Interestingly, pickups are supposed to react to the moving ferromagnetic metal strings. I don't know how these other stationary metal or non medal components translate into the mix. Whatever the case it seems to be a good FUD subject.
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.
It's very obvious with the pick.
The maple almost has a scooped sound. The warm mids are much more subdued.
Looking at what I could find regarding density, and admittedly this is regarding bodies, maple and rosewood differ by 20%, but concrete is an additional 400% as dense, yet does not seem to affect tone. On a neck the difference between rosewood and maple is likely to be a less than 5% change in overall neck density. This hints at density, even though it affects the speed of sound through a material, probably not bring a critical factor.
The modulus of elasticity of wood of the same species seems to vary by +-10% depending on sample, which means that for maple and rosewood likely overlaps depending on the particular sample, so at the very least it would mean that if elasticity is a factor, then species is not enough to ensure a different tone, even if the effect is there for the average of different species. Even then, rosewood necks are not homogeneous. If there is reflection at boundaries then we would also expect that to be an issue for maple capped maple neck, as there would be a joint, with glue and different elasticities.
I don't have an IOP subscription to download a relevant paper that might provide more information on a more solid footing.
Agreed.
For the life of me I really don't get why so many fight the idea that an electric bass is an acoustic instrument. And that the fundamental acoustic components of that can have an effect on the results that are available. So a composite neck can certainly sound noticeably different from a Maple one with Rosewood board.
One luthier I worked with made an all Ash bass, including the neck and fingerboard. One of the worst basses I've ever heard. Completely over the top zing. Even unplugged but much worse amplified. Swapped out the board for a Maple one and it sounded great.
Great point about natural oils. What the frets are installed on has an effect on the instrument. But people ignore almost everything about the material, instead focusing on things like hardness as if that alone could tell the complete story.
I play for me. I know it seems that many people here look at what the audience can hear as a measure of something important. If the audience doesn't care, neither do they
I don't. As long as I can hear what I want to hear and feel what I want to feel, I can play how I want to play. And if I do a good job the rest usually falls into place.
The idea that an engineer can fix things in the mix is another TB staple. Depends on where you set your bar. I'm trying to imagine how much time an engineer would need to spend to make one bass sound like a dissimilar one.
If you own an electric bass, pluck a string with it unplugged and explain the pickups' effect on what you hear.
If you change a bridge it can effect the tone. If you change tuners the same is true. Change the body, neck, ad nauseum. Heck, changing from an oil to gloss finish can effect the tone. It's a system that works together and thinking it's only about pickups and strings really misses what's actually going on.
If you don't think wood is important for an electric bass, then why don't you try make a bass out of just 4 metal wires and a pickup and see how that goes!
Last edited:
My ears suck, to be honest, I have catastrophic high frequency hearing loss, I'll admit it. I won't even try to compare the video, I won't be able to tell. Though all of my basses each sound different and unique to me, I'm just not sure what factors that can be attributed to, and have no interest in attempting a scientific analysis. I just roll with them all being unique and enjoy what I can enjoy with what I've got left...
It's been done, functionally successfully, though never popular. There are a few interesting examples of all-metal basses floating around out there now. And then there were the old Kramer and Travis Bean aluminum necks, worked and sounded pretty good too.
I'd like this post twice, if I could...Agreed.
For the life of me I really don't get why so many fight the idea that an electric bass is an acoustic instrument. And that the fundamental acoustic components of that can have an effect on the results that are available. So a composite neck can certainly sound noticeably different from a Maple one with Rosewood board.
One luthier I worked with made an all Ash bass, including the neck and fingerboard. One of the worst basses I've ever heard. Completely over the top zing. Even unplugged but much worse amplified. Swapped out the board for a Maple one and it sounded great.
Great point about natural oils. What the frets are installed on has an effect on the instrument. But people ignore almost everything about the material, instead focusing on things like hardness as if that alone could tell the complete story.
I play for me. I know it seems that many people here look at what the audience can hear as a measure of something important. If the audience doesn't care, neither do they
I don't. As long as I can hear what I want to hear and feel what I want to feel, I can play how I want to play. And if I do a good job the rest usually falls into place.
The idea that an engineer can fix things in the mix is another TB staple. Depends on where you set your bar. I'm trying to imagine how much time an engineer would need to spend to make one bass sound like a dissimilar one.
You should give it a listen. The difference isn't subtle.
Especially when he's playing with a pick, and it automatically switches from Rosewood to maple.
The pickups don't affect the sound unplugged, right? I can understand the sound waves coming off the strings and reflecting back from various parts may add to what the pick ups are hearing (plugged in). I guess the 64,000 question is how much. Probably varies from instrument to instrument and ear to ear.
There is no $64,000 question... because there is no single answer. Yet some seem to think that at best it's inconsequential, based on who knows what.
My point in setting up the experiment was to get you to really take into consideration what's going on with your instrument. The answers are in there, along with playing variat ions and really listening to what's happening.
One thing that can help is playing instruments minus effects or EQ tweaks or heavily voiced amplification. Many don't do this and draw conclusions in spite of it.
My point in setting up the experiment was to get you to really take into consideration what's going on with your instrument. The answers are in there, along with playing variat ions and really listening to what's happening.
One thing that can help is playing instruments minus effects or EQ tweaks or heavily voiced amplification. Many don't do this and draw conclusions in spite of it.
Really? It has to be a dead spot?
Frequencies may enter the neck-body system, but since it is highly unlikely that significant energy could be returned from an elastic but anisotropic substrate such as wood, it would be turned into heat. It may not be pronounced but it would be subtractive.
Reading a 1948 paper on elasticity in 2x2x30 inch bars of Douglas Fir (closest freely available research I have found so far that is quantitative) strongly hints that dead spots are the resonant frequencies of the nevk-body system, as for the bars examined it was ~450Hz.
I'll keep looking to see if there is more directly relevant freely available research.
The fact that dead spots exist shows that energy can enter the system, at least at the resonant frequency, but energy entering the system must be less at anything other than a dead spot, so dead spots will give an upper bound. If dead spots do not significantly vary between fretboard materials, in a systematic way, then audible differences are unlikely to vary in a systematic way either. This is not to say there might not be variances between necks, but whether there is a statistically significant difference between species. That potentially makes the measurement problem much easier as it then becomes a case of plotting resonant frequencies under vibration for a number of basses.
Maybe today I'll swap over my Telecaster guitar from the old rosewood neck that's been on there more years than I wish to admit for the maple one I got. I got the maple one as I fancied a change, because it was a little bit cheaper, to bypass a fret job, and a neck change overall because I wanted a more vintage radius. Sound... I doubt there will be any change, except maybe less fret buzz.
There is no $64,000 question... because there is no single answer. Yet some seem to think that at best it's inconsequential, based on who knows what.
My point in setting up the experiment was to get you to really take into consideration what's going on with your instrument. The answers are in there, along with playing variat ions and really listening to what's happening.
One thing that can help is playing instruments minus effects or EQ tweaks or heavily voiced amplification. Many don't do this and draw conclusions in spite of it.
My point in setting up the experiment was to get you to really take into consideration what's going on with your instrument. The answers are in there, along with playing variat ions and really listening to what's happening.
One thing that can help is playing instruments minus effects or EQ tweaks or heavily voiced amplification. Many don't do this and draw conclusions in spite of it.
