Can you hear the difference videos vs blind tests in person.

I love listening to instrument reviews and sound samples but from a practical point of view i have changed from listening for the best sounding instrument to listening for ones with poor tone that I would not buy.

I cant sound the same as the HMS team so wont get the same beautiful tone they do, let alone differences from recording and playback equipment. I wonder if recording to mic means the demonstrators can play more quietly and coax a better tone from the instruments.

The room and environment can make a big difference too, especially when playing in a noisy warehouse like shop compare to a quiet boutique.

I have just spent a year trying to find the perfect intermediate guitar and having played lots in shops there are some that sounded great on the internet that sounded terrible in my hands. There was also one or two that sounded quite different on Different visits, as I think i got nervous when the staff were listening to me fumble around an unfamiliar sized fret board. Once i liked a cheaper model over the more expensive model and was told it was because the cheaper one had been there much longer and had aged. That really messed me up, how am i supposed to choose an instrument if it is not going to be the same sound in a year?

The main thing i have learned from shopping in person is that there can be subtle differences between two instruments played alongside each other which i would not care about once i got the instrument home. Once heard, it is hard to get those differences out of my decision making. Now i am very careful only to play what i might buy.
 
Last edited:
Which sounds better to you? I can hear a difference when I play them, and recorded too. To me, the first one sounds louder, woodier and more open, both live and recorded.

I listened to this twice with cheap (free) earbuds I got on an airplane a couple of years ago. I liked your playing and both ukes sounded nice. But I definitely preferred the first one, it seemed to have a bit more punch and "airiness" which is a preferable characteristic for me, whereas the second seemed slightly more dull and mellow.
 
I listened to this twice with cheap (free) earbuds I got on an airplane a couple of years ago. I liked your playing and both ukes sounded nice. But I definitely preferred the first one, it seemed to have a bit more punch and "airiness" which is a preferable characteristic for me, whereas the second seemed slightly more dull and mellow.

Thanks for listening! I have since changed the strings on the Ohana to my go-to tenor reentrant set, Martin M620s, and it perked right up with more sparkle and chime. I've tried Nylguts on many mahogany tenors, and always come back to clear flouros like the M620; IMO it is just an excellent sweet tone, and I like the slightly larger string diameters, compared to many other clear flouros.
 
No one is asking the next question after can you hear the difference. The question is who cares? I never ever listen to sound comparisons because it just doesn't matter to me. I can hear the difference just like I can hear the difference between Kirsten Flagstad and Birgit Nilsson singing some Wagner. Whether we're talking ukuleles or soprano singers, they are all excellent and all a bit different. So just get one and after a short while, that becomes your default. Just commit to something and enjoy it.
 
Thanks for listening! I have since changed the strings on the Ohana to my go-to tenor reentrant set, Martin M620s, and it perked right up with more sparkle and chime. I've tried Nylguts on many mahogany tenors, and always come back to clear flouros like the M620; IMO it is just an excellent sweet tone, and I like the slightly larger string diameters, compared to many other clear flouros.

That is an interesting observation. I have a mahogany tenor with red low G & super nylguts, where I think it could use a bit less mellowness, and I actually had got a M620 set for it years ago but never installed it as it is re-entrant and I don't want to mix with Aquila red. It's too bad that Martin does not offer a low G version.
 
No one is asking the next question after can you hear the difference. The question is who cares? I never ever listen to sound comparisons because it just doesn't matter to me. I can hear the difference just like I can hear the difference between Kirsten Flagstad and Birgit Nilsson singing some Wagner. Whether we're talking ukuleles or soprano singers, they are all excellent and all a bit different. So just get one and after a short while, that becomes your default. Just commit to something and enjoy it.
Rarely heard sentiments on any instrument forum. I like that post.
To each his/her own though.
 
No one is asking the next question after can you hear the difference. The question is who cares? I never ever listen to sound comparisons because it just doesn't matter to me. I can hear the difference just like I can hear the difference between Kirsten Flagstad and Birgit Nilsson singing some Wagner. Whether we're talking ukuleles or soprano singers, they are all excellent and all a bit different. So just get one and after a short while, that becomes your default. Just commit to something and enjoy it.

Good point. Once you take it away from the shop, the only comparison is with your other ukes at home (if you have others). I was a little put off by my Opio when I first got it as I had different expectations of the tone from videos, but now it's my favourite.

Last year there was an HMS video podcast where they were comparing some mangos to mahoganies, acacias, etc, and they were having a hard time differentiating some of them. If they can't tell the difference even with different woods, well ...
 
Last year there was an HMS video podcast where they were comparing some mangos to mahoganies, acacias, etc, and they were having a hard time differentiating some of them. If they can't tell the difference even with different woods, well ...

