Does fretboard wood make a consistent difference in tone that you can hear?

[Munjibunga]

I don't know, but I like ebony for no known reason.

 

[MtManiac]

I believe every component in a solid body electric bass plays a role, including the strings that are on it, and most importantly, the hands playing it.

I truly believe the wood(s) used for the neck have a huge impact, including the fingerboard wood. I've replaced two stock Fender necks, both with rosewood fingerboards, to Warmoth necks, both with ebony fingerboards, and I wasn't the only person that could instantly hear the difference. And the difference was by no means subtle.

Mike Lull swapped my neck with a maple fingerboard to a neck with a rosewood fingerboard, because the bass sounded too bright for my taste. The rosewood fingerboard warmed up the tone of the bass, which has a swamp ash body.

My experiences with different body woods over the years has proven to me that the body wood also contributes to the instrument's tone. For me, alder provides a bright tone, with more audible midrange, compared to my basses with swamp ash bodies. However, my basses with swamp ash bodies have a stronger low end, and brighter sounding highs.

My overall favorite wood combination is an alder body with a bolt on maple neck, with a maple fingerboard, with an oil finish on the neck.

And yes, the pickups, electronics, and the instrument's bridge absolutely contribute to the tone of the instrument.

I still believe the neck wood(s) and fingerboard wood have the greatest overall effect on the instrument's tone.

Most people who I have heard or read describing tonal properties of body woods say that alder is "warm" whereas ash is "bright" or "aggressive." You seem to disagree.

 

[MtManiac]

Um, I hate to break it to you, but many of us Luthiers actually are degreed and experienced engineers and scientists. We got into building basses for fun. We do understand the engineering and science behind all this stuff, and we enjoy exploring and testing and trying to figure it out. We don't take the time to do full rigorous scientific testing procedures or write papers because that's boring and takes away from the fun of developing basses.

I don't "push a piece of basic science as evidence, by and large ignoring a wealth of other factors". I think and study carefully to see what design changes have an effect, and how other factors play into it. And I'm skeptical if something happens that I didn't expect. I don't believe it unless it's repeatable and makes sense technically. When I learn something interesting, I use it in my products. And I continue testing it and proving it to my own satisfaction. But I don't feel the need (or have the patience) to do rigorous scientific method to prove it to you. My proof is in my final product. Maybe you like them and maybe you don't, but they contain my design ideas and discoveries.

I'm unusual among Luthiers in that I enjoy talking and writing about all the little engineering details. So, you'll often see me on here talking about and explaining all of these details that you may not have considered. Other Luthiers tend to be more shy and keep their technical opinions to themselves.

So how would you describe the tonal properties of different fretboard woods?

 

[GrapeBass]

Most people who I have heard or read describing tonal properties of body woods say that alder is "warm" whereas ash is "bright" or "aggressive." You seem to disagree.

Generally speaking most ash bodies seem to be matched with maple necks although not exclusive. It seems the alder + rosewood combo is more prevalent, at least by Fender. Now, the difference between ash (northern or swamp) vs. alder is another debate (and how much influence a body vs. neck makes on the instrument). We're supposedly talking about differing neck fretboards as per the OP. IME the neck makes a more significant change unless comparing bodies that aren't so close in density and make up (ash vs koa for example, they're quite different).

 

[pudgychef]

LMAO

Nope, if you've ever changed a neck with a full standard maple fretboard to (let's say rosewood) you would not make that statement. Whether or not it's brighter, darker, snappy or dull... there are differences. I've moved from the maple to rosewood years ago and was convinced by experiencing the difference myself.

Was it the exact same neck with a different fretboard? Or an entirely different neck, fretboard and all?

 

[tfer]

Was it the exact same neck with a different fretboard? Or an entirely different neck, fretboard and all?

If tonewoods don't matter, he could have installed an aluminum baseball bat, and the sound wouldn't have changed.

 

[GrapeBass]

Was it the exact same neck with a different fretboard? Or an entirely different neck, fretboard and all?

Good question! They were very similar but alas, not the same. One was a Schecter maple neck (P-bass) and the new one was a Godin that was slightly narrower at the nut. Both were a lot heftier then a typical Jazz Bass (more maple mass). Both also had satin finishes and did not have a lot of finish.

 

[MtManiac]

Generally speaking most ash bodies seem to be matched with maple necks although not exclusive. It seems the alder + rosewood combo is more prevalent, at least by Fender. Now, the difference between ash (northern or swamp) vs. alder is another debate (and how much influence a body vs. neck makes on the instrument). We're supposedly talking about differing neck fretboards as per the OP. IME the neck makes a more significant change unless comparing bodies that aren't so close in density and make up (ash vs koa for example, they're quite different).

