• 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.

Roger's take, in a nutshell

upload_2024-6-25_12-59-22.jpeg
 
I like this little summation by Sadowsky, in part,I'm sure, because it fairly closely reflects my own experience and opinions. We've seen comments from Roger, and others, on this subject, so not new. And we've seen how contentious this stuff can be, unnecessary though that seems. Oh no!!!! :cool:
But I think he puts his perspective forward here pretty succinctly, and ends, appropriately, with "Use your own ears, play what you like." There ya go.


Rhett Shull did a similar comparison video recently. The differences were audible, but not dramatic by any means, and I must confess I don't really care that much one way or the other. And as Roger said in the video, it's more for the player than the audience, as it won't translate to much of a difference in tone in a live situation.

So I guess it matters to those to whom it matters.
 
I agree.

Sure, you can always say the differences are so subtle that the average audience listener is not going to notice, but you could also have the same argument for amps, speaker size, string gauge and material, pickups and electronics. It all makes an amplified sound and sounds like bass, right? Who's going to notice any difference? At the very least, the player will and that will affect how they play.

When I get a new bass, or bass toy, and summon The Wife to hear how great it sounds her response is always the same: “Sounds like a bass.” So yeah, play what you like.

Soooo many other things effect (affect?) tone. Strings. EQ. Other instruments you gig with and how they are EQed. Etc, etc, etc.
 
The ONLY rosewood that is restricted for musical instruments is dalbergia nigra, which is Brazilian Rosewood. 28 other species of rosewood are not restricted. East Indian Rosewood, the most common fingerboard these days, is farmed sustainably.
I know but some custom employees may not know.

I witnessed many people having to supply a lot of paperwork to get their rosewood and although it was supposed to be allowed by law, they either wasted a lot of time or couldn’t get their stuff. Warmoth is now warning you about this situation.

I’m located in Eastern Canada so I guess it could be easier elsewhere.

And I still prefer rosewood for my fingerboards !
 
  • Like
Reactions: murphy
Over the years (I'm age 72) I've owned around 30 or more bass guitars. I'm no expert and I don't have anything revelational to say about so called tone woods.

A bass is going to sound the way that it wants to sound.

Two basses made from the same tree will sound different.

How much different? Pffff, not all that much. Simple example, a P Bass will pretty much sound like a P Bass.

One time, I had 2 G&L Wunkays. One was mahogany body and the other was ash. Now, so called logic would say that the mahogany would be warmer sounding than the ash, right? Well, the mahogany Wunkay was the brighter. Fooled me!

I once talked to a guitar fanatic and and he used this example which I think is very true. He said that if he went into a guitar store and there were 50 Telecaster guitars hanging on the wall, he would play everyone of them and then buy the one that sounded the best.

IMO, that is the reality of bass guitars. Pick and buy the one that sounds best to "YOU"!

Ash? Alder? Maple board. Rosewood board. Etc, etc, etc.

The biggest variable in sound are/is the pickup/pickups, the strings and a player's choice of eqing.

I don't know why many of us try to get so "scientific" about bass guitars. Just play the damn thing!
 
The couple of times I've been to instrument builders and repairers here I've had the chance to pick up a few fretboard blanks in various materials and tap test them etc, they all have quite distinctive different tonal qualities, some of which seem to correlate with what people describe as the typical character for those types. As to whether this translates into a difference in a finished instrument is another question, I personally feel it does, but my experience is not that extensive.
I come from a saxophone playing background, and having played models where the only difference is the material it's constructed from (Brass, Bronze, Sliver etc) there's a big difference there. Yes they're an acoustic wind instrument so they work in a totally different way, but if the material can make a difference to the way a column of air vibrates, then I don't see why a string that's attached to a material is completely different.

I also wonder how much overlap there is between the different wood types, people seem to like to talk in extremes and generalisations (because it's simpler) but do they cross over? Is the brightest rosewood brighter than the darkest maple etc, or is there less overlap than that?
 
I whole-heartedly agree with his view. Including - the instruments that sound the best overall, also sound the best acoustically (unplugged). He mentions this around the 1:10 mark in the video.

