Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Body TONEWOOD - Myth or Fact?
- Thread starter bitwo
- Start date
Doesn't really matter to me why they sound different. I'm only interested in whether I like the sound or not. I've tried several new copies of the same model and they sound different. My most recent example is my search for a new Mustang P/J bass. I auditioned several, some at the same time in direct A/B comparison and they sound different. An instrument is the sum of its parts and all of those parts and their adjustment will effect the tone.
I've heard that if you beat a dead horse with tonewood, the horse will come back to life
The part about the tonewood discussion I am not willing to accept without evidence is the notion that different species of wood have a predictable, discernible, impact on tone. Of course "everything matters", in theory. In theory, the shape of the side view mirrors on a car "matter" to its' acceleration....but in the real world, not in any significant way. 2 different pieces of the same wood type can have dramatically different densities and resonate differently, so the notion that one wood species has "stronger mids" and another "muted lows" is a fantasy. Every bass sounds different. Trying to ascribe certain tonal characteristics to ash and others to alder or any other wood species is just a pile of the emperor's new clothes....but it's great marketing....just like so many other irrational beliefs held by Homo Sapiens. In order for me to become a believer, I'd have to see someone BLINDLY listen to the same recorded riff played through a dozen or so basses, half made of one body wood and half of another (all other parameters kept as close to the same as possible) and discern which clip was recorded with which wood.....with sufficient success to exclude chance. Anything else is faith, which is simply belief without evidence. Happy Tuesday.....another revolution of our crazy, collective flying rock 
Last edited:
Hey, the DA Bass is a GREAT instrument. Pretty much P Bass on steroids. The link you posted is sadly a fairly uninformed thread. If a player likes that big whomping John Wetton P tone, the DA delivers.
That said, the context of your post is somewhat missing the point of this thread. Like all bass guitars of dis-similar construction, the DA Bass does have it's own particular thing going on. You would know that if you gigged one. Plexiglass (dense) body with a wood neck. The neck is actually a big part of how an instrument responds; and variations between different necks are readily noticeable to an experienced player. Due to the variances between different maple necks, there is a bit of variation from one DA to the next. Unlike the Steinberger discussed earlier.
Just to be clear, "tone" includes more than just what goes to tape. Playing a bass guitar is an interaction between the player and the bass. Simply put, different basses feel different; and that "feel" is part of what the player refers to as "tone." That's why there is no way to perform "blind testing;" at least regarding the way an experienced player interacts with a bass while playing.
Each to their own. Many folks think that all red wines taste the same; and that discriminating a Willamette Valley Pinot Noir from a Santa Barbara Pinot Noir is for morons. All I can say to that is if your mind is made up that you can't tell the difference, then I can't help you.
My wife thinks all basses sound the same, and can't understand why I "need" a few of them. Except my Alembic. She agrees that one is different.
The part of this discussion, which is the most unfortunate, is folks for whom the discrimination between different basses is unimportant telling other players who do care about the construction of their instruments that they are essentially foolish. To me, that disrespect for other opinions over-rides the topic at hand and prevents any kind of meaningful exchange of ideas. Possibly too much to ask; but, we should all try to be kind about this topic. My $0.019.
I would have prefered a comparison with the Fender bolt-on neck system, but yes it more or less confirms the pretty insignificance of tonewood in the actual sound result. I remember a comparison not of tonewoods but recordings of different Gibson guitars (archtops and les pauls) playing jazz, some very affordable, some super expansive, and the tone difference in the recordings was extremely marginal. And blindfolded I don't thing anyone could have picked up the most expansive guitar.
I was going to say that. Danelectros are weird from stem to stern, I dare say a person could put normal pickups in one at familiar harmonic points along the scale length and have one that sounded like just about anything they wanted it to.Are Danos, a brand well known for having very different PICKUPS than most guitars and basses, really a good basis for this argument?
the "tonewood debate" is worth having again (and again, and again), IMO.* i think it's already been established that:
- the wood parts make a measurable difference(s).
- that measurable difference(s) doesn't mean much.
- great looking wood parts are the bomb.
- if you have great looking wood ( ) then you are more likely to hear differences.
- cool EBs are better than uncool EBs: no matter the materials!
i've posted this link before, but here it is again --- the best metal for tonewood:
* some of you cats don't recognize entertainment when you see/read it! this is TB and you love it!
- the wood parts make a measurable difference(s).
- that measurable difference(s) doesn't mean much.
- great looking wood parts are the bomb.
- if you have great looking wood (
) then you are more likely to hear differences.- cool EBs are better than uncool EBs: no matter the materials!
i've posted this link before, but here it is again --- the best metal for tonewood:
* some of you cats don't recognize entertainment when you see/read it! this is TB and you love it!
