Sadowsky Wood Selection

[Mike Lock]

Stock photo

Awwwww yeah that's nice

 

[fhm555]

I enjoyed the vids.
Until the part where he explained the chambering.
They check and document the weight of the body at every stage. Final weight and I assume a consistent final weight is clearly something that's important to them.
So, why not just say the chambering is to get the body to the desired final weight?
Would people be turned off by that?
Why give a nonsense explanation for why it's done and not say why they really do it?
I don't get it.

You don’t sell the steak, you sell the sizzle. Prospects care little for boring production tech talk like consistent weight of body blanks, but improving performance or adding an intangible extra like “better tone”, “more lively”, etc…
when graphite composites were making their way into fishing rods, a common sales tactic used to illustrate their superior “sensitivity”, was a sales minion placing a rod tip against their throat and talking while the prospect held the rod. While this was a good demonstration of frequency transmission, line movement in the guides is not a frequency generator until it physically loads the rod and releases that energy when the rod unloads.
It was such a successful ploy most early converts to graphite claimed increased sensitivity as their primary reason for switching from fiberglass rods.

 

[RichterScale]

You don’t sell the steak, you sell the sizzle. Prospects care little for boring production tech talk like consistent weight of body blanks, but improving performance or adding an intangible extra like “better tone”, “more lively”, etc…
when graphite composites were making their way into fishing rods, a common sales tactic used to illustrate their superior “sensitivity”, was a sales minion placing a rod tip against their throat and talking while the prospect held the rod. While this was a good demonstration of frequency transmission, line movement in the guides is not a frequency generator until it physically loads the rod and releases that energy when the rod unloads.
It was such a successful ploy most early converts to graphite claimed increased sensitivity as their primary reason for switching from fiberglass rods.

Exactly. I don't think the little extra comments are necessary. Seeing their process, it's obvious they put a lot of effort into building a quality instrument. And people who play them report that they're quality instruments. I see no reason to call weight reducing chambers, "tone" chambers, or say they use a thin finish because it lets the body "breathe", or "resonate". These are not acoustic instruments and it's not only a load of crap, it insults people's intelligence. They build great instruments. I don't see a need for it.
It would be refreshing for once, to see a builder say, "we pride ourselves on the effort we invest in making quality instruments,.....the steak sells itself,....there's no reason to blow smoke up your rear and sell you the sizzle."

 

[marchone]

Someone commented about how resonant these German Sadowskys are unplugged.

 

[fhm555]

Exactly. I don't think the little extra comments are necessary. Seeing their process, it's obvious they put a lot of effort into building a quality instrument. And people who play them report that they're quality instruments. I see no reason to call weight reducing chambers, "tone" chambers, or say they use a thin finish because it lets the body "breathe", or "resonate". These are not acoustic instruments and it's not only a load of crap, it insults people's intelligence. They build great instruments. I don't see a need for it.
It would be refreshing for once, to see a builder say, "we pride ourselves on the effort we invest in making quality instruments,.....the steak sells itself,....there's no reason to blow smoke up your rear and sell you the sizzle."

While I agree, the vast majority of the consuming public does not. Spinning wants into needs is the most effective method in sales. People don’t have to be convinced to get what they need, but you must appeal to those wants most folks have rationalized into needs, and the larger the outlay relative to income is, the more effective reenforcing the belief a want is a need, becomes.
A good sales type will never say you want the deluxe trim package, but they will feed you a line of BS which will translate to an already primed mindset that the deluxe trim package is needed to elevate a good idea into a great idea.
Plainly stated, sales is being able to understand what aspect of ego stroking will be most effective. Reading body language, conversation pace and tone, reaction to certain things as you discuss the superior performance of the Widget King 3000 and the smart people who already have one, are crucial to success in sales.
The quickest way to lose me is tell me which celeb endorses a product. If I like it I might buy it from someone else, but if a sales rep thinks I’m that easy, I won’t be buying it from them.

 

[RichterScale]

Someone commented about how resonant these German Sadowskys are unplugged.

I don't doubt that they are. But solid bodied electrics are designed to be amplified. It's kind of irrelevant how they sound unplugged.
If they were meant to be played unplugged, they would have large, hollow bodies and then it would matter how they resonated unplugged.
That said, a long time ago, when I played a lot, I used to play my bass/practice unplugged quite often. Sometimes I'd touch the the body to a wall or a table, so I could hear it better. So, in a situation like that, it would have been cool to have an electric bass that sounded good/louder unplugged. But that's all irrelevant once you plug it in.
My issue is with builders using terminology from the acoustic world and implying that it translates to a solid body. Some may see it as a harmless marketing tactic, but I say it's still just dishonesty. If you make a good product, it's not necessary. All it does is cause confusion and make people argue about silly crap on the internet.
Just give people the boring tech run down of how/why you do things. If you build a quality instrument, chances are you're doing more than the next guy and that should be enough to sell your product, without the need for nonsense marketing. Instead of assuming people are stupid and feeding them crap, give them the benefit of doubt and shoot straight with them.

