Tonewoods

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='CHRISDABASS' timestamp='1401514232' post='2464345']

The difference is very noticable before you even plug them in. For me this shows the affect that different woods have.

[/quote]
I would not be at all surprised to find that two different pieces of wood (all other things being equal) might sound somehow different [b][i]especially before you even plug them in[/i][/b]. That's exactly when they would likely sound most different. For me, this shows the very minimal effect (if any) that different woods have.

But even if there were such a difference, you can NOT extrapolate from that to either of:

1: This species of wood always sounds like X; it is a 'tonewood'.

2: The difference will be anything other than a very minor factor in the amplified sound.

[Pasco Jacorius]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1383349213' post='2263602']
Yes, interesting way of looking at it, and, I'm sure, a good one.

However, comparing to the voice, the wood of a guitar is rather like the flesh that holds the vocal chords. Not recognisable on its own, but then neither are the strings (or vocal chords) recognisable on their own. The whole voice, the sum of these and other parts, is though, as you say. Rather like recognising a Telecaster, or a Precision down the telephone or in a stadium. Perhaps not just the wood.
[/quote]

An ovangkol neck/bubinga strat won't sound like a fender ash or alder/maple/rosewood strat. Concerning the Pbass , any pickup place in this position will sound just like/ or almost like a pbass anyway when you add a pickup closer to the bridge (contact point of vibration between body and string) then you hear the difference. The voice doesn't depend on the flesh , just as the tonewoods aren't the flesh but the vocal signature of the instrument. And there is an exchange between strings and wood as they vibrate , for the body dictates how the strings will vibrate, and the strings make the body vibrate too (stiffer bass, heavier bass , more "perceived" tension..). Of course it's not just a matter of wood species.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Pasco Jacorius

[4 Strings]

Use plywood, much stiffer and lighter, what could be better?

[BigRedX]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1404221326' post='2490442']
Use plywood, much stiffer and lighter, what could be better?
[/quote]

Works for Jens Ritter:

[IMG]http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n249/BigRedX/0457-4.jpg[/IMG]

[4 Strings]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1404222459' post='2490449']
Works for Jens Ritter:


[/quote]

hmm, certainly makes a point!

[Beer of the Bass]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1404221326' post='2490442']
Use plywood, much stiffer and lighter, what could be better?
[/quote]

Plywood bodied instruments can sound good if the pickups and setup are up to scratch, I've observed this myself. Even if you consider that body material can make some difference to the sound of an instrument, it doesn't necessarily follow that cheap material = bad sound. I'd say that ordinary plywood is still an inferior body material for other practical reasons though. The lamination lines often show through a solid finish after a few years and they're prone to cracking around bolt-on neck pockets due to the short grain in this area. A higher grade laminated wood might fare a little better, like the Ritter above.

Edited July 2, 2014 by Beer of the Bass

[kurosawa]

Had to sell everything to feed the kids during this divorce. Just picked up a used $80 Peavey Milestone II, 8 lb, 2.8 oz (alder body, maple neck, rosewood fretboard) . It's better than most, but still not as loud as I'd like. Loudness seems to indicate wide dynamic range, so I think loudness tops my list of desiderata.

[4 Strings]

[quote name='kurosawa' timestamp='1404297216' post='2491206']
Had to sell everything to feed the kids during this divorce. Just picked up a used $80 Peavey Milestone II, 8 lb, 2.8 oz (alder body, maple neck, rosewood fretboard) . It's better than most, but still not as loud as I'd like. Loudness seems to indicate wide dynamic range, so I think loudness tops my list of desiderata.
[/quote]

If you mean the unplugged loudness, I would say the opposite. It's the body resonating to the strings you can hear. The resonance absorbs the string vibration, i.e. one big dead spot. The perfect bass may be a granite cliff, no sympathetic vibration of the body, very quiet acoustic sound, long sustain, no dead spots.

[kurosawa]

Nah. I don't mean deadness, I mean loudness. I sat in the car when I got home from work today mesmerized by what Jamerson did in "Reach Out," "Standing in the Shadows of Love," and "Bernadette." I was searching for the bass drum's pitch, then when I found it, I was able to appreciate that Jamerson ALONE was exceeding it in whack. He was LOUD, He was a string bass player. You will hear him and wonder how a bass drum could keep up because it sounds like they're hitting at the same time, then it dawns on you that it's the bass alone spitting out those hard-hitting sixteenths.

