Rosewood/Maple Finger Boards - Tone difference?

[Fretless5verfan]

Yeah, there's one thing. One key thing. Your opinion can't be wrong.

You're entitled to it, whatever it is. If you think milk chocolate tastes better than dark chocolate, that a mexican fender sounds better than a Sadowsky, that Green Day is the pinnacle of punk ... you're entitled. The rightness or wrongness of your opinion can't be demonstrated. Someone might disrespect your opinion, disagree with you, or think you're a dork ... but that's just his opinion.

Not so with those other concepts. Assumptions, predictions, speculations, can apply to things that are verifiable. "I'm going on the assumption that he doesn't have a gun." "I predict the Mets will lose." "It's my speculation that zinc prices will go up thousand percent." These topics are all up for debate, but they are not matters of opinion.

If more people got the significance of distinctions like these, they'd communicate more clearly, and we might even have fewer 14 page threads that don't go anywhere.

I see what you're saying, but the semantics of this argument is the LAST thing we need to bring up. Even though...

"In my opinion, rosewood is not as bright as maple." Even if you take an oscilloscope/ f analysis and tell me why i SHOULD hear something else, that doesn't change my opinion because that's not what I hear. For instance, everyone tells me GS112s are scooped sounding, but IMO, they aren't. And you can't prove me wrong. There might be a real dip in its frequency response, but i cannot hear that dip no matter how many times you tell me. See my point? Same thing with the turbo example that sav gave.

 

[rob_the_bassist]

i'm not sure if anyone adressed this yet..but have any of you ever took your bass and pressed the head of the neck into a solid wood wall..or any wall for that matter? the sound is amplified! so if you were to think that the vibrations from the string wouldn't resonate through the fingerboard..then you are wrong (i recall someone saying that, somewhere in these 14 pages)...in order for the vibrations to go through the head of the neck into the wall to produce a sound, there has to be vibrations everywhere throughout the instrument (vibrations may start at the body and then work their way up through the neck into the wall, i'm not sure but vibrations HAVE to go through the neck somehow to get to the wall). even if the vibrations from pressing down on a fret and plucking the string doesn't initially resonate through the fingerboard, after the note rings, the vibrations still go everywhere, including the fingerboard...therefore the type of material the composes the fingerboard does matter, and the different textures and properties of different woods would greatly affect the sound of the bass...i'm no wood engineer but this is what i'm guessing...whatever its all opinon and my response to this thread probably made no impact since what i said was probably really stupid..

edit: its not all opinion, i'm right.

 

[paulraphael]

There might be a real dip in its frequency response, but i cannot hear that dip no matter how many times you tell me. See my point? Same thing with the turbo example that sav gave.

I'm glad you posted that; it's an excellent point, and it leads to an elegant solution.

If you simply say "I can't hear a dip in the frequency response" or "it sounds flat to me," you're reporting on your subjective experience. No one can argue with that!

Unlike "In my opinion there's no dip in the frequency response," which attempts to turn something verifiable into a matter of opinion, and therefore doesn't make sense.

But the real value of doing it the first way isn't just that you'll make more sense and acutally communicate what you mean; it's that you won't provoke these endless pointless arguments.

If the people who don't hear a difference between maple and rosewood just said so, this thread wouldn't have turned into such a monster.

"In my experience, I can't hear the difference between maple annd rosewood."

A statelment like that might lead you to ask what exactly that experience is, so you can draw your own conclusions. But it probably won't provoke a fight.

 

[Fretless5verfan]

But it probably won't provoke a fight.

You don't come to TB often do you?

 

[Akami]

I liked how Jimi Hendrix sounded better when he was playing on a rosewood fingerboard versus maple.
But then everyone already knows that...

 

[Drake Kennedy]

Important point. It might well be that the fingerboard makes more of a difference in some basses than in others: f'r instance, it might make more of a difference in a bolt on bass commonly made of three woods (body, neck, fingerboard) than in a neck-thru multi-laminated bass made of a half-dozen or more woods. Or maybe there's something about the design and construction of Sadowsky basses in general that enhances the contribution of the fingerboard.