I agree on the topic of discussion (fretboard woods). My post was a reply to someone else's who was describing tonal properties of ash and alder.

Fender's American Standard, American Series, American Standard Series, and the new American Professionals, as well as the Mexican Standards have always been almost entirely alder bodies, with a few exceptions here and there, like a butterscotch ash body P I used to own that was a 2003 MIA (with rosewood). Almost entirely alder, regardless of fretboard wood.

I've played enough of each different combination over my 3+ decades of playing that I have found zero difference in tone that I can ascribe to fretboard wood. I can hear as much difference between two P basses that are both alder and maple as I can between one that is alder and maple and one that is alder and rosewood.

That's my opinion, and it's supported by science. As I've consistently said, you're not wrong if you can hear a difference, I'm not wrong if I can't, and we're both free to choose whatever instruments we want using whatever criteria we have. I'm checking out of the thread now, there's been way too much snark with zero non-anecdotal evidence, and I'm not into ticking people off pointlessly and repeatedly by asking them for facts when there are none, just opinions. I wish you all a great day, and will see you at a different thread on a different topic on a different day, where I may need your help with something or you may need mine. I won't be snarky about it.

 

[pudgychef]

If tonewoods don't mater, he could have installed an aluminum baseball bat, and the sound wouldn't have changed.

What nut, strings, fret material, tuning machines, scale length on that baseball bat?

 

[pudgychef]

Good question! They were very similar but alas, not the same. One was a Schecter maple neck (P-bass) and the new one was a Godin that was slightly narrower at the nut. Both were a lot heftier then a typical Jazz Bass (more maple mass). Both also had satin finishes and did not have a lot of finish.

So, possibly, several variables that might have varied. I sometimes wonder if truss rod installation style (under the separate board or via skunk stripe) may play a role....do one piece maple fretboards sound significantly different than separate ones?

 

[GrapeBass]

So, possibly, several variables that might have varied. I sometimes wonder if truss rod installation style (under the separate board or via skunk stripe) may play a role....do one piece maple fretboards sound significantly different than separate ones?

Since it's all a system and if it affects the resonance I would say yes, how much? I dunno.

 

[Bassist30]

I never heard a Luthier ever say of all the woods none of them makes any difference in tone.

 

[tfer]

I never heard a Luthier ever say of all the woods none of them makes any difference in tone.

And I believe them. Everything contributes to the vibration system, and causes a resonance change, even if it's so minute that it can't be heard.

A laminated neck vs a single piece of wood, has a different resonance, but I don't have enough experience to say how the sound changes.

 

[Arthur U. Poon]

Most people who I have heard or read describing tonal properties of body woods say that alder is "warm" whereas ash is "bright" or "aggressive." You seem to disagree.

I do agree swamp ash is bright and aggressive sounding, and a little bit mid scooped. IMO alder, compared to swamp ash has more midrange, is a bit more "even" sounding across the frequency spectrum, but I think it still has ample high end, but YMMV.

Personally, I'd say when I think of a body wood that provides warmth, my first thought is mahogany, but that's not to say it doesn't have brightness in its high end, either.

 

[GrapeBass]

I do agree swamp ash is bright and aggressive sounding, and a little bit mid scooped. IMO alder has more midrange, but I think it still has ample high end, but YMMV.

Personally, I'd say when I think of a body wood that provides warmth, my first thought is mahogany, but that's not to say it doesn't have brightness in its high end, either.

In YOUR experience, what would you guesstimate as the % of influence that necks vs bodies have at influencing the timbre or tone of an electric bass.

 

[Arthur U. Poon]

In YOUR experience, what would you guesstimate as the % of influence that necks vs bodies have at influencing the timbre or tone of an electric bass.

Hmmm, this is just my guesstimate, but IMO the neck and fingerboard woods contribute to at least 60% of the instrument's tone. But by no means are my opinions backed by science.

And I'm not trying to come across as an expert on this subject, nor do I question the opinions of those who say neck woods, fingerboard woods, body woods, have zero effect. It all may be a placebo effect for me personally, but I believe neck and fingerboard woods have an impact on tone.

In my humble opinion.

 

[TonyP-]

I'm curious to the folks that took place in this pool and/or commented in the thread.
I have a few questions...I mean this in serious way.

Does anyone here who thinks fretboard wood does NOT make difference feel that have more experiences in testing this theory that Roger Sadowsky or Michael Tobias?

