Tonewoods

[White Cloud]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1366317148' post='2051110']
Again, you've made incorrect assumptions based on what I have written here. I love science and music, and science is useful to explain things, and music is good to express things. The guitars are the tools in this process. But since people insist on saying that the fretboard material is such an important part of the sound, the only way to really find out is under scientific conditions. I don't see how that tells you anything about my views on music. My hypothesis is that the fretboard doesn't contribute much to the sound of the guitar, as the sound is picked up by an electric magnetic pickup installed on the guitar. Your hypothesis is that it makes a huge difference. who's right? Well, there's really only one way to say for sure (FIIIIGHT!), a scientific experiment. That's not the same as saying "Gee, I really love music. What I like most about it is how the strings are magnetically charged to interfere with the magnetic field of the electro magnetic pickup on the guitar, creating a charge that then gets turned into a sound".
[/quote]
Yes, instruments are tools. That is true. To me fretboard material is extremely important. I just cannot live with Ebony, Cocobolo or composite boards...and I especially hate Maple. I much prefer the way that Rosewood sounds, feels and responds. This hearing, feeling and responding is what makes me a sentient being. I have found MY ideal through experience and have little need for scientific dissection of my art. Everyone is different and that is as it should be.

If you do then good luck. We shall agree to disagree.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='White Cloud' timestamp='1366318106' post='2051128']
Yes, instruments are tools. That is true. To me fretboard material is extremely important. I just cannot live with Ebony, Cocobolo or composite boards...and I especially hate Maple. I much prefer the way that Rosewood sounds, feels and responds. This hearing, feeling and responding is what makes me a sentient being. I have found MY ideal through experience and have little need for scientific dissection of my art. Everyone is different and that is as it should be.

If you do then good luck. We shall agree to disagree.
[/quote]

Well you've just agreed that the guitar is the tool, so it wouldn't be dissection of your art, just the tools of it. But OK, agreeing to disagree.

[Mr. Foxen]

The pickup only picks up the movement of the string. The movement of the string is influenced by a bunch of factors, fairly key ones after the basic length mass stuff being resonant filtering properties of the materials the string and the pickup are attached to. Typically the more significant of those materials are wood (greater part of the mass, more variable resonant properties than metal parts, as long as those parts are basically fixed in place correctly), additionally, the playability of the instrument is the whole interface between tone and fingers/the player, and wood figures significantly there, since wood that warps will give a bad action and correspondingly poor playing characteristics, and also the less significant factor of how it feels under fingers, and retains dirt which affects sting tone.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Mr. Foxen

[White Cloud]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1366318290' post='2051132']
Well you've just agreed that the guitar is the tool, so it wouldn't be dissection of your art, just the tools of it. But OK, agreeing to disagree.
[/quote]
The sound and tone that I produce is of paramount importance in the art of making music...therefore the instrument (tool) is an integral part of the process, or art, of creativity.

However...agreeing to disagree, signing out.

To sleep , perchance to dream...................................................

[Roland Rock]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1366317148' post='2051110']
.. since people insist on saying that the fretboard material is such an important part of the sound, the only way to really find out is under scientific conditions.
[/quote]

I totally agree, but this is what confuses me about your stance on this - a couple of months ago, you were saying that 'maple is bright' and 'wenge and mahogany are bassier woods' but now you are adamant that tonewoods 'don't make one iota of difference'. What has changed your mind so drastically in so short a time? You seem so sure, even though there have been no scientific tests.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Roland Rock

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='Roland Rock' timestamp='1366324776' post='2051215']
I totally agree, but this is what confuses me about your stance on this - a couple of months ago, you were saying that 'maple is bright' and 'wenge and mahogany are bassier woods' but now you are adamant that tonewoods 'don't make one iota of difference'. What has changed your mind so drastically in so short a time? You seem so sure, even though there have been no scientific tests.
[/quote]

Those things are still true, just not in the instance that we are talking about.

[skankdelvar]

Fact is, differences make a difference. Some differences make more of a difference than others.

