Different woods and the effects it has on tone?

[Ewo]

Well, my pitch is far from perfect, but I can tell the relative difference between two tones and to me, the difference sounds like a minor 3rd, but what do I know...

Yeah, I heard the ash body as a minor 3rd lower than the alder--although both had overtones.

 

[Rocinante_x1]

 

[Seiki]

Which wood is the best for metal?

5500 year old bronze that was first used in swords and hammers

10/10 would bludgeon drop tunings with

 

[lethargytartare]

 

[descendent22]

Dude, if you already "know" the answer, then why post a question? The post you're denigrating is an excellent summary of how this will play out on TB. We've all seen it many times before. There is no solid consensus, especially on TB, about the effect of wood type on the tone of a solid-bodied instrument.

So if you want to believe this guy from Fender, please do so, but don't then come here, post a question, and then start arguing with the answers!

Uuhh dude I came across this in my search and also, sometimes looking for extra info to be certain and have more knowledge about the fact is cool too. Ok dude

 

[descendent22]

I wouldn't worry what's it's made of. I'd inspect and play it. See if it's a quality piece. Then plug it in to YOUR rig. See if it sounds right to YOUR ears

Usually that's what I'd do ang I 100% agree. Problem is, it's in Japan and there's no testing it

 

[cnltb]

i just want to know the different kinds of wood fender uses and what it does for the tone. For example, let's say a light ash compared to a basswood or an alder, or a maple or swamp maple.

Whats the difference in tone, is ash bright or more bass for example?

Swamp Maple?

 

[Laurent]

Ouch, here we go again.

Short answer is yes.

 

[Ulf_Hansson]

OP - this thread is likely to get messy or closed - so to quickly summarize what could be the following 30 pages:

- Some people do not think wood has any noticeable effect on an amplified solid body instrument.

- There are some generalizations about wood and tone, but you get as much variation from piece to piece of the same type of wood.

- There's no consensus to your question.

- I have my own beliefs on the topic, but they are more to do with the wood used for the neck, not the body. And again, my beliefs are not generally accepted by the community as a whole.

- I've played two basses by the same company, same model, same year, same wood, and they sounded different from each other.

Personally, don't worry about it too much. The strings you use probably have a much higher effect on the tone than the body wood.

Thanks, best post ever. Just wish you could contribute to some other forums I spend too much time on.

 

[descendent22]

Swamp Maple?

Ment to say swamp ash. I'm shot, years of partying catches up

 

[Flaked Beans]

View attachment 817938

This!! ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

 

[Ulf_Hansson]

Usually that's what I'd do ang I 100% agree. Problem is, it's in Japan and there's no testing it

Then there's about 42 other things that I'd worry more about than the wood it is made of. I'd never ever buy a bass without playing it first.

 

[arbiterusa]

Does the wood used make a difference? Absolutely. Is that difference consistent and quantifiable? Not really.

 

[awfulguitarnois]

One of my favorite movies ever! I knew there was a reason I kept reading this post.

 

[/\/\3phist0]

The answer is, yes. Can most people hear it? No
Can anyone REALLY hear it in a mix live, NO
Can the differences be heard on a recording? MAYBE.

 

[MobileHolmes]

Yeah, this question comes up a lot.

Here are my personal data points about it:

Twice I've had pairs of basses that were about the same age and identical except for the body and fingerboard woods. They were Fbass VF5s, and Sadowsky vintage 5s. Both pairs were the usual alder/rosewood and ash/maple. There's no doubt in my mind that the alder/rosewood basses had more in the mids and a "rounder" attack in the notes, while the ash/maple basses had more in the top and bottom and a "sharper" attack. Over time, I let the ash/maple basses go and kept the alder/rosewood.

So the dimensions, scale length, headstock shape, hardware, pups, and electronics were the same, within both pairs. And I had a definite preference for the sound of the alder/rosewood models.

My .02, based on experience as a player:

The woods used in a bass differ in their tonal _tendencies_. It's not the case that you can precisely and accurately predict the tone of a bass from the wood alone, but you can guess at where it's gonna tend.

I have two sort of comparable guitars and similar obsevations. Warmoth Strat, alder, Hardtail, riogrande pickups with overwound bridge. Warmoth Tele, swamp ash, riogrande pickups with a "stratty" sounding neck pickup. Are all the variables isolated? Nope, are they reasonably comparable? Yup. The swamp ash tele definitely as a sharper attack, the strat is definitely a little rounder. Actually, for comparison, I have a hacked vintage Epiphone with the same tele pickup in it as the tele, mahogany body (but 24 3/4 scale) and it is noticeably warmer than the other two.

The big caveat here, of course, is that what you run them through makes a huge difference. Through a brightish amp clean amp, they sound noticeably different. Through some OD, less so, Through a dimed big muff, I can't even tell when I've switched pickups, let alone what guitar I'm playing

 

[BassinCT]

 

[/\/\3phist0]

 

[Doug Parent]

I like coconut oil vs. butter

 

[FourBanger]

It matters but arguing about it doesn't.

Every piece of the instrument vibrates. To determine the absolute vibration of the string in the magnetic field one must sum all the vibrations together. They all matter.

Now how much? Argue away.