Proof that the neck has a big impact in tone.

[lfmn16]

You can pull multiples of the exact same bass off the wall at a music store and they will sound different. All you proved is that two basses don't sound the same.

 

[bucephylus]

Philip Kubicki, who I would tend to listen to as an authority on the matter stated that after the pu and electronics - the next most critical component of a guitar/bass is the neck (woods) for how it sounds. After owning/playing/recording with a few of his Ex-Factor basses I trust he knew what he was talking about. Unless you know this - the critical component of why a violin/cello/double bass (regardless of pedigree) sounds the way it does has a lot to do with the bow. At least if you trust Yo-Yo-Ma's word.

My sense about the various aspects of bass guitar construction / tone / feel pretty well lines up with Kubicki’s statement.

That said, I also feel one needs to be careful to differentiate between how the player perceives the tonal characteristics while playing and what actually goes to tape; so to speak. I hear distinct differences between instruments while playing, but tend to be hard pressed to differentiate on recordings. For example, I am utterly unable to hear a given recorded bass track and tell you much at all about the bass construction, other than basics such as Rickenbacker vs P vs J. And, I only get those correct sometimes.

And, I think that’s perfectly OK. As players, we have a much more sensitive interaction with a given instrument; and I think it’s perfectly ok to obsess over those preferences; at least to an extent.

Regarding Yo-Yo Ma’s comment, I would have to see that in context. My experience with the violin family basses is that bows kind of end up being like Harry Potter wands, where certain bows will pair with a given instrument better than others. But, a great bow with one bass will not necessarily be great with a different bass. That’s a whole different kettle of fish. Weight, balance, camber, hair etc all come into play. Somewhat counterintuitively, I actually tend to like lighter bows with bigger basses, but heftier bows with smaller instruments. But, what do I know? For sure not nearly as much as Mr. Ma.

 

[mongo2]

Philip Kubicki, who I would tend to listen to as an authority on the matter stated that after the pu and electronics - the next most critical component of a guitar/bass is the neck (woods) for how it sounds. After owning/playing/recording with a few of his Ex-Factor basses I trust he knew what he was talking about. Unless you know this - the critical component of why a violin/cello/double bass (regardless of pedigree) sounds the way it does has a lot to do with the bow. At least if you trust Yo-Yo-Ma's word.

Kubicki used bass necks with multiple thin laminations for a reason.

 

[doran.dragic]

Neck absolutely matters. Just last week I tried playing a bass that didn't have one and I didn't like how it sounded (or played for that matter).

 

[Pings Bass]

Your basses are exactly the same except for the neck and [long list of differences].

IMO any tonal differences from wood are gonna be lost in the mix and/or can be easily compensated for with subtle technique or EQ.

But this poor tone wood horse was beaten dead a long time ago. Play the bass you like for whatever reason you like it. If it sounds better to you, that's good enough.

 

[funkinbottom]

For example, I am utterly unable to hear a given recorded bass track and tell you much at all about the bass construction, other than basics such as Rickenbacker vs P vs J. And, I only get those correct sometimes.

Same here. Some years back (15?) a friend and I were listening to Edgar Winters 1st album, Entrance, (if you've never heard it, take a listen, great album) We went back and forth the entire album trying to convince one another, with all usual arguments etc, whether it was a P bass or a J bass. So to settle it once and for all, I sent an email to the guy who actually played on the album, Gene Kurtz. (Tommy Shannon plays on one cut also) To my surprise, about a week later, I received a response from Gene. Turns out we were both wrong. He told me he it was one of Tommy Shannons he had in the studio. Said it was a Gibson or Epiphone, and that they liked the sound of that bass over others for the material they were recording.

So.....Happy I could be of no help what so ever. I'll just go ahead and let myself out.

 

[wvbass]

In this case I believe it's the neck with the greatest overall effect on the tone.

Despite my previous post, I actually agree with this. I'm not ready to attribute it to the type of wood, but more to the overall stiffness of the neck. I think the neck is probably the "flimsiest" part of a bass, and it makes sense (at least to me) that the more rigid a neck is, the brighter the tone will get and the more it will sustain.

For those that mentioned Kubicki (I have one of those), I think that is why the neck is essentially made of maple plywood. I think maple was convenient and obviously suitable; I think the 32 layers was to make it rigid.

I think the modern compromise (construction cost verses neck stiffness) is to use 3 to 5 pieces of wood for the neck.

