Rosewood/Maple Finger Boards - Tone difference?

[Moo]

I do believe the FB does make a contribution.

I agree with that, just not that we can isolate it from the rest of the instrument with our ears. Kind of like if I gave Bill Gates $5 it would be a difference but he aint gonna notice

 

[MacGroove]

I agree with that, just not that we can isolate it from the rest of the instrument with our ears. Kind of like if I gave Bill Gates $5 it would be a difference but he aint gonna notice

I'll concure with that Moo.

 

[philthygeezer]

I can definitely hear a difference. Rosewood is fatter and maple is more overt. 2 Jazz basses tonight, same amp same settings, reaffirmed this for me.

 

[Drake Kennedy]

I, along with pretty much everyone else, see these threads all the time. "Blah, blah, TONE blah blah blah." It gets really old after a while. I for one dislike the term 'tone' because EVERYONE just throws it around as fact. Ugh...

Ok, so now the point of this post. I have come up with what I believe is a pretty logical explanation of tone, from reading on here, talking 1 on 1 with luthiers, and even a little cynicism. I do not claim any of this is fact, it's just my belief, however for clarity I'll state it as fact when describing it.



The tone of an instrument is widely subjective, but what contributes to the actual sound is almost entirely physics. The way stringed instruments (be it bass, guitar, etc...) work is pretty basic. Assuming that most of us know basic properties of soundwaves and the way strings work, it's like this - the string is tuned to a pitch, and is shortened to make a desired pitch. I'm sure we can all agree on that, yes? Ok, so that means that the string is resonating from the bridge to either the nut, or where it's being held down on a fret or fingerboard.

Now, one could have a narrow view and say "Since the string only connects at the bridge and fingerboard then only the strings, frets and pickups make any difference on tone." This would be wrong. Don't get me wrong, I think the strings and pickups have one of the greatest effects on the overall tone (outside of the non-bass stuff; amps, etc...), but that's not it. In theory, the string would vibrate independently and nothing else on the instrument would move. However, this is not the case on Earth. When the string vibrates, everything else on the instrument does too. I believe this is called 'sympathetic vibration'.

Going from there, the instrument is now resonating with the string, but the wood itself doesn't actually have a direct effect on tone, like most people think. One person in this thread even expressed his ignorance by saying "The pickups are down in the body, that is where you get the tonal differences in your wood on the bass". But when you really think about it, these are magnetic pickups, how can wood have a direct effect on them at all?

Here's the catcher though. The wood vibrates from sympathetic vibration, some coming from the string against the fret, some from the bridge into the body, some just from the frequency, and this vibration then causes the strings to vibrate more, and differently*. So all of these vibrations are occurring simultaneously, and causing overtones of the strings, which are producing different vibrations in the wood, which in turn creates more overtones, and it goes on and on. So the way the wood vibrates, both independently and in conjunction with the rest of the woods and metal, makes the strings vibrate differently, which in turn changes the tone of the bass. All these overtones are picked up by the pickup ( ) and sent through the preamp and into the amp.

So....In conclusion, the woods have a great (albeit indirect) effect on tone. If you want some proof of this, plug your bass in, and listen to how the notes character changes as it sustains, and eventually decays. That's the woods' effect.


*As a sidenote, the density, stiffness, and evenness all are contributing factors to these vibrations. Very dense wood vibrates differently to softer wood. The way these woods are glued or bolted together also has an effect on the resonance. The 'cleaner' the excecution of all of this will result in a more detailed tone, and an uneven production will yield opposite results. Also, wood is very inconsistent, as most luthiers will tell you, and even pieces of the same board can sound different.


Again - these are not my personal findings, just what I've come up with from all the info I've observed.

Hope it helps, it took me a while to write out

Peace,
Drake

 

[steve21]

I, along with pretty much everyone else, see these threads all the time. "Blah, blah, TONE blah blah blah." It gets really old after a while. I for one dislike the term 'tone' because EVERYONE just throws it around as fact. Ugh...

