Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

sterlingphoenix t1_iuej8m6 wrote

Cam you provide any backing for this statement? Because I'm not sure at all that it's accurate.

3

Holiday-Snow4803 OP t1_iuelxry wrote

It's badly phrased. What I mean is that the most expensive instruments listed anywhere on Google are violins.

Other instruments on the rankings such as pianos or organs seem much more sophisticated to me as non musician. Why do violins take the top spots at any valuation ranking?

1

sterlingphoenix t1_iuen7nk wrote

Oh, I hear you -- a while back I was curious why a cello and violin cost the same since a violin is so much smaller.

And the answer I got was that violins, being so small, are a lot harder to make because they're still as complex as a cello but, well, a lot smaller. That takes a lot more skill and specialised tools.

6

Twin_Spoons t1_iueuzpc wrote

It is said that certain very old violins (and some other string instruments, but the violins are more famous, and hence more expensive) are better than anything we can produce today, either because the materials (very particular kinds of wood) are no longer available or reverence for a particular craftsman (especially Stradivarius). These old violins are in fixed supply and so have their prices driven up by the large number of collectors and virtuosos who want to own/use one.

Other instruments are generally not affected by the same beliefs, so a top-notch piano made yesterday is considered as good as, if not better, than every other piano. This means that supply can keep up with demand, and prices are in the ballpark of what it takes to produce the instrument. Organs are a bit of a weird case, as many of them are built into large and famous buildings. They're probably left off these lists of expensive instruments because there's no feasible way to "buy" them. If somehow you could, some organs would likely cost more than a Stradivarius violin.

3