Why Choose Certain Woods?

[J Posega]

No, this is not meant to be a debate of tonewood or anything like that, just trying to gather some responses.

My wife has to do a project for a Wood Anatomy course, and she chose to do it on the woods that basses are made from.

What reasons do you choose certain woods for basses? Aesthetics? Tone? Weight? Cost? Market availability? Workability (if you build)? Other reasons?

What about neck woods? Any different reasons?

Again, NOT a tonewood debate, period, this is FOR A CLASS, not a troll-fest.

Thanks in advance!

 

[M.R. Ogle]

Yes, it's ALL those reasons, really. Just varying degrees of them.

 

[MUSHROOMSeAcOw]

I liek maple on the neck and body for many reasons. It is a very pretty wood, and I enjoy all the little figures in each individual board. It has a brighter sound to it (IMO) but it's denser than ash. It is also readily available and pretty easy to work compared to stringy poplar or alder.

My second favorite is mahogany. It is not known for it's figure, but I have seen some pretty great grain patterns in a few pieces of furniture I've built. It is also pretty dense, but darker in tone than maple. It is also fairly common and easy to get used to working with.

 

[fretlessguy]

For bodies I prefer my electrics with either light ash or alder for the sound and sustain they give. For the necks maple, and the fingerboards I like ebony and rosewood for fretless and rosewood/maple for fretboards on my fretteds.
For ABGs solid spruce tops with mahogony bodies.

 

[stingray2112]

I may be particular on this subject but from trying and owning many basses over the years I have always preferred maple to ash (although my favorite bass of the moment is made of ash, my t-bird pro) I just prefer the brightness of the maple on my geddy lee jazz and stingray. That's why I choose maple 90% of the time.

 

[Buslady7803]

Mostly aesthetics, bubinga, ovangkol and wenge is a neat combo of woods....and the price was right LOL...

Weight wasn't a huge factor, i knew the wick had weight but it wasn't terrible, so big + for me there.

thats why i picked A Warwick (other than quality, sounds ,etc)

 

[perfektspace6]

I choose woods for appearance, weight, and most importantly for how they sound on that particular bass (if I am playing it in-store). However, I don't like swamp ash. Every bass I have played with swamp ash has sounded like it's missing something. Hollow or something.

 

[bass12]

Tone comes first, then aesthetics and weight. Stability is definitely a factor when it comes to necks (my favourite woods for necks are maple and wenge). Stability (or "over-stability") can also be a factor when it comes to veneers and fingerboards. Ebony, for example, can be very stubborn and if it refuses to move (due to changes in humidity) with whatever wood it's laminated to cracks or splits can result.

 

[KeithAlanK]

I HAVE to get both woody tone and good looks so my 2 main basses are basswood, with flame and quilted maple tops.
Best of both worlds as far as tone + looks, with the added bonus of lighter weight compared to basses that are made entirely of high quality hardwoods.

My budget is tight, so a maple neck is a no-brainer because it does the job very well and is the neck wood of choice for the vast majority of off-the-shelf instruments.
Go into any music store and try to find a neck that isn't maple before you hear someone attempt the intro to Sweet Child 'o Mine.

Rosewood fingerboards, because again most guitars and basses use it and I don't see the need to pay extra for ebony, even though I've always thought it felt and sounded a little bit better. That extra 7% of quality just wasn't worth the price.
While I love the looks of a maple 'board, I've only owned 1 that felt good to me--possibly because every other guitar and bass I've owned in the last 35 years had rosewood and I'm probably just used to it.
Although back in the day, they used to put a heavy finish on maple 'boards that was sticky and made bending strings a real chore compared to naked and dry rosewood--I guess I never got over that.


This is an interesting thread.
I hope your wife gets some useful data from it.

 

[RedLeg]

Aesthetics? Tone? Weight? Cost? Market availability? Workability

If i had to place them in a particular order, that would be it

 

[loopee]

Wenge/mahogany neck with rosewood board
Mahogany (chambered) body with myrtlewood top
SDG pups
Flats
Markbass amp

 

[fingerbun]

I bought a mandolin in London last year and had a choice of spruce or cedar top in an otherwise identical instrument. The difference in tone was striking - spruce brighter and cedar warmer but less volume and cut-through.

Might be a good experiment for your wife to do the same if she can.

 

[fretno]

 

[plangentmusic]

For what it's worth. I think the wood of a body should be chosen for two reasons -- weight and appearance. If there's a tone difference it's so negligible it isn't worth a discussion.

On the fingerboard, I believe there's a bit of difference in sound and feel.

Rosewood is warmer and resonant while maple is sharper sounding. Each have appeal.

Ebony is hard and more solid sounding but a tad duller.

Synthetics are clearer, more even, and somewhat "glassy' sounding.

Now these are all subjective terms to define a intangible perspective. You have to make your own discoveries, but I believe this is a good jump-off point.

 

[GBassNorth]

I build and buy solid body electric basses and as for woods my preferences are as follows:
Body - Mahogany or Limba or Alder. Good tight grain and seems to really bring out the "punch" in a bass. All are fairly easy to work with from a shaping standpoint and fairly durable. Basswood also has a nice tone but isn't as durable as the others. I'm not keen on Swamp Ash. It's a fairly common wood for a bass body but I've never been fond of the look of the grain - too oak like for my tastes. As for top woods where grain and pattern will be the focus and the finish will be a transparent or tint I like Cocabolo, Koa, Buckeye Burl and all the figured Maples.