 

[marchone]

I don't doubt that they are. But solid bodied electrics are designed to be amplified. It's kind of irrelevant how they sound unplugged.
If they were meant to be played unplugged, they would have large, hollow bodies and then it would matter how they resonated unplugged.
That said, a long time ago, when I played a lot, I used to play my bass/practice unplugged quite often. Sometimes I'd touch the the body to a wall or a table, so I could hear it better. So, in a situation like that, it would have been cool to have an electric bass that sounded good/louder unplugged. But that's all irrelevant once you plug it in.

Agreed. It makes no difference when amplified. I have a Fender Precision that is the most resonant of my quiver. It’s very pleasurable to play unplugged.

As a selling point, I haven’t noticed.

 

[RichterScale]

While I agree, the vast majority of the consuming public does not. Spinning wants into needs is the most effective method in sales. People don’t have to be convinced to get what they need, but you must appeal to those wants most folks have rationalized into needs, and the larger the outlay relative to income is, the more effective reenforcing the belief a want is a need, becomes.

I'm on board with all of this. But I get the impression that this whole migration of acoustic terminologies to the solid body world was created by builders and marketing monkeys, and not the consumers
Aside from the practical constraints (time, money, space, other obligations, etc), I've come to realize that the main reason I will never strive to become a commercial bass builder is that I lack the ability to bull$#!t.
If a customer came to me and said they wanted tone holes, tone blocks, a certain tone wood, etc, because of all the misinformation that's been spread by other builders and companies, I wouldn't be able to look them in the eye with a straight face and say, "oh yeah man, that's all real, I can do whatever you want!" I'd go into Cliff Claven mode and start with, "Actually......"
So, I'm out.
I started my education in marketing. I got out. Not because I couldn't do it or wouldn't have made a boatload of money in the field.
It just felt wrong. And stupid me, 35 yrs later, I work for a living and live a modest existence. So, I take exception for ethical reasons, more than anything else.

 

[fhm555]

I'm on board with all of this. But I get the impression that this whole migration of acoustic terminologies to the solid body world was created by builders and marketing monkeys, and not the consumers
Aside from the practical constraints (time, money, space, other obligations, etc), I've come to realize that the main reason I will never strive to become a commercial bass builder is that I lack the ability to bull$#!t.
If a customer came to me and said they wanted tone holes, tone blocks, a certain time wood, etc, because of all the misinformation that's been spread by other builders and companies, I wouldn't be able to look them in the eye with a straight face and say, "oh yeah man, that's all real, I can do whatever you want!" I'd go into Cliff Claven mode and start with, "Actually......"
So, I'm out.
I started my education in marketing. I got out. Not because I couldn't do it or wouldn't have made a boatload of money in the field.
It just felt wrong. And stupid me, 35 yrs later, I work for a living and live a modest existence. So, I take exception for ethical reasons, more than anything else.

Preaching to the choir my friend. I’ve been building fishing rods to order for going on 30 years. I don’t depend on it for a living but I earn pretty good from it. My approach is simple, my goal with any new prospect is to educate them so they will know what they need in a rod. I’ll explain the science behind a rods performance, then the decorative aspect and how some of that can be detrimental to performance and reliability, but the only claim I make about my product is I offer a 100% satisfaction guarantee. If it ever fails in use i’ll replace it or refund your money. If you just don’t like it, I’ll buy it back, but I won’t build a rod I know is not up to the task they will put it to.
i’m not worried about telling a prospect their desires do not align with reality. A guy once asked me to build him a rod that wouldn’t break when he set the hook. After having him show me how he set hooks, I told him what he was doing was the cause of broken rods, that he would be better served to let me teach him how to set a hook. Or I could build him a broom stick with grips guides and a reel seat and guarantee he’d never break it.

 

[J Wilson]

These things can be difficult, primarily as people hear what they see and / or think.

It is also hard for me to add techniques for acoustic instrument building into a solid body electric. But that could easily be faulty intuition, I'm not a builder, but I would love to be educated about these things.

In racing cars and motorcycles, frame and overall stiffness is tuned to find the right compromise of flexibility for best grip.

In my own experience, I seem to have seen that adding stiffness (up to a point) sounds as if it adds definition. Possibly introducing the sealed chambers removes wood, which would lessen stiffness:. Maybe that's why these sound a bit softer vs a totally solid body.

But as I said, I'm no builder, I can only relate what I've seen and felt personally.

