Wow - over 1600 views of this thread and only 60 responses and 66 votes. You could put an interpretation on that, perhaps. 
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
Dan, this is a great thread, but I think that it would probably be more meaningful if you set it up as an ABX type test. Record three clips, A, B and X. X can be either A or B. Then let people decide whether A = X or B = X. That way, what you're testing is not whether people can tell which one is ash and which one is alder, but rather, whether they can tell the difference between the two.
In terms of the original question(Ash vs. Alder), ash can really vary in mass/weight. Alder seems more consistent but still can fluctuate. I don't think it's all that easy to make a blanket statement regarding ash vs. alder.
I firmly believe that different technical styles amongst players accentuate, or mask-out tonal differences between wood types to a large degree, especially when it comes to the old fretboard debate(rosewood vs. maple).
I firmly believe that different technical styles amongst players accentuate, or mask-out tonal differences between wood types to a large degree, especially when it comes to the old fretboard debate(rosewood vs. maple).
Tonal differences between woods in bodies? Possible...possible.
Meaningful tonal difference between woods in bodies over pickup and string and other differences, with the bass sitting in the mix? Hmmmmm. I think not.
Meaningful tonal difference between woods in bodies over pickup and string and other differences, with the bass sitting in the mix? Hmmmmm. I think not.
I think 1 A and 2 A are ash . I have two ash bodied basses 
but neck woods also matter , and I don't have maple necks on my basses but they both have this wide low end . The two MIM fenders would sound similar in a mix , but the ash one would have a bit more bottom . Though the main "character" is definitely due to the neck woods , that's why it's so hard to tell
but neck woods also matter , and I don't have maple necks on my basses but they both have this wide low end . The two MIM fenders would sound similar in a mix , but the ash one would have a bit more bottom . Though the main "character" is definitely due to the neck woods , that's why it's so hard to tellI can hear a difference, especially in the first set of recordings, but I couldn't tell you which was ash or alder. There -is- quite a tonal change, though.
Now I sort of wish I had two basses with the same pups but made of different wood to test the theory on. I do have an alder bass and an ash bass, but
that's not going to help as they've completely different pups in them. Still interested to hear what the final word on this is.
Now I sort of wish I had two basses with the same pups but made of different wood to test the theory on. I do have an alder bass and an ash bass, but
that's not going to help as they've completely different pups in them. Still interested to hear what the final word on this is.I can barely make out a difference and even that may be imagined.
Lot's of folks posting reasons for the difference not being obvious, but as someone else posted, each of these excuses is another point against the wood tone argument. Sure it makes some difference, but not enough to make a discernible difference.
Anyway, that's the way I voted. No difference.
Lot's of folks posting reasons for the difference not being obvious, but as someone else posted, each of these excuses is another point against the wood tone argument. Sure it makes some difference, but not enough to make a discernible difference.
Anyway, that's the way I voted. No difference.
The difference is more noticeable when he's playing higher notes, if you pay attention to that you can probably hear it more clearly. On the lower notes you can hear some difference too but to me it's negligible. I still think both sound good.
Also, the headphones you're using can make a huge difference. With my new set I can hear much more details than my old one, it changed a lot how I listen to some songs because I'm able to hear things I never heard before, so that's something to be considered...
Also, the headphones you're using can make a huge difference. With my new set I can hear much more details than my old one, it changed a lot how I listen to some songs because I'm able to hear things I never heard before, so that's something to be considered...
Wood tone is not an argument it's a fact. Take an ovangkol neck with wenge fingerboard neck vs maple neck with rosewood fingerboard , everything else being the same , the two basses won't sound similar. I hear a difference between the two fenders , there is one that clearly (enough) brings more midrange up , while the other one has more low end, the high frequencies sound the same though . Or maybe I've spent so much time in the studio , and I need some rest to listen again, if you say there are no discernible difference. Trust me in a live setting the two basses won't sit in the same way in the mix , that can be quite discernible.
Of course nobody cares about the bassist , so who cares ? lol
Also , one of the basses is not is tune..
Of course nobody cares about the bassist , so who cares ? lol
Also , one of the basses is not is tune..
Yeah you have tone whores and tone holes also. And then you have some old school homies who just plug and play , and don't care about anything but hitting the right note at the right time . And they're right !
I voted A=Ash, B=Alder. Just to muddy things up, though, what if the difference comes from slight differences in the density of the maple and rosewood used on the two necks? Maybe that's where the sound difference is coming from! 
I voted A=Ash, B=Alder. Just to muddy things up, though, what if the difference comes from slight differences in the density of the maple and rosewood used on the two necks? Maybe that's where the sound difference is coming from!
But he only used one neck.
Wow - over 1600 views of this thread and only 60 responses and 66 votes. You could put an interpretation on that, perhaps.
OK, I'll vote based on this unscientific thinking:
I like the sound of A better
Historically, I've liked the sound of lighter basses more than heavy ones
Therefore A = lighter wood = alder
First listen through I thought 1a 2b alder 1b 2a ash, that was my gut feeling. Second time through I could tell a small difference between the 4 clips. Third time through they all sounded the same to me. Does wood make a difference? I'm sure it does but it's such a small part of the equation that I don't factor it into my decision when making a bass purchase.
For the "1" recordings, "B" sounds more compressed to me than "A", which sounds a lot more dynamic.
For the "2" recordings, I can't hear a difference.
I will say that my opinion is that the wood is the least important part of a solid-body electric bass guitar in terms of contribution to tone.
For the "2" recordings, I can't hear a difference.
I will say that my opinion is that the wood is the least important part of a solid-body electric bass guitar in terms of contribution to tone.
Ok, drumroll please........
1-A is Ash, 2-A is Alder.
1-B is Alder, 2-B is Alder.
(I literally played it once, then played it again on the same bass)
So only 14% of people got it right. Was using Alder for both Lemon Song clips a dirty trick? Yep. But it was an educational dirty trick, for sure. Let's take a look at some quotes about the Lemon Song clips:
It's a very educational read. Check it out: http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm
1-A is Ash, 2-A is Alder.
1-B is Alder, 2-B is Alder.
(I literally played it once, then played it again on the same bass)
So only 14% of people got it right. Was using Alder for both Lemon Song clips a dirty trick? Yep. But it was an educational dirty trick, for sure. Let's take a look at some quotes about the Lemon Song clips:
"Lemon Song A has a presence in the midrange that I generally associate with alder, and Lemon Song B has a fullness to the low end that is indicative of ash." (This one from Spencer! is my personal favorite)
"...the A's definitely sound different from the B's."
"Although It was harder for me to tell on the first 2 files. But when I listened to the second 2 files I felt like "B" sounded softer or more mid scooped/mellow"
"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."
And that's just after the first 3 pages. So people swore they could hear a noticeable difference in tone FROM THE EXACT SAME BASS. To me, this is more evidence that body wood has minimal impact on tone, and that tone is far more impacted by other factors, including our own heads."Although It was harder for me to tell on the first 2 files. But when I listened to the second 2 files I felt like "B" sounded softer or more mid scooped/mellow"
"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."
“First of all (and speaking from a steel string guitar perspective), let’s discard the notion that some species of wood make good instruments and that others don’t. The concept of tonewood is a hoax. Of the few things that we can do to a guitar and still call it a guitar, changing the wood it is made of will have the least impact upon the quality of the sound that it produces. The tone of a guitar lies more in the hands of the builder than in the materials from which it is constructed.”
That quote is from John Calkin (from the Guild of American Luthiers) in his article “The Heretic’s Guide to Alternative Lutherie Woods”.It's a very educational read. Check it out: http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm
