fretboard material

[tfer]

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.

I agree with most of what you state.

However, when trying out an instrument, I play it acoustically - never plugging into an amp until I'm done examining it thoroughly.

My rig is heavily voiced, but I always have the acoustic tone in mind when I start. I've tried maple fret/fingerboards multiple times, but the sound they provide isn't what I'm looking for. I'm sure I could EQ it to something more to my liking, but I always start with the acoustic tone that I desire, and build up from there. Tone is based on everything that you add or subtract, whether it's your fretboard, body material, pickups, strings, bridge, effects, amp or cab. It all plays together to create the sounds you want to hear.

Some believe that even if there is a difference, that it's not something that the audience would notice. That's irrelevant to me: I notice, and as my harshest critic, that's who I need to please first.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I check instruments acoustically too. I had a TBer insist that was pointless because nobody records that way.

 

[Brad Johnson]

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.

Not sure if that's a yes, no or maybe.

 

[Eilif]

I have a Fender Blacktop bass with a P-Bass neck. I love the tone but I prefer the J-Bass neck. I have a Jazz neck on my Precision. I want to replace the neck on the Blacktop and found a pretty good price on one but the fretboard is maple. I know the purported differences in tone between rosewood and maple.

Has anyone ever switched and how noticeable was the change? I think the maple might complement the humbuckers on the Blacktop. Any ideas? I know it's subjective and I won't know unless I try. Just looking for experiences.

Never switched my own instruments, but I've played otherwise identical instruments (Fenders IIRC) at shops with different boards and found the difference to be possibly present, but extremely minimal. Did the same with bodies. Two otherwise identical MIM Fenders but one was an ASH bodied GC special. Noticed even less difference.

I think I notice a bit of difference on a fretless bases with different woods, but even that could be placebo and I've never had a direct a/b with otherwise identical basses.

Wood makes a difference, but it's a small one, and in a Fender, with thick slabs of wood (that vibrate less) and magnetic pickups (that only pickup the vibrations of the strings unless they're microphonic) the difference is going to be very small indeed. Even less so if you slap a big thick bridge on there to further isolate the vibrating string. You'll get much more change in tone from a pickup swap.

If you want to hear the sound of wood vibrating and/or affecting thet tone get a fretless bass with a thin (or hollow body) and a Piezo pickup, ideally mounted to the body or near the bottom of the bridge. You could even get a piezo pickup and experiment with placing it at different points on the body or neck though you'd probably need some kind of buffer preamp to get a good tone.

Check out Wendler Electrocoustic for an example of a bass where you might (I'm still slighty skeptical) really get the sound of wood.

The end result of all this is that with a fretted solid-body bass I'm generally far more interested in the weight and appearance of a given wood rather than it's puported acoustic qualities.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Not sure if that's a yes, no or maybe.

It's a qualified yes, in the sense that the effect has to be subtractive, and dead spots are the most extreme example.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

I check instrument acoustally too. I had a TBer insist that was pointless because nobody records that way.

If you are recording with magnetic pickups, then you probably want the one that is quietest acoustically, apart from the sound the strings make (e.g. jam your ear on the upper horn and hear nothing). You can use EQ to more easily remove than add frequencies, and a loud acoustic is a reduction in some frequencies. You can use mutes to reduce sustain, but it's much harder to add it.

 

[tfer]

Never switched my own instruments, but I've played otherwise identical instruments (Fenders IIRC) at shops with different boards and found the difference to be possibly present, but extremely minimal. Did the same with bodies. Two otherwise identical MIM Fenders but one was an ASH bodied GC special. Noticed even less difference.

I think I notice a bit of difference on a fretless bases with different woods, but even that could be placebo and I've never had a direct a/b with otherwise identical basses.

Wood makes a difference, but it's a small one, and in a Fender, with thick slabs of wood (that vibrate less) and magnetic pickups (that only pickup the vibrations of the strings unless they're microphonic) the difference is going to be very small indeed. Even less so if you slap a big thick bridge on there to further isolate the vibrating string. You'll get much more change in tone from a pickup swap.