I didn't see that video but I am not surprised at all. There is likely much more variation from one individual cut of wood to the next than between broad wood species, and the contribution of wood species to tone is totally over-rated compared to other factors like how the uke is actually built, e.g. how thick the wood and braces are, and how they are positioned relative to each other with the whole symmetry of the body and neck. Though I sure would like to think that my Hawaiian built koa ukes are "special".
 
I didn't see that video but I am not surprised at all. There is likely much more variation from one individual cut of wood to the next than between broad wood species, and the contribution of wood species to tone is totally over-rated compared to other factors like how the uke is actually built, e.g. how thick the wood and braces are, and how they are positioned relative to each other with the whole symmetry of the body and neck. Though I sure would like to think that my Hawaiian built koa ukes are "special".

They were blindfolded as I recall, listening to each other play and guessing what they were hearing. As soon as you take your blindfold off, you'll see how special Koa is. :)
 
No one is asking the next question after can you hear the difference. The question is who cares? I never ever listen to sound comparisons because it just doesn't matter to me. I can hear the difference just like I can hear the difference between Kirsten Flagstad and Birgit Nilsson singing some Wagner. Whether we're talking ukuleles or soprano singers, they are all excellent and all a bit different. So just get one and after a short while, that becomes your default. Just commit to something and enjoy it.

I care. :)

I think maybe some of the difference between caring/not caring is how we use the ukulele. If you strum a bit and sing, (with singing your focus), or mostly play with a group of others, where sound differences would be harder to hear, then maybe you wouldn't care as much about differences in sound. But if you only fingerpick, no singing, no group playing, sound differences might stand out more.
 
Rarely heard sentiments on any instrument forum. I like that post.
To each his/her own though.

I cannot take credit for it. If you listen to some of the luminaries, such as Kimo Hussey and Peter Forrest, they talk about embracing the individuality of the uke's voice. And that's what I try to do. Just to give a practical modus operandi of such a philosophy, here's what I do: instead of listening to sound files, I find a solid uke builder. The assumption is that that person is going to put the blood, sweat, and tears into assuring that the uke is made properly. I let that person do what they do, and I don't interfere (aside from some initial cosmetic preferences). I receive the ukulele. Because of a myriad of variables, maybe the uke sounds husky, maybe shrill, maybe chiming, maybe subtle. As long as the uke is excellent, it doesn't matter. In fact, it just adds to the fun because you're going to play whatever it is you play. But when you add in the voice of the uke it adds some interest into the mix. It is like getting Janis Joplin and Kiri Te Kanawa to sing random songs. The mixture of the traditional and the innovation is a joy to hear. Regardless of how novel or standard the voice of the uke is, after a very short while, that sound becomes ingrained in your heart as "the" sound a uke sound make.
 
I didn't see that video but I am not surprised at all. There is likely much more variation from one individual cut of wood to the next than between broad wood species, and the contribution of wood species to tone is totally over-rated compared to other factors like how the uke is actually built, e.g. how thick the wood and braces are, and how they are positioned relative to each other with the whole symmetry of the body and neck. Though I sure would like to think that my Hawaiian built koa ukes are "special".

I never saw the video mentioned here, but I saw one where they played a lot of Pono ukuleles with the "same" build but different woods. It did show some of the expected differences in sound, though you would need to listen to the woods back to back to catch the difference.
 
I have a problem with ukuleles, both sound and looks. I like them all. Or most of them. Some really cheap ukuleles sound bad to me, like Watermans, but for the most part I just hear different voices when I listen to sound samples. And I have tried to use sound samples to help me make choices. But they are lost on me. I just do not have a narrow enough preference to proclaim one sounds superior over another. Same with looks. There are just a lot of beautiful ukuleles out there. How can one even pick one over another? I can't. I just buy a beautiful ukulele that sounds nice and make it mine.
 
I cannot take credit for it. If you listen to some of the luminaries, such as Kimo Hussey and Peter Forrest, they talk about embracing the individuality of the uke's voice. And that's what I try to do. Just to give a practical modus operandi of such a philosophy, here's what I do: instead of listening to sound files, I find a solid uke builder. The assumption is that that person is going to put the blood, sweat, and tears into assuring that the uke is made properly. I let that person do what they do, and I don't interfere (aside from some initial cosmetic preferences). I receive the ukulele. Because of a myriad of variables, maybe the uke sounds husky, maybe shrill, maybe chiming, maybe subtle. As long as the uke is excellent, it doesn't matter. In fact, it just adds to the fun because you're going to play whatever it is you play. But when you add in the voice of the uke it adds some interest into the mix. It is like getting Janis Joplin and Kiri Te Kanawa to sing random songs. The mixture of the traditional and the innovation is a joy to hear. Regardless of how novel or standard the voice of the uke is, after a very short while, that sound becomes ingrained in your heart as "the" sound a uke sound make.
Very interesting philosophy. :cool:
 
Top Bottom