• 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.

Whats the difference of woods?

#305
mulchor said:
Not to worry. I'm fairly certain that the entire sum of your creativity and talent is scientifically imperceptible :spit:

(:p jk jk :D)
Click to expand...

That's fine with me... I don't play for science.

I try to imagine being so consumed by the supposed scientific method that I can't see what's right in front of me on a regular basis. That I could decide what isn't a factor while using the same logic to decide what is... and not see the disconnect. To doubt what I regularly experience.
:bassist:

It's funny, nobody's quoted Occam's Razor... I wonder why?
:D
 
#306
Eminor3rd said:
I have no means to prove anything to you, so I'm not even trying. I, having actually compared similar basses made of different woods, know that they sound quite different. And since I know that, I'm assuming you don't know what you're talking about, and haven't compared similar basses made of different woods, because if you had, you'd know that they sound different, too.

Thus, assuming that you haven't ever compared similar basses made of different woods, I think you shouldn't be telling people that they sound the same, when in fact, you haven't ever heard them.


I make absolutely no claim to be an expert, but I do consider the luthiers that are speaking in this thread to be experts, and to know whether or not different woods affect the tone of their instruments.
Click to expand...

+1 very well put.
 
#309
Brad Johnson said:
It's funny, nobody's quoted Occam's Razor... I wonder why?
:D
Click to expand...

I think the trouble is the ubiquitous trouble with Occam's in this kind of situation.

No one has presented a model.

Translating into science talk, some people say that the coefficient for wood-type in an unspecified model is large. Other people say the coefficent for wood-type in an unspecified model is small.

Since no model is specified, yet conclusions have already been drawn, the large-coefficient people are of the belief that their unspecified model is simpler than the unspecified model of the small-coefficient people. And vice versa.

We can't even get people to agree if it's an empirical question. Predominately, the implied characteristics of wood are not sonic. Snappy, bright, dark, lively, or whatever, but not mid-scooped or quick-decay...

It seems impossible to pin anyone down long enough to wrangle a decent explanation. And I can't imagine NSF putting out a call for proposals to solve such a puzzle. So I think it's gonna remain in the realm of ninjas vs pirates.
 
#310
Eminor3rd said:
I make absolutely no claim to be an expert, but I do consider the luthiers that are speaking in this thread to be experts, and to know whether or not different woods affect the tone of their instruments.
Click to expand...

To be fair, that's rather like trusting snake-oil merchants, palm readers, and faith healers to know of the validity of their claims about their peddled wares. ;)

But realistically, I don't think doubters believe there's no influence of wood on tone, but rather that other things (body/neck shape, bridge, truss, pup, strings, etc) collectively influence tone quite a bit more.
 
#311
Boy.. talk about opening a can of worms! I think the direction that this thread has taken is very funny. For years I have protected the secret to my tone as a bit of a trade secret. It took me a long time to get a range of bass tone that people take note off when they come to our gigs. I'm probably not the greatest player technically, but I get a fair bit of favorable feedback about my live sound. It's really funny when bass players come and inspect my setup between sets, they immediately walk over to my rig which is nothing special thinking that's were it all happens! The truth is I've been building parts basses for some time now and I pretty well know which parts give you what sort of sounds. For a start a maple/maple (and I'm talking proper maple, not Chinese crap maple) neck gives you a load of punch. This not only affects the sound, but also the action, or the way it feels when plucking or slapping strings. Rosewood/Maple is a completely different sound again. Body woods all have their own characters too. It really depends on what type of wave form and even volume you are trying to generate. Any way that is pretty much how I design my sound through selection of neck and body woods. After that I try and use pickups that give me the truest amplified version of the acoustic sound. I normally solder the pickups directly to the jack and test it. Sometimes the pickups distort the natural sound because they are too hot or just not right, and they get taken off as quickly as they get put on. I do use preamps, but that is more to fine tune while playing and I certainly don't pick them because of the way they enhance the natural tone. I think the problem is that a lot of people equate bass guitars with low, dull bass sounds. TBH if that is what you want then wood is not really going to be that important to you. If you want to actually have an instrument with colorful tone, wormth, and a full but natural tonal range then you really need to understand that a bass guitar is an acoustic instrument first and foremost. It is not a digital instrument with sounds being generated by an electronic module. The sounds are generated in the same way as on an acoustic guitar, violin, etc, before being amplified. That is the important bit to consider. Pickups do not generate the sounds they only amplify sounds. Where do the sounds come from? Not just the strings, but the entire instrument vibrating and resonating. If you can't see that then I recommend you buy a casio keyboard instead of a bass.
 