Electric guitars/basses resonate. Walk into a music store and play two or more basses, unplugged. There will be a difference in tone and when the bass is unplugged, the electronics have no influence. Only the wood.
 
Regardless of how Roger's insight is digested by the TalkBass family, we should pause to appreciate a builder of his stature being willing to take the time to repeatedly share his experiences, respond to the average Joe's questions and clear up all the bad intel floating around. How many other elite builders do this? Roger, I thank you.

Think about it, folks -- Roger doesn't need to post here. He's been in the upper echelon of bass building for many years. For anyone to say his posts are only a method to sell certain species of wood is laughable. In reality, he worked his butt off and created a brand of instruments that sound and play wonderful and are recognized as such across the planet.

I'll let the fact that many ads for high-end basses on this site include some sort of wording that reads, "Will trade for Sadowsky NYC" speak for itself. :cool:
 
Last edited:
Roger's comment about ebony fingerboards is spot on. This was the sound in my head and it wasn't until I bought a passive jazz bass (Moolloon Classic J) with an ebony board that I found my sound. Roger says it has to sound right for the player. The bass also has to feel right to inspire playing better. I run the Mooloon into an outboard Sadowsky preamp and then into my amp. WOW!
 
Agreed. Dismissing Roger's observations about wood and how it affects tone because he sells basses is pretty cynical. I've spoken with Roger on several occasions, including when I visited his shop twice. He comes across as being totally down to earth and no-BS in his approach. No hard-sell tactics whatsoever.
Roger is and always has been one of the nicest , most decent and upstanding men I have ever had the pleasure of dealing with.
I treasure the letter he wrote to me in 1988 and I have enjoyed several of his basses and preamps.
I love Roger...Fanboy here
 
Hate to be a cynic but he makes more money from telling evryone about expensive woods than from say innovation or the electronics. He's one clever dude and u all fall for it..
Roger has said that unless you want something fancy or custom there’s no need to go for an NYC, get the less expensive Japanese Metro.
 
For those of you convinced that Roger’s recommendations of exotic tone woods is for purely financial gain, I guess you don’t remember all the times (pre Warwick Sadowsky deal, but I’m sure he says the same now) he said if you don’t want exotic tops or custom colors then buy a Metro version. It was the same electronics and hardware, made in his Tokyo shop and had a final setup in NY. Why would someone only motivated by high prices do this?
I’ve owned probably ten Sadowsky basses, many new, and I don’t recall Roger ever pushing any upgrade on me. He has always been honest and helpful in the order process. One of the true gentleman in the business today.
I’m waiting for my current NYC bass to be completed. I added a few “tone wood” upgrades, which I had in mind before I ever spoke to Roger.
 
After the sound goes from my brain until it comes out the speaker, everything has an effect on the result. Do the types of wood make a difference? Probably. My query, I guess, is how much of that tone is changed by all the variables in the signal chain, to make the difference in wood that noticeable? It would be apparent in a purely acoustic setting, I feel, but after a pedalboard that has, let's say 6 pedals on it, plus the amp/cab/speakers, how much of that pristine tone (from the wood) is really that apparent?

I don't take any strong stand on one side of the debate the other.
 
There is a bass player here named Millie Marlow and she has a very nice Sadowsky NYC. She said years ago she worked for Sadiwsky. Very light bass and she let me play it in an open mic. She plugged directly in a Bergantino IP which was flat as can be. I did not touch the controls but it sure was not bright enough for me. I hope one day I could mess with the controls and play it more Then last Solstice I checked an F Bass through a B Amp and a Berg 210. That one was gave me a 'Gotta have it's feeling. Sadowsky had a very exotic top and F Bassjust a good paint job but ebony vs Rosewood. I think I just prefer ebony and most of my bases are My only bass with a Maple fb has TI flats so not the brightest in my small collection.

But yeah can't argue and definitely won't win 8K basses under their belt. Play music instead. One aberration of a brighter rosewood is not enoug to challenge his experience.