If you are from the "wood does NOT matter camp" what are you playing for basses? With that thought in mind...Would it not be easier to have the cheapest instruments, give them a fret job if necessary and just make sure they have the electronics of choice?

Just by imports based on looks and hot rod them then. You cab by something that looks like a Fodera for $400 you can something that is Jazz bass for lack for under $300. What is the most an aftermarket pre and pickups go for together $500. Typically a guitar refret will cost between $200 and $400. A fretdress, as part of a set-up typically costs between $50 and $100, and will solve most problems, without the need for a refret.

So lets say you bought a faux Fodera, bought the best electronics and then dressed the frets.
Did it cost much more over a $1000?

So does anyone here in the "wood does NOT matter camp" pay over $1000 for an instrument?

If so why?

 

[pudgychef]

I'm curious to the folks that took place in this pool and/or commented in the thread.
I have a few questions...I mean this in serious way.

Does anyone here who thinks fretboard wood does NOT make difference feel that have more experiences in testing this theory that Roger Sadowsky or Michael Tobias?

If you are from the "wood does NOT matter camp" what are you playing for basses? With that thought in mind...Would it not be easier to have the cheapest instruments, give them a fret job if necessary and just make sure they have the electronics of choice?

Just by imports based on looks and hot rod them then. You cab by something that looks like a Fodera for $400 you can something that is Jazz bass for lack for under $300. What is the most an aftermarket pre and pickups go for together $500. Typically a guitar refret will cost between $200 and $400. A fretdress, as part of a set-up typically costs between $50 and $100, and will solve most problems, without the need for a refret.

So lets say you bought a faux Fodera, bought the best electronics and then dressed the frets.
Did it cost much more over a $1000?

So does anyone here in the "wood does NOT matter camp" pay over $1000 for an instrument?

If so why?

1) Mr. Sadowsky and Mr. Tobias are both exceptionally talented builders and know 1000 x more about building a bass than I could dream to know....they also have a great deal of vested interest in heightening the notion of board selection and tonewoods...I think they matter, but as part of the whole, and not to the absolutes often attributed.

2) I play the following:
EBMM Bongo 4H (Basswood + RW)
EBMM Stingray 4H ('hardwood' and RW)
Fender USA P (alder and rw)
Ibanez Rkb900 (Ash and Maple)

I don't think specific wood preference or lack of preference would impact desire for quality...EBMM Bongo a perfect example....many people wouldn't play Basswood (or see it as inferior)...but they sure sound great to me.. exceptionally well built and not cheap...

This next part about imports and Fauxderas doesn't make sense to me....

Would I pay over $1000?
Yes. ..have before...but I typically buy used and all the current stable were under $1K ...

 

[Gorn]

Does anyone here who thinks fretboard wood does NOT make difference feel that have more experiences in testing this theory that Roger Sadowsky or Michael Tobias?

I'm on Team No, and that's not the question I'm saying no to. I don't think there's a difference that anyone can hear in a testable and predictable way. Saying you can hear it, even if you're Roger Sadowsky or Michael Tobias, isn't the same as proving that you can hear it. I don't have more experiences testing it than they do but I'd say they don't have any experience testing it at all. They have personal experience and anectodal data dripping in confirmation bias.

And sure I'd spend over a grand on a bass. I'd pay for good craftsmanship, looks, sound, feel...all that. Because I think the concept of tone wood is bunk doesn't mean I wouldn't pay for a good bass. I don't really see the correlation there. I'd pay for a Sadowsky if I wanted one. They're well made basses. I'd get a maple fretboard cuz I like the way it looks.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

I'm on Team No, and that's not the question I'm saying no to. I don't think there's a difference that anyone can hear in a testable and predictable way. Saying you can hear it, even if you're Roger Sadowsky or Michael Tobias, isn't the same as proving that you can hear it. I don't have more experiences testing it than they do but I'd say they don't have any experience testing it at all. They have personal experience and anectodal data dripping in confirmation bias.

And sure I'd spend over a grand on a bass. I'd pay for good craftsmanship, looks, sound, feel...all that. Because I think the concept of tone wood is bunk doesn't mean I wouldn't pay for a good bass. I don't really see the correlation there. I'd pay for a Sadowsky if I wanted one. They're well made basses. I'd get a maple fretboard cuz I like the way it looks.

So if you were having a bass custom built for you, your answer to the question of what fretboard material you'd want on the bass would be, "whatever is cheaper." Assuming you don't care about looks.