Hopkins, I never said poplar sounded bad. I said it sounds very different than alder. I greatly prefer alder. I'm sorry you can't hear a difference in woods. You are probably better off. You can use the cheapest wood you can find and be happy with the results. Nothing wrong with that. I would also mention that I'd imagine some of the best builders would be insulted if you told them that the only reason they use different woods is to lie to the tone-wood believers so they can sell a bass.
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.
How different is Poplar from Alder?
- Thread starter randysmojo
- Start date
I wouldnt wade into the tone swamp for all the money in the world but I personally dont like poplar because I dont consider it a good wood for long-life projects. I've built lots of cabinetry and furniture with poplar and I find that it is too soft, dents way too easily and sometimes has weird grain lines that can split long after a piece has been built. I've also found it a bit prone to move after the fact as well. More than once shops have had to replace poplar doors and drawers due to these issues. Also, it has a tendency to be fuzzy when planed and has an annoying kind of tearout in certain boards that is really hard to get rid of.
That being said plenty of people have used it for quality guitars and while I bring this list of issues, I judge them in comparison to the other more common woods used for guitar building. Poplar is still a very serviceable wood and could certainly work. In my mind it has no benefit other than affordability and its softness making it easy to work. For a large company ordering large quantities of lumber it makes financial sense but for a guy building one or two instruments at a time I dont see the benefit of using poplar for more than a test body unless it has a characteristic that is specifically desired. All just my opinion of course.
For clarity I am referring to white poplar like you find at Lowes or Home Depot. I have seen that MTD makes basses from yellow poplar, which they call Tulipwood for some reason. This is a wood I have no firsthand experience with so I would tend to lean toward Micheal Tobias's opinion until I learn more.
That being said plenty of people have used it for quality guitars and while I bring this list of issues, I judge them in comparison to the other more common woods used for guitar building. Poplar is still a very serviceable wood and could certainly work. In my mind it has no benefit other than affordability and its softness making it easy to work. For a large company ordering large quantities of lumber it makes financial sense but for a guy building one or two instruments at a time I dont see the benefit of using poplar for more than a test body unless it has a characteristic that is specifically desired. All just my opinion of course.
For clarity I am referring to white poplar like you find at Lowes or Home Depot. I have seen that MTD makes basses from yellow poplar, which they call Tulipwood for some reason. This is a wood I have no firsthand experience with so I would tend to lean toward Micheal Tobias's opinion until I learn more.
Hopkins
Commercial User
Explain what you consider very different. Because I doubt seriously that if someone were to play ten basses half of them made of poplar the other half made of alder that nobody could tell which was which just by hearing them. That includes the best builders in the world.
Also when you tell me that I can uae cheap wood and be happy, are you saying a bass made of inexpensive woods cant sound as good as a bass made from expensive wood? So if that were true, does a $300 top made from some super rare exotic burl make a bass sound better? Or is it just aesthic?
Hopkins, you can use cheap wood and be happy because you don't hear a difference. Can cheap wood sound great? Absolutely. Can expensive wood sound terrible? Absolutely. The point is that many have said, get the poplar because it's cheaper and you won't hear a difference. Well guess what? I do hear a difference, a very significant difference. In my experience alder has been deeper sounding with much fuller low mids than polar, and has a sweeter treble compared to little harsher yet slightly compressed high end of poplar. I absolutely hear the difference, but it's difficult to decribe tone with words so that we may both understand. I also hear a huge difference between ash and alder. Ash is deeper sounding and brighter with less mids which is very apparent in the A and D strings as well as the upper register. I do not like to solo on ash body basses as the notes tend to disappear up top whereas they tend to be fuller and rounder with a more singing quality with alder.
Hopkins
Commercial User
Im not trying to be a jerk or anything when I ask this so please dont take it that way.
Of the two basses in the pictures below, one I built with an alder body the other poplar. They have different pickups and different fretboard woods. Do you think you could tell which wood was was which by playing them. Even though they are totally different pickup combos, if the body wood made that huge of a difference shouldnt it be pretty obvious which one was poplar and which was alder? My guess would be that if I asked 100 bassist to do that test about 50 would answer correctly.
