I wouldn't disagree with this, but I legitimately do believe in the scientific process. I understand that I probably came off as stand-offish (which I won't deny), but it was moreso because of the way that the other fellow responded, I simply put forth an assertion based on my understanding of science and he replied by stating that my "theory" wasn't reality because he supposedly did some test (without giving any details about the test) that proved that wood makes a difference. It doesn't help that he, *as well as you (EDIT: I realized afterwards that you mentioned nothing about my opinion, my apologies) addressed me as if I believed that wood doesn't matter (which if you read my initial post, isn't the case.)
So I guess I'm sorry if it seems that I am close-minded, but really I am not, I am just an ******* who won't budge based on "You're wrong because I know I am right." In all actuality I would love to see whatever tests the fellow performed, and would gladly agree if the science dictated that tonewoods affect the electric tone of a guitar.
Tuhnedr - first of all, my apologies. I'm sure I came off as twice the ********* as you did! I get overly defensive on this topic because I've had multiple discussions on it over the years and there's always a select few that flat out tell me I didn't experience what I experienced, in essence calling me out on a public forum as a liar or some hallucinating punk kid.
Fact is I'm a retired engineer and very inclined to want proof before just blindly believing something. Largely because of the sound logic and lack of scientific proof constantly echoed here on TB, I was a complete skeptic of wood impacting tone on a solid body bass. That all changed when I built my first bass and has been reinforced on several builds since then.
So in a not so short story, here's the experience I personally had that changed my mind...
Got tired of carrying two basses to a gig (p bass and Stingray) to cover the types of music I was playing back in 2007. Decided to build my own Warmoth creation that had both a p bass and stingray pickup and preamps in it. They had a good cheap unfinished black limba (been told that's basically African mahogany) body with a stingray route already in it and rear routed for an active preamp. Note: someone who believes in tone wood would never spec a mahogany body for either a p bass or a stingray.
Bought the unfinished body but couldn't decide if I wanted to finish it in gloss black or aged white. So I bought two necks to the exact same spec with the exception of one being maple/maple (which would look hot with the black body) and one rosewood/rosewood (which would look hot with the white body). Note: a solid rosewood neck would be the last thing a tone wood believer would spec for a p bass or a stingray. As a side note, I was also very concerned the weight of the rosewood neck would make the bass a real neck diver.
So at this point I think we've established that I clearly was NOT considering any impact the different woods could have on the tone of a solid body bass. I bought what I bought because of how I wanted it to look in the end. After all, the pickups, preamps and strings where going to get me the sound I wanted, not the wood.
The maple neck came in the mail first so I installed it on the bass and over the next couple of days completed the build, with the exception of the body paint, which because of costs (the warmoth method isn't cheap) I had planned on having done a month or two after the initial build. With the now substantially completed and playable (but unpainted) bass I set all the tone knobs to their center detents, switched both pickups on and turned both volume knobs halfway up. Recorded each of the five strings open and let them ring out for a few seconds, then did the same thing at the 12th fret. After that I recorded a simple walking bass line. Everything sounded fantastic, nice and punchy, crisp top end, good bottom end, well defined mids. I was a little bummed that when I soloed the stingray pickup it didn't sound exactly like my preEB stingray but it did have the same general flavor and I figured I could probably EQ it at the amp if really needed. I attributed the difference to the Bartolini Stingray pickup and placement along with the custom John East MM preamp. Similar results for the p bass pickup soloed - not an exact match but still really sweet sounding (again, at the time differences were attributed to the Bart p bass pickup and custom East P Bass preamp).
Went on a business trip for a few weeks and when I got back the rosewood neck was there waiting for me. First thing I noticed was it wasn't as heavy as I thought it was going to be, in fact there was less than an ounce difference between the two necks. So that was a relief on the neck dive issue since the current set up with the maple neck wasn't divey at all. Thought, what the heck, lets give the rosewood neck a spin. So I removed the maple neck and all its hardware and strings and installed them on the rosewood neck and then set up the bass to the exact same specs (3/32 clearance at the 12th fret and 1/4 inch clearance between the pickups and strings). Played each note open, at the 12th and a the same walking bass line recorded to the same cd as before. It also sounded fantastic but different than my other p basses or stingray. Keep in mind I hadn't played the maple neck for a few weeks while I was on my business trip, so I didn't immediately spot any difference in tone between the two necks - they both sounded fantastic.
