• 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.

So if wood type makes no difference in tone...

#143
kodiakblair said:
Did you see the results from the Leonardo Guitar project a few years back

6 luithers built 12 guitars, same specs like internal bracing etc. Each built 1 from traditional acoustic timbers and 1 from poplar,plane and a few other timbers. Blind folded audience was asked which were traditional.

Turned out each guitar got 50% of the votes and the folks behind the test put this down to guessing. Once the blindfolds came off the traditional timbers gained 75%.
Click to expand...

Not being able to tell which wood is which doesn't mean that they all sounded the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smtp4me, JoeWPgh and stockplus
#145
Hey guys, if I can't really tell the difference between my merino wool and my lambswool trousers, then why are pants different than shorts?
riddle-me-this-riddle-me-that-batman.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim Nazium, DrMole, el murdoque and 3 others
#148
To finish the sentence the OP started, one might end the sentence by saying "so then pickups and electronics are the biggest factor affecting tone." That would be one way to end it. A very experienced and respected luthier once told me that pickups and wiring are the most important component of any electric musical instrument and there's no doubt that much can be done with electronics on any instrument. Moving into instruments made of man-made materials opens the discussion even further, but "if" wood makes perhaps "less" difference in tone than electronics there might be a more productive discussion especially on how the two might interact together. All instruments are a collaboration of materials and effort and work together to provide us with the sounds and tones we perceive and hear. Just my 2 cents...
 
#149
This is great! Best book ever, can't wait to read the next page! Where will it go next?


In all seriousness though, I'm in the camp that there's too much variation board to board of the same species. That post about the article Taylor made is excellent.
 
#150
I think that all factors matter to some extent.
The thing is, we use a limited range of woods for our bass necks and bodies.
It must be hard enough to build an instrument that lasts and it must be light enough so a normal person can dangle it from a belt over their shoulder for several hours.
I'm no expert on wood, but there are not too many around that fit the bill.
If we built two similar instruments, with the same everythings except for the wood and took the worst possible wood choice for one bass and something that is considered a solid, good choice of woods for the other, and furthermore, used a premium selection of Fender-Masterbuilt-Worthy set of slabs on that bass while the one with the bad selection gets not only the worst possible selection, but also the worst possible quality,
the difference in tone would be evident, even to layman's ears.
Now rip all those bits out of that terrible bass and build a new one, with another selection of Masterbuilt-Worthy slabs of tone wood, but take a different combination. All things else identical, we'd still have two different sounding instruments. An expert should be able to tell them apart by ear.

Now take one bass and change the pickup position for about half an inch.
Put a new bridge on the other.
Swap one pickup in one of the basses for something different.
Let the expert listen again. Phew, that'll be a lot harder.
 
#153
I thought it has been long accepted that it's wood density that seems to contribute most to tone which can be predicted within a certain margin of error via wood species.

That having been said, solid is decidedly much more dense than hollow...
 
#154
I absolutely believe wood matters on ACOUSTIC instruments. That’s self evident. The endless debate is how much difference it makes on an electric solid body, so the only ones relevant to this discussion are wood comparisons for solid bodies. There have been a few of them posted on TB, but all seem to feature some process flaw that prevents a true apples/apples comparison. The few I’ve seen that looked really well thought out and carefully designed indicated that wood DOES make a difference, but it’s so far below the effect of strings and electronics as to be negligible, differences you can twiddle away with a tone knob. Wood isn’t even the best available material for guitars, it’s so highly variable and subject to environmental change that every wood guitar is a unique object. They used to use wood because that’s what they had, now we use it because it’s visually and tactiley pleasant, reason enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Novarocker
#156
James Collins said:
The problem with this study design is there is no control. To properly test it you need a control. This is a randomized single blind uncontrolled study. I don't know what you gain from it.
Click to expand...
While it may be a flawed study, it is a step in the right direction. The participants sensed that more was needed to decide the question than 'anecdotal evidence'. It is an opportunity for the conductors of the study in question to improve their skill in designing a proper study after considering criticism.

To OP:
A thread like this may be helpful to gain perspective. Though, it is troubling that so many people consider the question settled without a proper study. After all, science is the way to avoid fooling ourselves (R. Feynman loosely quoted), why not use it?
 
#157
kodiakblair said:
There was a whole lot more to it than that.

Link Removed

I don't think you'll like the conclusion nor the 2 studies by Lincoln and Maine universities,links to both are on the Leonardo page.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting test, but it is far from being a scientifically rigourous experiment. First of all, it isn't double blind. It is conducted by a research group whose stated goal is to encourage guitar making from non-tropical woods. The same group that is biased towards non-tropical woods is the group that edited together different recordings as they saw fit. It also ignores performer bias, in which the performer adjusts their technique based on differences in instrumentation. Lastly, the external studies they present on their website are ones that agree with LGRP's stated mission.

So I'm curious why you think I wouldn't like the conclusion. Because you initially presented the study details poorly and I commented based on your description?
 
#158
Frank Tuesday said:
It's an interesting test, but it is far from being a scientifically rigourous experiment.
Click to expand...
I yet to see one that is. Each side always has an agenda,folks selling $3k guitars containing "tonewood" for example.

As to why I thought you wouldn't like the conclusion,there I probably misread your position on this. It'd been a few years since reading the LGRP thing and you're correct,I worded it badly.

My own position is tonewood is a marketing idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN WOODMAN
#159
kodiakblair said:
I yet to see one that is. Each side always has an agenda,folks selling $3k guitars containing "tonewood" for example.

As to why I thought you wouldn't like the conclusion,there I probably misread your position on this. It'd been a few years since reading the LGRP thing and you're correct,I worded it badly.

My own position is tonewood is a marketing idea.
Click to expand...

My position is that everything between the two ends of the strings affects energy dissipation of the strings. That isn't a stance on how much (anywhere from negligible to significant) any one thing affects it, because it is a system of different woods, metals, plastics, adhesives, finishes, etc, as well as different connections between the individual parts. The pickup changes the string vibrations into an electrical signal, but what everything else affects is the actual vibration of the string as the note decays.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back