Ok, so now the point of this post. I have come up with what I believe is a pretty logical explanation of tone, from reading on here, talking 1 on 1 with luthiers, and even a little cynicism. I do not claim any of this is fact, it's just my belief, however for clarity I'll state it as fact when describing it.



The tone of an instrument is widely subjective, but what contributes to the actual sound is almost entirely physics. The way stringed instruments (be it bass, guitar, etc...) work is pretty basic. Assuming that most of us know basic properties of soundwaves and the way strings work, it's like this - the string is tuned to a pitch, and is shortened to make a desired pitch. I'm sure we can all agree on that, yes? Ok, so that means that the string is resonating from the bridge to either the nut, or where it's being held down on a fret or fingerboard.

Now, one could have a narrow view and say "Since the string only connects at the bridge and fingerboard then only the strings, frets and pickups make any difference on tone." This would be wrong. Don't get me wrong, I think the strings and pickups have one of the greatest effects on the overall tone (outside of the non-bass stuff; amps, etc...), but that's not it. In theory, the string would vibrate independently and nothing else on the instrument would move. However, this is not the case on Earth. When the string vibrates, everything else on the instrument does too. I believe this is called 'sympathetic vibration'.

Going from there, the instrument is now resonating with the string, but the wood itself doesn't actually have a direct effect on tone, like most people think. One person in this thread even expressed his ignorance by saying "The pickups are down in the body, that is where you get the tonal differences in your wood on the bass". But when you really think about it, these are magnetic pickups, how can wood have a direct effect on them at all?

Here's the catcher though. The wood vibrates from sympathetic vibration, some coming from the string against the fret, some from the bridge into the body, some just from the frequency, and this vibration then causes the strings to vibrate more, and differently*. So all of these vibrations are occurring simultaneously, and causing overtones of the strings, which are producing different vibrations in the wood, which in turn creates more overtones, and it goes on and on. So the way the wood vibrates, both independently and in conjunction with the rest of the woods and metal, makes the strings vibrate differently, which in turn changes the tone of the bass. All these overtones are picked up by the pickup ( ) and sent through the preamp and into the amp.

So....In conclusion, the woods have a great (albeit indirect) effect on tone. If you want some proof of this, plug your bass in, and listen to how the notes character changes as it sustains, and eventually decays. That's the woods' effect.


*As a sidenote, the density, stiffness, and evenness all are contributing factors to these vibrations. Very dense wood vibrates differently to softer wood. The way these woods are glued or bolted together also has an effect on the resonance. The 'cleaner' the excecution of all of this will result in a more detailed tone, and an uneven production will yield opposite results. Also, wood is very inconsistent, as most luthiers will tell you, and even pieces of the same board can sound different.


Again - these are not my personal findings, just what I've come up with from all the info I've observed.

Hope it helps, it took me a while to write out

Peace,
Drake

Yup, I definately agree, maple is brighter and snappier sounding!

 

[JAUQO III-X]

I, along with pretty much everyone else, see these threads all the time. "Blah, blah, TONE blah blah blah." It gets really old after a while. I for one dislike the term 'tone' because EVERYONE just throws it around as fact. Ugh...

Ok, so now the point of this post. I have come up with what I believe is a pretty logical explanation of tone, from reading on here, talking 1 on 1 with luthiers, and even a little cynicism. I do not claim any of this is fact, it's just my belief, however for clarity I'll state it as fact when describing it.



The tone of an instrument is widely subjective, but what contributes to the actual sound is almost entirely physics. The way stringed instruments (be it bass, guitar, etc...) work is pretty basic. Assuming that most of us know basic properties of soundwaves and the way strings work, it's like this - the string is tuned to a pitch, and is shortened to make a desired pitch. I'm sure we can all agree on that, yes? Ok, so that means that the string is resonating from the bridge to either the nut, or where it's being held down on a fret or fingerboard.