Loads of people whipped the mudbucker out of their EB's and noticed a difference even though the rest of the instrument remained the same. Score one for the pup.

Other people switched from a maple board P to a RW board P and noticed a difference even though everything else was (theoretically) the same. Score one for the board.

It certainly may be the case that longer and wider exposure to different materials and instruments enhance one's ability to hear differences. But it does not in itself confer enhanced musicality. Nor does a lesser ability to hear differences invalidate an individual's [i]perception [/i]of any particular sound.

We all hear with different ears and hear different things differently, which is in itself a rather marvellous thing. It reflects the individual and personalised nature of the human mind. As with so many topics on BC, the heat and fury is inversely proportional to the diversity of perception. I would venture there is no right or wrong or or magic bullet or definitive position except that of holding a particular opinion, the validity of which is rather difficult to measure at a distance through a PC screen.

I'm with the Kiwi on this one.

Edited April 18, 2013 by skankdelvar

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='Roland Rock' timestamp='1366324776' post='2051215']
I totally agree, but this is what confuses me about your stance on this - a couple of months ago, you were saying that 'maple is bright' and 'wenge and mahogany are bassier woods' but now you are adamant that tonewoods 'don't make one iota of difference'. What has changed your mind so drastically in so short a time? You seem so sure, even though there have been no scientific tests.
[/quote]

Maybe it was studying under an experienced luthier, and making a few dozen instruments. Or using first engineering principles and an understanding of resonance both acoustic and electronic to draw conclusions based on observation. Or maybe it was not having the first clue either way, but posting anyway.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1366327562' post='2051235']
Maybe it was studying under an experienced luthier, and making a few dozen instruments. Or using first engineering principles and an understanding of resonance both acoustic and electronic to draw conclusions based on observation. Or maybe it was not having the first clue either way, but posting anyway.
[/quote]

That's a bit presumptuous, and I don't appreciate the insinuation that I don't have the first clue about instruments. You are the most impossible person I have ever met. It's nearly like you pick arguments for fun.

[Mr. Foxen]

The first to options are kind of suggestions of ways to go if you have a problem with falling under the third.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1366333062' post='2051253']
The first to options are kind of suggestions of ways to go if you have a problem with falling under the third.
[/quote]

You have an opinion on this, so does that mean that you also need to build a few dozen instruments to validate your opinion?

As for "Why the change of heart?". I realised that there was more to do with the pickup in a solid bodied electric instrument than the woods it is made from. A good instrument with a crappy pickup is a crappy instrument. As for the speed of the shift, well, i've been at this for 2 years, if my opinions have changed in that time (and a lot of them have) it will be seen as a rapid change.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1366333947' post='2051254']
You have an opinion on this, so does that mean that you also need to build a few dozen instruments to validate your opinion?
[/quote]

Have done. Hence 'informed opinion' which is the thing people have a right to. No-one has the right to be ignorant.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1366335910' post='2051257']
Have done. Hence 'informed opinion' which is the thing people have a right to. No-one has the right to be ignorant.
[/quote]

Everyone has the right to be ignorant, nobody should have the desire to, though. I don't think I really am, though.

Look, we'll probably never agree on this, and it will just descend into a more insulting discussion with time, so like with White Cloud, I'll agree to disagree, and call it a day on this one.

[Dave Vader]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1366316256' post='2051084']
No. You've told us about the fretboard. There's no way the nut could be the same on every one. The setup was also bound to vary a little. And that's assuming you used the exact same strings over the life of the guitar, and amp, and lead. This isn't about the acoustic sound, it's about the amplified sound.
[/quote]

Almost Milty, except that the nut I made out of a bit of bone many years ago has never really died, and I swapped it straight over for about 3 of those necks. IME nuts have even less bearing on the sound (particularly amplified) than the wood, since as soon as you fret a note, it is completely out of the equation.
And it was the amplified sound that changed, I've been using roto 10-52 for as long as I can remember, have mostly used the same cable I nicked off a stage in barnstaple 20 odd years ago, and before I got rid of it last year, the very same red knob fender twin of a similar age.
And if you read what I said, I pointed out that it sounded different through bucketloads of distortion and fuzz. If it hadn't I wouldn't have had to change my amp and pedal settings to get my usual sound out of it.