The difference would be pretty far off since there is nothing similar with those two basses except try are basses. As for which is which wood? Well if the had the same pickups and everything else I'm sure there would stil be some tonal difference. I just don't know which one I would favor still! Who knows. A good piece of Poplar, a bad piece of Alder, viva versa, it could really go anywhere.
Hopkins
Commercial User
That's exactly the point I'm trying to make, if poplar sounded that much different than alder then it should be apparent, even on a completely different bass.
Even if it were identical except for the body woods, the basses would probably sound slightly different, but how many people would be able to tell which was which? Two basses made from the same woods with the same parts would still sound slightly different.
Hopkins
Commercial User
No not at all, One of them has T-40 pickups, and the other has a pair of jazzbuckers (one under a mudbucker cover) in completely different pickup locations. There is no way they could possibly sound the same. But the fact that one is Alder and the other Popler, not even close to the reason they sound completely different.
The comparison isn't really something I would think very accurate way of describing then. You could have a Mahogany bodied bass with a rosewood neck with a maple fretboard. It would sound just as different, but you wouldn't know which is which without knowing what those pickups, electronics, etc sound like in the same position on a body of one of the other woods. You could make a very dark tone wood sound brittle with the right pickups. Those no real world way to test any of it because just as you said, two Alder body basses with the exact same electronics, bridge, neck, everything, will still sound different. If I find the right piece of Poplar, it could sound worlds better than a bad piece of Alder. I'm still as much ip in the air as when I originally posted the question! Oh, well. I think I'll go with the plan of doing one in each. If one of them is just that off, I can always sell it, or change it up to make something really different. I don't think I will really be let down by either wood!
Hopkins
Commercial User
You basically just drove my point home man
But what I consider is good wood doesn't have much to do with its tone. If its straight, light weight, stable with out knots or worm holes (sometimes knots and worm holes look amazing). Wood is an imperfect material, so even if it did have a "tone" that would effect an electric instrument, it would be impossible to say one species sounds different than another, because no two pieces of wood or alike. All you can do is make a broad sweeping generalization.
In a way. I wasn't trying to dispute your point. Just wanting to understand. In my case I would e using the exact same neck, bridge, pickups, other electronics, etc and would like to make sure whatever wood I make the body out of gets me closest to my goal tone, which is warm, nice low mids, high mids that are there but not over bearing, and round present highs, but not super strong. I don't like the highs to cut so much as just make the notes nice and clear.
I think this is starting to get a bit personal.
I believe the whole idea here is that the tonewood debate is completely theoretical + opinion based.
We cannot know, in any concrete way, what tonal characteristics any wood has, because there really is no definite, non subjective way of measuring or defining any said tonal characteristics of any piece of wood.
People who feel that different woods have different tonal characteristics (i.e., more bass, mids, growl, punch, etc.) will argue that they consistently hear certain tonal characteristics from instruments of certain woods. I happen to be one of these people.
Alternately, some people claim that they hear little to no difference in tonal characteristics with different body and neck woods. That's fine, and I and no one else can actually refute them, because I can't know what they hear, and I have no proof that any tonal characteristics I think I hear actually exist or are due to the instrument's body or neck woods.
Theoretically, factors such as the density, grain pattern, weight, etc. of a type of wood SHOULD affect how that wood typically resonates. Do these factors actually affect resonance though? And if so, is the difference noticeable through pickups and other electronics? Will an alder bodied instrument always sound like an alder bodied instrument, regardless of electronics, for example?
I can't tell you for sure either way. No one actually can. Also, tonewood and electronics are two separate factors that both MAY affect tone. I personally believe that tone is determined in part by each and that certain woods always have certain tonal characteristics, but:
That is my opinion.
My advice is this. Buy a piece of poplar, buy a piece of alder. Make two bodies, and see if you notice a difference in tone. Ultimately, it's up to you, what you like best. If you don't hear a difference, you'll know that at least for you, the wood choice doesn't matter, at least with these two woods.
