• 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.

Tonewoods

#101
Rodent said:
when comparing two basses, it's always good to make sure all things except the specific component are truly equal before making generic statements about which wood has which characteristics

all the best,

R
Click to expand...
I agree with this, it's also important to not know which bass you are testing at the time since it's extremely well documented that what we see effects what we hear.

Also too many people assume that since they don't see a difference between one preamp and another that they will be identical. Electronic parts can have huge acceptable tolerances of 20% or more in their parts, batteries change their voltage throughout their life. If the golden ears are so sensitive how come they never hear this difference?
 
#103
The Penguin said:
Also too many people assume that since they don't see a difference between one preamp and another that they will be identical. Electronic parts can have huge acceptable tolerances of 20% or more in their parts, batteries change their voltage throughout their life. If the golden ears are so sensitive how come they never hear this difference?
Click to expand...

I am curious who is making these claims? I haven't heard anyone claiming this level of detail....
 
#104
ggunn said:
Is there even a ghost of a chance that anything anyone could post here will change anyone's opinion on the subject? I didn't think so. Carry on... ;^)
Click to expand...

That's the problem of arguing against faith, no fact will change a faith by definition. However I have asked dozens of times for anyone to demonstrate these special powers which if they could would completely change my mind. When people claim that they can always tell the difference between two items but when asked to show this offer pages of reasons not to test it I tend to think they know the powers don't really exist so they become hyper defensive. This pattern is seen in many tests of paranormal powers.
 
#105
ggunn said:
Ah, well, here we go. Anybody want to argue about cables while we're at it? ;^)
Click to expand...

Yes, because at least the cable people have done the double blind tests. They fail them every single time but they have done them :D

I guess this could be settled by saying scientifically no one can hear the difference between wood species but thousands of people believe they can. I guess my flaw is assuming others share my way of thinking and my faith in the scientific method.
 
#106
Gard said:
...that said, if YOU like a particular tone, and a particular group of woods/electronics/amplification helps you achieve this tone (I'm also firmly of the opinion that at least 60% of your tone is in your HANDS), then it will help you with getting your groove on, right?

:smug:

;)
Click to expand...
Judging by my experience with people who spend more time on their tone than playing I would say no. Not a binary no but a general one. IME in actual playing with people I generally find an inverse relationship between the amount of time spent on tone versus the ability to groove. Sometimes it seems one is used to compensate for the other.

In an appeal to authority I will point out that Marcus says find a tone quickly and get over it and move on playing music.
 
#108
The Penguin said:
I guess this could be settled by saying scientifically no one can hear the difference between wood species but thousands of people believe they can. I guess my flaw is assuming others share my way of thinking and my faith in the scientific method.
Click to expand...
I have faith in the scientific method, I just think there are two many variables and not enough controls in almost any experiment we could possibly devise here. For these reasons I default to the people who have had hands-on experience with hundreds, or even thousands of basses. I'm curious what Nino V. thinks, I'd bet it's along the same lines of Gard's thinking.
 
#109
Gard said:
No...wait...yes...:confused:...er....

(head explodes)

:spit:



;)



...really, yes, you CAN hear the difference. Is it worth worrying about? That's not MY call, it's yours.

:)
Click to expand...
So now it's a yes? Maybe the all caps things is confusing me. I'm simply trying to clarify your claims and then I wanted to ask you about them. I would like to see someone demonstrate this ability and if they do I will change my opinion on the subject.
 
#110
lowphatbass said:
I have faith in the scientific method, I just think there are two many variables and not enough controls in almost any experiment we could possibly devise here. For these reasons I default to the people who have had hands-on experience with hundreds, or even thousands of basses. I'm curious what Nino V. thinks, I'd bet it's along the same lines of Gard's thinking.
Click to expand...

If you concede there are 2 many variables to tell then you have just stated it can not be discerned. I would also disagree that we couldn't devise an experiment to settle many of these claims here. When someone claims they can always tell the difference then we could expect them to listen to a recorded soloed bass track and discern the species. But I find when I suggest that that the claim will be redefined to exclude recordings of a solo unprocessed bass track. Even though previous boasting may have contained the ability to tell in a live band.

If you assume above average ability based on how many guitars you handle then a veteran GC salesman should also be an expert.
 
#111
This is really very simple.

I just evaluate each instrument on its own merits.

It doesn't really matter what it's made from if it sounds good. It could be a Pine frame body with a Masonite top and back and a Poplar neck with a Brazilian Rosewood fingerboard or a hippie sandwich of fancy flame Koa on Mahogany body with a Bubinga neck and Ebony fingerboard.

BTW two of my favorite instruments are exactly as described above.
 
#112
The Penguin said:
I often see people claiming they are testing two otherwise identical basses assuming the electronics are equivalent. There are examples of this all over this board and at least 2 in this thread if you care to go back a bit.
Click to expand...
Yea, this is just not a large enough sample size when you factor in all the variables, I would think tho, after about the hundredth comparison anyone would start to recognize certain, definable tonal characteristics of different woods, even within the acceptable and unavoidable variations in 100 different basses.
 
#113
lowphatbass said:
Yea, this is just not a large enough sample size when you factor in all the variables, I would think tho, after about the hundredth comparison anyone would start to recognize certain, definable tonal characteristics of different woods, even within the acceptable and unavoidable variations in 100 different basses.
Click to expand...

You said you've never heard that claim, I said there are examples in this thread. I don't see what your reply has to do with your subject unless you are just changing it.

You said it doesn't exist, I point out 2 in this thread, are you claiming that's not enough to show they exist? 1 should do it.
 
#114
lowphatbass said:
Yea, this is just not a large enough sample size when you factor in all the variables, I would think tho, after about the hundredth comparison anyone would start to recognize certain, definable tonal characteristics of different woods, even within the acceptable and unavoidable variations in 100 different basses.
Click to expand...

Why is it that you think that? I'm really not trying to pick a fight, but since you haven't done that experiment, how can you predict what the results would be? Also, in all those hundred basses, how could one be certain that it is the difference in wood species that is responsible for the variations in tone one is ostensibly hearing?

I haven't said it lately, so I'll say it here: I am not taking a stand one way or the other; I don't have enough data. I am just interested in the reasons behind the (sometimes vehement) stands that some of us are taking.
 
#116
The Penguin said:
You said you've never heard that claim, I said there are examples in this thread. I don't see what your reply has to do with your subject unless you are just changing it.

You said it doesn't exist, I point out 2 in this thread, are you claiming that's not enough to show they exist? 1 should do it.
Click to expand...

This is all fouled up!

All I'm saying is for people that own 2 or 3 or even 5 of basically the same bass to make the claim that they sound different because of ash, alder or whatever is bogus. There are simply too many variables between basses. Once you get into triple digits, basses manufactured at the same shop/plant then I lend credence to ones opinion. If a QC guy tells me that he can hear the difference I buy it.
I agree with you about almost all of this, I think where we differ is that you want undeniable proof before changing you're opinion and I am willing to take someones word on it because I recognize their experience with this topic is far greater than mine. I can totally respect someone sticking to their guns on something like this.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back