• 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.

Tonewood Experiment.

#42
OP thanks for the experiment and kudos for having the guts to post it.

You know who I would really love to hear from on this topic? The guys who did the analysis and wrote the code for Variax. I know they ditched basses, but I wonder if they did any testing to see if an ash body needed different code than alder with all other variables the same.
 
#43
Rôckhewer said:
I look at it this way:
It's NOT that the "tone" is being processed and influenced by different woods...and thusly yes... would need the pickups to be microphonic to make a lick of difference.

Rather I CAN accept that different woods ARE going to process vibrations differently...to deal with and transmit vibratory frequencies differently....are going to themselves, vibrate differently.
And those differences will in turn affect the vibration of the strings...DIFFERENTLY!
Vibration is not a one way street. The vibration of a plucked string doesn't die when that wave hits the saddle/nut.
It is transmitted to the body and reflected back by the body.
Some will argue that this energy transference only affects the sustain of the strings vibration...but what if...what if the way that DIFFERENT WOOD absorbs, processes, and reflects DIFFERENT FREQUENCIES, can actually have an altering effect on not just THAT the string continues to vibrate but also HOW the string continues to vibrate.
And because this energy transfers to the body and gets reflected back in the blink of an eye....were not just talking about sustain....but attack and decay as well.
In other words: TONE
Click to expand...
This x1000
I've tried to love, or even find useful as a Bass Bass guitar, over twenty mahogany basses- some long scale, some sg/eb-3's. Testing them through one tube amp set just on the edge of grind, while a P or J will have even lengths of grindy attack from well below E up to about 17th fret c, if I set the amp to have that same grind on 12th fret g on a mahog bass, it will be impossible to get that attack grind below 10th fret D on E, likewise if I set the amp to grind on open E, everything above open g played anywhere on the board will full-on stonerdoom distort through/beyond halfway the total available note sustain. Probably useful for lead bassists. To get an even response out of the amp I had to be gentle on the higher notes and really dig in on the low ones.

I once cut four tele bodies out of the same huge slab of quilted maple and built them up with mim necks and identical hardware. Even with swapping the necks around, it was easy to pick a favorite body to play, but nearly impossible to tell a difference in direct-in recording without visually analyzing long rung notes.

What dictates what 99% of the audience hears according to this jackass poster (me):
80% Fingers
5% Speaker+cab
4% Amp
2% Pedals
1% Pickups
.8% Strings
.6% setup
.2% what clothes you're wearing
.1% Fingerboard material
.01% bridge
.001% neck material(s)
.0009% body material(s)
.0006% pots, caps and wires
.0005% Tuners
6.288% room and mood

Since your fingers are so huge a part of the tone, if there's a combo of woods and hardware makes them happy, the sound reaching ears will benefit. If a player is blessed with fingers that do not care, almost any bass will do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nikwiat
#45
Gully Foyle said:
i see your point - but then i wonder again, why do kramers with aluminum not sound radically different than maple necks, or why don't carbon necks sound radically different? (plugged in of course)
Click to expand...

In my opinion and experience they DO in fact sound very different. Unfortunately I have no hard scientific data to back that up, only theories and speculation as to why. But I won't bore you with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: One Drop
#48
First off, always an interesting debate. And good job on the experiment, always fun to do stuff like that regardless of what the outcome produces.
This is not exactly related to what you are doing, but interesting nontheless and always inspires debate...
Invalid Link Removed
 
#50
Very interesting post. I liked that link to the violin version of this "test", too. I think a lot of it is in our heads and hands.

My guitar player can make his Les Paul sing; when I play it, it sounds like someone throwing sausages at a really nice tin can.

Alternatively, I play a plexiglass bass as my main instrument. One time on my Instagram page, I jokingly referred to it as #toneplastic and was treated to a barrage of insults and legitimate questions regarding it's tone properties compared to wood.
 
  • Like
Reactions: twinjet, Nikwiat, Jay Jillard and 1 other person
#53
nashman said:
Re: "They will vary slightly simple because they are made from the exact same ore" - that I don't understand (?)
Click to expand...

It's worded poorly, but the OP is saying that ore, by nature, has variances to it (naturally), so the same pots, built from the same ore block, are going to be slightly different sounding due to metals having different properties despite being formed from the same ore block.
 
#56
Dark Horse said:
...or we could spend more time PLAYING our instruments instead of worrying about minute details that we won't even hear in the context of a band, a different room, a different material floor, etc, etc...

:)

That said, I like the idea behind the experiment.
Click to expand...
With all due respect I would suggest that this particular topic is very well suited considering it's posted to a sub-forum whose main purpose is discussing the art and science behind forging the instruments for said playing. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rôckhewer
#57
michaelwayneharwood said:
With all due respect I would suggest that this particular topic is very well suited considering it's posted to a sub-forum whose main purpose is discussing the art and science behind forging the instruments for said playing. ;)
Click to expand...

Absolutely agreed, that's why I changed my post slightly to "I" instead of "we". The fact is that no matter what our instruments are constructed of, they will all sound different when you add a drum kit, guitar, etc on top of them...and they'll all sound different in different rooms, and even in various places in the same room. That's why I say "I" worry more about knowing the instrument and how to make it sound the way "I" want, and worry less about what it's made of. (and thus the edit of my original post)

Just my opinion, and my philosophy. :)
 
#58
Dark Horse said:
Absolutely agreed, that's why I changed my post slightly to "I" instead of "we". The fact is that no matter what our instruments are constructed of, they will all sound different when you add a drum kit, guitar, etc on top of them...and they'll all sound different in different rooms, and even in various places in the same room. That's why I say "I" worry more about knowing the instrument and how to make it sound the way "I" want, and worry less about what it's made of. (and thus the edit of my original post)

Just my opinion, and my philosophy. :)
Click to expand...
Fair enough!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dark Horse
#60
Dark Horse said:
And regarding the debate, I feel neck construction is far more important than the body construction. But again, it all varies, as the plaing environment varies.
Click to expand...
I assume you mean the woods used for both fingerboard and the "core" of the neck, as well as neck reinforcement technologies (e.g. truss rods, carbon fiber, etc.). One thing I have noticed is that vibrations in the neck translate to the tone captured by magnetic pickups. As an example I built a neck where the truss rod was not properly glued in and it rattled during playing, and the rattling was readily apparent in the amplified sound.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back