Not ganging up on you milty, just want you to clarify your position, as you seem to have accepted that different woods sound different, but then claim this has no bearing on the amplified sound of the instrument. Which is a first for this very long thread, even VGS before he went away never said that.

To clarify, I am claiming that you cannot predict what a lump of wood will sound like by name alone, and that every bit of wood sounds different and affects even the amplified tone of an instrument. Which seems pretty reasonable.
Pop a single coil pickup in a solid bodied electric and record the output from the pickup alone, everything on full, then do it again with the pickup in a hollow bodied guitar and do the same. They are different, very different, thus the wood is affecting the amplified sound. reasonable?

[4 Strings]

[quote name='Dave Vader' timestamp='1366360329' post='2051364']
Pop a single coil pickup in a solid bodied electric and record the output from the pickup alone, everything on full, then do it again with the pickup in a hollow bodied guitar and do the same. They are different, very different, thus the wood is affecting the amplified sound. reasonable?
[/quote]

A good example, but that's a totally different construction, not just a marginal change in the qualities of the wood. Pop the same pup (quite like that!) on an upright and it will be different again as it has a great big booming box to affect the way the strings vibrate and create natural harmonics. Pop it onto a MM bass with an ash body, then one with an alder body and, well, with all else the same I'd be very surprised if I could hear any difference in sound due to the different wood.

Use chipboard for your speaker cabinet, then the same conditions with solid oak or something, I'm sure I'll be more likely to hear a difference but this is rarely talked about. I may also be wrong about that as BF use the lightest of woods for their cabs which sound great!

[Dave Vader]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1366361618' post='2051385']
A good example, but that's a totally different construction, not just a marginal change in the qualities of the wood. Pop the same pup (quite like that!) on an upright and it will be different again as it has a great big booming box to affect the way the strings vibrate and create natural harmonics. Pop it onto a MM bass with an ash body, then one with an alder body and, well, with all else the same I'd be very surprised if I could hear any difference in sound due to the different wood.

Use chipboard for your speaker cabinet, then the same conditions with solid oak or something, I'm sure I'll be more likely to hear a difference but this is rarely talked about. I may also be wrong about that as BF use the lightest of woods for their cabs which sound great!
[/quote]

Yep, pretty much agreeing, I was just pointing out that there is much more to it than strings and pickups, albeit with a ludicrous example. Ash and alder are just names, bits of wood are bits of wood and all are different, I've swapped necks and bodies that are essentially identical and yet sound completely different after the change.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='Dave Vader' timestamp='1366360329' post='2051364']
Pop a single coil pickup in a solid bodied electric and record the output from the pickup alone, everything on full, then do it again with the pickup in a hollow bodied guitar and do the same. They are different, very different, thus the wood is affecting the amplified sound. reasonable?
[/quote]
[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1366361618' post='2051385']
A good example, but that's a totally different construction, not just a marginal change in the qualities of the wood.
[/quote]

FWIW, last year I whipped the bridge pup out of an alder-bodied rw board Tele and stuck it in an alder-bodied maple board Tele of about the same age. A weeny bit toppier, I thought, and most noticeably so through a clean Princeton at 3. Wind the vol up, the top softened off (?) and Bob's your doo-dah.

All very confusing.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='Dave Vader' timestamp='1366360329' post='2051364']
IME nuts have even less bearing on the sound (particularly amplified) than the wood, since as soon as you fret a note, it is completely out of the equation.
[/quote]

Actually they still contribute something, since there is a component of string motion travelling along the length of the string, the component frequencies are damped, reflected or allowed to pass through the nut, and the properties of the nut determine which. Think its a tensile wave or similar. If you are convinced that fretting eliminates this as an effect, you'll be able to fret a note and cut the string between your finger and nut and not perceive a change in tone.

http://www.edgeguitarservices.co.uk/rout_serv/nut_geom.htm

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1366375992' post='2051741']
FWIW, last year I whipped the bridge pup out of an alder-bodied rw board Tele and stuck it in an alder-bodied maple board Tele of about the same age. A weeny bit toppier, I thought, and most noticeably so through a clean Princeton at 3. Wind the vol up, the top softened off (?) and Bob's your doo-dah.

