The Guitar Wood Myth - Emperors New Clothes???

[WezV]

This was what Tim Mills had to say on the subject:

I don’t want to upset all of the guitar makers, but this reliance on the body timber as being the whole source of the tone is a complete misnomer. My understanding of it, which is based on my own investigations and also having worked with some of the better luthiers in the country, is that the guitar’s voice comes from the pickup. The feel and the resonance and the sustain are a combination of body timber and body construction.

“With pickups, I believe that if you can find the right voice with your guitar pickup, then you will really bring out the best in your guitar. After all, an electric guitar without a pickup doesn’t work. The pickup is the guitar’s mouthpiece; the pickup hears the sound of the strings, but equally the strings are reliant on factors like the timber and the construction as to how resonant they are going to be. That’s when the importance of timber comes into it, but the ‘voicing’ is down to the pickup and how carefully you choose the materials. As with all of these things, it’s a combination of the whole.”

i agree with all of that actually.

but there is a big difference between saying "wood is not the main factor towards amplified tone" and "wood makes no difference to amplified tone".

[richard]

I remember a few years ago an amp manufacturer claiming that their solid state amp produced the same tonal characteristics as a valve amp. They had images of the signal being analysed on oscilloscopes and other gizmos to prove their point. Just goes to show there are some things you can't analyse with a gizmo.

[darkbluemurder]

He didn't use his ears, he used scientific equipment so he could show fact based evidence rather than opinion. I think that was his point. (i'm not having a go at anyone here, that's really why he did the test)

As WezV correctly pointed out there was surprisingly little detail about the equipment used to put anyone in a position to evaluate whether the set up was indeed up to scientific standards.

Regarding the crawlers, maybe the tone would be identical if you tested the same set of crawlers in both guitars with the same pickup height etc.

I did not measure the exact height on both guitars but even if there are different height settings there is no way that these alone could account for the vastly different tones of the guitars. And BTW they have different scale lengths and different bridges so that of course does factor in. But a scale length alone does not make a sound. A bridge alone does not make a sound, either. Not even a guitar alone makes a sound until somebody plays it. I fully agree with Tim that it's the sum of the whole parts.

This is a highly charged topic because we've all been taught from an early age to believe that woods have a huge effect on the tone of our Electric instruments...but has anyone seen real testable evidence proving that beyond a shadow of a doubt?

But I was also taught the rule " I before E except after C " and that's been proven to be incorrect most of the time :-)

You would not believe how much I would want to agree with the results - you could save a lot on the guitar itself and spend the money entirely on quality pickups and a quality amp set up. Yet I have played enough guitars in my life that could not have been brought to life with any BKP. They were simply dogs. Whether it was the wood, the hardware or the combination thereof - no idea, except that these planks sounded flat and dead regardless of the pickup used. That wood should have never made into a guitar but should have been used as firewood - the only way to get any warmth from it  :D

We dont have to like the results, in fact I hate that it could be true, and it means that I've paid way too much for some of my guitars,  but he has evidence and all we have to argue against it is our highly charged opinion

As said above, before we don't have the exact details of the test set up which includes guitars used, pickups used, pickup position, scale length, pickup height, amp, cab and recording set up we don't have any proof whatsoever.

I am not saying body wood is the main factor. A luthier I know well says the neck wood strongly overrides the body wood, and having had two replacement necks from him I have to agree. Each time the guitar sounded miles better than with the old neck - everything else unchanged. 

Cheers Stephan

[DaveyHoran]

Anyone here got sound clips of the exact same pickup (as in the actual physical same pickup and not just the same model)  used in different guitars through the same amp on the same settings?

there must be guys here who have recordings that could help add weight to either side of the argument. I've seen posts where people have said a pickup was to bright for a particular guitar but perfect for another...

Interesting discussion. I think part of this is that in recent years the standard of guitar making in the cheap factories has improved considerably...probably the standard of machinery used to mass produce guitars?

[TheyCallMeVolume]

Anyone here got sound clips of the exact same pickup (as in the actual physical same pickup and not just the same model)  used in different guitars through the same amp on the same settings?

there must be guys here who have recordings that could help add weight to either side of the argument. I've seen posts where people have said a pickup was to bright for a particular guitar but perfect for another...

Interesting discussion. I think part of this is that in recent years the standard of guitar making in the cheap factories has improved considerably...probably the standard of machinery used to mass produce guitars?

Very good point here. If this study is true, does that mean all our recommendations are trash? Does it mean that you could just pick your favorite pickup from the line and it automatically work? In that case, why have more than one pickup to offer? I'm probably misinterpreting something here, but it all still seems a bit fishy to me.

[Philly Q]

Very good point here. If this study is true, does that mean all our recommendations are trash? Does it mean that you could just pick your favorite pickup from the line and it automatically work? In that case, why have more than one pickup to offer? I'm probably misinterpreting something here, but it all still seems a bit fishy to me.

It would, on the face of it, mean just that.

But we all know if you put - say - a Crawler in an SG it will sound muddy, if you put it in a Les Paul it probably won't, if you put it in a Strat it definitely won't.

I really can't be bothered to say much more than that.

[gwEm]

^^ well put Philly

[Philly Q]

But, to be fair, science can teach us a great deal of useful stuff about guitars and amps:

The difference comes down to this... umm, the more fragile harmonics can survive in a vacuum tube; where they seem to be, ah, eliminated or squashed in a solid state crystal lattice. I think it comes down to that. The physics of it... electrons can survive in a free space vacuum where they have trouble in a crystal lattice. I think that's the best and simplest I can put it.

[DaveyHoran]

Yes, in my opinion if you pick your favorite pickup from the line it should automatically work if you are modeling your sound on the official clips...but if you intend to modify your tone then you would need recommendations as you cant be sure how a pickup handles extra drive or low turnings etc.

I'm being devils advocate hear, i swear I'm not this pedantic normally, its just that I haven't actually heard clips proving the wood makes a difference...and you think the internet would be littered with tone junkies proving such a commonly held belief...you'd think it would be real easy to prove right???

[WezV]

I'm being devils advocate hear, i swear I'm not this pedantic normally, its just that I haven't actually heard clips proving the wood makes a difference...and you think the internet would be littered with tone junkies proving such a commonly held belief...you'd think it would be real easy to prove right???

too many other variables

[gordiji]

 I'm not sure what 'scientific equipment' was used to 'hear' the guitars. It's a good idea not to poo poo ears though as a means of listening, they can be very subtle in what they hear.
As an aside, when touring an old cognac 'house' (Otard) the guide explained how they spent a fortune on 'scientific equipment' to smell the mixtures of spirit making the final blend, to ensure  consistency. Alas, they gave up as the humble nose of a master taster/blender was more accurate which is how it's been done for 250 years or so.

[FELINEGUITARS]

This was what Tim Mills had to say on the subject:

I don’t want to upset all of the guitar makers, but this reliance on the body timber as being the whole source of the tone is a complete misnomer. My understanding of it, which is based on my own investigations and also having worked with some of the better luthiers in the country, is that the guitar’s voice comes from the pickup. The feel and the resonance and the sustain are a combination of body timber and body construction.

“With pickups, I believe that if you can find the right voice with your guitar pickup, then you will really bring out the best in your guitar. After all, an electric guitar without a pickup doesn’t work. The pickup is the guitar’s mouthpiece; the pickup hears the sound of the strings, but equally the strings are reliant on factors like the timber and the construction as to how resonant they are going to be. That’s when the importance of timber comes into it, but the ‘voicing’ is down to the pickup and how carefully you choose the materials. As with all of these things, it’s a combination of the whole.”

i agree with all of that actually.

but there is a big difference between saying "wood is not the main factor towards amplified tone" and "wood makes no difference to amplified tone".

I disagree in as much as I feel wood can have a huge effect on what I hear
I can hear the difference between an ash  bodied strat and an alder or mahogany one
I can hear the difference between a mahogany neck and a maple one on a Les Paul

and I might choose different pickups for each based on how the combination of the timbers , hardware and all the other factors add up towards the overall sound

Some guitars sound awful with a Nailbomb in my opinion whilst others are totally well suited in my opinion
Same is true with an Aftermath...and it may be a personal preference, and a casual listener might never know or sense what the player does.
Both of these examples I tend to  love in an ash bodied guitar but not in a Les Paul - your mileage may vary.

[Zaned]

Ignore whether wood makes a difference for a minute. because if he cant detect the difference caused by scale length then i dont trust he has any chance of picking up the differences caused by wood.

This. I wonder if anyone has brought this physical fact to his attention?

I have (and most people here probably too) had guitars I just never fully connected with. Had them set up, had different pickups.  Played OK, but still there was always the thing that was not right. What he's basically saying is that my mind is tricking me, all I need is the right pickup and hardware for that guitar. And if I still had a problem with it, it's all in my mind. Well, at this point I would give up on him and that guitar, and just grab the guitar that's actually does what I want it to  :lol:

I agree that the guitar is a sum of it's parts. Providing that the hardware and all the electronics are good quality, you're going to get a good sound providing that the woods are not horrid. But good and right (for you) woods make the difference between good tone and great tone.

-Zaned

[WezV]

I disagree in as much as I feel wood can have a huge effect on what I hear
I can hear the difference between an ash  bodied strat and an alder or mahogany one
I can hear the difference between a mahogany neck and a maple one on a Les Paul

but i don't see that as disagreeing with Tim's quote.... you would be disagreeing if you said "body timber is the whole source of the tone". 

I can also hear the differences between woods and from the guitar builder perspective it makes sense to focus on those factors as the foundation to everything else we do.   So like him, you are also saying its a combination of those factors - but you are both coming at the same point from different perspectives.

If someone comes to you with a telecaster and a set of tonal requirements it does not currently meet I would assume you would focus on pickups first before wanting to swap the body. but I also assume you would provide a realistic viewpoint that that pickups wont counteract everything else about the construction that goes towards the whole sound.  This is the essence of what I read in Tim's quote

I have a few examples I am working with recently.
*I made a guitar with a solid macasser ebony neck.  everything else is pretty standard stuff, it has a mahog body but with a trem and i beleive this makes neck wood more important than body wood.  Its very bright and the pickups i originally chose (emeralds) were completely wrong.   with mule/manhattan set its usable but I am still not quite happy as it has an overriding brightness that I don't find pleasing.  its now controlable, but not as instantly great as i expect
*Those emeralds in another mahogany bodied guitar are great.  This one has a maple neck, hardtail bridge and 1/2" shorter scale.  its certainly not pickup height that accounts for the difference in tone as I set up all guitars teh same way and tweak from there
*My John Birch is 100% maple (well, 99% maple and 1% body filler ;) ).   It sounds pretty awesome with its dimarzios.   well balanced, I can hear the maple, but its not anything like most people would expect from a solid maple guitar.   Its about to receive a pickup change for a pair of John Birch Hyperflux's so I am very interested to see how that affects things.   I believe some woods like basswood, and possibly in this case the maple to a certain degree, are more tonally transparent and in these situations the body wood effect becomes less noticeable

[AndyR]

Fascinating stuff here.

I have listened to the "wood talk" over the many years, and bought into it as a kind of "yardstick" for searching out what I want.

But now, when it comes down to it, tonewise, I realise don't give a bugger what the wood is :lol:. I either like the guitar or I don't. And a lot of those that I don't, I find I can learn to like - just play it for a few hours and find out what it can do for me, I'll soon end up liking it after all.

What it (the wood) feels like, though, and how it looks, and its "mojo" - those are very important to me. I've got an "aha! mahogany" vibe going on... or an "ooh, that feels like a nice solid lump of alder"... wotever...

That's what I value, I guess. And I leave it up to the builders to stick a decent plank together that I fancy.

How this guy could measure this stuff, I've no idea!!

And, like Wez, I'm not entirely sure he's measuring the other stuff in a totally believable way...

(But I must admit I've only read what's said in this thread - I haven't read one word of what this poor guy has typed or said himself! :lol:)