Neck - I like an unfinished neck best, never been fond of high gloss necks. There are only a few woods that you can leave unfinished on a neck and not eventually have problems with stability. My favorite unfinished neck woods are Rosewood and Wenge. They both are very stable and contain enough oils naturally that you don't need to seal or coat them. If I'm doing a finished neck it would most likely be a matte finish on rock maple.

Fret boards - I'm more traditional here. I like Rosewood for the warmth and feel and Maple for the look and speed. Maple fb's seem to be a little brighter sounding so I only go that route if I can balance the tone out with the electronics or other wood selections.

Hope that helps. Check out the Warmoth site they have a good section on Bass and Guitar woods and the sound and finish properties of them.

 

[cnltb]

I like alder for the body as it seems to do something I like to the tone of the instrument.
I like maple(not flamed or quilt tho!) for the neck as it is stable.
I like rosewood for the board as I like the feel under my fingers.

I like this combination as it seems to have a good tone/weight ratio.

I don't like fancy tops as they don't do anything for the tone apart from adding compression which I don't tend to like.
I find that they get very boring to look at very quickly.
Well most of them get boring very quickly.

 

[arsie]

Yeah, I have A/Bed two of the same model bass at a shop, one with a rosewood and one with a maple fretboard and I could discern a difference, as plangetmusic mentioned, rosewood is warmer and maple is brighter. If there was another factor affecting the tone, such as fitting etc, I was unaware of it.

However, I have also heard contrary statements in TB stating that for fretted instruments, the fingerboard wood makes no difference. I have not played enough basses to contradict that, just share my experience.

Besides the sound, there is also durability, I believe basswood bodies are softer and more prone to dents.

One thing I have learned from briefly reading this forum, is that priorities change. There are a number of threads where someone goes "After I threw my back, I have decided to play basses under 8lbs" or to that effect.

For the purpose of your wife's research, isn't it better to ask luthiers rather than buyers?

 

[Nikoubis]

Looks and weight mostly, as well as stability for neck woods. Given how remarkably different two identical (woods, construction, pickups, electronics etc) basses can sound, I think that trying to apply specific tonal characteristics to specific woods is a bit of a lost cause.

 

[Gard]

Depends.



Necks: Stability FIRST. Maple is reliable, affordable, works well, and if you select it carefully and use it correctly it will be very stable. Purpleheart is heavy but VERY stable and strong, good for part of a neck to add stability. Wenge is similar to purpleheart, a bit harder to work with (splinters a LOT), but is beautiful when finished, and very stable. Sonically, maple has a quick, snappy response; purpleheart is a bit less dry/snappy, but similar to maple; and wenge is a bit midrangy/punchy sounding to my ear. Each is visually appealing in it's own way, in my opinion.

Fingerboards: Again, stability FIRST. Lots of good choices here, mainly they need to be strong enough to support fretting and not splinter or collapse, if fretless, take a lot of abuse from strings. They can affect tone noticeably, but typically on a fretted bass it's a smaller affect, fretless moreso. Funny that everyone thinks of ebony as being this impervious, never moves kind of wood - my experience is exactly the opposite, it's a PITA, shrinks and wobbles all over the place. My favorites are pau ferro, maple, purpleheart, and African tulipwood for fretted; diamondwood (aka pakkawood or phenowood) for fretless.

Body woods: Here, I start thinking about TONE and appearance a bit more (but stability is also a major concern). Again, lots of good choices, and YES, it DOES affect tone - of the wood choices you make this is the major component, in my experience. Primary choices here are:

Alder - works well; usually non-descript appearance, but takes finish nicely; sonically warm but neutral.

Swamp ash - bit more difficult to work with because of the strong graining and a lot of soft/hard areas right next to each other; I find it visually appealing, as it has CHARACTER; sonically it has a very good "punch" and a bit of edge.

Mahogany - nice to work with; can range from incredibly beautiful to non-descript; sonically warm but slightly compressed sounding to my ears.

Spanish cedar - easy to work with, but can be a bit "sappy" if it's not aged a bit; visually, like mahogany, can range between "oh wow" and "meh"; sonically also similar to mahogany, but less compressed sounding.

Tops: More appearance than anything else, can range from having literally no effect (i.e. Buckeye Burl) to being a bit overwhelming (i.e. Boxelder Burl), depending on the woods and application. Most tops are too thin to have any noticeable effect in my opinion, if they are less than 1/4". There are so many different tops that a discussion of any specific one is pointless.

As for the woods having an effect on tone argument, it's like religion, there are those that are convinced on all sides. I am only able to speak from my direct personal experience with literally hundreds of basses a year over the course of 6+ years with the identical electronics being played through the exact same amplifier, in the same room. I definitely HEAR a difference, and can pick out different body woods and fingerboards based on it. Yes, there can be significant variation between two basses with identical woods, however, you can draw a "circle" and say that it will be within that circle based on species of woods - it won't necessarily be the same POINT within that circle, but it WILL be within the circle.