• 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.

Rosewood/Maple Finger Boards - Tone difference?

#321
I've heard many times before that the fretboard contributes more tonally than the neck wood(s). Not true?

On a side note, I know what woods I like, for tone (to my ears) and for looks. I buy based on that. This peeing contest seems lose-lose to me. I also strongly agree that the potential difference between maple and maple (or ANY other wood) could be more blatant than maple and rosewood (or ANY other woods).

Just my rambling, incoherent $.02.
 
#322
Fuzzbass said:
Did you physically swap the board? Or did you swap the neck containing the board? Or are you simply comparing basses that are "identical" (emphasis on the quotes) except for fingerboard?
Click to expand...
No, we didn't physically swap the necks. We compared two similar weight Alder bodies (one with an Ebony board and one with Rosewood) as well as an Ash body with a Maple board.

The basses were otherwise identical (i.e. no tops, same hardware, same pick-ups, same electronics, etc.)

We recorded the same player using the same groove on each bass.

It certainly wasn't a completely scientific experiment by any means but I think it's at least directionally correct.

The results are pretty interesting - take a listen if you get a chance.
 
#323
Joelc73 said:
No, we didn't physically swap the necks. We compared two similar weight Alder bodies (one with an Ebony board and one with Rosewood) as well as an Ash body with a Maple board.

The basses were otherwise identical (i.e. no tops, same hardware, same pick-ups, same electronics, etc.)

We recorded the same player using the same groove on each bass.

It certainly wasn't a completely scientific experiment by any means but I think it's at least directionally correct.

The results are pretty interesting - take a listen if you get a chance.
Click to expand...

where are these tracks? did you post them here or can we get them through a PM?
 
#324
Ok, here we run into the same problem we have had throughout the thread. Cut a tree down, build ten basses from the wood, not a single one will sound exactly the same. The only way you can really judge this thing is if you use the exact same bass with the exact same neck and just change the fretboard. And in response to Fuzzbass, and I don't care who I offend here, ANYONE who thinks the fretboard contributes more tone than the body is a f***in idiot. Nuff' said.
 
#325
Well, eventually you may get to the point where you really don't care what anyone else thinks. Even bass players.

More and more when I go on stage these days, I'm doing it for my own reasons, and whatever other folks think is just fine by me. The relevance for me in this discussion is what are you going to pick when you go to buy an instrument.

Well, first off, most of us with some experience are going to look for a bass that sounds good. It might have a maple or rosewood or whatever board. The instrument needs to sound good as a whole. I mean how many of you are standing there concentrating on a solo in the opening set thinking, "gee, this bass sounds all right, but it would sound better with a ______board?" I mean, I don't generally even look at the board, much less think about it. Who cares?

OTOH, when I am custom ordering a bass, I will a) rely on the builder's experience, and b) my preconception about what I am going for and what I believe based on my experience may be tonal differences in the selection. Then the bass gets built and it may or may not sound like what was intended. So what? At the end of the day, the instrument will either hang or it won't. The whole is so much more than the sum of the parts, that I don't believe we will ever reduce this to pure science. Thank God. The best you can hope for is some guidelines and then prayer. Money can help too.

Anyway, that's the way I see it.
 
#326
Joelc73 said:
It certainly wasn't a completely scientific experiment by any means but I think it's at least directionally correct.

The results are pretty interesting - take a listen if you get a chance.
Click to expand...

The difference in tone is subtle (through my desktop PC speakers) but does exist. We probably disagree about what exactly is proven by those clips: f'r instance, would the result always be the same if 20 alder/rosewood basses were compared to 20 ebony/rosewood, instead of 1 vs. 1? I seriously doubt it. But the bottom line is that I enjoyed listening!
 
#327
Akami said:
You feel you get something you're looking for with a particular fingerboard material then I'm glad it's available for you to buy.

Anyway, body wood affects tone more than fingerboard material and ss screws sound the same as black ones.
Click to expand...