#313
today, i just replaced the pickups in a fender jaguar bass that i purchased last week as a new project bass. the new pickups have a bit more output than the stock ones did (they have double the DC resistance), and they have a bit more low end, but the response, more specifically, the ADSR (attack, decay, sustain, release) and overall harmonic structure remains unchanged. it's really just a bit louder and a bit bassier. i'm going to be replacing the neck next week with a little beefier one piece maple neck, and i expect it to actually change the 'voice' of the bass, more than changing the pickups did. the main reason for changing the pickups was to use dual side by side coil jazz bass pickups to reduce hum as compared to the stock single coils.
 
#314
Aspidites said:
Dark Horse is definitely on the right track and I would be far more likely to accept his research as valid than any ones opinion regardless of who they are.
Click to expand...

Well, if the wood doesn't make any difference at all, then I feel really silly for spending so much time on the phone with Carey Nordstrand discussing what woods to use on my bass so I get the tone I am after.
 
#315
Aspidites said:
That was not a meltdown, that is how I speak normally, the manner in which I normally speak on here is me being far more polite than is the norm for me.

And again, you can say that wood effects the tone but until there is scientific evidence supporting your hypothesis that is what it will remain, a hypothesis.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of a story a carpenter friend of mine told me. He needed to hire a helper and, during the interview, he asked the candidate, "Do you have a nail gun?" The guy responded, "I don't believe in nail guns." My friend said, "Well, if I showed you one, then would you believe in them?"

So the question is, if I let you play my two Sadowsky M5-24s that have identical electronics, strings, necks and fretboards, but different body woods, would you believe any sonic difference you might hear?
 
#316
Munjibunga said:
This reminds me of a story a carpenter friend of mine told me. He needed to hire a helper and, during the interview, he asked the candidate, "Do you have a nail gun?" The guy responded, "I don't believe in nail guns." My friend said, "Well, if I showed you one, then would you believe in them?"

So the question is, if I let you play my two Sadowsky M5-24s that have identical electronics, strings, necks and fretboards, but different body woods, would you believe any sonic difference you might hear?
Click to expand...

not unless you had scientific proof that the pickups are wound within .0000001 ohms of each other, had exactly the same magnetic flux, the truss rod's diameter was within .00000000000000000001" of each other, with the same set of strings, and the test was played by a robot. ;)
 
#317
Muaguana said:
I meant in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, with every detail and step of the procedure you used outlined clearly so other scientists may replicate the experiment.
Click to expand...

LOL, I knew that was coming.

At least I tested my hypothesis and have empirical evidence supporting my conjecture. What do the skeptics have to support their position?
 
#318
A fact is a truth verifiable from experience or observation. You may use a different definition in a lab environment but the rest of us don't.

What a bass is made of effects it's tone. Imagine a bass made from wood, metal, stone
or some composite material. How about a drum with skin stretched over those materials or an acoustic guitar, better yet a marimba made from these materials. That would obviously effect the tone.
 
#319
mulchor said:
To be fair, that's rather like trusting snake-oil merchants, palm readers, and faith healers to know of the validity of their claims about their peddled wares. ;)

.
Click to expand...

That's BS, and pretty damn offensive.

"Snake Oil" merchants, palm readers, etc ALL are making money off of telling a potential customer lies - they don't believe what they're selling, but still get a direct benefit from lying. They are liars and thieves.

Those of us who believe that wood makes a difference...

A) Aren't liars. We truly believe...KNOW...it makes a difference

b) Aren't getting any actual benefit from sharing our opinions and experiences. In fact, if anything, the opposite is true. More bass players with great tone creates more competition for gigs, which creates the potential for LESS money in our pockets.


I've been VERY careful to be respectful of others in this thread - so it pisses me off to be called a flat out LIAR and a THIEF by you.

I've also provided PROOF to back up my opinion - proof in the form of actual scientific studies. What have you done except "spout off" ? Not a damn thing, except call me, John K, and Brad, and others, liars and thieves.

Kiss off.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back