[4 Strings]

Jamerson gets his punch and effective 'loudness' from string dampening. No dampening lets the notes ring, everyone tells you to turn down. Dampen with your palm (or sponge if you're Jamerson) and you can give an enormous punch but it's not perceived as loud.

Great for definition.

I too am a big fan of his, studied him for a Motown tribute band, changed my playing for life.

[Pasco Jacorius]

Plywood can sound good. I think that longhorns were made out of it no ?

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='henry norton' timestamp='1263919438' post='718041']
Hah! Probably not but he did use 'cheapo, inferior' wood to make some of his instruments. Most people think of violin family instruments being made of highly figured sycamore, yet quite allot of makers back then - Strad included - used other, cheaper woods like poplar. You don't hear Stradivarius owners complaining about the quality of their tonewoods....
[/quote]

Post necrophilia alert!

Having just bought a bass with a figured (seems to be curly) sycamore top, I am curious as to why it isn't used more. As said in other posts, it grows like a weed all over Europe. It certainly looks very nice.

[Bolo]

Sycamore is the name of the tree, maple the name of the wood maybe? Same plant it seems.

[Roland Rock]

Same genus (Acer) but different species.
From my experience, maple is easier to work with being a bit less brittle and more consistent.
The one time I worked with seasoned sycamore, it was quite knotty and a bit more difficult to get clean cuts.

[4 Strings]

Build diary here, one piece flame maple neck and solid British sycamore body.

http://basschat.co.uk/topic/209972-ruach-utility-bass/

Sycamore is, apparently, of the maple family and has been uncommon use for classical instruments for many years. Heath, at Ruach, is an enthusiast for it's use in bass bodies.

As rubbish for syrup as it is good for little helicopters.

[Gaslion]

IMHO As builder i tap every piece of wood before buying( tuning fork is really useful too!) you have to spend some time listening the different resonance between each blank. The best sounding is the one i take to my workshop. Pickups are a big part of the instrument but not the most important.

[4 Strings]

[quote name='Gaslion' timestamp='1412983846' post='2573972']
IMHO As builder i tap every piece of wood before buying( tuning fork is really useful too!) you have to spend some time listening the different resonance between each blank. The best sounding is the one i take to my workshop. Pickups are a big part of the instrument but not the most important.
[/quote]

Then why to these spoof Teles, with bodies of concrete, plastic, steel etc sound like Teles?

[vailbass]

I think the wood and design makes the most difference; I base this on my experience with playing row after row of 'identical' basses at several manufacturers and noting the huge differences between them. For example, I played 20 or so identical American Standard Precision basses, all alder body, maple neck, rosewood 'board, passive p/u. Huge differences between them. Conclusion, it's not simply the kind of wood, but the actual piece of that kind of wood that makes the most difference to the sound.Pickups will vary by ruining the sound to different degrees. Much of the 'high- end' stuff get's too bright and sometimes harsh results. I have a cheap Squire Jaguar bass with the stock junk passive pickup that sounds full, clear, loud and bright...how did that happen? Got lucky with the wood is my conclusion. Now the question is, can you predict how the end result will sound when choosing a particular slab of wood? hmmmmm.......dunno....

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='Gaslion' timestamp='1412983846' post='2573972']
... The best sounding is the one i take to my workshop ...
[/quote]
... and what is your test for best sounding?

Edited December 24, 2014 by EssentialTension

[kurosawa]

Just got a MIK Peavey Milestone II and I put an old set of JF344 and an original EMG P on it. Even though it's alder-maple-rosewood, it sounds woodier than other Ps have that I've set up similarly, drier, not the liquid syrup that's so familiar. Very different, and I like it a lot. That's the maddening and magical thing about wood. Every piece sounds different. But as 4 Strings says, some arrangements of pickups and build specs have persistent identities. That's the stronger characteristic. The rest is gravy, and likely few but we notice, but it does inspire our playing, so it has definite value.

Edited December 24, 2014 by kurosawa

[SingleMalt]

All scientific thinking and evidence (sadly there have not been many studies into this exact topic) show that the 'tonewood' makes no difference to the sound of an electromagnetically signalled instrument significantly enough for a human to even come close to being able to tell. 99.99999% of the sound comes from the initial vibration of the string being converted, and while the vibration of the strings will be transferred into the body and thus some transferred back into the strings that doesn't account for much of the signal.