All very confusing.
[/quote]

Fender's idea of clean is fairly far from. Also turning up the volume can lose top in some circuits because sometimes there is a bright cap that shunts some top around the volume control, which is how most 'bright' switches work, more you wind up the volume, the less significant that bypass becomes.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1366376247' post='2051749']
... turning up the volume can lose top in some circuits because sometimes there is a bright cap that shunts some top around the volume control, which is how most 'bright' switches work, more you wind up the volume, the less significant that bypass becomes.
[/quote]

Case closed.

[Dave Vader]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1366376121' post='2051746']
Actually they still contribute something, since there is a component of string motion travelling along the length of the string, the component frequencies are damped, reflected or allowed to pass through the nut, and the properties of the nut determine which. Think its a tensile wave or similar. If you are convinced that fretting eliminates this as an effect, you'll be able to fret a note and cut the string between your finger and nut and not perceive a change in tone.

[url="http://www.edgeguitarservices.co.uk/rout_serv/nut_geom.htm"]http://www.edgeguita...rv/nut_geom.htm[/url]
[/quote]

That explains why that brass nut guitar I had sounded so marvellous. Cheers Oli.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1366376121' post='2051746']
Actually they still contribute something, since there is a component of string motion travelling along the length of the string, the component frequencies are damped, reflected or allowed to pass through the nut, and the properties of the nut determine which. Think its a tensile wave or similar. If you are convinced that fretting eliminates this as an effect, you'll be able to fret a note and cut the string between your finger and nut and not perceive a change in tone.

[url="http://www.edgeguitarservices.co.uk/rout_serv/nut_geom.htm"]http://www.edgeguita...rv/nut_geom.htm[/url]
[/quote]

That link is fascinating mate, thanks for posting it!

[yann]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1366376121' post='2051746']
Actually they still contribute something, since there is a component of string motion travelling along the length of the string, the component frequencies are damped, reflected or allowed to pass through the nut, and the properties of the nut determine which. Think its a tensile wave or similar. If you are convinced that fretting eliminates this as an effect, you'll be able to fret a note and cut the string between your finger and nut and not perceive a change in tone.

[url="http://www.edgeguitarservices.co.uk/rout_serv/nut_geom.htm"]http://www.edgeguita...rv/nut_geom.htm[/url] [/quote]

Agree too!
This "oposite vibration" allmost becomes a problem on neckthroughs...
some necks have such good transfer that make a "ghost note" hearable when playing around the 12th fret (the one from...the back!).
(some players still don't realise that a lot of "mud" comes therefrom,the noises of playing from a... virtually "dead zone").

[quote name='Dave Vader' timestamp='1366376760' post='2051755']
That explains why that brass nut guitar I had sounded so marvellous. Cheers Oli.[/quote]

I'm a brass nut myself...i use it wherever it suits,but i've seen guitars that didn't like it,they were screaming for their special piece of bone!!
With basses,i've only seen screaming players,eather for brass or for bone!

Edited April 19, 2013 by yann

[4 Strings]

Thought this might be of interest. Its mostly about how Leo Fender played around to get the sounds he was after in his designs.

You'll notice his concerns were about pickup design and positioning, the piece of wood they were mounted on is, well, a piece of wood. If he mounted that little lot on a different piece of wood, do you think Fenders, MM and G&Ls would sound different?

http://youtu.be/o1uba8foudk

Edited April 27, 2013 by 4 Strings

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1367061137' post='2060760']do you think Fenders, MM and G&Ls would sound different?
[/quote]

They don't all sound the same. Plus Fender was an electrical engineer not a luthier. Hence the instruments that need a cloured amp to sound right. Electronics can be replicated much more consistently in mass production, doesn't require ongoing skills.

Edited April 27, 2013 by Mr. Foxen