 

[RichterScale]

In my own experience, I seem to have seen that adding stiffness (up to a point) sounds as if it adds definition. Possibly introducing the sealed chambers removes wood, which would lessen stiffness:. Maybe that's why these sound a bit softer vs a totally solid body

You nailed it. This is exactly it. Material choice and construction methods absolutely affect performance, playability and ultimately, the sound. And yes, by carefully removing material in a precise way, you can weaken the structure in a controlled way that allows just enough flex to absorb string energy and dull the sound of the strings. Which would translate to what most people hear as a "warmer" tone. However, with the hardwoods typically used and where/how much chambering is typically done, I don't see the structure from the nut to the bridge flexing much more than if there were no chambering, if at all. That said, I know Bruce has experimented with removing more material from his scroll bass bodies to give them just a tiny bit more flex and dialing the tones back a hair. But he already removes a lot of material from his bodies and he has put a lot of time and experimentation into his designs. Is that what other builders are doing? Tons of R&D into the precise flexibility of the structure, and adjusting for each type of wood and body shape? Yeah, I doubt it.
Typically (ideally), there's no flex in the body or neck joint. There's enough flex in the neck to create relief for string clearance and then it's stopped and locked in place with the truss rod.
When someone simply CNCs a few chambers into the wings for weight reduction, it won't cause enough weakness to make the body flex. My issue is when people say they're "tone" chambers. As if it's an acoustic body. If the structure is doing its job, the strings are vibrating and the pickups are transducing the string vibrations into an electrical signal. The pickups are not microphones that are hearing body resonance from little chambers in the wings. If the material or chambering is not flexing, it's not affecting how the strings vibrate. Therefore, not affecting what the pickup sees.
That's my theory and that's why I don't think builders should blurt out terminologies from the acoustic world. If they do, they should explain the how/why of it. But I notice they never do. They simply say words like "tone" and "resonant", which implies something and they leave it to the imagination and assumption. Then people connect dots that aren't there and when you try to have a discussion about it, well, you see how every "tonewood" thread goes.
So, builders should just stop doing it. Especially the good ones. I think it cheapens and takes away from the good work they do. It's an element of dishonesty and bull$#!ttery that's simply not called for.

 

[James Collins]

Is that what other builders are doing? Tons of R&D into the precise flexibility of the structure, and adjusting for each type of wood and body shape? Yeah, I doubt it.

To me, that is what a luthier does. They keep a log of every instrument they make and all of the little changes and the effects. It is why luthiers can make consistently good instruments. Antonio Stardivari and Antonio Torres didn't just get lucky every time producing world famous instruments. They learned from their experiences.

 

[Bruce Johnson]

That said, I know Bruce has experimented with removing more material from his scroll bass bodies to give them just a tiny bit more flex and dialing the tones back a hair. But he already removes a lot of material from his bodies and he has put a lot of time and experimentation into his designs. Is that what other builders are doing? Tons of R&D into the precise flexibility of the structure, and adjusting for each type of wood and body shape? Yeah, I doubt it.

That is what I do. I mess around with the structures of my necks and bodies to change their stiffness and damping properties, to adjust how and how much the frame vibrates when driven by the vibration of the string. How/how much the frame vibrates then affects the vibration on the string, which affects the sound that the pickup reads and sends on to the amp. That's how the design of the wood frame affects the sound out through the amp.

It has very little to do with acoustic sound coming directly off the bass. It's the internal mechanical vibration of the frame affecting the vibration of the string. However, the vibration of the bass in your hands and the small acoustic sound from it while playing unplugged are helpful in understanding how the frame is vibrating.

This is what builders like Fodera and Sadowsky are doing too. They work with the design of their frames to adjust the final output sound of their basses. Choice of wood species and combinations of species are just one variable. Bigger variables are thickness of parts, and changing the stiffness by adding reinforcements or cutting chambering. They work out their own formulas by experimenting and testing.

From the Sadowsky videos, you can see that they are mainly doing the chambering/top construction for weight reasons. Weight is a big deal these days with customers. They've worked out a standard weight that they would like for the body, and a pattern of chambering that they can rout in to bring any heavier boards down to their spec. And they've experimented with the chambering to find a pattern that keeps the stiffness and vibration consistent among all the bodies. That's the main thing they want: Consistency in weight and sound.

As a small builder, I'm trying to push the limits farther, to see how much I do with the design of the frame.

 

[James Collins]

That is what I do. I mess around with the structures of my necks and bodies to change their stiffness and damping properties, to adjust how and how much the frame vibrates when driven by the vibration of the string. How/how much the frame vibrates then affects the vibration on the string, which affects the sound that the pickup reads and sends on to the amp. That's how the design of the wood frame affects the sound out through the amp.

It has very little to do with acoustic sound coming directly off the bass. It's the internal mechanical vibration of the frame affecting the vibration of the string. However, the vibration of the bass in your hands and the small acoustic sound from it while playing unplugged are helpful in understanding how the frame is vibrating.

