Perry Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 One of my basses is a Warwick Covette in Bubinga. I really like the look of the same bass in Ash. What's the difference in the sound? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutToPlayJazz Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 (edited) Here's what Rob Green from Status-Graphite says about Ash as a tone wood... (Obviously discount the bit about the graphite neck!) [quote]Ash bodies are medium density and weight. The timber produces a clear tone with plenty of definition. When combined with the graphite neck this bass is great for percussive playing. The wood has an open grain and a light colour with darker features.[/quote] ... And from A musician’s guide to choosing tonewoods by Paul Woolson... [quote]Bubinga is quickly becoming a favorite wood with custom builders, and may soon find its way into large production shops. This wood, which comes from Africa, has a tremendously rich sound replete with warm even tones and a brilliant sparkle across the entire spectrum. It is plentiful and available in a wide variety of cosmetic appearances. Typically Bubinga has a mottled "bees-wing" appearance under finish that is absolutely gorgeous, and also can be acquired with strong ropey curl.[/quote] I'd imagine the Bublinga instrument would have a warmer sound that the much brighter ash-based one Edited December 29, 2007 by OutToPlayJazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul, the Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 [quote]It is plentiful and available[/quote] I'm fast realising that this will be one of the main factors for me when thinking about buying a bass. Is there a statistic that shows a percentage of lumber going towards instrument production? [url="http://www.warmoth.com/bass/options/options_bodywoods.cfm"]Tone of woods.[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 Bubinga sucks the treble out of many instruments I've tried, it makes them feel less lively to me but it can add warmth when used in small amounts in neck laminates. Rob has told me he reckons lots of woods sound the same if they have similar density and weight. I see so many graphite necked basses paired with ash and the combination sounds very brittle to my ears and with swamp ash, it completely lacks low end oomph and midrange. One thing I'd like to hear is a graphite bolt on necked instrument with a bubinga body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickhunt Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Crazykiwi' post='110721' date='Dec 29 2007, 09:59 PM']Bubinga sucks the treble out of many instruments I've tried, it makes them feel less lively to me but it can add warmth when used in small amounts in neck laminates. Rob has told me he reckons lots of woods sound the same if they have similar density and weight. I see so many graphite necked basses paired with ash and the combination sounds very brittle to my ears and with swamp ash, it completely lacks low end oomph and midrange. One thing I'd like to hear is a graphite bolt on necked instrument with a bubinga body.[/quote] FWIW I have to say that Bubinga bodied Warwicks are no where near as snappy/clear as maple or cherry Warwicks. HOWEVER you do have to take into account all of the other factors! Are the pups, preamps, fingerboard woods etc the same; if they are and the only difference is the main body wood then I'd concede that the Bubinga body will have less attack and top end. Edited December 30, 2007 by warwickhunt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mottlefeeder Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 [quote name='Perry' post='110662' date='Dec 29 2007, 07:57 PM']One of my basses is a Warwick Covette in Bubinga. I really like the look of the same bass in Ash. What's the difference in the sound?[/quote] A bit off-topic, but I have a Bubunga 4-string fretless Corvette, and auditioned the Ash-bodied 5-string version before buying one. It still has plenty of the Warwick sound, but is a lot lighter. However, on a 5-string, that means it is not as well balanced. If you are thinking of a Warwick, check it out with a strap before you buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheBigBeefChief Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 I sometimes think that there are so many variables when picking a bass that the wood type almost becomes redundent. Thats not to say that a bass can be made out of an ironing board and sound good, but the pick ups and the electronics probably mean more than the type of wood used in construction. Having said that, my current bad boy (Gibson Thunderbird 4) sounds great having been made out of mahogany. But its difficult to tell how much is due to the wood and not the pups. It would be interesting to do a blindfold test with differnt woods and the same electronics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheBigBeefChief Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 and a pocket full of welks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay249 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 (edited) I consider the weight of an electric bass [b]way[/b] before I worry whether it's mahogany, alder, ash etc. And then I consider electronics and strings, and to a much lesser degree, the bridge. Edited December 30, 2007 by jay249 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftySteve Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 I currently have a bubinga Corvette and until recently had an ash bodied one too which gave me endless opportunity to A/B them. Tonewise I found so little difference between the two it is not worth mentioning! The common factor with the two basses was the ovangkol/wenge neck and that I believe is where the much mentioned Warwick tone lies. The big difference of course is in the weight, the bubinga being much, much heavier to the point that the ash one never seemed like a "proper" bass in comparison! Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay249 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 Basses being light in weight doesn't bother me at all! especially after a night of lugging a 10k pa system in, and masses of lighting with the sound company and then playing bass all night! I once had a rosewood neck jazz bass with a badass 2 bridge and nice pickups etc and i bought a good quality upgrade neck from allparts. I also had plenty of time to a/b and actually made recordings too at one point, and I don't mind admitting if there was a difference, my ears cant hear them! I've also had two ash mij 75 reissues recently, one maple neck, one rosewood, i sold one to buy the other, and It was almost like playing the same bass again, especially with my eyes closed. I would like to publically admit that if there's a difference, I can't hear it, and i won't pretend to! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s_u_y_* Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 For the Corvette I much prefer ash. The corvette shape is quite large, and bubinga is a dense wood meaning it's a bloody heavy bass! (For me at least). I know another bassist who thought the same and sold his. Also I see the Corvette as a one of the more versitile basses that Warwick make, and ash lends itself well to this view. I personally bought mine in ash even though I saved up for the bubinga version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARGH Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 [quote name='finnbass' post='110818' date='Dec 30 2007, 03:34 AM']Cockles have a brighter, more punchy sound...