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.
Can You Tell The Difference??? ASH vs. ALDER
- Thread starter -=DanAtkinson=-
- Start date
I could tell a difference both times, but it was so subtle I couldn't begin to describe what the difference was. They all sounded good 
I don't really have a good "ear" but I really tried to listen. The "A" versions sounded a little bit deeper (I don't know what wood that would mean) but I voted I couldn't hear a difference...
For me, I may have just been trying to find a difference and not actually hearing one. Honestly though... It really sounded pretty much the same to me.
For me, I may have just been trying to find a difference and not actually hearing one. Honestly though... It really sounded pretty much the same to me.
Let me preface this by saying this is a friendly debate, and nothing but love for all my Talkbass brothers! Weather we agree or disagree, we're just talking bass!
Also before I let this fly, let it be known that I am in the wood matters department!
So with that all up front................................
What's to stop you from recording the tracks all with the same bass so you can listen to the wood supporters, guess and pick which wood is which, while you prove their inability to identify the wood and get one big laugh out of it?
Furthermore did you record these with a DI? Did you use an amp and a mic? What about your mixer, EQ, mic pre, etc. All of thes factors are going to shape the tones similarly perhaps negating some of the difference.
Also, I've said in the past that wood definately matters and effects the tone, BUT I NEVER STATED THAT I COULD DO A BLIND "PEPSI CHALLENGE" AND NAME THAT WOOD, That's rediculous.
Also before I let this fly, let it be known that I am in the wood matters department!
So with that all up front................................
What's to stop you from recording the tracks all with the same bass so you can listen to the wood supporters, guess and pick which wood is which, while you prove their inability to identify the wood and get one big laugh out of it?
Furthermore did you record these with a DI? Did you use an amp and a mic? What about your mixer, EQ, mic pre, etc. All of thes factors are going to shape the tones similarly perhaps negating some of the difference.
Also, I've said in the past that wood definately matters and effects the tone, BUT I NEVER STATED THAT I COULD DO A BLIND "PEPSI CHALLENGE" AND NAME THAT WOOD, That's rediculous.
At first i could hear no diff, but after several listens I think I got it. Or I convinced myself at least.
Don't know which is which but this is how I perceived the subtle differences
The A's sounded a little edgier to me, more bite.
The B's sounded a little thicker and smoother.
I think i'd choose A for my body wood.
Please don't tell me they're completely random and not a=a and b=b.
That'd be cruel
Don't know which is which but this is how I perceived the subtle differences
The A's sounded a little edgier to me, more bite.
The B's sounded a little thicker and smoother.
I think i'd choose A for my body wood.
Please don't tell me they're completely random and not a=a and b=b.
That'd be cruel
Absolutely nothing.
Fair question. Please understand that I do a good amount of mixing on the side, so I know how to get a clean recording (if you couldn't tell by the clips). My signal flow is: Bass --> FMR RNP Preamp --> Delta 44 Audio Interface --> Cubase 5. I applied gentle compression (about 3db max on the loudest peaks, with a 3:1 ratio) using the Waves SSL 4000 plugin.
Essentially I'm recreating a very, very typical signal flow that would be used for studio tracking.
Well, I voted with the majority, but the difference between 2A and 2B was difficult to discern. I'm pretty sure about 1A and 1B (ash and alder), though.
This is funny. I heard A as being more scooped (deeper lows, snappier highs), but other people thought B was more scooped. If we can't even agree on that...
The difference was there, but fairly subtle. Much less than the difference of changing the angle at which your fingers contact the strings. Perceptible but probably inconsequential.
My vote: 1-A and 2-A are Ash, 1-B and 2-B are Alder.
And I liked the clean quality of the recordings. I wish everybody could demo their basses with recordings this nice sounding!
The difference was there, but fairly subtle. Much less than the difference of changing the angle at which your fingers contact the strings. Perceptible but probably inconsequential.
My vote: 1-A and 2-A are Ash, 1-B and 2-B are Alder.
And I liked the clean quality of the recordings. I wish everybody could demo their basses with recordings this nice sounding!
If you put these clips on a scope you'll see the differences in the frequency plots. That says to me wood makes a difference.
How consistent the differences between wood types, how large the tonal differences, how much a different neck or fretboard wood in combination with the body wood would intensify or negate the differences, etc. are all important practical considerations, and are beyond my knowledge or caring, but they are considerations worth a luthier's pondering, IMO.
I believe all the parameters the OP mentioned affect the final tone of an instrument, but the design of the instrument and the way it is built will determine to what degree each contributes to the final tone of said instrument. On some basses a bridge swap will radically change the tone, on others very slightly. Multiply this effect by each component, and then factor in how much each component's effect is magnified or nullified by the other parameters, and you end up with your final tone. Think cumulatively rather than any one component being the big game changer, IMO.
Personally I stay away from generalizing because I don't trust my ears enough and I haven't enough experience to make rules from my auditions, but to argue that wood has no discernible effect at all on the tone of a bass is silly, IMO.
Personally, I think the neck and fretboard woods affect overall tone more than body wood does, but again each individual piece of wood's density and it's other physical characteristics are what count, and are not necessarily categorized so easily by, say, wood type.
BTW, I voted with the crowd, but before looking at the other posts. I've been way wrong before in these tests, but the fact that there is a difference, whatever that difference is, is consistent with my posted opinion.
How consistent the differences between wood types, how large the tonal differences, how much a different neck or fretboard wood in combination with the body wood would intensify or negate the differences, etc. are all important practical considerations, and are beyond my knowledge or caring, but they are considerations worth a luthier's pondering, IMO.
I believe all the parameters the OP mentioned affect the final tone of an instrument, but the design of the instrument and the way it is built will determine to what degree each contributes to the final tone of said instrument. On some basses a bridge swap will radically change the tone, on others very slightly. Multiply this effect by each component, and then factor in how much each component's effect is magnified or nullified by the other parameters, and you end up with your final tone. Think cumulatively rather than any one component being the big game changer, IMO.
Personally I stay away from generalizing because I don't trust my ears enough and I haven't enough experience to make rules from my auditions, but to argue that wood has no discernible effect at all on the tone of a bass is silly, IMO.
Personally, I think the neck and fretboard woods affect overall tone more than body wood does, but again each individual piece of wood's density and it's other physical characteristics are what count, and are not necessarily categorized so easily by, say, wood type.
BTW, I voted with the crowd, but before looking at the other posts. I've been way wrong before in these tests, but the fact that there is a difference, whatever that difference is, is consistent with my posted opinion.
On this I would say that A is ash and B is alder. It is an incredibly subtle difference though.
I think I can hear a difference but it's so insignificant that it wouldn't affect my choice if I were to buy one of those basses. I'd just choose the one that is lighter and/or better looking.
I think if anything this shows that there is obviously a difference in sound.... just some percieve it better that others
I could hear a difference between the 1A and 1B clips, too. But not really much to choose between the 2A and 2B Lemon Song clips. So, I voted the 3rd option in the poll. I only listened to each clip once and went with my initial impressions.
Whatever the answers are, I think Dan's made his point here and there's some interesting things to be learned from this thread, as well as some interesting questions posed.
The first thing to be learned is that in this particular case (with these two particular bodies), the differences are pretty subtle to me. Other people may claim to hear more of a difference than I do.
Some of the interesting questions:
1) If the number of different bodies were used and the experiment repeated, would there be any cases where the audible difference was way, way more pronounced than is the case with these?
2) If several instances were found where there were really obvious and unquestionable differences, would these be directly related to the species of tree from which the wood was taken? Or would the differences between different samples of, say, ash in some cases be just as obvious as differences between two different species?
