• 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.

Wood resonance in basses

#21
If you search about within "Talk Bass" you will find several and at times "heated" discussions about whether any material used to make a body for a solid-body instrument does or does not make much of a difference in tone. The world of hollow-bodied instruments, though, is a completely different world.

During my time as a luthier/builder (and this is just my opinion) that body woods did not make much difference in tone/resonance of a bass guitar. The neck material, on the other hand, makes a huge difference. Also, bridge, strings, pick-ups and electronics. I can always tell the difference between a swamp ash body and a alder body unplugged (the former being more outwardly resonant unplugged). I never felt or "heard" much difference when played "plugged". I will say, however, that the totality of components does characterize each unique instrument.

Maple fretboards and rosewood boards used on necks do have tonal differences. The difference between graphite and wooden necks is quite pronounced. I am using these as examples only.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XtraFancy and DanoesqBass
#26
ZorgRift said:
magical thinking. guitarists are worst for it. bassists, second worst.
Click to expand...

This. When we have no evidence we go with anecdotes, which are poor substitutes for evidence. You can't fault us for putting faith in what we perceive. It's how we were built to function. I just wish people would consider that their brains can profoundly distort their perceptions, a result of being influenced by numerous biases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tubenutq5 and blindrabbit
#28
tubenutq5 said:
If you search about within "Talk Bass" you will find several and at times "heated" discussions about whether any material used to make a body for a solid-body instrument does or does not make much of a difference in tone. The world of hollow-bodied instruments, though, is a completely different world.

During my time as a luthier/builder (and this is just my opinion) that body woods did not make much difference in tone/resonance of a bass guitar. The neck material, on the other hand, makes a huge difference. Also, bridge, strings, pick-ups and electronics. I can always tell the difference between a swamp ash body and a alder body unplugged (the former being more outwardly resonant unplugged). I never felt or "heard" much difference when played "plugged". I will say, however, that the totality of components does characterize each unique instrument.

Maple fretboards and rosewood boards used on necks do have tonal differences. The difference between graphite and wooden necks is quite pronounced. I am using these as examples only.
Click to expand...

Yes, but also the bass neck construction makes a difference too. I think in the world of bolt-on's the body wood is quite minor compared to the neck wood. With an all through, the body wood seems to dampen the tone more and makes a slightly larger contribution. If the body has hollow voids or is solid slab seems to also contribute to the over all tone. Headless construction seems to make a bass more compressed and punchy. All though's tend to be smoother and sustain slightly longer. Bolt on's seem to walk a middle path between the two.

I think a basses tone can be charectorised by a number of changeable qualities. Attack or punch. Sustain (how long a note naturally holds). EQ balance (ie warm, bright, middy tonality). Bark, Growl, Clarity (often noticed when A/B'g cheaper vs quality instruments). Harmonic content and

All of the above can be influenced by some degree by the thickness of the finish, puck up choice and placement, Active EQ circuit, Fretboard wood, neck wood and construction, Body wood, bass construction / headstock size.

Some charectoristics like pickup choice and it's placement will have a bigger influence over than others. But it's my opinion that if all other things are the same a single item change will effect the tone. It might be big or small, it might be in the bark, growl, tonal balance, clarity etc...but it will make a difference.
To my ears a bass body wood tends to effect the overall tone (bright or warm) but not my as much as the neck wood. BUT the tonal variation will still be within the character of the other components such as the pickup choice. A jazz will generally always sound like a jazz bass regardless of body wood. But compare two different Jazz basses with different woods, then there is a noticeable tonal difference, but the attack, sustain, clarity, bark, growl pretty much stay the same. However the tone will have the same personality, much like twiddling Bass / mid / treble controls on an active EQ circuit. A Music Man will always sound like a Music Man regardless how much EQ is applied and it will never sound like a Jazz or a Rickenbacker.
 
#29
I can instantly tell a dead string without needing to plug in to an amp an it always sounds as bad amplified.

I can hear a difference between basses unplugged and they - for the most part - relate to what I hear through an amp. My wenge-ntb bass and my P sound completely different unplugged with the exact same strings and nearly identical setup.

I can never recognize woods used based on a recording alone - certainly not in a context of a complete song. Often - in a denser mix without much room for bass - I doubt anyone could hear a difference between a P and a J.

I have two basses with alder bodies and mahogany necks - based on all the "tone woods" descriptions they should be deep, mellow and dark. Both are extremely tight, bright and loud - go figure... Wood type does not matter much to me but the QUALITY does.
 
Last edited:
#31
Fliptrique said:
I can instantly tell a dead string without needing to plug in to an amp an it always sounds as bad amplified.

I can hear a difference between basses unplugged and they - for the most part - relate to what I hear through an amp. My wenge-ntb bass and my P sound completely different unplugged with the exact same strings and nearly identical setup.

