• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

What's heavier, alder or ash?

IME ash is heavier than alder but the difference is not that significant I.e. We are not comparing concrete with butter.
It depends on what you consider as significant. 1-2lbs difference is not significant when you lift the instruments for say....5-10 minutes. But after about 2 hours, your shoulder can definitely feel it.

I too never think it was significant before I experience it myself.
 
L

Most of the lightweight alder is gone. Lightweight alder would be old growth stuff. Most of that wood is gone, because alder was considered a firewood

Do you have any sense of what the timeline on this is? I haven't followed closely, but I feel like warmoth had more lightweight alder bodies a few years ago
IME lighter instruments sounds better.
I've played some killer heavy ash basses, but wouldn't gig them
 
If you are buying from a guitar company that mass produces their basses...then alder would probably be a more consistent choice. The problem with light weight ash...is that there isn't a lot of it about and it's hard to source reliable supplies in large quantities. Premium grade ash isn't just expensive, it's hard to find. Alder's weight is it's natural function and it's very consistent...if a little boring to look at. I have a few premium grade ash body blanks in my store and they are amazingly light weight, probably the lightest that I've seen. At a guess, I'd say about 1/3 of maple of the same dimensions. But this lightness comes at a cost / rarity premium and it's also very fragile compared to Alder. It chips and dents very easily...so I'd need to use a lot of hard lacquer to protect it....not a wood for an oiled finish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImprecisionBass