Charalampos Saitis
email: charalampos.saitis@campus.tu-berlin.de

Claudia Fritz

Gary P Scavone

Catherine Guastavino

Danièle Dubois

Conceptualization of violin quality by musicians

Keywords: numbers: 43.75.De, 43.75.Cd, 43.66.Lj, 43.66.Jh

Conceptualization of violin quality by musicians

In this paper, we investigate how the notion of violin quality is conveyed in spontaneous verbalizations by experienced violinists during preference judgments. The aims of the study were to better understand how musicians conceptualize violin quality, what aspects of the sound and the playing experience are essential, and what associations are formed between perceptual evaluation and physical description. Upon comparing violins of varying make and age, players were interviewed about their preferences using open-ended questions. Concepts of violin quality were identified and categorized based on the syntactic and linguistic analysis of musicians' responses. While perceived variations in how a violin sounds and feels, and consequently conceptualization structures, rely on the variations in style and expertise of different violinists, the broader semantic categories emerging from sensory descriptions remain common across performers with diverse musical profiles, reflecting a shared perception of physical parameter patterns that allowed us to develop a musician-driven framework for understanding how the dynamic behavior of a violin might relate to its perceived quality. Implications for timbre perception and the crossmodal audiotactile sensation of sound in music performance are discussed.

I. INTRODUCTION

When evaluating violins, performers spontaneously describe perceived quality characteristics calling upon a diverse vocabulary, for example, rich sound, responsive instrument, even sound across strings, and clear notes. This lexicon, shared not only by violinists but also by other instrumentalists, is traditionally communicated from teacher to student and between musicians and instrument makers. In the present study, we adopted a psycholinguistic approach to investigate how violin quality is conceptualized in the mind of the violinist as reflected in free verbalizations collected from experienced musicians during playing-based preference ranking and attribute rating tasks, using a method that relies on theoretical assumptions about cognitive-semantic categories and how they relate to natural language.

In the context of relating the dynamic behavior of a violin to its perceived quality, a number of studies have tried to match such verbal attributes with features of structural dynamics measurements or recorded audio signals. Analyzing radiation measurements, [START_REF] Meinel | Regarding the sound quality of violins and a scientific basis for violin construction[END_REF] and [START_REF] Dünnwald | Deduction of objective quality parameters on old and new violins[END_REF] each suggested similar divisions of the violin's frequency response into four quality-critical regions: high-amplitude resonances at low frequencies below about 800 Hz give full sound that carries well; the more weak the response in the vicinity of 1.5 kHz, the less nasal the sound is; a strong peak around 2-3 kHz (today known as the bridge hill) is associated with brilliance and effective radiation; and low-amplitude resonances at high frequencies above about 3 kHz allow a soft and clear sound.

Based on observations from bridge mobility measurements on over 100 violins with "a wide variety of tone and playing qualities, as described by their owners-players," [START_REF] Hutchins | A measurable controlling factor in the tone and playing qualities of violins[END_REF] argued that violins with a difference of less than 40 Hz between the B1 + and A1 resonances were easy to play with little projection; violins in the 55-70 Hz range were more powerful in terms of projection; and above 100 Hz instruments were harsh and hard to play. According to [START_REF] Schleske | Empirical tools in contemporary violin making: Part I. Analysis of design, materials, varnish, and normal modes[END_REF], violins with B1 + < 510 Hz versus > 550 Hz are soft versus harsh, less versus more resistant, and characterized by dark versus bright sound. 1 In a study on violin sound projection by [START_REF] Loos | Untersuchungen zur Tragfähigkeit von Geigentönen (Studies on the projection of violin tones)[END_REF] strong lower partials in a note appeared to enhance its perceived nearness. In another study by [START_REF] Stȇpánek | Rustle as an attribute of timbre of stationary violin tones[END_REF] it was observed that violin notes described as sharp and narrow were associated with higher and lower spectral centroid values, respectively, while a perception of rustle was attributed to temporal changes of the spectral energy around the A0, B1 -and B1 + modes. Łukasik (2005) proposed that the first cepstral coefficient is associated with the bipolar linguistic pair strained:light; the spectral centroid with bright:dark; the tristimulus 1 and 3 with deep/full:flat/empty; and a coefficient of steady-state envelope fluctuation with smooth:coarse, but listening tests did not confirm the scheme. In one of our previous studies, we found that low spectral centroid and high tristimulus 1 and 2 values are likely associated with a rich sound [START_REF] Saitis | Effect of task constraints on the perceptual evaluation of violins[END_REF]. [START_REF] Hermes | The harmonic centroid as a predictor of string instrument timbral clarity[END_REF] reported evidence of a strong positive correlation between the harmonic centroid of a violin note and its perceived clarity. Fritz et al. (2012a) had violinists arrange 61 sound-descriptive adjectives on a two-dimensional map, so that words with similar meanings lay close together and those with different meanings lay far apart. Multidimensional scaling revealed three perceptual dimensions (acoustical interpretations proposed by the authors): warm/rich/mellow:metallic/cold/harsh (spectral balance, undesirable qualities associated with excessive high-frequency content or too little low-frequency content); bright/responsive/lively:muted/dull/dead ("amount of sound" produced by the instrument, particularly in the middle and upper ranges); and even/soft/light:brash/rough/raspy (noisy character, width of distribution of spectral energy). A listening experiment using virtual violin sounds with modified amplitudes of vibration modes in five one-octave wide bands showed that, in contrast with Meinel and Dünnwald's observations, increased brightness and clarity were associated with moderately increased modal amplitudes in the 1520-6080 Hz region, whereas increased harshness was associated with a strongly increased modal level in the 1520-3040 Hz band.

A potential issue with interpreting the outcomes of these studies is that the investigated verbal descriptors are part of a lexicon that is often taken for granted in the design of perceptual evaluation studies, as opposed to identifying relevant semantic descriptors emerging from a systematic linguistic analysis of the verbalizations spontaneously used by musicians to describe instrument quality. [START_REF] Fritz | A situated and cognitive approach of violin quality[END_REF] were the first to carry out such an analysis of violin quality perception, but only collected data from three musicians.

