a huge market for antique/rare bows. Some of them are
tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars. The same argument would
hold true there.

So is a virtuoso that buys a Stradivarius violin over another one that
performs better being stupid?

Well argued and probably true account. A real model for a genuine
discussion of issues.
Will keep in mind. Thank you
Ludovic Mirabel