Now, one could have a narrow view and say "Since the string only connects at the bridge and fingerboard then only the strings, frets and pickups make any difference on tone." This would be wrong. Don't get me wrong, I think the strings and pickups have one of the greatest effects on the overall tone (outside of the non-bass stuff; amps, etc...), but that's not it. In theory, the string would vibrate independently and nothing else on the instrument would move. However, this is not the case on Earth. When the string vibrates, everything else on the instrument does too. I believe this is called 'sympathetic vibration'.

Going from there, the instrument is now resonating with the string, but the wood itself doesn't actually have a direct effect on tone, like most people think. One person in this thread even expressed his ignorance by saying "The pickups are down in the body, that is where you get the tonal differences in your wood on the bass". But when you really think about it, these are magnetic pickups, how can wood have a direct effect on them at all?

Here's the catcher though. The wood vibrates from sympathetic vibration, some coming from the string against the fret, some from the bridge into the body, some just from the frequency, and this vibration then causes the strings to vibrate more, and differently*. So all of these vibrations are occurring simultaneously, and causing overtones of the strings, which are producing different vibrations in the wood, which in turn creates more overtones, and it goes on and on. So the way the wood vibrates, both independently and in conjunction with the rest of the woods and metal, makes the strings vibrate differently, which in turn changes the tone of the bass. All these overtones are picked up by the pickup ( ) and sent through the preamp and into the amp.

So....In conclusion, the woods have a great (albeit indirect) effect on tone. If you want some proof of this, plug your bass in, and listen to how the notes character changes as it sustains, and eventually decays. That's the woods' effect.


*As a sidenote, the density, stiffness, and evenness all are contributing factors to these vibrations. Very dense wood vibrates differently to softer wood. The way these woods are glued or bolted together also has an effect on the resonance. The 'cleaner' the excecution of all of this will result in a more detailed tone, and an uneven production will yield opposite results. Also, wood is very inconsistent, as most luthiers will tell you, and even pieces of the same board can sound different.


Again - these are not my personal findings, just what I've come up with from all the info I've observed.

Hope it helps, it took me a while to write out

Peace,
Drake

You sold me,rosewood is definitely warmer than ebony.


But can any one tell me which is brighter between a single truss rod and a duel action truss rod in a fingerboardless Bass?

 

[Drake Kennedy]

Good, I'm glad both of you got my point. By the way, what I really meant to say was EBONY > ALL. I just slipped and typed all that up.

 

[Akami]

Does this mean that a dead spot is the result of the fret as opposed to the fretboard?

A dead spot is a result of fret installation and instrument resonance. Not the fingerboard material.

 

[jobo4]

Here is how it was explained to me by John Files at Bass Emporium (with my own little spin)...

Until 1958, the Fender P had a one piece maple neck with the truss rod inserted through the back. The resulting cavity was filled with rosewood, thus the "skunk stripe." In 1959, Fender changed the neck making process by inserting the truss rod into the front of the neck, designing it in such a way as to be able to apply a "fret board" to complete it. To show off their new technology, they made the fret board out of rosewood and the skunk stripe dissappeared.

There would be little doubt that the resulting necks sounded different, because they were constructed in very different ways. Perhaps it was at that point, long ago that the idea that fret surfaces sounded different.

Today, however, most necks are constructed in the same way, with just a different board attached. Looks are different for sure; feel may be different; tone? A tiny bit, maybe.

 

[SamJ]

Good, I'm glad both of you got my point. By the way, what I really meant to say was EBONY > ALL. I just slipped and typed all that up.

Ebony is certainly very bright, and allows for a very low action.. I've decided to use it in my next Jazz Bass.... it should prove to be a very good slap / funk bass.

 

[MaHei]

I, along with pretty much everyone else, see these threads all the time. "Blah, blah, TONE blah blah blah." It gets really old after a while. I for one dislike the term 'tone' because EVERYONE just throws it around as fact. Ugh...

Ok, so now the point of this post. I have come up with what I believe is a pretty logical explanation of tone, from reading on here, talking 1 on 1 with luthiers, and even a little cynicism. I do not claim any of this is fact, it's just my belief, however for clarity I'll state it as fact when describing it.