Relationships between measurable physical properties of sound-producing objects, such as musical instruments, and their perceived characteristics rely on cognitive representations of both auditory and haptic phenomena, which, however, cannot be accessed in a direct, quantitative way. The psycholinguistic analysis of how people spontaneously describe their experience of acoustic and vibrotactile stimulations can be considered as one way to study these representations empirically [START_REF] Dubois | Categories as acts of meaning: The case of categories in olfaction and audition[END_REF]. Instead of starting from physical properties of sounds or their sources to describe cognitive representations, semantic categories are identified first through the analysis of linguistic descriptions. Language can be seen as mediating between collective knowledge and individual representations conveyed in discourse. From what is being said (content analysis) and how it is being said (psycholinguistic analysis), relevant inferences about how people process and conceptualize sensory experiences can be derived (semantic level) and further correlated with physical parameters (perceptual level).

Psycholinguistic studies of urban soundscape quality have shown that the meanings attributed to sounds in everyday sensory experiences act as a determinant for evaluations, in addition to or independently of physical parameters of the acoustic signal [START_REF] Guastavino | The ideal urban soundscape: Investigating the sound quality of French cities[END_REF][START_REF] Dubois | A cognitive approach to urban soundscapes: Using verbal data to access everyday life auditory categories[END_REF]. Semantic-linguistic analyses of musical instrument quality descriptions have revealed that structural properties or audio features traditionally used to describe certain perceptual attributes cannot always explain the cognitive categories emerging in the musicians' verbalizations, which in turn can provide novel insights into defining meaningful and unambiguous quality descriptors to distinguish one instrument (or one performer) from another-for example, semantic synonyms and opposites, or relations between gestural control and desired sound [START_REF] Faure | Des sons aux mots, comment parle-t-on du timbre musical?[END_REF][START_REF] Rioux | Analyses of verbal descriptions of the sound quality of a flue organ pipe[END_REF][START_REF] Traube | An interdisciplinary study of the timbre of the classical guitar[END_REF][START_REF] Bellemare | Verbal description of piano timbre: Exploring performerdependent dimensions[END_REF][START_REF] Bensa | Perceptive and cognitive evaluation of a piano synthesis model[END_REF][START_REF] Cheminée | Est-ce bien clair ? Stabilité, instabilité et polysémie d'une forme lexicale en contexte (Is it clear? Stability, instability and polysemy of a lexical form in context)[END_REF][START_REF] Bernays | Expressive production of piano timbre: Touch and playing techniques for timbre control in piano performance[END_REF][START_REF] Lavoie | Conceptualisation et communication des nuances de timbre à la guitare classique (Conceptualization and communication of classical guitar timbral nuances)[END_REF][START_REF] Paté | Influence of the electric guitar's fingerboard wood on guitarists' perception[END_REF].

When [START_REF] Fritz | A situated and cognitive approach of violin quality[END_REF] examined the differences between preference judgments made by three violin players in active playing vs. passive listening situations in conjunction with psycholinguistic analyses of free-format verbal descriptions of the musicians' experience, they found that the overall evaluation of a violin as reflected in the verbal responses of the musicians varied between playing and listening conditions, the former invoking descriptions influenced not only from the produced sound but also by the interaction between the player and the instrument.

Accordingly, we carried out two violin playing perceptual tests based on a carefully controlled yet musically meaningful protocol. In the first experiment, skilled violinists ranked a set of different violins from least to most preferred. In experiment 2, another group of players rated a different set of violins according to specific attributes as well as preference. In both tasks, musicians verbally described their choices through open-ended questions. We previously showed that violinists are self-consistent in their (nonverbal) preference judgments and tend to agree on what qualities they look for in a violin, but a significant lack of agreement between individuals was observed, likely because different violinists assess the same attributes in different ways [START_REF] Saitis | Investigating the origin of interindividual differences in the preference for violins[END_REF][START_REF] Saitis | Perceptual evaluation of violins: A quantitative analysis of preference judgements by experienced players[END_REF]. A third experiment [START_REF] Saitis | Effect of task constraints on the perceptual evaluation of violins[END_REF] and studies by Fritz et al. (2012b[START_REF] Fritz | Soloist evaluations of six old italian and six new violins[END_REF] and Wollman et al. (2014a,b) reached similar conclusions.

In this study, we investigated the perceptual and cognitive processes involved when violinists evaluate violins by focusing on the linguistic expressions they use to describe quality characteristics. Expanding on the work of [START_REF] Fritz | A situated and cognitive approach of violin quality[END_REF], the free verbalizations collected in the two playing tests were analyzed on the basis of semantic proximities in order to identify emerging concepts that could be coded under broader categories acting as psychologically relevant descriptors of violin quality. Semantic proximities were inferred from syntactic context and linguistic markers.

The coding process was based on the inductive principle of Grounded Theory, where a system of ideas is constructed not starting from a hypothesis (or a set of hypotheses) but from the data itself [START_REF] Strauss | Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory[END_REF]). An acoustical interpretation of the semantic categories-descriptors is proposed as a first step in translating the semantics of musicians' expressions into hypotheses for explaining links between perceptual judgments and physical description. In both experiments, musicians were remunerated for their participation. Of the 13 players in the experiment 2, 3 had previously participated in experiment 1. Musical profile information for each violinist is reported in Table I.

In both experiments, the tested violins were chosen from several local luthier workshops in order to form, as much as possible, a set of instruments with a wide range of characteristics (Table II). The respective luthiers provided the price estimates and tuned the instruments for optimal playing condition based on their own criteria. The fact that some violins may have been less optimally tuned or had strings of varying quality was not a concern, as that should not influence the consistency of the evaluations.

Low light conditions and dark sunglasses were used to help hide the identity of the instruments as much as possible and thus circumvent the potential impact of visual information on judgment while ensuring a certain level of comfort for the musicians, as well as safety for the violins. To avoid the potential problems of using a common bow across all participants (e.g., musicians being uncomfortable with a bow they are not familiar with, bow quality), each violinist used their own bow. Sessions took place in acoustically dry rooms to help minimize the effects of room reflections on the direct sound from the violins.

B. Questionnaire and procedure

Taking into account the lingual diversity of Québec, a bilingual questionnaire in English and French was compiled for each study, and participants were invited to respond in the language they felt most comfortable with. To avoid confining the responses into pre-existing categories, very general open-ended questions were formed, wherein no restriction was imposed on the format of the response. Five participants from experiment 1 and three participants from experiment 2 chose to reply in French and it was decided not to translate their responses but include them in the analysis directly. 2 In experiment 1, participants preference-ranked 8 violins in 5 identical trials. Each time they had up to 15 min to play and rank the instruments. Upon completing the first trial, participants justified their choices by providing written responses to the following set of task-specific questions (French version is given in parentheses):

A1. How and based on which criteria did you make your ranking? (Avec quels critères avez-vous effectué votre classement et de quelle fac ¸on les avez-vous utilisés?) A2. Considering the violin that you ranked as "most preferred," can you say why? (A propos du violon que vous avez classé comme votre préféré: pourriez-vous nous dire pourquoi?) A3. Considering the violin that you ranked as "least preferred," can you say why? (A propos du violon que vous avez classé en dernier: pourriez-vous nous dire pourquoi?) At the end of each subsequent trial, musicians could modify their initial response to any of the above questions if they so wished. Upon completing the last trial, participants answered a more general question: B. More generally, what is a very good violin for you? (En général, comment définissez-vous personnellement un très bon violon?)

Violinists returned for a second, identical session 3-7 days later, wherein they provided written responses to the same questions. All participants answered questions A1-A3 in up to 4 trials as well as question B in each session.

In experiment 2, musicians rated a different set of 10 violins according to ease of playing, response, richness, dynamic range, balance across strings and overall preference (one violin on all scales at a time) in three blocks of repetitions. They had up to 5 min to play and rate each instrument. The attributes were chosen based on a previous, more rudimentary analysis of the verbal responses to question A1 in experiment 1 (Saitis et al., 2012, Sec. II B 4). At the end of the session, all participants provided written responses to question B.

In both experiments, violinists were instructed to follow their own evaluation strategy with respect to what and how to play. Prior to the actual tasks, they were encouraged to play and familiarize with the different violins for up to 20 min.

C. Analysis

In their original conception of Grounded Theory, both Glaser and Strauss acknowledged that "the researcher will not enter the field free from ideas" [START_REF] Heath | Developing a grounded theory approach: a comparison of Glaser and Strauss[END_REF]), but their views on the role of prior ideas later diverged. [START_REF] Strauss | Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory[END_REF] argued that specific understandings from past experience and literature can be used to inform the development of categories, whereas for [START_REF] Glaser | Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory[END_REF] this is to be avoided in order to maintain sensitivity to the data. In the present study, prior knowledge of the researchers as well as previous findings in the literature and informal discussions with musicians, luthiers and colleagues were considered as per the view of

Strauss and Corbin.

Grounded Theory relies on several data coding steps, not strictly sequential, which form the so-called constant comparison method. According to [START_REF] Strauss | Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory[END_REF] these are: open coding, wherein key concepts are identified; axial coding, wherein concepts are linked based on semantic proximities, yielding semantic categories and inter-categorical associations; theoretical sampling and selective coding, wherein new data are selectively sampled with the emerging conceptual framework in mind and integrated to potentially improve it; and theoretical saturation, wherein coding concludes when categories do not develop further (i.e., no new concepts emerge) despite new data.

Appropriately, our analysis started from the verbalizations collected in experiment 1. First, group of words indicating a concept of violin quality, henceforth called verbal units, were extracted from musicians' responses to questions A1-A3 and classified in semantic categories (open coding).

Inter-categorical associations were then established (axial coding), at which point a tentative core for our conceptual framework had been formed. We next scanned the verbal responses to question B (theoretical sampling). New concepts were identified and the core was updated to fit with the new data (selective coding). The analysis was then extended to the verbal responses collected in experiment 2 (question B only) on the basis of the updated core (theoretical sampling), wherein no further concepts emerged. Consequently coding was stopped as theoretical saturation had been reached.

Each verbal unit corresponded to a semantically distinct violin quality characteristic. Semantic proximities were assessed through syntactic context and linguistic markers such as the use of apposition, opposition, reformulation, explanation, comparison, or negation. For example, the phrase "a rich, velvety tone" contained two verbal units, namely "rich" and "velvety," whereas the phrase "can cut across a hall but not to such an extreme that it sounds shaved on the top" constituted a single unit which, however, comprised two manifestations of the same quality characteristic with opposite meanings, namely "can cut across the hall" (positive connotation or desirable quality) and "sounds shaved on the top" (negative connotation or undesirable quality). In total, 766 verbal units were extracted from the responses collected in experiment 1 (20 musicians, 4 questions, 38 units per respondent on average) and 62 units (13 musicans, 1 question, 5 units per respondent on average) in experiment 2, and were classified in eight distinct semantic categories.

We provide some examples from the collected verbalizations to better illustrate the analysis method. One participant said: "Essentially I was looking for . . . "flexibility" (i.e., the ease with which I could produce a variety of different sounds and timbres) and a kind of resonance that seems to last well beyond each note. Beyond that, balance across all the strings is also important (i.e., the timbre and power remain even across all the strings)." Here it was inferred that: "flexibility" and "ease" are semantically very close; "resonance" is associated with the sustain level of a played note; "balance" and "even" are also related to one another.

Another violinist commented: "A weaker violin will tend to sound as if there is something inhibiting the sound -the sound will sound strangled or will break or scratch under bow weight."

In this example, it was first inferred that "weaker" and "inhibiting" are: related to one another; related to "strangled" and thus associated with sound intensity; related to "break" and "scratch" and thus associated with sound production and the interaction between musician and instrument.

It was further inferred that "break" and "scratch" are semantically very close.

Illustrating the polysemy often found in lexical semantics, a final example shows a relationship between "clarity of sound" and articulation (i.e., successive notes played quickly do not "meld" together). From another musician's response: "I also listened for a muddy sound. Some of the less well made violins have this sort of blurry sound, where even if you play notes quickly they meld together, while the instruments with the brighter sound seem to sound clearer." Here it was inferred that "muddy" and "blurry" are semantically close to one another and opposites of "clearer" and "brighter," respectively, in the context of articulation. It was also inferred that "clearer" and "brighter" are related to one another.

III. RESULTS

A. Objects of reference and directed attributes

Semantic categories of violin quality evaluation emerged from the syntactic and linguistic analysis of musicians' verbal responses by progressively examining the cognitive objects of reference-What is being evaluated?-the linguistic resources directed to these objects-How is it evaluated?-and the semantic dimensions underlying the used lexicon-What does it mean? There were primarily two distinct cognitive objects of evaluation for the violinist in the present corpus, namely the violin-player interaction, as the physical direct interaction with the instrument, and the produced sound, as the perceived result of this interaction.

The emerging semantic dimensions of the lexicon used to describe perceptual attributes of the sound can be summarized as texture (e.g., round, complex, muddy), luminance (e.g., clear, bright, blurry), mass (e.g., full, deep, hollow), action-presence (e.g., powerful, present, strangled), balance [across strings] (e.g., even, balanced, uneven), and interest (e.g., beautiful, interesting, irritating).

Referring to material object properties, the texture, luminance and mass dimensions indicate an evaluation of structural (i.e., related to timbre and intensity) attributes, for example relative amount of high-frequency content or total spectral energy. The more abstract dimension of action-presence suggests an assessment of "how much sound" comes out of the violin based on estimated spatial attributes (e.g., projection), but also on the "amount of felt vibrations" from the body-bow system (i.e., vibrotactile cues). Interest assumes a cognitive evaluation of the subjective-affective value of the played sound, an axiological evaluation. The balance dimension indicates a comparative evaluation of structural attributes between different notes and strings. The dimensions of interest and balance emerged also in descriptions referring to the violin-player interaction. Central to the latter were the concepts of ease and speed of response (e.g., responsive, quick, rigid), indicating an evaluation of proprioceptive (i.e., reactive force) attributes.

As an example, one participant commented: "An instrument that is good needs to feel comfortable, sound interesting and round, with enough complexity in the sound (i.e., overtones) that I can get a variety of sounds with ease." Here "comfortable" and "ease" refer to proprioceptive attributes of the physical interaction of the performer with the instrument, whereas "interesting" describes an affective value attributed to the played sound and "round" and "complexity" refer to its spectral content (structural attributes). Two of the preference criteria reported by another violinist were: " . . . projection of that sound, vibrancy of the sound, . . . ." In this example the played sound is evaluated through the attribution of spatial ("projection") and vibrotactile ("vibrancy") characteristics. In describing their idea of a good violin, one musician said "It doesn't need to be perfect across the board, but it needs to respond interestingly to different approaches." and another remarked that "It is . . . consistent in playability and tone." Here "perfect" and "interestingly" denote subjective-affective values attributed to the violin-player interaction, while "consistent" signifies that proprioceptive and structural attributes are assessed comparatively across notes and strings.

B. Semantic categories

The resulting categorization is summarized in Table III. The label for each category, hereafter reported in SMALL CAPITAL letters, was chosen either among the words of the respective category, often being the one most frequently used by the musicians, or based on the main underlying semantic dimension (see previous section). Unique phrases from verbal units are reported together with the number of occurrences across all verbal units coded in the respective category (i.e., a verbal unit may contain more than one unique phrase). Morphological variants were transformed from a descriptive noun, adverb, or verb into adjectival form and grouped together (e.g., ease of playing → easy to play, richness → rich). When unambiguous, French expressions were considered together with their direct English translations (e.g., facile a jouer → easy to play, richesse → rich).

Cognitively these unique phrases represent microconcepts-the most basic concepts (i.e., minimal elements of knowledge) activated by a stimulus object (here the violin sound or body-bow response and vibrations) which are not meaningful on their own but instead yield meaning when assembled into broader semantic patterns-categories [START_REF] Bassili | Implicit and explicit attitudes: Research, challenges, and theory[END_REF][START_REF] Conrey | Attitude representation: Attitudes as patterns in a distributed, connectionist representational system[END_REF].

Manifestations of the same quality characteristic with opposite meanings were coded in the same category. For each microconcept, its positive (+) or negative (-) orientation was inferred from the syntactic and semantic context wherein it occurred (see Sec. II C). The smaller number of "negative" versus "positive" expressions might have been a result of the particular way questions were formatted. When asked to explain their preference criteria (question A1), justify their most preferred choice (question A2), or describe their idea of a very good violin (question B), participants naturally focused on discussing desirable quality features. Problems and unfavorable qualities were largely commented only when musicians were asked to explain why they chose violin X as their least preferred (question A3).

Under RICHNESS are verbal expressions referring to the amount of spectral content as in the perceived number of partial frequencies present in a violin note. Desirable attributes are associated with an abundance of partials, where it is possible for the performer to produce "different sounds" based on musical (repertoire) and affective (emotion) intentions. Also referring to spectral content, expressions grouped under TEXTURE direct to the distribution of partials between the bass and treble registers in a played note. Undesirable qualities are associated with disproportionately more treble or not enough bass frequencies. On the whole, RICHNESS and TEXTURE encompass steadystate timbre characteristics of the sound.

RESONANCE groups together verbal descriptions that refer to the intensity of the radiated sound "under the ear" as perceived crossmodally through two physical channels: total energy in the acoustic signal during sustain and release, and felt vibrations (i.e., motions and deformations of skin mechanoreceptors) from the violin body and bowed string. Spectral energy further evokes a different category of verbal expressions, which describe the intensity of the radiated sound in terms of spatial attributes, i.e., transmission from the instrument to the performance space. These are summarized by the meta-criterion PROJECTION.

RESPONSE comprises descriptions of how quickly the violin responds to different configurations of bowing parameters (force, velocity, position on the string, tilting with respect to the string) in terms of transients, dynamics, and fast passages (articulation), and thus how easy and flexible it is for the violinist to interact with the instrument and control the played sound. Grouped here are also descriptions referring to the size and weight of the violin, including the string height or action, as design factors contributing to the instrument's response. Physically, expressions such as "easy to play" and "responsive" indicate that the player feels the reactive force (proprioceptive feedback) from the violin body in the right hand (via the bow) and assesses its amount and how fast it emerges in relation to how "good" the resulting sound is.

CLARITY captures verbalizations that refer to (the lack of) audible artifacts in the played note, such as wolf tones (i.e., oscillating beat when note frequency too close to the resonance frequency of the violin body), "buzzing" coming from loose or faulty fittings in the different parts of the instrument, slow and deficient buildup of partials in bowed string attacks and transients, the "melding" together of successive notes when played quickly (here articulation is evaluated based on audio information rather than proprioception), or different notes masking each other due to overlapping content. A sound is described as "clear" when perceived as having more distinct and welldefined spectral components. CLARITY and RESPONSE incorporate aspects of the instrument's playability as evaluated based on auditory and haptic information, respectively. BALANCE sums up expressions referring to the lack of striking differences across notes and strings in both the physical response of the violin (e.g., one or several strings being harder to play or slower to respond to varying gestures than the others) and the timbre and intensity of the produced sound (e.g., notes played on one string having too much or too little frequency content or spectral energy compared to those played on the other strings).

INTEREST groups together verbalizations describing the subjective-affective state of the musician in response to their physical interaction with the violin and the acoustical characteristics of its sound, as well as abstract, context-free references to sound quality such as "timbre" of the strings, "color" of the sound, or "tone quality," where it was not possible to identify associated concepts.

To illustrate this difference, one violinist said "Again, the easily-producible singing quality of this instrument made it stand out from the others." (attributive reference), while another responded "I liked the tone quality of my first choice." (abstract reference). While semantic categories identified until now describe sensory attributes, INTEREST refers to affective or hedonic qualities that do not reflect the perception of certain physical parameters.

A microconcept can be recruited into many different evaluations depending on context and thus coded in more than one semantic categories or as both positive and negative within the same category. In the present corpus, the word "even" was used to denote either a balanced spectrum with no excessive high-frequency content or a consistent sound and playing sensation across different notes and strings. "Bright" had three distinct meanings: lively (lots of energy), clear (well-defined spectral components), and warm (balanced spectrum). In the same semantic category as warm, bright was also used negatively to denote excessive high-frequency content. The adjective "weak" described either structural (not enough energy in the spectrum) or spatial (inadequate projection) attributes of the sound. The antonym pair "small-big" referred either to the physical dimensions of a violin (with small being preferable to big) or to how much sound it produces (here small was valued negatively). The phrase "muted overtones" indicated a short number of activated partials, while "muted sound" meant lacking in total spectral energy. Finally, the French noun "focus" meant either clarity (well-defined partials) or balance across the strings (referred to both the sound and the playing behavior).

Table I reports the musical profile of each participant along with information on whether they used verbal expressions within a given category. No obvious relationship between having a certain style and/or level of experience and attending to particular attributes was observed. Consequently, Table IV summarizes the across musicians distribution of semantic categories within each and over all responses to the different questions. In experiment 1, distributions were comparable between trials in each session as well between sessions, so occurrences were collapsed respectively. The proportion of verbal units referring to the sound versus those describing the violin-player interaction in each of the two experiments, as well the distribution of attribute types directed to each of the two cognitive objects of evaluation in either corpus is shown in Table V. In experiment 1, occurrences were further summarized across questions due to similar trends.

IV. DISCUSSION

A. The perspective of the violinist

The present analysis offers novel insights into the perception of violin quality by performers.

The psycholinguistic analysis of their spontaneous verbalizations produced in playing-based violin preference judgments showed that they conceptualize violin quality on the basis of semantic features and psychological effects that integrate perceptual attributes (i.e., perceptual correlates of physical characteristics) of both the sound produced and the somatosensation experienced when playing the instrument.

As [START_REF] Traube | An interdisciplinary study of the timbre of the classical guitar[END_REF] noticed, the perspective of the player is at the same time that of a musician and a listener. To the bowing of the string, the violin responds by providing information communicated to the player-musician via vibrotactile and proprioceptive channels (RESONANCE, RESPONSE, BALANCE) and by producing a sound processed by the player-listener though the au- ditory modality (RICHNESS, TEXTURE, CLARITY, RESONANCE, PROJECTION, BALANCE). The combined audio-haptic sensory information is also perceived in a subjective-affective dimension related to musical and emotional situations relevant to the player-musician-listener (INTEREST).

The perception of quality is thus elaborated not only from sensations linked to physical input, but also from non-sensory contextual factors associated with previous experience such as memory and training, and interpretation processes such as aesthetics and intention (Fig. 1).

More importantly, vibrations from the violin body and the bowed strings (via the bow) are used to provide the player-musician with extra-auditory cues that contribute to the perception of the sound, so that the player can assess their interaction with the instrument crossmodally, often supplementing auditory feedback with vibrotactile signals to better control the played sound [START_REF] Askenfelt | On vibration sensation and finger touch in stringed instrument playing[END_REF][START_REF] Chafe | Tactile audio feedback[END_REF][START_REF] Woodhouse | On the playability of violins. part I: Reflection functions[END_REF][START_REF] Obata | Chin force in violin playing[END_REF].

Recent findings particularly illustrate that vibrotactile feedback at the left hand of the violinist can make the played sound perceived as "richer" and "louder" (Wollman et al., 2014a). Indeed, vibrotactile cues are perceptually relevant not only to violin performers but also to non-violinist musicians [START_REF] Galembo | Quality assessment of musical instruments-effects of multimodality[END_REF][START_REF] Giordano | Multisensory integration in percussion performance[END_REF][START_REF] Eitan | How music touches: Musical parameters and listeners' audio-tactile metaphorical mappings[END_REF][START_REF] Fontana | Perception of interactive vibrotactile cues on the acoustic grand and upright piano[END_REF][START_REF] Paté | Influence of the electric guitar's fingerboard wood on guitarists' perception[END_REF]. A biomechanical explanation for the crossmodal sensation of sound by the ear and the skin during musical performance may rely on structural similarities both in the respective stimuli (what is heard and what is felt both result from the same vibrations) and the particular mechanoreceptors involved [START_REF] Marks | On the cross-modal perception of intensity[END_REF][START_REF] Orr | Mechanisms of mechanotransduction[END_REF].

B. A framework for the perceptual evaluation of violins

The lexicon musicians use to describe characteristics of the violin sound and playing experience (rich, mellow, resonant, responsive, clear, balanced, etc.) illustrates the extent to which perceived variations in the structure of acoustic and haptic stimuli generated by the same source (violin), and consequently microconcepts of quality perception, are very subtle. In some cases, the same physical phenomenon can give rise to different concepts (e.g., well articulated notes make a violin perceived as both clear and responsive). Conceptualization structures further rely on the variations in expertise and experience of the different individuals [START_REF] Bensa | Perceptive and cognitive evaluation of a piano synthesis model[END_REF]. Yet the broader seman-FIG. 2. Placed approximately here. tic categories emerging from these sensory descriptions remain common across performers with diverse musical profiles, reflecting a shared perception of physical parameter patterns that allows us to form a number of hypotheses for understanding psychoacoustical relationships.