I'm guessing you'll like the alder better, but that's based on my opinion.
I believe the whole idea here is that the tonewood debate is completely theoretical + opinion based.
We cannot know, in any concrete way, what tonal characteristics any wood has, because there really is no definite, non subjective way of measuring or defining any said tonal characteristics of any piece of wood.
People who feel that different woods have different tonal characteristics (i.e., more bass, mids, growl, punch, etc.) will argue that they consistently hear certain tonal characteristics from instruments of certain woods. I happen to be one of these people.
Alternately, some people claim that they hear little to no difference in tonal characteristics with different body and neck woods. That's fine, and I and no one else can actually refute them, because I can't know what they hear, and I have no proof that any tonal characteristics I think I hear actually exist or are due to the instrument's body or neck woods.
Theoretically, factors such as the density, grain pattern, weight, etc. of a type of wood SHOULD affect how that wood typically resonates. Do these factors actually affect resonance though? And if so, is the difference noticeable through pickups and other electronics? Will an alder bodied instrument always sound like an alder bodied instrument, regardless of electronics, for example?
I can't tell you for sure either way. No one actually can. Also, tonewood and electronics are two separate factors that both MAY affect tone. I personally believe that tone is determined in part by each and that certain woods always have certain tonal characteristics, but:
That is my opinion.
My advice is this. Buy a piece of poplar, buy a piece of alder. Make two bodies, and see if you notice a difference in tone. Ultimately, it's up to you, what you like best. If you don't hear a difference, you'll know that at least for you, the wood choice doesn't matter, at least with these two woods.
I'm guessing you'll like the alder better, but that's based on my opinion.
Thank you, cstar. I try to value everyone's opinions. They vary quite a bit I'm afraid, so truthfully it will have to come down to my ears for me. Hopkins hears good things I Poplar bodies, and by the looks of his builds, I'd say he has some experience. Nice looking basses for sure. I know I've heard the good ad the bad, sometimes within the same wood type. I have also heard a good sounded plywood guitar. Once. 
I won't try to do that myself! Everyone's opinions are completely valid because they are opinions. None of them can be wrong! I just have to decide my own I guess. There are good points to both sides of the general argument. I'll just try both and go from there!
I won't try to do that myself! Everyone's opinions are completely valid because they are opinions. None of them can be wrong! I just have to decide my own I guess. There are good points to both sides of the general argument. I'll just try both and go from there!
Hopkins
Commercial User
Poplar is grown and harvested en masse for the purpose of cheap, fast production methods, whether it be for furniture, homes or instruments. The biggest problem I see with poplar is stability. It is probably the "greenest" wood out there, meaning that because of the way it is handled in the market, it retains its moisture more than other "tone" woods. It basically never sits around long enough to cure, thus rendering it unpredictable in that it will still have ALOT more shrinking and expanding to do even after it has been finished.
In the context of furniture for example, it's pretty much the difference between a $60 entertainment center from Walmart and a $2000 vanity chest from Ethan Allen.
In the context of furniture for example, it's pretty much the difference between a $60 entertainment center from Walmart and a $2000 vanity chest from Ethan Allen.
Hopkins
Commercial User
Well the $60 entertainment center would most likely be particle board with a fake wood veneer
But you do have a very valid point, especially if the poplar is coming from a big box store like home depot, you really don't know what you are getting. I usually get all my wood from Invalid Link Removed I haven't gotten any from them that hasn't been sufficiently dry, or unstable.
Well the $60 entertainment center would most likely be particle board with a fake wood veneer
But you do have a very valid point, especially if the poplar is coming from a big box store like home depot, you really don't know what you are getting. I usually get all my wood from Invalid Link Removed I haven't gotten any from them that hasn't been sufficiently dry, or unstable.
Well there you go, a good source. A smaller wood supplier may have better connections as far as getting quality poplar goes. I was more speaking toward what is on the mass market, as such that is found in major retailers like HD, as you mentioned. I say go for it if the supplier is solid and can provide some back info on the sourcing.