I can never recognize woods used based on a recording alone - certainly not in a context of a complete song. Often - in a denser mix without much room for bass - I doubt anyone could hear a difference between a P and a J.

I have two basses with alder bodies and mahogany necks - based on all the "tone woods" descriptions they should be deep, mellow and dark. Both are extremely tight, bright and loud - go figure... Wood type does not matter much to me but the QUALITY does.
Click to expand...

For the record, mahogany has probably the biggest variation in wood density of any wood species. Between tree to tree, even from one end of the same tree can yield different results. Where as maple...that's much more consistent.

Even in a mix, I can always hear a difference between a J or P bass. It's pretty obvious to my ears, but then again I've always been quite perceptive and my current £4K HiFi is very clear. If you are listening through a pair of crappy headphones on a ipod which has digitally compressed everything...well then I prolly wouldn't be able to hear a difference either!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Emanuel Apascaritei
#32
I have been led to believe that Fender and Gibson (and I'd assume the rest) actually test bodies to determine if there's enough resonance for a premium quality (read: over $1000) bass, and those that fail go to the MIMs/Squiers/Epiphones... I'd love to know if that's true. Unfortunately most of the basses I've ever tried were a complete crap-shoot; no 100% success with pricey MIA models and not every $300 one sounds bad, IME.
 
#33
When it comes to bass I'm not the scientific type at all but I know what I like. For me, I prefer swamp ash bodies with maple necks and maple boards. My next Custom build will have a swamp ash body, ash neck, and maple board. Still debating on electronics, top wood, inlays and color and finish. To this day the bass in my avatar would get much more love if the board was maple. For some reason Brubaker decided to make the boards rosewood. This is the only bass in my collection with a rosewood board. The rest are all maple.
 
#34
I have several Warmoth basses for the reason I swap out bodies and necks to suit my need. They are all interchangeable. When I switch from a maple neck, maple fretboard to a wenge neck with ebony fretboard it sounds like a totally different instrument. These differences are way beyond the scale of what you could do with a 31 band EQ. Read an article by Michael Tobias on the subject of tone woods, he has it dialed in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: static0verdrive
#35
static0verdrive said:
I have been led to believe that Fender and Gibson (and I'd assume the rest) actually test bodies to determine if there's enough resonance for a premium quality (read: over $1000) bass, and those that fail go to the MIMs/Squiers/Epiphones... I'd love to know if that's true. Unfortunately most of the basses I've ever tried were a complete crap-shoot; no 100% success with pricey MIA models and not every $300 one sounds bad, IME.
Click to expand...

Every American Fender Deluxe bass I ever had that was alder had a certain "voice" that seemed consistent. I even have a Strat made from alder that sounds kinda similar in it's acoustic properties, so I think you make a point that I was to make, Fender's made in Corona do seem to perhaps have some consistency but I'm sure someone else is going to chime in with a different opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: static0verdrive
#37
I have a lot more experience with electric guitars over basses, but...

I don't find much correlation between acoustic vs plugged in sound. i.e. there are guitars that sound really good unplugged, but not all that great plugged in. And vice versa. If unplugged tone was such a massive factor, everybody would want to play acoustic guitars/basses for everything.
 
#38
I've always found that playing a bass unplugged gave me a very good idea of how it would work for me.

I'll plug them in to make sure everything works, but that's pretty much just a formality or even a bargaining point--if a bass is getting plugged in I've already decided it's a winner.

If it's a P I expect it to sound like a P, likewise an Ibanez or Rick or whatever.
That's down to pickup placement and design, hardware, and woods.
But getting one that rings and sings the way I want it to can easily be determined within seconds of taking it off the rack.
 
#39
Doug Parent said:
I have several Warmoth basses for the reason I swap out bodies and necks to suit my need. They are all interchangeable. When I switch from a maple neck, maple fretboard to a wenge neck with ebony fretboard it sounds like a totally different instrument. These differences are way beyond the scale of what you could do with a 31 band EQ. Read an article by Michael Tobias on the subject of tone woods, he has it dialed in.
Click to expand...

I you read carefully what I said earlier, the body wood probably has the least influence on the sound of a bolt on bass. Where as the neck and fingerboard wood seems to have a stronger influence. I don't know why, it just seems to be that way. Michael Tobias is a huge influence on my bass builds btw but there is many here to have slightly different opinions to him in regards to body woods. There is more to a bass' sound that eq balance; attack, decay and harmonic clarity are just another three which come to mind, all of which are influenced by the tone woods, construction and pickups. But as was said earlier a dead spot is in the wood and that can't be dialled out using a different pickup.

My current 6 string bass build uses very early Tobias tone wood choices for the neck laminates. Qudos to MTD, I regularly find that he's several steps ahead of the curve.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back