That said: I think most of us agree that woods contribute far less than pickups and electronics. For example, when I play Sadowsky basses I predominantly hear the clear Sadowsky electronics, and the signature tone of either P or J pickups (I haven't played many H's).

Also IME: tonal differences between fingerboard woods might well exist, but are lost in the mix when playing with guitars, drums, etc. And the last time I compared (just recently, many thanks to kjones), the bass rigs were top-notch: Aguilar/Accugroove, Read/Bergantino, AI/EA.

I know where you're coming from there. Some basses, such as early Fenders, only used really thin strips of wood, while others like Jerzy Drozd use 1/4" thick fingerboards. Something to consider...

 

[lug]

Yeah, there's one thing. One key thing. Your opinion can't be wrong.

I am the strongest man....IN THE WORLD.

It's my opinion so it's not wrong.

I am the greatest lover....IN THE WORLD.

It's not my wife's opinion so it is wrong.

 

[Drake Kennedy]

I was thinking about this. Why does it really matter? Not the tone, or the fingerboard, but whether or not it affects it to a certain degree?
One could argue that the audience couldn't tell the difference, and that's probably true, but talkbass is for the bassists, and they can. So if you like one, then you like it! If you have two basses with birdseye FBs, but different other specs, and you say that they both sound good because of the fingerboard, who's going to stop you? What difference does it make? If you think it sounds/plays/feels good, then it does to you. Just as Paul said, opinions can't be wrong.
I'm not trying to be a smart@$$ here, but honestly think about it. If you like something, then go with it. No one else has the right to tell you that your opinion is wrong.
There have been 14 pages of arguments over something that most people basically agree on. The fingerboard affects tone. The argument is over something subjective; "To what degree?"

 

[Fuzzbass]

If the people who don't hear a difference between maple and rosewood just said so, this thread wouldn't have turned into such a monster.

"In my experience, I can't hear the difference between maple annd rosewood."

"Monster" thread? As Fretless5verfan said, you must not come here often! This has been a civil discussion... no reason to play the blame game. And it's incorrect and inconsiderate to put blame on one side.

There is no objective evidence to support anyone's opinion. Or speculation, or experience, or whatevertheheck you prefer to call it. Maybe there's a difference between fingerboard woods, maybe there isn't, or maybe the differences are unpredictable.

Therefore, a number of politically correct statements exist:

"From my experience, I believe there's a difference between X and Y"
"From my experience, I don't believe there's a difference"
"From my experience, there's sometimes a difference"
"From my experience, the difference between X and Y is unpredictable"

It's as politically incorrect to say "A difference exists but you can't hear it" as it is to say "There is no difference and you're imagining it".

But again: this has been a friendly, civil debate. As far as I'm concerned, all posts here are tacitly qualified with "IMO" or "IME" or whatever. And this thread is more than just "is not/is too". I enjoy discussing the whys and wherefores.

Speaking of wherefores, here's another question. Maple fingerboards are almost always finished whereas rosewoods usually aren't. So, to those who believe maple is brighter: is it because of the wood, or because of the finish?

 

[Moo]

Moo,

I'd suggest to make it accurate you'll need not only basses that are all similar except for the fingerboard but also basses that are the same *including* the fingerboard since those too can vary widely in sound.

Human playing of an instrument doesn't make for a constant input source unfortunately, so it'd be great if different players might participate, ideally without knowing what bass they're being handed and/or at times deliberately playing differently not just trying to always play the same. This'd go some way towards negating the natural minor changes in playing approach which make huge tonal differences whether consciously done or not.

If you're only talking something like 7 samples (per your comment about "6 out of 7 would be good"), to me that doesn't seem nearly enough to wash out all the inconsistancies but if that's all you end up with then someone would at least have to replicate a high score consistently to be convincing.