The tone of an instrument is widely subjective, but what contributes to the actual sound is almost entirely physics. The way stringed instruments (be it bass, guitar, etc...) work is pretty basic. Assuming that most of us know basic properties of soundwaves and the way strings work, it's like this - the string is tuned to a pitch, and is shortened to make a desired pitch. I'm sure we can all agree on that, yes? Ok, so that means that the string is resonating from the bridge to either the nut, or where it's being held down on a fret or fingerboard.

Now, one could have a narrow view and say "Since the string only connects at the bridge and fingerboard then only the strings, frets and pickups make any difference on tone." This would be wrong. Don't get me wrong, I think the strings and pickups have one of the greatest effects on the overall tone (outside of the non-bass stuff; amps, etc...), but that's not it. In theory, the string would vibrate independently and nothing else on the instrument would move. However, this is not the case on Earth. When the string vibrates, everything else on the instrument does too. I believe this is called 'sympathetic vibration'.

Going from there, the instrument is now resonating with the string, but the wood itself doesn't actually have a direct effect on tone, like most people think. One person in this thread even expressed his ignorance by saying "The pickups are down in the body, that is where you get the tonal differences in your wood on the bass". But when you really think about it, these are magnetic pickups, how can wood have a direct effect on them at all?

Here's the catcher though. The wood vibrates from sympathetic vibration, some coming from the string against the fret, some from the bridge into the body, some just from the frequency, and this vibration then causes the strings to vibrate more, and differently*. So all of these vibrations are occurring simultaneously, and causing overtones of the strings, which are producing different vibrations in the wood, which in turn creates more overtones, and it goes on and on. So the way the wood vibrates, both independently and in conjunction with the rest of the woods and metal, makes the strings vibrate differently, which in turn changes the tone of the bass. All these overtones are picked up by the pickup ( ) and sent through the preamp and into the amp.

So....In conclusion, the woods have a great (albeit indirect) effect on tone. If you want some proof of this, plug your bass in, and listen to how the notes character changes as it sustains, and eventually decays. That's the woods' effect.


*As a sidenote, the density, stiffness, and evenness all are contributing factors to these vibrations. Very dense wood vibrates differently to softer wood. The way these woods are glued or bolted together also has an effect on the resonance. The 'cleaner' the excecution of all of this will result in a more detailed tone, and an uneven production will yield opposite results. Also, wood is very inconsistent, as most luthiers will tell you, and even pieces of the same board can sound different.


Again - these are not my personal findings, just what I've come up with from all the info I've observed.

Hope it helps, it took me a while to write out

Peace,
Drake

Thanks for taking your time to post this, Drake. From another perspective: different kinds of Woods absorb different frequencies of the vibrating string.

Why does ebony sound bright and snappy? It is a hard, dense wood and DOES NOT absorb those high frequencies of the vibrating string. Thus they are passed on to the pickups. Different materials absorb different frequencies. Thats why luthiers talk about weight, density, oil content etc.

Apply this to other kinds of woods: alder, mahagony, swamp ash, maple. How do you think a bass made of balsa would sound? Carbon Fiber? Granite?

On the maple/rosewood fingerboard issue: I don't think it is the point to IDENTIFY a rosewood or maple or ebony board in a blindfold listening, but to state that they indeed sound different, even if the difference may be very small. However small, every component makes a contribution to the overall sound of the instrument. I have heard a bass with a metal fingerboard. Can you hear it? You bet.

Mark

 

[Fretless5verfan]

Maple is brighter because it's yellow...rosewood is darker because it's brown...and ebony is better than both of them because black eats other colors.

 

[Akami]

Rosewood vs. Maple. Wow, is it the 3rd Friday of the month already? Time flies.




Great posts on this topic, Moo. PLEASE add magic cables to the testing !!?