This is what builders like Fodera and Sadowsky are doing too. They work with the design of their frames to adjust the final output sound of their basses. Choice of wood species and combinations of species are just one variable. Bigger variables are thickness of parts, and changing the stiffness by adding reinforcements or cutting chambering. They work out their own formulas by experimenting and testing.

From the Sadowsky videos, you can see that they are mainly doing the chambering/top construction for weight reasons. Weight is a big deal these days with customers. They've worked out a standard weight that they would like for the body, and a pattern of chambering that they can rout in to bring any heavier boards down to their spec. And they've experimented with the chambering to find a pattern that keeps the stiffness and vibration consistent among all the bodies. That's the main thing they want: Consistency in weight and sound.

As a small builder, I'm trying to push the limits farther, to see how much I do with the design of the frame.

It must be frustrating and insulting for people to just discount all your work as fake.

 

[Bruce Johnson]

It must be frustrating and insulting for people to just discount all your work as fake.

It is, very. I've been trying for years to explain it all, from the engineering and physics standpoint, here on TB. It isn't some mystical complex knowledge, really. I'm one of the few pro Luthiers who makes the effort to try. Most get too frustrated by all the garbage to bother anymore. Does Wood Matter is a cynical joke among us old Luthiers. We know it does, and how it does, but it isn't worth the hassle trying to explain it to many of our customers. Most Luthiers just avoid the discussion. I've got a small crowd of customers and fans who appreciate what I do. They buy and love my basses. And most of my effort here on TB is in helping "young" Luthiers improve their craft. I'm usually not going to waste my time in the long Tonewood arguments.

 

[James Collins]

It is, very. I've been trying for years to explain it all, from the engineering and physics standpoint, here on TB. It isn't some mystical complex knowledge, really. I'm one of the few pro Luthiers who makes the effort to try. Most get too frustrated by all the garbage to bother anymore. Does Wood Matter is a cynical joke among us old Luthiers. We know it does, and how it does, but it isn't worth the hassle trying to explain it to many of our customers. Most Luthiers just avoid the discussion. I've got a small crowd of customers and fans who appreciate what I do. They buy and love my basses. And most of my effort here on TB is in helping "young" Luthiers improve their craft. I'm usually not going to waste my time in the long Tonewood arguments.

Well i appreciate your insight. You are one of the people who's opinion i value most.

 

[RichterScale]

It must be frustrating and insulting for people to just discount all your work as fake.

Not sure if this is in reference to anything I said, but if it is and anyone misunderstood,
I wasn't saying that wood doesn't matter and Bruce's work is fake. I was actually citing what Bruce does as- how it actually works.
My gripe is with builders throwing the word "tone" around for everything, as if it's some mystical phenomenon that they have the spell book for and don't bother to explain how it all works.
I'm talking about when a builder makes a mistake, fills it in with a patch and says, "meh, I'll call it a tone block and these idiots will gobble it up".
Chambering for weight savings and purposely calling them "tone chambers" isn't that far removed.
Is it killing anyone? No.
Is it the end of the world? No.
But is it necessary? No.

 

[James Collins]

Not sure if this is in reference to anything I said, but if it is and anyone misunderstood,
I wasn't saying that wood doesn't matter and Bruce's work is fake. I was actually citing what Bruce does as- how it actually works.
My gripe is with builders throwing the word "tone" around for everything, as if it's some mystical phenomenon that they have the spell book for and don't bother to explain how it all works.
I'm talking about when a builder makes a mistake, fills it in with a patch and says, "meh, I'll call it a tone block and these idiots will go blue it up".
Chambering for weight savings and purposely calling them "tone chambers" isn't that far removed.
Is it killing anyone? No.
Is it the end of the world? No.
But is it necessary? No.

No. I didn't really have any ill intent with youin particular. Not anyone really. Take it more as my attempt to encourage people like Bruce to stay involved with some of these explanations.

I don't think anyone should lie about his or her recipe for manufacturing a good tone. I also don't like names such as "tone pockets" for things. It just comes across too much like marketing scams whether they are true are not.

I do think a lot of this debate has to deal with a move from the Antonio Torres model of manufacturing to the Fender model of manufacturing. We moved from a world where people built quality instruments to a high standard to where people built instruments that looked about right and most tone issues were addressed with an EQ adjustment. Also, people stopped being as willing to pay someone a living wage to make an instrument for them.

There is a funny video where Rob Scallon makes a classical guitar with a lot of help from Marshall Brune. He uses a neck attached with a biscuit in the video if I remember, and in a bit of a joke on what you are talking about, Rob called it a tone biscuit.

 

[RichterScale]

Gotcha.
My only concern is that you guys didn't misread anything I said.

 

[RichterScale]

I'm usually not going to waste my time in the long Tonewood arguments.

I've been doing really good staying out of them lately.
I blame @Beej. He's a bad influence.