If you want to hear the sound of wood vibrating and/or affecting thet tone get a fretless bass with a thin (or hollow body) and a Piezo pickup, ideally mounted to the body or near the bottom of the bridge. You could even get a piezo pickup and experiment with placing it at different points on the body or neck though you'd probably need some kind of buffer preamp to get a good tone.

Check out Wendler Electrocoustic for an example of a bass where you might (I'm still slighty skeptical) really get the sound of wood.

The end result of all this is that with a fretted solid-body bass I'm generally far more interested in the weight and appearance of a given wood rather than it's puported acoustic qualities.

I agree with you as well. The difference is admittedly small, but it exists.

But that for me, is where the tone begins. If I handicap myself at the beginning of the tone, everything I do afterwards in my signal chain is directly affected by my choices in materials.

Through my experiences, I've learned what I like, and it includes a few things that make other TBers shake their heads. My 6er is HEAVY. That mass contributes directly to its sustain - I've found that lighter woods dampen it. It's weight also contributes to its tone. Harmonics and upper register notes just sing. On my fretless, the rosewood fingerboard combined with the mahogany body are warm with a subtle upper-mid response.

And as you pointed out, piezo pickups really accentuate the acoustic properties of the instrument, and it's a big reason that any bass I happen to buy in the future will have one.

 

[ole Jason]

I check instrument acoustally too. I had a TBer insist that was pointless because nobody records that way.

I guess they're technically right but, as you'd probably agree, passive basses especially do tend to sound pretty similar amplified and acoustically. I think you can get a good quick idea of how a bass sounds by playing it unplugged. I do think some electronics can kind of overpower the natural acoustic sound of a bass though.

 

[bholder]

It's very obvious with the pick.

The maple almost has a scooped sound. The warm mids are much more subdued.

I just listened to the pick part and if there is a difference, it's subtle to me, maybe. Not accounting for all sorts of things that could be happening in the frequencies I can no longer hear, though, so YMMV. If that's how subtle the difference is, then I guess I just don't care, maybe I'll try with my hearing aids in.

 

[ajkula66]

I do think some electronics can kind of overpower the natural acoustic sound of a bass though.

Agreed, at least to some extent.

Back in '83 I bought a brand new Walnut Precision Special which blew me away unplugged, and spent maybe 2 minutes with it plugged in while in store. Could not replicate that "unplugged" sound with stock electronics under any circumstances so I pulled everything out ten days later, installed a passive Duncan and enjoyed the bass thoroughly for as long as I've owned it.

 

[tfer]

My question for fans of vintage instruments, is why?

After decades of use, why do they sound better when the only thing that's changed is that the wood aged? How can that be, if the wood, neck, body and finger/fretboard don't make any difference to the sound?

 

[ajkula66]

My question for fans of vintage instruments, is why?

After decades of use, why do they sound better when the only thing that's changed is that the wood aged? How can that be, if the wood, neck, body and finger/fretboard don't make any difference to the sound?

I'll start by saying that I belong to the "wood does make a difference" camp.

With that being said, I've never bought a vintage instrument for the sake of it being vintage per se. Earlier this year I bought a guitar - not a bass - that I couldn't get out of my head after first trying it out six months earlier. I have absolutely no idea how it sounded when it was brand new - 50+ years ago - since I wasn't a musician when that baby first saw the light of the day and have nothing to base the comparison on. I just love the way it plays and sounds *now* and that's why I bought it.

My $0.02 only...

 

[Eilif]

I agree with you as well. The difference is admittedly small, but it exists.

But that for me, is where the tone begins. If I handicap myself at the beginning of the tone, everything I do afterwards in my signal chain is directly affected by my choices in materials.

Through my experiences, I've learned what I like, and it includes a few things that make other TBers shake their heads. My 6er is HEAVY. That mass contributes directly to its sustain - I've found that lighter woods dampen it. It's weight also contributes to its tone. Harmonics and upper register notes just sing. On my fretless, the rosewood fingerboard combined with the mahogany body are warm with a subtle upper-mid response.

