Science? Marketing? Or just a load of old Bollock?

[xilddx]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRT7HnQJ6qU

[Roland Rock]

A bit of all three. I believe that the density of a neck plays a part, among a hundred others, in the overall tone of the instrument.
Regarding flat sawn v quarter sawn, this will have a bearing on density, and therefore tone (see above)
Other than that, flat sawn v quarter sawn is more significant in terms of neck stability than tone.

[gjones]

I don't know about guitars but I've experimented with a lot of my basses over the years. The first time I realised that the neck makes a big difference to the sound was when I bought a Geddy Lee. I loved it's playability but it was just too toppy and twangy (dare I say weak sounding) for me. I bought an Allparts neck for my Squier Jazz and as an experiment I fitted it to the Geddy. The neck was quite chunky and deep, compared to the ultra shallow Geddy neck, and made a huge difference to the sound. It deepened it out and made it a lot rounder. The affect it had on the sound was as pronounced as if I had fitted different pickups.

Recently I bought a mighty mite Jazz neck, which I have fitted to my precision. I then fitted the Precision neck to my Jazz. The result is a much lighter and defined sound to the notes from my Precision and a deeper rounder sound from my Jazz. Which is exactly what I was looking for.

I know a lot of people don't like messing around with the necks of their basses but trust me, the neck of a bass ( and presumably a guitar as well) makes a big difference to the overall sound.

Edited October 12, 2013 by gjones

[dannybuoy]

He contradicts himself ask over the place. The first time he taps the necks, the quarter sawn neck is lower in pitch but he says it's higher. The way he mixes and matches necks and bodies of different resonant frequencies makes no sense, except maybe in his own head!

[bobbass4k]

Couldn't get past the first minute, he has no idea what resonance is, or does but is intentionally using it wrong because it sounds cool. Tapping something with a hammer and declaring it has a "lower resonant frequency" is about as scientific as a rain dance. A really bad rain dance too.

[icastle]

On an acoustic instrument I can see the benefits of selecting and using different wood types to achieve a particular tone.

On even the simplest of electric instruments you have a tone control of some description and at that point I have to question the validity of getting hung up on wood types to control tone.

[mcnach]

My luthier friend does that... taps different woods etc and uses that to choose which to use for a top on what guitar etc. He builds acoustic instruments. I spent enough time being shown these things to realise that it makes a difference.... in an acoustic instrument.

In an electric guitar or bass?
I'm not so sure.
There are other factors that influence sound a lot more on electric instruments. So, answering the question in the title, I'd say "a load of all bollocks"

edit: I'm talking specifically about the "ah, I tap here, it's higher, then I'll match it with this body and not that other body". I'm not arguing that all bodies and all necks will sound the same. They don't. They're variable. I just don't think you can predict the outcome the way the Fender guy seems to believe.

Edited October 12, 2013 by mcnach

[paulflan0151]

Mostly bollocks.

[gjones]

Knocking a bit of wood with a hammer is not very scientific, that's true, but from my own experience pairing different necks with different bodies makes a big difference to the sound. A Geddy Lee bass, fitted with a baseball bat neck, won't sound like a Geddy Lee anymore (I know because I've done it)..

[White Cloud]

[quote name='dannybuoy' timestamp='1381586921' post='2241026']
He contradicts himself ask over the place. The first time he taps the necks, the quarter sawn neck is lower in pitch but he says it's higher. The way he mixes and matches necks and bodies of different resonant frequencies makes no sense, except maybe in his own head!
[/quote]
Perhaps he hears it that way.

Who is to say that the way you hear it is "right"?

[LukeFRC]

I just watched all 3 videos in that series.... if anything he's a bit more down to earth about it than some other more custom builders (or actually the custom builder's fanboys) are about it. I mean what he was saying was that if the neck was higher pitch it would go with a lower pitch body and so on - which kinda makes sense if you've got 20-30 necks and 20-30 bodies and you're wanting to make 20-30 consistentish guitars.