It wasn't until I played the recording back that I actually heard the two basses back to back. The difference was night and day! The maple neck had more definition, crisper highs and slightly more high mid focused. The rosewood neck had much deeper lows, was more low mid focused and had a smooth top end. My first thought was crap, I must have mucked up my strings when I changed necks ($120 gold optima 5 string set). So being the engineer that I am, I thought *** lets put the maple neck back on and record it again to see if the removal and reinstall of the strings messed them up somehow.
So, maple neck back on, same set of strings now moved back to the maple neck, all set up and ready to record. Recorded the same routine (open, 12th and walking bass line) on the same CD. Because it had only been a couple of hours between playing the different necks I could clearly hear the difference. However, as an engineer who designed triangular testing of consumer products for years I was also very aware of how biased opinions and psychoacoustics can come into pay. Again, at this time I still hadn't attributed the difference to the different woods. I just wasn't sure what was going on because now it appeared that my assumption about the strings being mucked up wasn't the case.
So I played the recording back to my wife. As a little background, my wife is pretty much tone deaf when it comes to bass notes. She rarely can pick the bass line out in a mix and frequently confuses it with the kick drum. Not exactly what I'd call a bass expert. I asked her to tell me which two tracks sounded the same and which one sounded different. She was able to pick them out correctly the first time and correctly indicated that the first and third recordings sounded brighter and crisper and the one in the middle sounded deeper and darker (I didn't give her those descriptions she came up with them). So I thought, interesting - she's hearing the same thing I'm hearing but its really only one data point and not an expert at that, besides she knew two of the three matched and i might have influenced her unknowingly in the single blind test, I needed better data to confirm my ears weren't playing tricks on me.
I passed the recording on to one of the guys at work and told him I was interested in finding out if any one could tell me if there was any difference in the recording from track to track. He passed it around the office for a few days and got back to me. Of the dozen or so people there were only one or two that didn't pick out the correct responses and all of those who did cited similar reasons - #1 was brighter than #2 which was darker or deeper than #3. A large percentage of the people that got it correct also questioned or stated that they thought #1 and #3 might even be the same recording but weren't completely positive. Only a couple of people admitted that they had to guess and one of those was one that got it wrong. Overall, this was an adequate double blind test and put my curiosity to rest.
It was at that point that I came to the realization that the two necks sounded different. It wasn't the strings, or the pickups or my ears or some suggestion I planted with the listeners. It was the necks. So how identical were the necks? Both weighed virtually the same, both had the same size and type of frets, both had the same brand of nut and were grooved by the same luthier for the set up I wanted, both had the same type of truss and stiffening rods, both were manufactured by the same company within days of each other, both shared the exact same tuners, both shared the exact same strings, both shared the exact same neck plate and screws, both fit in the neck pocket equally tight, and both were set up to the exact same specs. The only notable difference was the wood.
The logical conclusion - these different neck woods did impact the tone of a my bass. That cannot be refuted. A logical assumption based on this particular anecdotal experience is that different woods can impact the tone of a solid body bass.
And now you have roughly the same data set I have. Of course someone will want to hear the recording for themselves, good luck, it was recorded over years ago. Someone else will want to personally interview the participants, good luck, I don't share personal names on public forums on the Internet. Someone else will want to see a formal full blown scientific experiment outlined and corroborated with other results from identical tests, good luck, I wasn't on a quest to prove wood matters so I didn't design an experiment. Bottom line is, this is concrete anecdotal evidence that points to a relationship between woods and tone. It meets my needs, if it doesn't meet yours then design your own experiment and before you actually carry it out be sure to run it past the pseudo scientific community here at TB. You'll get lots of suggestions and virtually no consensus.
Wood matters to me, it may not to anyone else and that's ok. But no one can tell me I didn't experience what I did or my conclusion is wrong unless they have a very clear explanation of what happened in my case.
