• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Lets talk about finger board woods...

Jan 23, 2016
269
428
61
Bronx, NY
I just posted about the odd choice of finger board wood on my new Ibby Mikro, Jatoba. It's apparently a harder wood than Rosewood and it's obviously better available for manufacturing. Which brings me to the point of this post. Does anyone know what moving away from traditional woods used will do to the sounds/feel/durability we are all used to? I'm seeing a few out there now that seem like a odd choice, like Pau Ferro, so this may end up being the norm now that Rosewood is starting to vanish from production. Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jd56hawk
I recently commissioned a build and got to hand pick my wood. I looked at rosewood, but what struck my eye was a piece of quartersawn wenge for the neck. When I asked the guy doing the build about wood, he told me that he hasn't seen the wood make a tremendous difference in a solid body electric. In fact, he said you can use the same type wood and depending on the source of the wood it will be different. His advice, pick the wood that was the most appealing and that wasn't too heavy.

I know this is sacrilege to the "tone wood" folks. But we sat and discussed that some electric instruments used to be made of pine or even plywood, and they sounded great. Some very famous instruments weren't even made of wood...old Dano basses were masonite. Dan Armstrong used to build them out of acrylic. Some instruments have had formica tops.

I do believe quality materials make a big difference, but I feel that quality bridges, strings, pickups, preamps, signal path, amp/DI, cabinet and/or PA, and the room have a bigger influence on tone than any wood you build your bass out of.

My bass will have African mahogany body with three vaneers on the top (rosewood, wenge, and figured maple). The neck will be a laminate of birdseye maple, rosewood, wenge, and purpleheart. The fingerboard will be wenge. But the most important parts, to me, are the frets, nut, bridge, preamp, and pickups.
 
I recently commissioned a build and got to hand pick my wood. I looked at rosewood, but what struck my eye was a piece of quartersawn wenge for the neck. When I asked the guy doing the build about wood, he told me that he hasn't seen the wood make a tremendous difference in a solid body electric. In fact, he said you can use the same type wood and depending on the source of the wood it will be different. His advice, pick the wood that was the most appealing and that wasn't too heavy.

I know this is sacrilege to the "tone wood" folks. But we sat and discussed that some electric instruments used to be made of pine or even plywood, and they sounded great. Some very famous instruments weren't even made of wood...old Dano basses were masonite. Dan Armstrong used to build them out of acrylic. Some instruments have had formica tops.

I do believe quality materials make a big difference, but I feel that quality bridges, strings, pickups, preamps, signal path, amp/DI, cabinet and/or PA, and the room have a bigger influence on tone than any wood you build your bass out of.

My bass will have African mahogany body with three vaneers on the top (rosewood, wenge, and figured maple). The neck will be a laminate of birdseye maple, rosewood, wenge, and purpleheart. The fingerboard will be wenge. But the most important parts, to me, are the frets, nut, bridge, preamp, and pickups.
Good points. I'm a drummer and I found that the type of woods used didn't make nearly as much of a difference as the heads/skins I used...it became a matter of preference to me. I do worry about the durability of the new woods being introduced, like if they can even be re-fretted, only time will tell if they have the staying power of the traditional woods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN WOODMAN
i have to go with chadhargis . i play fretlesses and have 3 different types of fingerboard woods/substances in my tiny 'stable', but i don't get that any of the fb differences play much of a role in the sound/tone. by the time i'm dialing in on the gig = they either all sound the same, or the differences are more attributable to tone knob and amp settings.

per the issue of feel: (fretless) they feel the same, IME. and even if other fretless players claim a significant difference in feel: all of that would seem to be negated with the addition of frets.

durability: i don't get any difference (over years) with my axes = those with the most wear have been played more/longer.

those are my thoughts, such that they are. :)
 
I don't think that Pau Ferro, Jatoba, etc. are "odd" choices at all. Rosewood has been used a lot because:

1) It worked well and looked good
2) It was widely available

Given that the business of making instrument is highly traditional, once something worked well for someone, the band wagon took everyone on the same path

Now that #2 is being challenged (Indian Rosewood is sustainably farmed at this point, but as it isn't easily distinguishable from stuff being poached elsewhere, it's being controlled to the point where it isn't worth it to manufacturers to go through the red tape), manufacturers are going to look for the next wood that satisfies #1 and #2, and there are a bunch of choices. Pau Ferro has been used a fair amount in instruments before, so it's logical choice. Some of the decision also will rest on what's nearby - if you're making stuff in Asia, local woods don't have as much transport cost as stuff from Africa. Gibson is using baked maple, as it's a relatively "local" wood, which they process to darken it - that process is something they can control better than the distribution of dark stuff from overseas.

In short, things will be different, but not THAT different.
 