[jonsmith]

[quote name='Roland Rock' timestamp='1381584101' post='2240972']
A bit of all three. I believe that the density of a neck plays a part, among a hundred others, in the overall tone of the instrument.
Regarding flat sawn v quarter sawn, this will have a bearing on density, and therefore tone (see above)
Other than that, flat sawn v quarter sawn is more significant in terms of neck stability than tone.
[/quote]

Perhaps I'm being a bit dense (haha) and missing something, but isn't the wood is the same density regardless of how it's cut?

[lojo]

I agree, acoustic instrument would be a difference, electronic, not so much.

Anyway, whilst I love and use Fenders, I am not sure they worry to much what they make the necks from, I got Fender UK to pay half the cost toward a new neck on a fairly new Fender (out of warranty) because they could not argue it was not rubbish.

Edited October 12, 2013 by lojo

[Roland Rock]

[quote name='jonsmith' timestamp='1381598337' post='2241269']


Perhaps I'm being a bit dense (haha) and missing something, but isn't the wood is the same density regardless of how it's cut?
[/quote]


Wood has alternating layers of dark, thin wood (latewood), and paler, wide wood (earlywood). The latewood is much more dense than the earlywood.

Quartersawn timber, being cut radially, has lots of straight layers packed pretty close together. A similar width of tangentally sawn timber will pass through far fewer layers, and they appear to be much wavier and more spaced apart.

So it's simply the fact that quarter sawn has a higher concentration of the dense stuff in it.
TBH, I don't know how significant it would be in terms of tone.

Edited October 12, 2013 by Roland Rock

[lurksalot]

[quote name='Roland Rock' timestamp='1381601443' post='2241307']



Wood has alternating layers of dark, thin wood (latewood), and paler, wide wood (earlywood). The latewood is much more dense than the earlywood.

Quartersawn timber, being cut radially, has lots of straight layers packed pretty close together. A similar width of tangentally sawn timber will pass through far fewer layers, and they appear to be much wavier and more spaced apart.

So it's simply the fact that quarter sawn has a higher concentration of the dense stuff in it.
TBH, I don't know how significant it would be in terms of tone.
[/quote]
The denser wood can be cut from the centre of a tree at any angle , the trick with quarter sawn is that it is cut radially through the centre , the main idea behind this is consistency of grain direction so that when it dries, the direction and shape of the timber is predictable .
When making anything that needs excellent stability most woods are engineered into laminates and that gives a much greater degree of stability .

[Roland Rock]

[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1381602577' post='2241320']

The denser wood can be cut from the centre of a tree at any angle , the trick with quarter sawn is that it is cut radially through the centre , the main idea behind this is consistency of grain direction so that when it dries, the direction and shape of the timber is predictable .
When making anything that needs excellent stability most woods are engineered into laminates and that gives a much greater degree of stability .
[/quote]

Yes, I'd agree with all of that. I understand that wood can be denser towards the centre (and bottom) of the tree, but I'm talking about something different. I'm talking about latewood and earlywood. A quarter sawn board has a higher concentration of dense latewood compared to a tangentially sawn board, regardless of where on the tree it was cut.

[discreet]

It's bollock.

[Beer of the Bass]

[quote name='Roland Rock' timestamp='1381605431' post='2241398']
Yes, I'd agree with all of that. I understand that wood can be denser towards the centre (and bottom) of the tree, but I'm talking about something different. I'm talking about latewood and earlywood. A quarter sawn board has a higher concentration of dense latewood compared to a tangentially sawn board, regardless of where on the tree it was cut.
[/quote]
i'm not quite getting your point here. Picture a square section of timber, say 2x2" with the grain parallel with one of the planes. It would effectively be quarter sawn if you looked at it one way round and flatsawn if you rotated it by 90 degrees. How would that change its density?

