• 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.

Maple vs. Rosewood?

#24
I took the maple vs. rosewood test and I got it "right," but the difference was extremely small to my ears. No, I don't think I'd notice the difference I heard in a performance setting, not even in a bass solo, what with crowd noise, A/C in the club, and background racket from the rest of the band (like, is the drummer playing? How about hum and bleed from the PA?). Caveats: I didn't run the test, I didn't observe the performances, I haven't seen the equipment, I don't know about lots of possible variables (e.g., was it "true," i.e., soft, oily, rosewood, or was it the [reputedly these days more frequently encountered] pau ferro/morado "rosewood"?).

-Steve
 
#26
On average, maple is a bit brighter than rosewood, though the effect is subtle. They feel pretty different too. Maple tends to be slicker, rosewood a little grittier (although this is subtle as well, since you have a string in the way).

Personally, I like pau ferro and ebony these days. Both are bright, slick, and handsome.
 
#32
ggunn said:
Yes, absolutely. You don't have the data to back it up either way.
Click to expand...

I'll pop back in for one more! My example of the larger sample of basses was actually meant to replicate the fact that most of those who have done this 'test'... i.e., gear hogs that have owned a ton of different instruments with various wood combinations, luthiers who have made many, many similar basses with RW versus Maple boards, etc., seem to think that, in general and on average:D the harder maple boards do have a different tone and feel to the softer true RW board.

Another way to look at this averaging is to do a kind of informal 'meta analysis', treating each individual pairwise comparison (like the clip posted on this thread) as a data point, and look across many comments and posts.

It again seems to me that the 'general consensus' among those that even care about this stuff is that a maple board can act as one component of a bass to move the tone toward a little more 'brighter immediate' tone, and that a true RW board can be one component of a bass that, when combined with others (pickups, preamp, strings, body wood, etc.) can move the tone toward a somewhat warmer, growlier sort of tone.

No big deal one way or the other to me, but I enjoy the 'quasi-experimental design' issues involved in this topic, so I always participate in these thread.

There are a few of other things that really make this question 'murky'. One is that most players who like a modern, bright slap tone gravitate toward maple boards... based on combined consensus of maple tone opinions, etc. Since these types of players also tend to prefer aggressive pickups, bright strings, and modern sounding SS amps, it tends to further reinforce the idea that 'maple boards are bright'. The opposite is true with the RW boards, which seem to be prized by those players who want a more organic tone, and are usually seen on mellower voiced instruments, those using vintage amps, etc. (I know this is an over-generalization, but you get the point.

Secondly, again as I posted before, most RW boards seem to actually be Morado, which to my ear, hands, etc. is closer to maple in hardness and tone.

Finally, most maple boards are paired with ash bodies, and most RW boards are paired with alder bodies (at least on Fender type instruments). This further confounds the evaluation. For example, the maple board Sadowsky's sound WAY different than the RW board models (again, not the Morado as much). Is this because of the board material, or a combination of the board material and the body woods (most maple Sads are ash body, most Morado or RW models are alder). Who knows!!!!!

I just enjoy the discussion!:)
 
#36
The major difference between rosewood and maple, IME, is that when I'm on a mostly-dark stage I can see the black side marker dots against a maple fretboard much easier than I can see the white side marker dots against a rosewood fretboard.

That's just me and my failing eyesight. YMMV.

Oh yeah, and other people tell me my basses SHOULD sound brighter because they have maple fretboards!
 
#40
KJung said:
I'll pop back in for one more! My example of the larger sample of basses was actually meant to replicate the fact that most of those who have done this 'test'... i.e., gear hogs that have owned a ton of different instruments with various wood combinations, luthiers who have made many, many similar basses with RW versus Maple boards, etc., seem to think that, in general and on average:D the harder maple boards do have a different tone and feel to the softer true RW board.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, because Invalid Link Removed.

So many people love to say that maple is brighter because it's harder. Maybe maple is brighter, but it isn't harder.

My experience, after doing my best to listen with my ears and not my eyes, is that maple is brighter some of the time... and that rosewood is brighter some of the time (even in all-else-being-equal comparisons). My conclusion is that it's a crapshoot (to borrow Rumblin' Man's term).
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back