Blackwood Tek...looks like rosewood but smooth and hard like maple.
o77ip1.jpg
 
Regardless of what type of wood, each wood chosen has an input to the sound of a bass. Sometimes it will be noticeable and sometimes it will be so subtle that the differences are less discernible. There's generally 3 things in play; the correct wood to serve the function, the weight-to-firmness/stiffness ratio of the wood, and the way it looks. To say it makes no difference is a subjective assessment/blanket statement. It's ok if that's what one believes, but it doesn't make it universally true.
 
My experience with different fretless fingerboard woods doesn't lead me to the same opinions as yours
i'm sure...and i have no quarrel with those who experience the issue differently. i have to assume that you are just more 'perceptive/sensitive' to what those differences are.

actually: there have been occasions when i thought rosewood was soft/spongy compared to ebony/ebonol, but it was a 'passing moment' for me = "just my imagination!"
 
i'm sure...and i have no quarrel with those who experience the issue differently. i have to assume that you are just more 'perceptive/sensitive' to what those differences are.
actually: there have been occasions when i thought rosewood was soft/spongy compared to ebony/ebonol, but it was a 'passing moment' for me = "just my imagination!"

Yeah, arguments that boil down to "I notice something!" vs "I don't!" are pretty silly. At least when we're talking about what sounds we enjoy. If it was curing a disease or keeping a building from collapsing it would be a different story.

I'm sure we have many differences in our EQ settings, setups, amps, strings, playing styles, etc. Things like that can either mask small differences in sound, or make them irrelevant. Most of it falls by the wayside in a mix anyway.

Even our personal definitions of what "tone" is makes a big difference. I usually include the sustain envelope in mine, for example, and that's where I notice most of the difference in fingerboard materials. Other people conceptualize sustain as completely separate from "tone", so we're really not talking about the same thing.
 
I love rosewood... the sound, the feel, the look, it's tough and wears well. It's simply what I've always preferred.

Maple is nice, but I prefer it when it's not glossed up... even if that means it's gonna show dirt and oil.

I have pau ferro on a Strat neck and it's smooooooooooth. I'd take pau ferro over ebony any day.

I've had a few Modulus basses with phenolic boards -- decent and bulletproof... but it's just not wood, which is what I like.

I'd like to try a Fender-style bass with a wenge board someday.
 
Maybe in our living rooms or studio or in well mixed recording some minor tonal differences might be more apparent but in live mix I doubt we'd hear or care. Plug it in and play it.

As for durability if a 400 year old instrument hasn't crumbled to dust I'm sure I'll be dead long before it ever becomes an issue so I'm not gonna fret over what wood my fret board is made of.
 
The material of the body of an electric solid instrument is more important than that of an acoustic instrument - drums, acoustic guitar, etc. Those have resonating chambers to do the heavy lifting with the tone. ie. Ramirez' experiment with a paper mache flamenco guitar.
The wood type in an electric solidbody guitar or bass isn't as important as whether you lucked out and got a really great resonant piece. You know the good stuff before you plug it in and it is beautiful thing!
 
My Killer B T-Hawk bass has a bubinga fretboard on it and I really like it. The body is mohagony and maple and the neck is a dark birdseye maple neck that almost looks slightly roasted but it isn’t. The bass sounds and plays great and I think the different woods that it is made out of, really compliment each other.
Here are some pics of it.

F861B7C4-15D0-409B-93B5-F5A2C6A73EFE.jpeg
4B330B1A-CC84-467E-873D-D701E2FF27BF.jpeg
A85BF513-1007-4C87-92C1-8ECD412C6D02.jpeg
B0D56C4B-7A56-4959-B0D5-EAEBD4733F56.jpeg
3D53CC74-EF26-452D-9391-61FEE0110088.jpeg
BD6C6725-D8D5-496A-B868-626FE9FB8700.jpeg
E50DC7E0-E5AF-483E-B850-6EF2DD90454D.jpeg
7053B652-173A-44E2-97B2-47391EFF4257.jpeg
 
Could someone explain to me how the wood changes the way the magnets of the pickups and the vibrations of the strings are impacted? I could definitely understand the wear of the fingerboard, and the potential for chipping when refretting with some wood types. But when you're talking the wood of the body, or for that matter the wood on the fretboard, I just can't fathom how it would impact the electrical characteristics of a non acoustic guitar/bass.
 
I've noticed a lot of talk about roasted necks lately. I saw one in a recent thread and it looked drop dead GORGEOUS. The fretboard was flame maple as was the neck. The fretboard was darker roasted and looked stunning. I think the builder joined the thread and said that since the wood was roasted, it made the wood much more resonant, as the pores were dried out and didn't contain water.

Anyway, the neck and body (also roasted) were beautiful. I noticed that Warmoth is also doing roasted necks.