 

[JIO]

Kubicki used bass necks with multiple thin laminations for a reason.

It's funny though as that multi-lam method had been around since the '60s, used on some of the cheap Japanese guitars/basses. On a Kubicki, along with having an effect on tone being hard rock maple (with an ebony fb) it also creates a very stable neck. I've never heard of a Factor neck warping. There's a guy who posted his all maple (neck/fb/body) Ex-Factor on the Kubicki Factor fb page which is very rare - must sound like a beast.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Pickups make a bigger difference. If I take the pickups out of my bass I notice a significant drop in volume, for example.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Despite my previous post, I actually agree with this. I'm not ready to attribute it to the type of wood, but more to the overall stiffness of the neck. I think the neck is probably the "flimsiest" part of a bass, and it makes sense (at least to me) that the more rigid a neck is, the brighter the tone will get and the more it will sustain.

For those that mentioned Kubicki (I have one of those), I think that is why the neck is essentially made of maple plywood. I think maple was convenient and obviously suitable; I think the 32 layers was to make it rigid.

I think the modern compromise (construction cost verses neck stiffness) is to use 3 to 5 pieces of wood for the neck.

I am not sure the issue is high frequencies given where deadspots appear.

 

[wvbass]

I am not sure the issue is high frequencies given where deadspots appear.

Agree. "Brighter" was a poor word choice, but if we all picked every word carefully, TB would be less fun. Or less annoying.

One of those.

 

[Old_Noob]

I have struggled to understand how a maple neck could sound different than a maple neck with a rosewood fretboard. But perhaps there could be a reason.

Here is the best A/B test I can imagine on the subject using a P bass. The gent simply swaps necks on the same body/strings/pups/bridge. If there is indeed a difference it is subtle. I would opt for which neck feels and/or looks better.

to my novice ears, the rosewood sounds darker and fuller

 

[mongo2]

It's funny though as that multi-lam method had been around since the '60s, used on some of the cheap Japanese guitars/basses. On a Kubicki, along with having an effect on tone being hard rock maple (with an ebony fb) it also creates a very stable neck. I've never heard of a Factor neck warping. There's a guy who posted his all maple (neck/fb/body) Ex-Factor on the Kubicki Factor fb page which is very rare - must sound like a beast.

Actually multi-lam tech has been around since WWII and was used on German KAR-98 rifle stocks.

I had a Teisco EB-200W with a multi-lam neck that was very stable and durable.

 

[Spirit of Ox]

Your basses are exactly the same except for the neck and [long list of differences].

IMO any tonal differences from wood are gonna be lost in the mix and/or can be easily compensated for with subtle technique or EQ.

But this poor tone wood horse was beaten dead a long time ago. Play the bass you like for whatever reason you like it. If it sounds better to you, that's good enough.

Same electronics, body wood,.and strings. The bridge is different but a similar style high mass.

 

[Spirit of Ox]

You can pull multiples of the exact same bass off the wall at a music store and they will sound different. All you proved is that two basses don't sound the same.

I put the Warmoth on the Geddy lee and it darkened the tone significantly

 

[drumvsbass]

What’s the conclusion for the laymen? I can hear slight differences, and the frequency analyzer seems to indicate as much. Truthfully, I think most the differences can be explained by the slight differences in attack.

The conclusion, for the layman, is the emperor's new clothes are clear as day.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

I once took the neck off a bass, fixed the loose screw hole and shimmed it, and thought I perceived a tone change. A couple of days later I could no longer hear a difference. So unless you do objective measurements or record things and later do some blind test, I'd be sceptical (in the old-fashioned sense).

 

[arbitrary]

my aluminum necked jazz bass sounded massively different from my maple necked jazz with the same pickups, spacing and body wood...

 

[Madhouse27]

I bought a Fender Player Precision with a maple neck. It sounded great. At the time I also had a Player Jazz bass with a maple neck (same model year as well). Thinking that I preferred the 38mm nut width, I swapped that Jazz neck onto the Precision body. Something was definitely lost in the sound after the neck swap which was noticeable enough for me to switch them back. I don’t know if it was the slightly less mass of the slimmer neck or what, the fit was prefect.

 

[JIO]

Actually multi-lam tech has been around since WWII and was used on German KAR-98 rifle stocks.

I had a Teisco EB-200W with a multi-lam neck that was very stable and durable.

Was not aware of that -