Which, AGAIN, has zip to do with the question... so why keep bringing it up. No doubt if a bassist pulls an all-nighter and then eat pancakes it might affect his tone... but it's not relevant to fingerboard woods;)

I also have no problem with people who feel there is a big enough difference to matter to them unless they're trying to make others feel inferior for not having the same values as them.
Click to expand...

I've found that you can't make anyone feel inferior who doesn't already. As such I don't have a problem with anyone who's trying to make someone else feel inferior, be it real or imagined. It's usually pretty transparent.


That's one of the main reasons threads like this repeatedly go down the path they do IMO... ego. Be it this topic or something as simple as the perennial: "what box do I need to even my fingerstyle and slapping?":confused:

"A box called practice":D
"Well, are you saying I can't play???":mad:
I don't know... are you saying you can't control this?":smug:

Making a blanket statement that it doesn't matter is pretty silly. As if one couldn't imagine there ever being a noticeable difference. Heck, there may not be depending on the situation but in many cases there is.
 
#329
Brad Johnson said:
That's one of the main reasons threads like this repeatedly go down the path they do IMO... ego..
Click to expand...


IMO... the reasons that threads like this go down the path that they do is that most people (shockingly even people who have a university degree) have no understanding of the scientific method, and constantly confuse spurious correlation with causality. This is a much bigger problem with our society than people thinking that two basses with the same general spec's are 'identical'.

Don't mean to get so heavy on such a trivial topic (and I have always agreed that, in general, if you keep everything else constant... which you never can... that a maple board is a touch brighter than a rosewood board, etc.), but the lack of understanding of identifying causal influences makes me sad given it's 2006.:bawl:
 
#330
Fuzzbass said:
Jeez, Brad... your tagline used to be "As always, I could be wrong". How come you're conceding no such thing in this case? You lay claim to "reality", and everyone who disagrees "doesn't get it".
Click to expand...

It's still my tagline:D

Geez, Ken, is what you quoted what you're referring to?

"Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Johnson
For those that don't get it it will remain bull$#!t. For those elitists (;)) that do, it's reality. I have no problem with people who don't get it....".

There are people saying the fingerboard makes little to no difference and that anything to the contrary is BS. They are saying as far as there being a difference, THEY DON'T GET IT. Get it? They're calling people who claim to notice the difference elitists, hence my use, with a smiley, of the term. In that respect, by their measure, I must be an elitist.:hyper:

You could be wrong. You also misrepresent many of us the other side. I've never said that there's no difference between fingerboard woods. I've simply said 1) that difference is subtle, and 2) it's unpredictable. Luthiery is not chemistry.
Click to expand...

Unless you resemble the people I'm talking about (and it seems clear you don't), how am I misrepresenting you?

As far as me possibly being wrong on this, sorry, there is no way in hell I'm wrong. Maybe I should state that more forcefully, I don't know ;) (there's the smiley again).

I'm not going to pretend there's any overall merit to the idea that the fretboard wood makes no difference. I know that the opposite has been true in many cases so why would I? If that offends anyone, in this case so be it. I don't think this is a matter of opinion, I've experienced it way too many times... and if someone hasn't that doesn't nullify those experiences. I'd be lying if I conceded otherwise.

People try to muddle this down with all sorts of stuff, why I don't know...maybe the idea that someone heard or experienced something that, at least so far, they haven't makes them feel inferior. I can't hear a dog whistle but I'm sure some of these same folks would deny the dog does either... it's all a scam.

Slightly different topic: do you agree with Roger Sadowsky that the fingerboard wood has more of an effect than body wood (all else being equal, yadda yadda)? I'm not trying to start anything :p; just curious.
Click to expand...

Do you think it CAN'T?

Do you mean by "all else being equal" everything EXCEPT the body wood and fingerboard wood?

To get to what Roger's talking about (and I won't portend to talk for him) you have to consider the particular situation he's clearly referring to. He's talking about in reference to HIS BASSES. In that respect I agree with whatever conclusions he's drawn on the instrruments he's built. Not because he's Roger... rather because he's there EXPERIENCING the instruments. I can easily believe that on a Sadowsky a Maple board vs. Rosewood could make more of a tonal difference that Alder vs. Ash.