Good luck. If you feel like adding in magic cables, I'd be glad to contribute towards costs and I know of at least one other who'd offered to do so in the past as well. I'd insist on a static input source in that case - no human playing/interaction required for those samples.

And if you're really going whole-hog, factor in speakers of varying size as well? Just a thought.

Again, good luck. The results will no doubt be interesting.

Thanks, good points and it looks like we have something actually happening with a large builder, I'll drop names once we get an OK.

I agree that human playing is inconsistent, this will be pointed out by some who don't like the test ignoring that humans play the bass when they can hear the differences I feel a single player will give more consistency than many players, right now it will be Jauqo playing.

What I want for the first test is as many similar instruments as we can get plus some oddballs too. I want to record direct to a click or drum track and will try to remove as much of the human factor as we can which will not be all of it unfortunately.

Since the app I want to build will have the ability to shuffle the clips and try again anyone who scores quite high should see if they can repeat it. I intend this more as a tool to become aware of our abilities more than trying to find a winner.

 

[Moo]

I have read (skimmed parts) through this thread and haven't seen anyone make the point that regardless of what wood resonates at what positive or negative frequency most of us will play differently on different fingerboards.

I'm sure that a lot of you will admit that a large part of what you sound like has to do with your fingering & technique.

When I play my Rosewood FB P Bass I just approach it different because it simply "feels" different than when I play my Maple FB Jazz. Obviously the fretless Ebony FB on my Through body Cargill makes me play different again.

I'm not suggesting that these basses should sound anything like each other, just that my approach, style, technique differs from one kind of fingerboard to the other and this in turn will change the overall sound regardless of weather or not the different woods colour the sound.

If I respond to your post will you cease to exist, or was that Jorg's cat? (I barely get the reference myself, don't worry about it).

Now onto what you actually wrote, I think that's a very important point that people will play to meet their expectations. It's been shown that you can dress the same baby in either boys or girls clothes and it will greatly influence how adults interact with it. I know that when I first see a bass I instantly have an impression of what it sounds like and that influences how I play it and what I want to hear. When I pick up a fretless I don't go straight for a slap lick. I've already made some decisions and play accordingly without ever hearing it.

I feel colors and design have the same kind of effect just less so. This is why orange basses never sound very good

 

[Moo]

hahaha, I agree, honestly though, I was trying to make a point. It has been brought up that it would be dubious at the best that any one could claim to disnguish an ebony, rosewood or maple fretboarded intrument by sound alone. The conlusion reached is that they dont sound different.

Wrong, the argument against the concept is this binary polarization. Assuming the inverse of, you can make taxonomic distinctions in wood by listening to a copy of the electromagnetic patterns of a vibrating string touching it, is automatically there is no difference at all is flawed, and desperate, and already stated more than once is not the intent. Please make up a fresh straw man, this ones spent.

on another note. The idea that luthiers cant hear things any better than us mere musicians is nonsnense.

No, it makes perfect sense, to argue they can suggests that the use of power tools and solvents refines hearing more than years of studying and playing music and training your ear to hear subtle differences while a band plays at full blast.

Any reputable luthier has spent a long time learning to discriminate which materials and methods sound good and which do not.

No, they haven't. They have spent years deciding what to believe. If you have some info on this training please fill me in. And also if you could explain how these builders contradict each other that would be nice too

Sure there is variability from piece to piece in one species of wood, and there are many other variables like finish, moisture etc. But I am sure they are able to compensate. Otherwise certain masters of the craft would not rise to the top.

Of course, we only purchase items based solely on quality and expert appraisals we make ourselves. All this advertising and business tuff is just for show

 

[JAUQO III-X]

Then shouldn't someone do the playing who does not have expectations, or at least doesn't know for what purpose they're playing?

In this experiment that Moo and I are working on I have no expectations at all(I will be playing the Basses)and my purpose is to only assist in providing an outlet for those who may be interested in what the outcome of this particular experiment may bring.