Accordingly, Fig. 2 presents a model that may explain how the dynamic behavior of a violin relates to its quality in the mind of the player. Body vibrations, driven by the bowed string and shaped by the physical dimensions of the instrument (i.e., size, weight, action), shape in turn the spectrum of the radiated sound. The quality of the spectral content is then processed in terms of number of partials (conceptualized as RICHNESS) and distribution of energy across the spectrum during sustain (conceptualized as TEXTURE), total energy during sustain and release (conceptualized as RESONANCE and PROJECTION), audible artifacts during transients (conceptualized as CLARITY), and how these differ from note to note across the four strings of the instrument (conceptualized as BALANCE). The bowed string and vibrating body system further contributes to the quality profile through the amount of felt vibrations in the left hand, shoulder and chin (conceptualized as RESONANCE); through assessing the offset (speed) and amount (ease) of reactive force (conceptualized as RESPONSE) from the body in the right hand (through the bow) with respect to the quality and quantity of the heard and felt vibrations; and through comparing these between notes and strings (conceptualized as BALANCE).

This is a tentative model and several issues would need to be clarified empirically. Can such standard acoustical measurements as a violin's input admittance or radiation profile capture everything significant about the spectrotemporal structure of the produced sound, or about the reactive force and vibration levels felt by the player? If yes, in what ways can this information be extracted (e.g., [START_REF] Elie | Acoustic signature of violins based on bridge transfer mobility measurements[END_REF][START_REF] Fréour | Extraction and analysis of body-induced partials of guitar tones[END_REF]? Together with the illustration of the violin-violinist system of interactions shown in Fig. 1, this model is proposed as a first step toward a framework for the perceptual evaluation of violins, grounded in psycholinguistic evidence of how musicians conceptualize sound and playing qualities.

C. Implications for the perception of timbre

The use of words associated with texture, mass, and luminance to describe structural attributes of the sound indicates what type of semantic dimensions may explain the perception of timbral nuances in violin sound. Very similar semantic resources are commonly observed in verbal descriptions of instrument-specific timbre by experts, for example the trombone [START_REF] Edwards | The perception of trombones[END_REF], pipe organ [START_REF] Rioux | Analyses of verbal descriptions of the sound quality of a flue organ pipe[END_REF][START_REF] Disley | Spectral correlates of timbral semantics relating to the pipe organ[END_REF], saxophone [START_REF] Nykänen | Development of a language for specifying saxophone timbre[END_REF], classical guitar [START_REF] Traube | An interdisciplinary study of the timbre of the classical guitar[END_REF][START_REF] Lavoie | Conceptualisation et communication des nuances de timbre à la guitare classique (Conceptualization and communication of classical guitar timbral nuances)[END_REF], acoustic piano [START_REF] Cheminée | Est-ce bien clair ? Stabilité, instabilité et polysémie d'une forme lexicale en contexte (Is it clear? Stability, instability and polysemy of a lexical form in context)[END_REF][START_REF] Bernays | Verbal expression of piano timbre: Multidimensional semantic space of adjectival descriptors[END_REF], violin (Fritz et al., 2012a;[START_REF] Zanoni | The violin ontology[END_REF], and electric guitar [START_REF] Paté | Influence of the electric guitar's fingerboard wood on guitarists' perception[END_REF]. They are also evident in verbalized impressions of vocal [START_REF] Garnier | Characterisation of voice quality in Western lyrical singing: from teachers' judgments to acoustic descriptions[END_REF], percussive [START_REF] Brent | Physical and perceptual aspects of percussive timbre[END_REF] and electroacoustic [START_REF] Grill | Perceptually Informed Organization of Textural Sounds[END_REF] timbre, but also in social tagging of "polyphonic timbre" or songs [START_REF] Ferrer | Semantic structures of timbre emerging from social and acoustic descriptions of music[END_REF]. The recent work of [START_REF] Zacharakis | An interlanguage unification of musical timbre: Bridging semantic, perceptual, and acoustic dimensions[END_REF] demonstrated that the texture-mass-luminance dimensions may provide a general semantic framework for timbre across different types of musical and non-musical sounds, as well as between different linguistic and cultural groups (the study was conducted with native Greek and English listeners).

The metaphorical nature of the lexicon used to describe timbral qualities of the played sound shows that violinists are not familiar with describing sound as a sensory experience in an objective, quantitative way and share little knowledge about the perceptual dimensions of sound. Instead, they conceptualize and communicate sound qualities through different sensory domains-for instance, a sound "felt" as soft, velvety, or strong (touch); "seen" as bright, clear, or big (vision); and "tasting" as sweet, raw, or acide (gustation). These metaphorical linguistic structures are central to the process of conceptualizing timbre by allowing the musician-listener to meaningfully experience and communicate subtle sonic variations in terms of other domains [START_REF] Lakoff | Metaphors we live by[END_REF][START_REF] Wallmark | Appraising Timbre: Embodiment and Affect at the Threshold of Music and Noise[END_REF]. As with semantic resources, such cross-domain metaphors are common in sensory descriptions of musical as well non-musical sound experience (the reader is referred to the works cited in the previous paragraph). Furthermore, they exemplify a particular aspect of human perception: we make many synaesthetic-like associations between experiences presented in different sensory modalities, such as matching low-pitched sounds to umami and bitter tastes [START_REF] Crisinel | As bitter as a trombone: Synesthetic correspondences in nonsynesthetes between tastes/flavors and musical notes[END_REF] as well as to big sized objects [START_REF] Bien | The sound of size: Crossmodal binding in pitch-size synesthesia: A combined TMS, EEG and psychophysics study[END_REF]. Psychophysiological evidence specifically suggests that timbral cues can activate attributes or concepts borrowed from other modalities [START_REF] Schön | The evocative power of sounds: Conceptual priming between words and nonverbal sounds[END_REF][START_REF] Grieser-Painter | Can out-of-context musical sounds convey meaning? An ERP study on the processing of meaning in music[END_REF].

D. Influence of task and sample constraints

Two final considerations of general methodological significance are necessary about the interpretation of these results and thus their importance. First, the analysis presented here adopted a situated approach: semantic categories of violin quality were elicited from spontaneous descriptions of preference judgments by experienced violinists collected in playing tests. We took special caution in designing experimental tasks that are empirically valid but also musically meaningful to the violinist. Rather than simply listening to and verbally tagging recorded sounds, violin players thus described the different quality characteristics they perceived inside a more involved and familiar experience.

