Ash or Alder?

[JamesBass]

So, I'm thinking about building my own 60s inspired P Bass, but I'm at a loss when it comes to body wood?!

My great question is; Ash body or Alder body? Which was more prevalent back then and what benefits can I expect from either?

[leroydiamond]

As far as I know Fender pair the alder body with rosewood fingerboard and ash with maple fingerboard

[geoffbyrne]

Ash. Always.



G.

[Lozz196]

After years of alder/rosewood I`m really loving my ash/maple 78 Precision at the moment. In the mix it seems to have a better even-ness of tone across the strings, though this of course could be the pickups.

[Musky]

It was mostly alder used during the sixties. That decision was based on cost and availability, not tonal considerations.

[gsgbass]

Alder, and Maple. Old habits die hard.

[BassHappy]

The truth is - Fender used ash exclusively on P Bass bodies from 1951 up until about 1954 - and you will notice that they pretty exclusively finished them in butterscotch. They discovered alder and began using it in 1954 - it was a much more friendly wood as far as finishing goes, took much less filler to fill the grain and a much less "finicky" wood - and they found they could successfully and relatively effortlessly apply sunburst and other finishes on the alder that they struggled with on ash. They also felt the alder bodies sounded good enough - and did not degrade the sound quality of the P Bass at all.

There is a book available by Hal Leonard that details most of this here if anyone is interested:

[url="http://www.amazon.com/The-Fender-Bass-Illustrated-History/dp/0634026402/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398215433&sr=8-1&keywords=fender+bass+book"]http://www.amazon.co...ender+bass+book[/url]

Certainly not the end all of Fender bass books, but great photos and very informative text, even though it rarely speaks to the issue of the non-US Fender manufacturing etc.

'51 in ash:



'54 in period burst:



Best to all in the UK

BassHappy

Edited April 23, 2014 by BassHappy

[JamesBass]

Well I've got an ash and maple combo P which has a more modern feel to it, bit brighter and punchy, closer to a 58 than a 60s era, I'm thinking a 60s era P or one built to be that era, would compliment my stable of options aha, well that's how I'm thinking of it!

Thanks for the great knowledge and the book recommendation Bass Happy and best to you States-Side

[BigRedX]

If you are going to finish it in a solid colour then it doesn't matter. If the grain is going to visible, whichever wood has the most pleasing grain pattern to you.

What Fender did back in the 60s is mostly irrelevant. What ever wood you buy here, today, will be considerably different to what was being used on the other side of the Atlantic 50 years ago.

[molan]

Very, very general theory is that alder will be a bit more rounded and warmer whilst ash will be brighter and snappier.

However there's a zillion other factors involved in how an instrument finally sounds!

[HowieBass]

Here, from Fender's own site, the two woods discussed http://www.fender.com/news/tech-talk-ash-and-alder/ and in summary, for the period, it'd likely be red alder for a coloured finish and white ash for clear/natural finishes.

Note that an ash body will weigh more than alder:

White Ash average dried weight = 42 lbs/ft[sup]3[/sup] (see http://www.wood-database.com/lumber-identification/hardwoods/white-ash/ for more data)

Red Alder average dried weight = 28 lbs/ft[sup]3[/sup] (see http://www.wood-database.com/lumber-identification/hardwoods/red-alder/ for more data).

[waynepunkdude]

Alder started off funny but got a bit serious.



Ash were good until they got that new guitarist

[Dingus]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1398243072' post='2431910']
If you are going to finish it in a solid colour then it doesn't matter. If the grain is going to visible, whichever wood has the most pleasing grain pattern to you.

What Fender did back in the 60s is mostly irrelevant. What ever wood you buy here, today, will be considerably different to what was being used on the other side of the Atlantic 50 years ago.
[/quote]

Mmmm, except that most prefabricated ash and alder bass guitar bodies on the market are usually made from North American ash and North American alder, just the same as Fenders were fifty years ago. Bodies of either wood that are fifty years old may well sound slightly different to their new equivalents though, due to changes in their moisture content . For a '60's style Fender bass , alder is the traditional choice , and ash is a bit more complicated as a proposition, because whereas alder is a fairly uniform wood, ash has far more variants within the species. Lightweight swamp ash sounds different to very heavy and dense Northern ash like Fender and Musicman used in the 1970's.

Overall though, like Molan very rightly says, a whole host of factors influence the final tone of the bass. I have played a few late 1960's Fenders that had actually had ash bodies and they sounded no different to their alder equivalents , to my ears at least , anyway. . In reality, either wood sounds fine in most instances.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1398276498' post='2432425']
Mmmm, except that most prefabricated ash and alder bass guitar bodies on the market are usually made from North American ash and North American alder, just the same as Fenders were fifty years ago.
[/quote]

However the OP makes no mention of prefabricated bodies. For all we know he's off down to his local timber yard for some boards of whatever he decides upon.

Also I would contest that wood being cut down today is the same as that from 50 years ago. Environmental growing conditions have changed and in general the trees are harvested at a younger age these days. Also the various seasoning processes that the boards see from being cut to being fabricated into bodies have changed especially in the case of mass-produced instruments.

[Dingus]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1398277689' post='2432446']


However the OP makes no mention of prefabricated bodies. For all we know he's off down to his local timber yard for some boards of whatever he decides upon.

Also I would contest that wood being cut down today is the same as that from 50 years ago. Environmental growing conditions have changed and in general the trees are harvested at a younger age these days. Also the various seasoning processes that the boards see from being cut to being fabricated into bodies have changed especially in the case of mass-produced instruments.
[/quote]

Do you think any of those things will make a tangible difference ? Generally speaking, an alder body is an alder body, in my humble opinion. In practice, any decent example will sound fine.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Dingus

[White Cloud]

I like Ash bodies and I also like Alder bodies....they will both work equally well on your bass.

[deepbass5]

Swamp ash would be my choice. set fire to it, then acid wash it to bring the grain out then use it as a coffee table for about five years before you drill any holes in it. well thats what mine looked like, sounded great though

[cocco]

Ash for me. I don't know why, but my 3 'keepers' are all ash, also my first name is Ash.

[dannybuoy]

If the grain is going to be visible, then ash every time.

[Bassman Steve]

I have two 75 reissue Precisions, one alder and one ash. Both sunburst with rosewood fingerboards. The alder is the heavier by a little but you're welcome to do some comparing when you venture my way.

[Grand Wazoo]

[quote name='dannybuoy' timestamp='1398291720' post='2432677']
If the grain is going to be visible, then ash every time.
[/quote]

yes