There is so much unscientific anecdotal evidence from some horrifically bias sources flying around it hurts. Of course a Luther (Whose job is to sell instruments made out of expensive tonewoods) is going to say that it makes a huuuuuge difference.

People always say that their alder P sounds different to their ash P, neglecting that the fact that pick-up winding are never exactly the same (usually a +-10% tolerance), that pots have something like +-20% tolerance and the same sort of tolerance differences are true for the other components as well. More than enough to cause significant tonal differences, which explains why people here a difference between their alder strat and their mahogany strat. If these companies that promote their tonewood so religiously really believed that it was that important they would take steps to get electrical components with much tighter tolerances.

People hear what they want to hear.

[url="http://www.stormriders.com/guitar/telecaster/guitar_wood.pdf"]http://www.stormride...guitar_wood.pdf[/url]

[url="http://www.latrobe.edu.au/synergy/synergy-news-articles/$10k-or-$300-guitar-it-sounds-the-same"]http://www.latrobe.e...sounds-the-same[/url]

[b][url="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking"]https://en.wikipedia...agical_thinking[/url][/b]

[b][url="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo"]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo[/url][/b]

[b][url="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias"]https://en.wikipedia...nfirmation_bias[/url][/b]

Edited February 10, 2015 by SingleMalt

[BassBus]

The only problem with scientific studies is their objectivity. Wood is a natural substance and as such you cannot apply scientific formulas to it. People try, as in many studies, but they never take into account the subjectivity of the human ear/experience. The FACT is that many people who actually build and play the instruments hear a big difference. Science never explains that.

This subject was closed for me when I watched the video below. Roger Sadowsky and Michael Tobias are world renowned builders who have built many thousands of instruments between them. No science can ever say they are wrong. Scroll to 41.00 minutes for the discussion on wood. The whole video is very interesting too.

http://youtu.be/QzDxC98VNx8

[chris_b]

Of course. Those guys say that first and foremost a bass in an acoustic instrument. If it sounds good acoustically then it'll sound better amplified. Alex Clabber posted a few weeks ago explaining why. I'd take the opinion of these guys against the opinion of any "week-end warrior" on Basschat any day.

With little knowledge, it seems, comes great certainty. Prepare to get shouted down.

[BigRedX]

But to a certain extent these people have a vested interest in telling us that wood makes a difference. And it probably does. However I don't think that anyone can categorically state that a particular type of wood will produce a particular type of sound for every given example.

And for every luthier that claims to be able to tell how a particular wood will make an instrument sound there are just as many equally respected ones who say that wile they can make certain predictions, until the instrument is completed they will have no way of knowing for sure.

[chris_b]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1425296800' post='2705863']
....I don't think that anyone can categorically state that a particular type of wood will produce a particular type of sound for every given example....
[/quote]

Has anyone ever said that? Not me, and I've never heard anyone in the bass making business claim that.

There might be people out there spinning a line, but they're not respected builders of basses.

Pieces of maple will have a similarity of sound, as will alder, as will mahogany and Brazilian rosewood and there will be variations within that signature sound, but a piece of maple will never sound like Brazilian rosewood. Most good luthiers will be hand picking and buying the better pieces of wood so these tones will be more consistent and fit the tone profile better. That will allow them to predict with a degree of certainty the overall sound of the instrument. The finished bass will have its own voice, but to a good maker that won't come as a surprise. There is a wide variety in design choices. Some choose the wood for the tone, Mike Tobias is one, and some like Alembic try to make neutral sounding basses so their sound is generated by their pickups.

Large volume manufacturers will just order wood in bulk, sight unseen and use every piece which is why their instruments can be so variable in weight, tone and sustain and can suffer from dead spots and lack luster tone. These basses are very likely to need to get their sound from the pickups because they're not going to get much of it from the wood.

That's fine because high volume manufacturers are selling to players who aren't interested in the smaller details of tone. But the differences are certainly there whether the general public can hear them or not, as with the differences between plonk and fine wine, Datsuns and Aston Martins, Cafe Creme and Havana cigars.... the list is endless.