And as you pointed out, piezo pickups really accentuate the acoustic properties of the instrument, and it's a big reason that any bass I happen to buy in the future will have one.

I would suggest that on your 6'er heavier bass actually gives you less of the "sound" of the wood than a lighter bass. A big massive bass will sustain forever because the bass body is vibrating less and absorbing less of the string's vibrations. This also means that the wood of your bass also isn't absorbing as many frequencies hence youre getting rich harmonics and a singing tone. It's likely result is that you're actually getting less "wood" in the tone and more of the full tone of the string. I get a similar result with my Peavey T-40 which has a big heavy body and a big bridge, tuners and a metal nut. It can have a very ringing and singing tone if you work the electronics right.

I don't have the address but there's a video out there of a string anchord to a thick support post in a house they put a pickup to it and pluck it and it vibrates forever. The wood doesn't give at all. Remember that Les Paul just mounted a couple of pickups on a piece of railroad tie and only added the sides to please band leaders.

All that said, I'd be curious to hear what kinds of tones you get with a piezo. Alot of folks with a piezo use piezo saddles, but that just gives you more of the sound of the strings. However, against the soundboard (on a hollowbody), or in the neck pocket, or inside a wooden bridge as well as others are all options. My Wendler has it in the middle of a wooden bridge. In a very similar position as the bridge-wing pickup often seen in an upright.

 

[tfer]

I would suggest that on your 6'er heavier bass actually gives you less of the "sound" of the wood than a lighter bass. A big massive bass will sustain forever because the bass body is vibrating less and absorbing less of the string's vibrations. This also means that the wood of your bass also isn't absorbing as many frequencies hence youre getting rich harmonics and a singing tone. It's likely result is that you're actually getting less "wood" in the tone and more of the full tone of the string. I get a similar result with my Peavey T-40 which has a big heavy body and a big bridge, tuners and a metal nut. It can have a very ringing and singing tone if you work the electronics right.

I don't have the address but there's a video out there of a string anchord to a thick support post in a house they put a pickup to it and pluck it and it vibrates forever. The wood doesn't give at all. Remember that Les Paul just mounted a couple of pickups on a piece of railroad tie and only added the sides to please band leaders.

All that said, I'd be curious to hear what kinds of tones you get with a piezo. Alot of folks with a piezo use piezo saddles, but that just gives you more of the sound of the strings. However, against the soundboard (on a hollowbody), or in the neck pocket, or inside a wooden bridge as well as others are all options. My Wendler has it in the middle of a wooden bridge. In a very similar position as the bridge-wing pickup often seen in an upright.

Completely agree with the 6er mass being less 'transparent', but that's what I was looking for.

My Breedlove acoustic, Portamento fretless and my NXT EUB all utilize piezo systems. I'd argue that they are picking up even more of the string sound, based on how they react to lightly tapping on the body of each instrument, with the strings muted. All taps are audible when amplified, so the pickups are 'hearing' the vibrations of the wood.

 

[Eilif]

Completely agree with the 6er mass being less 'transparent', but that's what I was looking for.

My Breedlove acoustic, Portamento fretless and my NXT EUB all utilize piezo systems. I'd argue that they are picking up even more of the string sound, based on how they react to lightly tapping on the body of each instrument, with the strings muted. All taps are audible when amplified, so the pickups are 'hearing' the vibrations of the wood.

That makes sense. I don't mind a lack of woodyness on a heavy bass. How's the tone on the NXT? Does it require an offboard pre for buffering? My Wendler is a passive with a piezo, but it supposedly uses the mag pup to buffer the piezo passively.

It'd be interesting to move a piezo around on a single bass and see how the sound changes. Things like a sound board vs back vs neck joint. Or perhaps the under the saddle/string vs between the bridge and body.

As an additional option, I recall some mention of an instrument whereby the magnetic pickup was deliberately slightly microphonic so that the vibration of the body intentionally bled through to the pickup. This being opposed to most magnetic pickups that are deliberately intended avoid being microphonic. This could be especially effective in an instrument like some of the super-strats where the pickup is bolted strait to the body with no spring or foam in between.

