• 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.

What is the difference Between Rosewood and Maple Fretboards?

#41
lousybassplayer said:
IHOP. LOL.

My thoughts too, but I did see that someone had said maple would wear quicker.

minor derail, what is YMMV? your something may vary I was guessing.
Click to expand...

Most maple comes finished, and poly doesn't hold up to stainless or nickel strings that well...if you don't finish the maple, it gets really dirty and ugly quickly since its so light. I have a rosewood board fretless that's un finished and has done well with rounds over the years, but you can always sand it down if it gets too worn. Ebony is harder, but can have problems like cracking to contend with.

Of course, you could get it epoxied or cyano-ed and it would be hard as a rock for many many years.
 
#44
I know there are no silly questions, but here's one:

If, on a fretted bass, a finger on your left hand holds a note played between two frets, the string never really touches the fretboard wood (well, maybe a little, but even then, it's on the non-vibrating side).

How then could the type of fretboard impact the tone? I'm just sayin'...
 
#45
A brazilian rosewood (Dalbergia Nigra) fingerboard was standard, even in the late 60's on Fender instruments. :p

Because is has been over-exploited, Dalbergia Nigra is heavily protected. Now you will pay ~$600 (USD) for a brazilian rosewood 5-string bass fingerboard, which will likely come from recycled furniture or stump wood. :eyebrow:

All the other "rosewoods" are fine, but they are different in look, feel, and tone from Dalbergia Nigra, IMHO. There are reasons why it was and is so highly prized. :ninja:
 
#49
So does the relative hardness of the board somehow affect the vibration of trings thus causing the tone variations? If that was the case I would think the maple would absorb more vibration and give a muddier tone than the harder wood which should transmit the vibrations better. I dunno, I am not that smart.

Could it be that color is the only reason people assume maple is brighter sounding and rosewood is darker? Is it a coincidence that those two terms can be used to describe color and sound? I got the whole argument licked now I think.
 
#52
lousybassplayer said:
So does the relative hardness of the board somehow affect the vibration of trings thus causing the tone variations? If that was the case I would think the maple would absorb more vibration and give a muddier tone than the harder wood which should transmit the vibrations better. I dunno, I am not that smart.
Click to expand...

I believe the oils in rosewood absorb some frequencies slightly, hence the slightly mellower tone on average. Let me stress the "on average."
 
#53
Maple looks better on darker basses.
Rosewood is ugly.
Ebony looks better on lighter basses.

It's really all aesthetics. Fingerboard wood plays such an insignificant role tonally because of its comparatively small size and the fact that the string doesn't even touch it (on fretted basses, that is), you wont notice a difference.

If I remember correctly, a blind test was done a while back here on TB, and the results were no more accurate than flipping a coin or guessing at the answer.
 
#54
JTE said:
The only way to nail it down would be to build around two dozen necks as identical as possible with the exception of half having rosewood board glued on and half having maple boards glued on. Then bolt those necks onto the exact same body and listen to them closely.

But just to compare two, or two dozen totally different instruments (because there ain't no such thing as two identical wooden instruments) is pointless.
Click to expand...

John Turner made the suggestion to do a similar experiment with his double-neck Conklin.

I'd be interested in the results.
 
#55
FunkMetalBass said:
Maple looks better on darker basses.
Rosewood is ugly.
Ebony looks better on lighter basses.

It's really all aesthetics. Fingerboard wood plays such an insignificant role tonally because of its comparatively small size and the fact that the string doesn't even touch it (on fretted basses, that is), you wont notice a difference.

If I remember correctly, a blind test was done a while back here on TB, and the results were no more accurate than flipping a coin or guessing at the answer.
Click to expand...

I hate to break it to you, but no less an authority than Roger Sadowsky has come on these forums and stated unequivocally that in his experience, fingerboard wood has more effect on a bass's tone that the instrument's body wood. Search is your friend.

This post of his addresses most of the tone issues/generalizations and ends with some superb practical advice:

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3621264&highlight=#post3621264
 
#56
its-a-trap.jpg
 
#58
I gotta just say - I built a bass with a Warmoth Pau Ferro neck and Macassar Ebony board. According the Warmoth's site, they give each wood a mellow to bright rating. They talk about the combination of a bright fretboard material to a warmer neck material for example, or vice versa. Anyways - both woods I chose were supposed to be bright - and when I play this bass compared to any of my other basses, it is much brighter.

Could it be the Warmoth neck construction at play as well (with the steel support rods?). Could be a bunch of things I guess - but they said the neck would be bright, and it sure is. (and I like it!)

I've always felt with guitars that rosewood gave a warmer sound, and maple gave more bite/snap. Kinda the different between a tele and strat. Then again, there are many other variances that go into account for the sound - including the actual piece of wood itself - the age, dryness, knots, grain pattern, etc etc. Some woods will resonate when you tap on them. Others will "thunk". Could be the same type of wood, just different trees.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back