Yet another tonewood post

[ARandGenUsrName]

I’m just going to keep sharing this on any tone-wood threads:

Thank you for this! Watched all his videos this morning and love it. I've seen a few other similar videos in the past, but not as well done as this or in as much detail.
This lines up extremely well with my experience and what I say to people, but it's nice to have a well thought out video to back it up rather than just "trust me"

 

[James Collins]

True. And moreover if it were possible to somehow definitely analyze, we'd find that the various factors VARY in importance, with some having more effect on the sound and others having less, but still some.

On a solid body instrument -- as opposed to a HOLLOW ACOUSTIC instrument -- I'd put the body wood somewhere in the middle of the ranking of importance.

This is a perfect example of "Internet mis-learning." Somewhere, sometime back, someone read something on an acoustic guitar forum about "tonewood" and mis-appropriated the term, migrating it into these discussions of instruments with bodies made of slabs of wood 1 1/2 to two inches thick, as opposed to the very thin SOUNDBOARDS of acoustic instruments which generate the MAJORITY of the sound. And here we are.

Even in an acoustic guitar forum, the effects of tone wood are a bit mysterious. Building technique is the most important factor by far in construction of any musical instrument. I would rather have a guitar constructed of low end wood by a high end luthier than a guitar constructed of high end wood by a low end plant.

If the neck wood/design had no effect on the sound production, there would be no wolf notes. There is more to a guitar or bass than just open strings with distortion for example. The ergonomics and portability for example of that table guitar look awful.

 

[perfektspace6]

Maybe the focus is on click bait and growing the 24k subs vs. accurate info… look at all of the comments the video has generated here let alone on YT. There’s no way to replace or edit a video once it’s published, but you can reference another video with a pop up.

Agree. The YT poster should take it down given the wiring issue which renders the comparison mute. However, it's catchy clickbait and will stay up. Not sure who the YT poster is but I lose respect for leaving something up like this and wouldn't subscribe.

 

[Grinderman]

So this is or isn't yet another tonewood post or?

 

[eottjake]

Can we just get @LowEndLobster in here? All this talk about "author should have done this..."
He's on TB, guys. Let him chime in--maybe he'll be filming again with proper wiring, or maybe swap out different Warmoth bodies with same hardware and same neck. Lots of possibilities

Come to think of it, the best test for this would likely be just that--
Get multiple Warmoth bodies with same pup locations, same bridge location, etc. Different woods for each. Same neck, same strings, same pups.

Record output, and show frequency analyzer.

 

[Snert]

Get multiple Warmoth bodies with same pup locations, same bridge location, etc. Different woods for each. Same neck, same strings, same pups.

The first video I linked did this with a pair of custom guitars made for this purpose. And put them in a mix.

 

[Thumpin6string]

I’m just going to keep sharing this on any tone-wood threads:

That's not a bass. So that's a moot point.

 

[Snert]

That's not a bass.

So why would it be different for a bass?

 

[Thumpin6string]

So why would it be different for a bass?

Totally different frequency range. Do the same demo using bass parts and strings. I can pretty much guarantee that it will sound like a tinny, shallow sounding . You need the body and neck for the low end resonance. As a builder for over 20 years, I know without question that the materials chosen for the body and neck will affect the tone. Not as much on a guitar.

 

[eottjake]

So why would it be different for a bass?

If we want a real, scientific analysis of this, then we need to eliminate all variables. You said it yourself:

I hope you don't do any engineering comparison work for a living, as here are way too many variables unaccounted for there, let alone how it was recorded and listened to.

Having an entirely different instrument/range is a variable we can easily remove

 

[Snert]

You need the body and neck for the low end resonance.

Sorry, I don't buy this. If that's the case why do my extremely stiff, non resonant CF instruments sound so good? And why does one octave in tuning make the difference?

 

[eottjake]

And why does one octave in tuning make the difference?

That's not the point here--if we want to check this scientifically, we don't arbitrarily decide that a variable won't affect the outcome. It may affect it, it may not. But we can't know for sure unless we do it properly.

 

[Snert]

If we want a real, scientific analysis of this, then we need to eliminate all variables.

See my previous post. Works as a guitar with no body/neck and sounds excellent, so why not a bass? It seems here that the body/neck structure has been eliminated and still sounds good.

 

[Snert]

That's not the point here--if we want to check this scientifically, we don't arbitrarily decide that a variable won't affect the outcome. It may affect it, it may not. But we can't know for sure unless we do it properly.

No disagreement. I'll await your tests and look forward to evaluating them. Not being a smart ass but I would like someone to do it.
For years I've heard tone wood does make a difference. Same with bridges of different design etc but all I see offered as evidence is anecdote. I'm happy to know that it does, but I need evidence (data) and so far it's lacking.

 

[eottjake]

We're going in circles here, bud. It's still a variable that can/should be eliminated for testing.

And "still sounds good" is not the same as "has no effect."

 

[Thumpin6string]

Sorry, I don't buy this. If that's the case why do my extremely stiff, non resonant CF instruments sound so good? And why does one octave in tuning make the difference?

Believe what you want. That is the great thing about having the freedom of your own opinion. All I can say is that I can make the same body out of different woods with the same electronics, hardware and strings and they will have different nuances. I can then add a neck made from different combinations of wood or solid graphite and that will change the tonal qualities even more. My 6 with a graphite neck is a sustain monster due to the density of the material. I won't say that the body and neck material is the only contributing factor, but it is a factor, along with electronics, hardware and strings

 

[Williethump]

If you guys don't believe in wood making a difference then WHY comment on the topic. All you gotta do is say tonewood around here and everybody gets upset like 4th graders who hate a pop quiz

Same with phlogiston and the ether that fills all of space. And Dark Matter too.

 

[Snert]

My point was twofold: my CF gear does not 'resonate' in the audio band that I can see, and woods very so much piece to piece, I doubt I will ever be of the belief that 'maple sounds like...' for example.

Believe what you want.

As can you, but all I see is anecdote. Jim Lill's videos as well as many others are a counterpoint to that.

 

[iiipopes]

Lowend lobster put Rickenbacker pickups in a Harley Benton bass. It did not sound like a ric. So I guess the wood, the scale length and type of materials clearly make a difference

Yes. Please read my thread about my custom P/J bass with a Rickenbacker humbucker in the P position: it sounds like a P with a little more growl since the pickup is a tad closer to the bridge.

 

[LBS-bass]

If you guys don't believe in wood making a difference then WHY comment on the topic. All you gotta do is say tonewood around here and everybody gets upset like 4th graders who hate a pop quiz

This is because wood choice is a lot less important in electric instruments. The idea of tonewood goes back farther than Stradivarius but people who play electrified instruments get confused over it. Talking about tonewoods with electric players is a little silly.