And if that weren't enough, if one really wants to capture the acoustic sound (i.e. the sound of wood making the air vibrate) of the wood that many folks talk about, there's always the possibliity of a microphone as many acoustic instrument have inside.

All this to say that if people really want -as most seem to say they do- the wood to make a difference or to capture the "sound of wood" there are ways to make this happen and relying on a traditional mag-only pickup system is certainly not the most effective solution.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

Agreed, at least to some extent.

Back in '83 I bought a brand new Walnut Precision Special which blew me away unplugged, and spent maybe 2 minutes with it plugged in while in store. Could not replicate that "unplugged" sound with stock electronics under any circumstances so I pulled everything out ten days later, installed a passive Duncan and enjoyed the bass thoroughly for as long as I've owned it.

I also had a Walnut '82 or '83 Precision Special, I also loved the bass but never got along with the active electronics.

While I was searching for a Walnut Specialto buy, I built a walnut bodied bass and had a Schecter all-rosewood neck attached to it. I went through SEVERAL bass pickups (all "hotter" than normal) in it and was never thrilled with the tone until I put a relatively "mild" set of Fender CS 62 Precision Pickups in it. Those pickups were perfect for that structure, and it's the bass I have done 90% of my recording with. Even, smooth, full, perfect!

 

[ajkula66]

I also had a Walnut '82 or '83 Precision Special, I also loved the bass but never got along with the active electronics.

While I was searching for a Walnut Specialto buy, I built a walnut bodied bass and had a Schecter all-rosewood neck attached to it.

Funny enough, the bass that ended up replacing my Walnut Special was a FrankenBass that sported a Schecter walnut body, an unidentified neck that looked and felt very much like a replica of '66 Jazz - bound with dots but with jumbo frets and ebony fingerboard - and vintage Duncan PUs along with Schaller gold hardware. One incredible instrument, top to bottom. I got to play it again last year - after more than 15 years of not seeing it, or its current owner - and was blown away once again by how great it sounded.

 

[Turnaround]

I've always heard that RW produces a warmer sound than maple. But I recently saw a You Tube video by a member here who brought out that RW is harder than maple, based on the Janka hardness scale. He suggested RW produces a brighter sound.

Janka Hardness chart for Exotic Wood and Domestic Wood | Bell Forest Products

Hardness isn't a measure of resonance. There's a lot more at play. Think of a diamond - HARD. Resonant? Not so much.

 

[JPMcGuire]

Walnut too for me is a body of choice. Tight warm and articulate

 

[tfer]

That makes sense. I don't mind a lack of woodyness on a heavy bass. How's the tone on the NXT? Does it require an offboard pre for buffering? My Wendler is a passive with a piezo, but it supposedly uses the mag pup to buffer the piezo passively.

It'd be interesting to move a piezo around on a single bass and see how the sound changes. Things like a sound board vs back vs neck joint. Or perhaps the under the saddle/string vs between the bridge and body.

As an additional option, I recall some mention of an instrument whereby the magnetic pickup was deliberately slightly microphonic so that the vibration of the body intentionally bled through to the pickup. This being opposed to most magnetic pickups that are deliberately intended avoid being microphonic. This could be especially effective in an instrument like some of the super-strats where the pickup is bolted strait to the body with no spring or foam in between.

And if that weren't enough, if one really wants to capture the acoustic sound (i.e. the sound of wood making the air vibrate) of the wood that many folks talk about, there's always the possibliity of a microphone as many acoustic instrument have inside.

All this to say that if people really want -as most seem to say they do- the wood to make a difference or to capture the "sound of wood" there are ways to make this happen and relying on a traditional mag-only pickup system is certainly not the most effective solution.

The NXT doesn't require a preamp to buffer, but I do use a Zoom A3 for the upright modeling.

Most modern piezo systems have eliminated the inherent 'honk' that gave them a bad name.