[lurksalot]

[quote name='Roland Rock' timestamp='1381605431' post='2241398']
Yes, I'd agree with all of that. I understand that wood can be denser towards the centre (and bottom) of the tree, but I'm talking about something different. I'm talking about latewood and earlywood. A quarter sawn board has a higher concentration of dense latewood compared to a tangentially sawn board, regardless of where on the tree it was cut.
[/quote]

Ok , the late wood / early wood issue is largely irrelavent in this context as the difference in the wood is in essence the definition of the grain . this happens every year in the cycle of the tree and you can tell the good growing years by the width of the ring of growth , the ' late and early' purely define the parts of the year that the growth occured . most trees of the same age in the same climate will show similar patterns in the grain to each other .
yes the late wood is denser , but by definition you cant cut a stable quarter sawn board to incorperate more latewood , a quarter sawn board will radially cut a tree and the growing cycle of the tree will determine how much early and latewood is in the board .
If a board is quarter sawn, it will shrink along the lines of the grain, effectively compressing the grain but staying flat . this is the quality that is sought after , and because of the way you have to cut it, it is is more wasteful and time consuming than just slicing a tree along its length.
as soon as you cut up up sliced tree and start glueing it together again, opposing the grain each time, you will get some very strong and stable constructions without worrying tooooo much about which way the wood was cut.

[JapanAxe]

I think that vid is aimed at people who want to believe it - they'll lap it up, and use it to provide affirmation for their buying decisions. Whereas I am a cynical old git.

[Dingus]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1381605752' post='2241403']
It's bollock.
[/quote]

Does that mean that it's almost bollocks but not quite?

[Dingus]

Given the fact that I recently bought five brand new Fender basses and had to send four of them back because they were faulty before I eventually got one worth keeping , I would suggest to this chap that he would would do much better to use that mallet to tap on the heads of some of the dullards actually making their bleedin' guitars at the factory .

Quartersawing is most cetainly not a load of old bollocks and a lot of the very best basses available have quartersawn necks, but whether you can "tune" the tone of an as yet unbuilt guitar by tapping on bits of wood...I am sceptical, to say the least. Paul Reed Smith taps bits of wood and listens to them in the same manner as this guy in the video but he, just like this chap at Fender, may well at best be clutching at straws or at worst trying to think of new ways to convince people that there has been some additional dark art worth paying for manufactured into his instruments.

Edited October 13, 2013 by Dingus

[Roland Rock]

[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1381621129' post='2241613']


Ok , the late wood / early wood issue is largely irrelavent in this context as the difference in the wood is in essence the definition of the grain . this happens every year in the cycle of the tree and you can tell the good growing years by the width of the ring of growth , the ' late and early' purely define the parts of the year that the growth occured . most trees of the same age in the same climate will show similar patterns in the grain to each other .
yes the late wood is denser , but by definition you cant cut a stable quarter sawn board to incorperate more latewood , a quarter sawn board will radially cut a tree and the growing cycle of the tree will determine how much early and latewood is in the board .
If a board is quarter sawn, it will shrink along the lines of the grain, effectively compressing the grain but staying flat . this is the quality that is sought after , and because of the way you have to cut it, it is is more wasteful and time consuming than just slicing a tree along its length.
as soon as you cut up up sliced tree and start glueing it together again, opposing the grain each time, you will get some very strong and stable constructions without worrying tooooo much about which way the wood was cut.
[/quote]

Again, I agree with all of that, but to clarify on this point:


[quote name='lurksalot' timestamp='1381621129' post='2241613']
by definition you cant cut a stable quarter sawn board to incorperate more latewood......
[/quote]

But by definition, a quarter sawn board has more late wood than any other type of cut.
It is probably largely irrelevant though, ie one tiny factor among a hundred others, as I intimated in my first post

[Roland Rock]

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1381619308' post='2241590']

i'm not quite getting your point here. Picture a square section of timber, say 2x2" with the grain parallel with one of the planes. It would effectively be quarter sawn if you looked at it one way round and flatsawn if you rotated it by 90 degrees. How would that change its density?
[/quote]

You put it this way, and now I'm questioning my logic .......


Edit: yes, thinking about it, I was focusing on the larger number of layers of dense wood in quarter sawn boards, but not the length of the layers! Apologies to all for the misinformation [embarassed smilie that I don't know how to insert on my phone]

Edited October 13, 2013 by Roland Rock

[Greggo]

I've never been able to believe that wood has any bearing on the amplified sound of an electric guitar. People have tried to explain the way it is meant to work but I can't accept it. I'm not sure if I even believe wood affects sustain. I think it's the metal the strings are attached to that affects the sound. We Should concentrate on looking into "tone metals".

Edited October 13, 2013 by Greggo