• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Alder vs. Swamp Ash

I have a 4 string Xotic J bass with a maple fb and a ash body and a 5 string Xotic J with a rosewood fb and alder body. These two basses have the same exact pickups and pre's and the 4 string is overall brighter and the 5 string is always darker more rounded sounding.

Can you explain why they sound so different? and the difference in tone is huge.

Does Xotic uses identical pickups on their 4 and 5 strings? A little unusual...

If everything is indeed the same the difference in sound is because of fretboard wood and overall mass of the neck. Body wood should have little to no effect on how your bass responds.

His playing would, his tone, maybe not. What about Marcus with flats or a short scale EBO -- the difference is only one of degree.

That would sound completely different.

Length of scale and type of string makes a huge impact in tone.
If you build a Marcus Miller bass with everything identical except for the body wood he'll sound exactly like Marcus Miller.
 
Yes, based on my experience with the six ash-bodied and five alder-bodied basses I own. Alder is a bit "warmer" and fuller in the mids. In honor of ulynch, it's true. If you distort the sound beyond recognition, the wood will not make any difference.

I've decided I'm not going to get into religious arguments on TB anymore, so Imma just leave that laying there.

/ can I get an amen?
 
I spend a to of time trying to make this distinction. It can be tricky as the fingerboard wood, neck construction and strings probably have as much or more effect on tone. Having said that though, all I know is that EVERY time I pick up an ASH bodied bass it just puts a smile on my face. It is a tad bit more organic (maybe just a pinch less warm) and the natural scoop let's me add mids back in if I need them. The downside of Alder is sometimes the mids are just a bit thick straight from the gate and you can only dial out so much, I find it easier to dial in the mids on ASH than to dial them out on ALDER (of course a lot depends on body shape and size - this phenomenon is more pronounced on single cuts).
 
I actually quite admire these guys for their ability to only really care about their playing. I sometimes get to hung up on the gear, or my tone to always just appreciate the shear act of playing.

Not tryin' to start a squabble with you here, Roger. But it is exactly this characteristic of many players - even big-name, seasoned professionals - that seems so childlike and narcissistic to me anymore. In the extreme cases, they take no responsibility for anything...so long as they get to continue to play. The lack of any curiosity about what qualities of their favorite instruments makes them so favored, is an illustration of that sense of insularity.

The opposite end of that continuum would be the pure gearhead who knows everything about every bit of gear he owns & uses...but can barely play the instrument at all, much less make beautiful music with it.

I'm coming to the realization that, as bassists, we have a unique vantage point by which to shape and develop the music, as no other instrumentalists do. Transcending the level of chops-based wanking, I'm coming to the realization that we bassists have the potential to be come superior producers and arrangers - and may at least hold our own amongst the ranks of composers as well...

MM
 
R Baer said:
In my experience with these two woods, I find alder to be a bit rounder and more even sounding across the entire frequency range. I'm not surprised to find players that can't tell a difference though. Not every player has an ear trained enough to hear subtle differences in frequencies. That's not a bad thing, it just comes down to experience picking out slight frequency shifts in tone. I've done A/B test with two identical test cabs, with only a slight difference in tuning and a good majority of players can't hear the difference, while it's quite obvious to others. Same thing as one player who can hear the difference between two brands of tubes and another player that can't. And by the way. being able to, or not be able to pick out these difference has zero to do with your abilities as a player. I've met some amazing players who can't tell the different between 50Hz and 80Hz and who quite frankly, couldn't care less.

Yea I have a hard time telling the difference. I have some slight hearing loss at higher frequencies. Unfortunately I was a dumb a$$ in my younger years and did not wear ear protection like I should've at all the concerts I have attended or ones my bands have played in. I had that stupid kid mentality that hey it won't effect me and I would not look cool with ear protection. Now that I am older and wiser, wish I had!!! Infact I bring extra ear plugs with me now to shows to give out!!! I still hear good, just at certain frequencies I have trouble. I don't think it is bad enough to effect my playing enough to matter at this point but down the road it may. :( Wish I could go back in time, talk to myself and pull a Red Foreman (dad on 70s Show) and say "You dumb ass!!" Lol.
 
I'm coming to the realization that, as bassists, we have a unique vantage point by which to shape and develop the music, as no other instrumentalists do. Transcending the level of chops-based wanking, I'm coming to the realization that we bassists have the potential to be come superior producers and arrangers - and may at least hold our own amongst the ranks of composers as well...

MM

Amen Brother!
 
Yea I have a hard time telling the difference. I have some slight hearing loss at higher frequencies. Unfortunately I was a dumb a$$ in my younger years and did not wear ear protection like I should've at all the concerts I have attended or ones my bands have played in. I had that stupid kid mentality that hey it won't effect me and I would not look cool with ear protection. Now that I am older and wiser, wish I had!!! Infact I bring extra ear plugs with me now to shows to give out!!! I still hear good, just at certain frequencies I have trouble. I don't think it is bad enough to effect my playing enough to matter at this point but down the road it may. :( Wish I could go back in time, talk to myself and pull a Red Foreman (dad on 70s Show) and say "You dumb ass!!" Lol.

Right there with ya. But you have to admit, as a dumb kid there was just nothing better than getting together with "the band" and cranking up the amps. Actually, I put most of my hearing loss down to standing next to the cymbals of hard hitting drummers. I always played on the drummer's right and I have much more upper frequency loss in my left ear. Despite it all, my hearing held up pretty well. I don't hear much above 14k or15k, but hey, I'm a bass player and have no use for those frequencies anyway! :smug:
 
Serious answer, I believe it's a Jazz but have no idea which body wood. Guessing alder for the heck of it.

Correct.... and correct.... I think. I actually have no idea about the body wood it's a MIJ. :D I assume it's alder.

Brad the point is to keep the discussion in context. Sure woods may have an impact on tone, but in the wider context of a band performance - how significant is that? Is it actually possible to say - "Gee he should have used a Bubinga bass on that recording and it would have come alive"? Compared to EQ setting, where the string is plucked, pickup height, preamp, string type, whether the mixer decided to butcher your bass tone by goosing the bass to give the recording "sonic separation" (as per the my recording :atoz:)..... etc...

I'm amused by the increasing polarisation of debates these days. Comments like "I can never get a good tone out of an alder bass" just make me think - Jeez man you should practice more. :p

And for the record - I say all that - but am personally particular about alder bodied Fenders.... except my 51RI which I think is ash. :rolleyes:
 

Latest posts