RESONANCE was the second most frequently emerging semantic category in experiment 1, but in experiment 2 such expressions were less prominent. A methodological difference between the two experiments could explain this difference. Whereas experiment 1 involved perceptual judgments based on overall preference, in experiment 2 players evaluated violins on five specified attributes-ease of playing, response, richness, dynamic range, balance-none of which was explicitly related to the intensity of the sound. It thus seems plausible that the type of task at hand may affect how quality dimensions are negotiated.

Descriptions of sound PROJECTION were the least recurrent in both experiments. To a certain extent, in experiment 2 this might have been imposed by the design of the task similarly to the case of RESONANCE. However, the very small proportion of PROJECTION in the corpus of experiment 1 may generally reflect a low cognitive priority for this attribute as a result of the difficulty in judging reliably how well the sound is transmitted across the performance space solely by playing the violin-but still musicians consider this an attribute important enough to evaluate even if by estimation [START_REF] Loos | Untersuchungen zur Tragfähigkeit von Geigentönen (Studies on the projection of violin tones)[END_REF][START_REF] Fritz | Soloist evaluations of six old italian and six new violins[END_REF].

Second, we expect that there are variations of the language (i.e., the specific lexicon and its meaning) used by musicians from place to place (sometimes resulting from a strong influence by one or more particular teachers in an area). The present analysis might thus be biased toward a verbal tradition specific to the Montreal region. Nevertheless, this research provides a resource that should be consulted by any researchers planning to conduct perceptual studies of violin quality (i.e., when designing the language used in their experiments).

V. CONCLUSIONS

The overall goal of the research presented here is to better understand how musicians evaluate violins within the wider context of finding relationships between measurable vibrational properties of instruments and their perceived qualities. Contrary to the typical approach of beginning with a physical hypothesis based on structural dynamics measurements or audio feature extraction, a method based on psycholinguistic inferences [START_REF] Dubois | Categories as acts of meaning: The case of categories in olfaction and audition[END_REF] was used to identify and categorize concepts of violin quality emerging in spontaneous verbal descriptions collected in two experimental studies, whereby a total of 29 musicians played and evaluated different violins and subsequently justified their choices in free verbalization tasks. This method has been previously applied to other instruments such as the piano (e.g., [START_REF] Bellemare | Verbal description of piano timbre: Exploring performerdependent dimensions[END_REF] and the guitar (e.g., [START_REF] Paté | Influence of the electric guitar's fingerboard wood on guitarists' perception[END_REF], advancing our understanding of how their sound and playing characteristics are perceived by performers. This paper reports the first extensive psycholinguistic investigation of violin quality perception, expanding on an earlier study with only 3 musicians by [START_REF] Fritz | A situated and cognitive approach of violin quality[END_REF].

The semantic patterns-categories underlying the found concepts can be seen as a first step in translating the semantics of violinists' expressions into perceptually meaningful descriptors of violin quality. Importantly, they demonstrate that violin players with different levels of experience and expertise share a common framework for differentiating the sensory meanings of auditory and haptic information. A schematic depiction of this framework is proposed, which can be useful for future studies aimed at assessing violin quality characteristics (see Fig. 1 and2). The emergence of shared conceptualization structures between musicians suggests, in line with our previous findings [START_REF] Saitis | Perceptual evaluation of violins: A quantitative analysis of preference judgements by experienced players[END_REF][START_REF] Saitis | Effect of task constraints on the perceptual evaluation of violins[END_REF], that interindividual differences in the preference for violins originate from variations in the perception of different violin attributes, rather than from disagreement about what properties a preferred violin possesses.

Specifically considering the relevance of playability aspects in overall violin preference judgments, more research would be needed on how to describe and assess the control of bowing parameters and their coordination, which allow the player to access the high musical expressivity of a particular instrument. Recent evidence suggests a bowing-based link between the quality of a violin and its range of quiet to loud playing [START_REF] Sarlo | Measuring violin bow force during performance[END_REF]. Improving our understanding of how violinists vary bowing parameters to shape their desired sound could help tease apart the effects of individual playing skills on quality evaluation.

Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 2 Amateur Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 3 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 4 Professional Classical, Baroque, Folk, Jazz ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 5 Professional Classical, Folk, Modern ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 6 Professional Classical, Baroque ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 7 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 8 Professional Classical, Baroque ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 9 Amateur Classical, Baroque, Folk, Modern ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 10 Professional Classical, Baroque ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 11 Amateur Classical, Folk ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 12 Amateur Classical, Folk ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 13 Amateur Classical, Baroque, Folk, Jazz ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 14 Professional Classical, Folk ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 15 Professional Folk ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 16 Professional (no style reported) ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 17 Amateur Classical, Baroque ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 18 Amateur Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 19 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 20 Professional Classical, Folk ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ Experiment 2 a 1 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ 2 Professional Folk, Jazz, Tango ✗ ✗ ✗ 3 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 4 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ 5 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 6 Professional Classical, Baroque, Folk, Jazz ✗ ✗ 7 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ 8 Amateur Classical, Folk ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 9 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ 10 Professional Classical, Folk ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 11 Professional Classical, Baroque ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 12 Professional Classical ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ 13

  , violins and controls Twenty violinists participated in experiment 1 (8 females, 12 males; average age = 34 yrs, SD = 13 yrs, range = 20-65 yrs). They had at least 15 years of violin experience (average years of violin training = 26 yrs, SD = 12 yrs, range = 15-60 yrs). Experiment 2 involved 13 violinists (9 females, 4 males; average age = 28 yrs, SD = 9 yrs, range = 21-53 yrs) that had at least 12 years of violin experience (average years of violin training = 22 yrs, SD = 9 yrs, range = 12-46 yrs).

FIG. 1 .

 1 FIG. 1. Placed approximately here.

Fig. 1

 1 Fig. 1 Musician-instrument interaction in violins. Quality evaluations and affective reactions are elaborated on the basis of both auditory and haptic cues (sensory factors) filtered through previous experience and interpretation processes (non-sensory contextual factors). Adapted from Papetti (2013, Fig. 1).

Fig. 2

 2 Fig.2From body vibrations to semantic categories: a model describing how the dynamic behavior of a violin relates to its quality in the mind of the musician.

TABLE I .

 I Musical profile of participants and semantic categories they used.