And you can't?

In the meantime you have people making blanket statements about all basses that are frankly stupid. Not just ignorant... you can talk to an ignorant person, OTOH when someone is just too thick to consider something this basic is even possible... and you clearly aren't someone who thinks it makes no difference... not sure what your feelings are on Sadowsky question.
 
#334
KJung said:
IMO... the reasons that threads like this go down the path that they do is that most people (shockingly even people who have a university degree) have no understanding of the scientific method, and constantly confuse spurious correlation with causality. This is a much bigger problem with our society than people thinking that two basses with the same general spec's are 'identical'.

Don't mean to get so heavy on such a trivial topic (and I have always agreed that, in general, if you keep everything else constant... which you never can... that a maple board is a touch brighter than a rosewood board, etc.), but the lack of understanding of identifying causal influences makes me sad given it's 2006.:bawl:
Click to expand...
I blame home skoolin!

Cause and effect is a concept that seems to be foreign now. Once it was proven that milk leads to alcoholism the concept was finished. I also think a culture with hyper self esteem finds it difficult to accept that they can't know everything. At least until they have 20,000 posts :)
 
#336
bigd4207 said:
Ok, here we run into the same problem we have had throughout the thread. Cut a tree down, build ten basses from the wood, not a single one will sound exactly the same. The only way you can really judge this thing is if you use the exact same bass with the exact same neck and just change the fretboard. And in response to Fuzzbass, and I don't care who I offend here, ANYONE who thinks the fretboard contributes more tone than the body is a f***in idiot. Nuff' said.
Click to expand...


Well said;).

What do you think about this, Fuzzbass? If Roger is saying what you say he is, this guy is clearly calling him a f***in idiot.

The truly idiotic thing is this idea that anyone is saying anything will sound EXACTLY THE SAME. Duh.

Has anyone contended that if you make identical basses out of the same wood they's sound exactly alike? No... but that's where this has to go for some to make their "point":rolleyes:

To the contrary, different woods GENERALLY have identifiable sounds. If you can't understand the difference between IDENTIFIABLE and EXACTLY ALIKE, read no further.

I have no idea why some people keep trying to make this an issue of extremes... it's not. It's pretty obvious only one side of this debate is doing it.

Or this could all be some weird coincidence or a mass hypnotic state that allows people to slap on SIMILAR instruments (and no, a Ric and a Jazz ain't similar:rolleyes: ) and think that they hear a distinctive slap tone with a Maple neck that is somehow different from Rosewood.

'Nuff said indeed.
 
#337
Moo said:
I blame home skoolin!

Cause and effect is a concept that seems to be foreign now. Once it was proven that milk leads to alcoholism the concept was finished. I also think a culture with hyper self esteem finds it difficult to accept that they can't know everything. At least until they have 20,000 posts :)
Click to expand...


Many know nothing with far less. Not sure if there's a correlation there or not.
:bassist:
 
#338
KJung said:
IMO... the reasons that threads like this go down the path that they do is that most people (shockingly even people who have a university degree) have no understanding of the scientific method, and constantly confuse spurious correlation with causality. This is a much bigger problem with our society than people thinking that two basses with the same general spec's are 'identical'.

Don't mean to get so heavy on such a trivial topic (and I have always agreed that, in general, if you keep everything else constant... which you never can... that a maple board is a touch brighter than a rosewood board, etc.), but the lack of understanding of identifying causal influences makes me sad given it's 2006.:bawl:
Click to expand...
Ken,

Agree with what you say here - to take it one step further...I'm furious with much of the national media who actually work very hard to influence the general public to (how did you put it?) "confuse spurious correlation with causality" in order to further their own political agenda. I also agree with your comment concerning the particular effects of this during 2006.

I know...no political threads...so I'll climb down off the soapbox. I also, like you, tend to think that a maple board is a touch brighter and snappier than a rosewood board. However, that is only based on my own subjective hearing/reasoning and not on any use of the scientific method.

Jay
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back