[/quote] Sorry I find Cockles have far too much top end. Oysters are a ,shall we say, more refined sound.... But then I like distortion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARGH Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 (edited) Quickest way to work out what a woods properties has an effect on an instrument (poor grammer) is simple PICK IT UP AND PLAY IT. Regardless of whoever says X has blah blah,luthiers or players,its not a hard and fast rule,Mahogany by traditional word is quite blurry and muddy in tone (Think those old Gibson EBs in the late 60s) But Ive played instruments that just dont have that tone,yet they are mahogany?.. Its like people saying x type neckwood affects tone,it dosent. Woods wood,it has too many variables to say outright that its HAS a sound. If you want a different tone,change the scale. Edited December 30, 2007 by ARGH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay249 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 People tend to say stuff about EB's being all ''dull'' and ''wooly'' and then you see the amps theyre using, i call this ''cobweb overtones''. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARGH Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 [quote name='jay249' post='111119' date='Dec 30 2007, 08:17 PM']People tend to say stuff about EB's being all ''dull'' and ''wooly'' and then you see the amps theyre using, i call this ''cobweb overtones''.[/quote] Throw in that big ol'bucker at the neck.... and short scale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay249 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 Nah I love em, I wouldn't buy one but I love em! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Funk Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 I have a fretted and a fretless 4-string Corvette Bubinga. Warwick say that the Ash model has a more open sound while the Bubinga model has a richer midrange. Sounds about right to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay249 Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 What's a 'more open' sound? Also, fretless basses are bound to have different sonic characteristics. We should do a blindfold test. I have a maple neck knocking about that I could use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Funk Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Open as in more even across the frequencies, I think, with a smooth top end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mybass Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 I had one of the earliest bubinga/ FRETTED Warwicks in the country and I found it lacked bottom end on stage but was a great recording bass, probably because the mid range was well defined. My rantings about this to Melvyn Hiscox (guitar building author) when he worked at Roger Giffin's shop some years ago, prompted him telling me to make my own basses, which I now do. ( Okay, he more or less dared me to try and make one! My basses are FRETLESS and often UK ash, with maple neck and macassar ebony fingerboards). My ears told me that bubinga has a strong mid range and was quite bright. However, I consider that ash does give a better low end with the wood matching I use. I was at the Frankfurt music fair years ago and tried Mike Tobias's basses. Not happy with the sound from several of his lovely "exoctic" wood basses, he eventually brought out a FRETTED ash body bass and that was the one I liked. Strange stuff wood. I do feel that the over exposure to all the more exoctic woods (as I call them) and the fashion of several layers of differing types to make a body/neck may have sometimes blinded us away from the fundamentals. I used to have hilarious chats with Sid Poole (R.I.P.) a top notch guitar builder about all this and his remarks are too "colourful" to write here! He was a straight mahogany/maple man. Our 6 string band mates still largely use the woods that have been used since the first Gibson or Strat was made. Bass player preferences changed alongside our attempt to get the bass to stand out more clearly in the track and on stage, the result being that we now have super duper pre-amps, speaker systems and active eq. Coupled with all the new woods available now, the sound of the bass has evolved quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Like many of us here i am no expert but i have owned quiet a few basses and recently built one up from parts. The one i built had a solid rose wood neck(ziricote board), a walnut body, the electronics consisted of two darkstar pickups and an audare preamp. I could get a whole bunch of different tones out of it but fundamentally it sounded deep full and woody. My gut feeling is this came mainly from the neck construction. I might be talking out of my bomber Harris but i also reckon my current Warwick dolphin will sound like a Warwick dolphin even with different pickups and preamp, it might amplify whats there in a slightly different way but i think the fundamental sound will still be there. so for what its worth i think the neck construction and wood makes more difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mybass Posted January 4, 2008 Share Posted January 4, 2008 [quote name='steve-norris' post='113207' date='Jan 3 2008, 09:21 PM']Like many of us here i am no expert but i have owned quiet a few basses and recently built one up from parts. The one i built had a solid rose wood neck(ziricote board), a walnut body, the electronics consisted of two darkstar pickups and an audare preamp. I could get a whole bunch of different tones out of it but fundamentally it sounded deep full and woody. My gut feeling is this came mainly from the neck construction. I might be talking out of my bomber Harris but i also reckon my current Warwick dolphin will sound like a Warwick dolphin even with different pickups and preamp, it might amplify whats there in a slightly different way but i think the fundamental sound will still be there. so for what its worth i think the neck construction and wood makes more difference.[/quote] The Warwick Bass I had did have a bubinga/wenge thru neck and I agree that the neck wood plays its part with the overall sound. Same as for the fingerboards too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charic Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 TBH sound is so subjective to yourself its silly to try and blind buy without trying these woods. Its the whole describe the sound or timbre of this that. Do it for 100 people and youll probably find theyre all slightly different. Different people, different ears. Only true way to test would be scientifically... frequency analysis n all that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay249 Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I'm still not sold on this one, not with a solid bodied bass guitar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.