		Musical profile		Semantic categories
	Practice (yrs)	Skill	Style of music	Ri Te Pl Cl Re Pr Ba In
	1
	Experiment 1

TABLE III .

 III Emerging semantic categories of violin quality concepts (French verbalizations are reported in verbatim). solidité, cushioned, convenient to handle, enough room for control, reflexible, well-adjusted, small, touche agréable, fit bridge, to feel a healthy contact with the bow on the string, répondre au quart de tour, to give a lot back, to take a lot of weight from the bow, to stand up to what the player gives hard to play (5), heavy (3), uncomfortable (3), more effort (3), difficult to play (2), slow (2), missing of the tuning (2), bulky (2), big, gros, awkward, rigid, too light, labored vibrato, big neck, to fight with the instrument [to produce the desired sound]

	Semantic	Microconcepts	Microconcepts	Type of	Object of
	category	(+)	(-)	attribute	evaluation
	RICHNESS	rich (32), [with many] colors (10), [with many]	hollow (3), colorless, simple, dry, sourd,	structural	sound
		harmonics (10), [with many] overtones (9),	inexpressif, limited color palette, muted
		deep (9), full (5), complex (3), expressif (2),	overtones
		thick, different sound qualities, different
		tonalities, different shades, emotive
		possibilities, to have substance, to have a
		weight behind it
	TEXTURE	warm (15), bright (9), mellow (8), sweet (6),	tinny (9), harsh (6), bright (6), raw (3), rough	structural	sound
		silky (6), smooth (5), round (5), dark (5),	(3), shrill (2), strident (2), acide (2),
		velvety (3), singing (3), soft (2), golden,	grossier, stringy, grating, hard edge to the
		coupant dans le son, a viola type of sound	sound, mechanic
	RESONANCE resonant (28), powerful (19), open (7), vibrant	muted (9), flat (4), muffled (3), weak (3),	structural &	sound
		(5), strong (5), puissance (4), volume (4),	compressed (2), tight (2), petit (2), éteint	vibrotactile
		loud (4), sustain (3), responsive (2), ringing (2),	(2), étouffé (2), ferme, strangled, squeezed,
		free (2), big (2), bright, brilliant, present,	thin, dormant, constrained, controlled, terne,
		liveliness, sonority, unconstrained, unrestrained,	nasillard, mince, to lack ability, to get
		ample, to carry a lot of sound, good sound	trapped inside, n'avoir aucun tonus, as if
		production, une voix qui ''parle",	there is something inhibiting the sound
		repondre facile proche de nous, to last
		after the bow is lifted
	PROJECTION projection (28), to carry (2), porter (2), to fill	weak, to sound shaved on the top, empecher	spatial	sound
		[a space] (2), to cut across a hall, to travel,	de voyager
		voyager sans forcer
	RESPONSE	easy to play (66), responsive (23), broad dynamic range (14), light (11), comfortable (8), quick (8), playability (7), flexible (6), ability to create different timbres (6), versatile (4), low action (2), predictable (2), maniable (2), liberty (2), proprioceptive violin-player interaction
	CLARITY	clear (29), pure (3), to speak well (3), focus (3),	scratchy (10), wolf tone (7), buzzing (7), muddy	structural	sound
		clean (2), consonnes articules (2), direct,	(5), whistles (3), sore throat (3), hoarse (2),
		straightforward, defined, bright, to articulate	blurry (2), sand (2), noise (2), kettle effects,
		well, the way notes lead into the next,	metallic, tinny, unrecognizable, to break
		l'ouverture du son
	BALANCE	even (20), balanced (11), égal (8), consistent	uneven (4), inegal, to not feel as good on the	structural &	sound &
		(6), stable (2), l'equilibre entre les	lower strings	proprioceptive	violin-player
		cordes (2), relation between strings (2),			interaction
		focus, strings harmonized best, string
		differentials, equal
	INTEREST	beautiful (18), good (8), quality (8), color (7),	irritating (2), unpleasant (2), sans interet,	affective	sound &
		interesting (6), nice (6), unique (4), pleasant (4),	boring, overbearing, generic, impersonnel, to		violin-player
		timbre (3), enjoyable to play (3), great (3),	not like, the sound is like a poor quality		interaction
		pleasing (2), to inspire (2), basic (2), natural (2),	recording
		to have character, perfect, rare, complet,
		fascination, satisfaction, preference, to appeal,
		fun to play, to feel right, to feel great, a sound
		that I look for

TABLE IV .

 IV Distribution of categories within and across responses to questions (N = total units; # = coded units; % = proportion).

						Experiment 1					Experiment 2
		A1 (N = 240)	A2 (N = 189)	A3 (N = 169)	B (N = 168)	ALL (N = 766)		(N = 62)
		#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%	#	%
	RICHNESS	20	8	28	15	11	7	22	13	81	11	8	13
	TEXTURE	13	5	36	19	23	14	23	14	95	12	8	13
	RESONANCE	46	19	17	9	45	27	24	14	132	17	5	8
	PROJECTION	12	5	9	5	8	5	10	6	39	5	2	3
	RESPONSE	66	28	45	24	29	17	46	27	186	24	19	31
	CLARITY	26	11	13	7	26	15	14	8	79	10	8	13
	BALANCE	29	12	12	6	9	5	13	8	63	8	2	3
	INTEREST	28	12	29	15	18	11	16	10	91	12	10	16
							29

The complete original verbal responses are found in the appendix of the first author's doctoral dissertation(Saitis, 2013, pp. 145-172).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project has been partially funded by the Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology (CIRMMT) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). We thank two anonymous reviewers for constructive comments. The first author thanks Esteban Maestre for fruitful discussions and stylistic suggestions.

NOTES 1 In the open string region, 196-660 Hz, the frequency response of the violin body as measured at the bridge is characterized by the presence of five resonances that are sufficiently separated from the adjacent modes and hence easily identifiable: A0, a Helmholtz-type resonance with f A0 ≈ 280 Hz that radiates strongly through the f -holes; CBR, the lowest corpus mode with f CBR ≈ 400, twodimensional flexure, usually a weak radiator; A1, a higher cavity mode with f A1 ≈ 1.7 × f A0 that sometimes radiates strongly but is usually a weak radiator; B1 -(mainly motion of top plate) and B1 + (two-dimensional flexure), the first strongly-radiating corpus bending modes with f B1 -≈ 480 and f B1 + ≈ 550, also radiating strongly through the sound holes.