+1, agree with many of your points. Wood is a VERY complicated material with substantial structural, and hence property, variation even among pieces coming from the same tree. Building musical instruments from wood is a non-trivial combination of art and engineering. "Predictability" is poor.The part about the tonewood discussion I am not willing to accept without evidence is the notion that different species of wood have a predictable, discernible, impact on tone. Of course "everything matters", in theory. In theory, the shape of the side view mirrors on a car "matter" to its' acceleration....but in the real world, not in any significant way. 2 different pieces of the same wood type can have dramatically different densities and resonate differently, so the notion that one wood species has "stronger mids" and another "muted lows" is a fantasy. Every bass sounds different. Trying to ascribe certain tonal characteristics to ash and others to alder or any other wood species is just a pile of the emperor's new clothes....but it's great marketing....just like so many other irrational beliefs held by Homo Sapiens. In order for me to become a believer, I'd have to see someone BLINDLY listen to the same recorded riff played through a dozen or so basses, half made of one body wood and half of another (all other parameters kept as close to the same as possible) and discern which clip was recorded with which wood.....with sufficient success to exclude chance. Anything else is faith, which is simply belief without evidence. Happy Tuesday.....another revolution of our crazy, collective flying rock
Still, there are some general guidelines. Heavy Northern Ash bodies TEND to produce one kind of response. Roasting a maple neck TENDS to produce a certain kind of response. That kind of thing.
And, as you said, we are basically playing away our time as the rock spins.
We agree on this ^^^. As far as your wine analogy goes, there's an enormous difference: many people can make the distinction between grape varietals blindly and reliably/ demonstrably. It is objectively proven that pinot noir tastes different from cab sauvignon in a way people can distinguish...this is simply not so with tonewoods. If I am mistaken, I am open to seeing the evidence. If I can't tell the difference but others can, then I want to see it done, blindly. Further, as far as your statement that tone isn't just sound and therefore cannot possibly be tested blindly, I must respectfully disagree. When most people talk about "tone", I'm confident they are referring to sound, and only sound. It could be tested blindly and objectively, but as in the hifi audio world, that would risk shattering illusions, and for most, that's just not fun.
I have built a bass entirely of cocobolo, neck, and body. In my experience with Cocobolo, a billet tapped with a small tapping hammer will ring like a bell; the maple not so much so. Based on this, one would expect the Cocobolo to be brighter and more lively, but it sounds more or less like any other P bass, albeit a little more sustain perhaps.
The pickup and strings are the dominating factors in solid body electric instrument timbre.Myth or Fact? As a civil engineer who spent a lot of time in testing labs, I can tell you that pretty much everything effects anything that you're testing. So, yeah, "tonewood" is more of a fact than a myth. The real question should be "how much effect does it have?" And, personally, my answer is - I don't know; mainly because I don't care. But, I suspect the answer is - on a solid body bass or guitar? Not a whole Hell of a lot... I have 23 basses and 7 guitars (plus a banjo and a mandolin); they're made out of most of the different "tonewoods" that basses and guitars are made out of. And, some of them are made out of stuff that they usually aren't made out of. Do they all sound different? Yes, they do; but not all that different. My Ricks sound like Ricks. My Gibson T-Bird sounds like a T-Bird. My Danelectro Longhorn sounds like (you guessed it) a Longhorn. They all sound like what they are. Which is why I have them. If you want to splash around in the Great Tonewood Swamp, be my guest; in fact, splash around for me some, too. I have better things to do - like playing my basses and guitars...
On that latter point at least, we disagree. As a player, my perception of tone very definitely includes the way the instrument responds in my hands; in complex ways which are very much part of the sound I ultimately get out of the amp. If that isn't the case for you, then vive la difference.
BTW, stating that "many people" can distinguish between varietal wines obviously does not mean that ALL people have that same distinction. Some do, some don't. So what? It's all good. Why does the "Tonewood doesn't matter" tribe NEED to shove it down the throats of players holding the opposite view that they are foolish believers in Psychic Vortices?
Were it true that the materials of construction of the bass guitar didn't matter, then some of our most experienced luthiers would be cast in the light of snake oil salesmen. Rick Turner, Roger Sadowsky, Mike Tobias etc etc. Really?
Why can't we just all agree that the construction of the bass matters more to some than others? And, leave it at that.
Not only that, but y'all see the pickups and electronics sub-forum? Swapping pickups can make drastic changes to the timbre of the instrument. However, we don't see any sub-forums where guys are using the same pickups and changing out the wood they are installed into, in an experimental manner. My guess is that the wood is a subtle, inconsequential parameter in the big picture, despite what the boutique bass marketeers would have you believe.
Each time I see those subjects (tonewood, cable myth, tune vs solidstate, gibson hate/praise...), I have to fight not to post my point of view, knowing this is a trap...it is maple hard not to