 

[Moo]

It's why someone like Roger Sadowsky's impressions are likely to count for more: we have reason to believe he has listened to multiple samples with only one variable changed. This isn't hard science, but it's the kind of empirical experience that's more likely to lead to a meaningful conclusion.

It could lead to a better opinion, it could also be a superstition reinforced for decades by simply dismissing all examples where it didn't hold up and remembering the ones where it did. This is actually the more likely scenario as most myths are started by "experts' in the field. Human nature is not self critical and taking notes to compare the facts with our beliefs. As a rule we as humans decide what we believe is true and reinforce that with whatever reality we run into.

This can sometimes be easier to demonstrate not by measuring what we perceive and comparing that to reality but simply getting someone to believe a lie and watch the dynamic work. In this case a good example would be a famous luthier posting that the secret to a funky tone is filling the control cavity with cottage cheese and then watch all the lo-fat vs. non-fat threads pop up. Leland Sklar's famous Producer Switch is a less ridiculous and actually real example.

For those not familiar with the story, to avoid carrying too many basses to studio gigs he installed a switch in the face of his bass hooked to nothing. When a producer would say they don't like the tone and ask him to try another bass he would very visibly flip the switch and ask how's this?

 

[Moo]

We should perhaps just merge all the fingerboard/cable/15"speaker/switch/religion/etc. threads into one since the call & response is almost verbatim. Ah well, it helps pass the time.

I added one more to your example, hope you don't mind.

 

[Moo]

I come from a hard science background and I do understand scientific method. But since it very difficult to test this empirically, especially at a reasonable cost, you'll have to rely on my experience. As I said, I have nothing invested in this point of view. I really don't care if I make more basses with rosewood or maple boards.

Roger

Hi Roger, have you in your years of building ever tested any of these theories in a scientific way? Or more scientific?

Would you think you could identify the basses in your shop with someone else playing them and accurately tell us what the woods are? How accurate do you think you could be and would you be willing to test this one day?

 

[Moo]

If a Maple tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, will it sound like rosewood?

Depends which forest you ask

 

[JAUQO III-X]

You've stated strongly that you can easily hear the difference so you do have expectations, and therefore as long as you're seeing the fingerboards and you're doing the playing that goes against one of Moo's main points which is that someone may make things sound the way they expect them to sound, perhaps subconsioucly.

Because of this, if a lot of people score highly then any skeptic wishing to debunk the sound samples would point to that first I'd expect, and as far as methodology goes they'd be correct in doing so. In that light, while it very cool what you're trying to accomplish, it seems a bit of a waste IMO if it can be so easily shot down from the start.

Good luck whatever methods you choose.

Me and Moo(Bob)have went over this in phone conversation and E-mails and he knows where I stand on this experiment and he's been knowing me long enough to know that I am just as interested in this as all the others want to see this thru.Once the tracks are recorded I will have no say in who is taking the test and there will be witnesses on the day of the recording.At this point SMASH I would just like to see us get thru the test and see what the results may show us.


All the settings on the Amps and Basses will be set flat.Volume will be the only thing used and of all the Basses that will be used the same exact Bass lines will be played on each one.

I will not be taking the test.

 

[Moo]

That said: I think most of us agree that woods contribute far less than pickups and electronics.

I do but I sure hear a lot of people that say the wood is number 1. But I'm basing my impression on anecdotal evidence

 

[Akami]

I do but I sure hear a lot of people that say the wood is number 1. But I'm basing my impression on anecdotal evidence

I completely agree on this, but I see an order of importance starting with 1) Body wood; 2) Neck wood; 3) Fingerboard wood (if any detectable difference is truly there.

Another analogy; Throw a cup of hot chocolate in the ocean and see if the flavor of the ocean changes. That which is the majority will most often make the biggest contribution in flavor too, whether that flavor be sound or what have you.

I'm really excited to see you guys are going to do this and although I'm not a believer in the audible difference, I'm definitely willing to be proven wrong and I also trust both you and Jauqo to be honest enough that regardless of what your findings you'll report them as you find them.

Is anyone else going to participate?