I used to think there was a difference I could hear, simply because of the differences in one bass (J) with rosewood vs. another (Stingray) with maple. How riduculous eh?! But that's no different than someone comparing two different J's. Even luthiers will say that "exact" same basses with the same woods throughout can sound quite different, but some guys can isloate the sonic diff. of the fingerboard veneer on different basses with different pickups and different strings? I seriously doubt that, and blind testing would prove my doubts correct I'll wager.

I've swapped as similar neck as I could find into a bass, one with rosewood and one with maple, recorded onto different tracks without being told which was which, and could tell zero difference nor could my g/f who has an excellent musical ear and gr. 10 piano.

It could be that the necks had other properties which negated the fingerboard difference, but then that just proves my point that you can't isolate the fingerboard difference or guess reliably how it'll interact with one neck to the next.

As for what luthiers say, they're salesmen and woodworkers and can make mistakes or outright BS you or themselves too. Same as cable manufacturers and cabinet makers - do we trust all claims of magic cables and switches? And luthiers contradict each other on the topic in any case - there's no consensus I've ever seen.

Another great post by one of our more thoughtful members!

But then he got upstaged by this:

Maple is brighter because it's yellow...rosewood is darker because it's brown...and ebony is better than both of them because black eats other colors.

So to have my cake and eat it too, I concur with both these posts!

 

[lpdeluxe]

"Maple is brighter because it's yellow...rosewood is darker because it's brown...and ebony is better than both of them because black eats other colors."

Someone finally said something sensible on the subject...


...and I can understand it, too!

 

[JAUQO III-X]

I'd do a blind fold test if I could have the test results confirmed in a publication and to make it fair all settings on the amp and the Basses are to be set flat.

 

[poptart]

There are some great ideas here and I concurr with most of them, it is not a science and because of this we can all argue all day it is still subjective. I believe that if we all bought basses with blindfolds on that we would probably have very different basses to the ones we own today.

As consumers we like to believe that certain elements of an instrument somehow have properties that we desire or need and because of this we are prone to be deceived by false (unsubstantiated) claims by manufacturers, and in the end we can deceive our selves.

Having listened to recording of my playing over the past twenty years on a big variety of instruments the sound I produce on a bass is fairly consistant regardless of the bass. Conclude from that what you will.

Last year in Italy on honeymoon we ended up in an Eutruscan hill town in Tuscany that was famous for its production of alabastor products - similar to soap stone, and is used to make statues, ornaments etc. It is heavy but easily carved and shaped. Well in one store I found a strat shaped guitar and a warwick shaped bass made entirely out of alabastor with guitar tuners, pick ups and frets etc like a normal instument. The fretboard was alabastor too. It weighted about 20lbs even though it was 30in scale. Upshot was it sounded wierd, but after a few minutes and a bit of fiddling I got some good tone out of it....with no wood in it at all.......go figure.

My 0.02p

 

[Dan1099]

Ebony is certainly very bright, and allows for a very low action.. I've decided to use it in my next Jazz Bass.... it should prove to be a very good slap / funk bass.

Whoa, tone differences MAYBE, but action? How exactly does Ebony allow for a lower action than any other wood board?

 

[JAUQO III-X]

There was a guy at a Namm show a couple of years ago that had a few Basses made of some sort of stone.the sonic out put had more of a compressed focus with a very soft edge to it but I'm more than sure other key elements played a part in the tone as well.


there's also is a company that makes solid stone guitars and they are heavy.

here's a link
Link Removed


can any one tell the difference if a guitar player was using a nylon,graphite,copper,brass,etc. pic all the same gauge

 

[poptart]

can any one tell the difference if a guitar player was using a nylon,graphite,copper,brass,etc. pic all the same gauge

I think pics can sound quite different and many years ago when I used picks found that the compound and type made a big difference, in the same way the more frequently I play the harder my fingure tips/pads become and the more focused my sound becomes. I do strongly beieve that so much of your "tone" comes from your fingers, on both hands.

 

[Drake Kennedy]

I would also like to throw out that callouses make a difference in the attack. If a very experienced player had really developed leathery callouses, it would sound very different than that same player with bare fingers. This is accentuated the lighter you play.