The Guitar Wood Myth - Emperors New Clothes???

[MDV]

 C'mon now BigB... You talk about sensible arguments and then call me a troll because I want to see some scientific evidence that proves wood has an effect on the tone, something that's worth paying extra money for.

As with many others here, I dont need scientific evidence for everything I think.

Theres enough cumulation of experience, both in general and in many cases (including mine) personally, that its redundant. I'm hardly opposed to an inquiry, but my first instinct if some actual supportive data came out would be to challenge it, as I think its wrong. I'd look for why. Thats a scientifically sensible thing to do. Just because data exists to support a hypothesis, doesnt mean that hypothesis is proved. They are extremely different propositions. Hell, just because theres data, doesnt even mean the data is right. And this hypothesis at the moment is nothing more than idle speculation and a little hype. 'Me and some mates had a look at it and we thought, based on a quick glance, with just our eyes, that they wasnt any difference'. ho ho $%&#ing ho. You seem very eager to cling to scientific evidence...okey dokey, fine, but that kind of cr@p aint it, and until the actual data is out, thats all it is. Supposition, and the reports, such that they are, are as subjective as anything can be.

My second instinct would be to attempt reproduction of the results, and then if promising with improvement of the methodology. Science doesnt take one answer as good enough. The answer has to be repeated, time and again.

Sorry but if youre going to hold on to 'no scientific evidence' as a crutch for your objection, then I fear you dont really know what that entails.

Meanwhile, the fact of the matter is human hearing is more complex and sophisticated than most analytical methods have been able to catch up with (theres plenty of data to support that). Its very possible that a rigid empirical analysis would fail to capture something that ears can identify effortlessly. OTOH, there are the myriad pitfalls of psychoacoustics (again, lots of data), so a serious attempt at analysis of the impact of woods should be given some credence; there is a vaguely plausible mechanism for our collective delusion. As ever, we could all be wrong, but its highly unlikely in my view.

And all this is utterly redundant until theres some real data to inspect. That is also just a starting point for someone else to see if they get the same answers, if we're actually being scientific ;)

And as to 'worth paying extra for'....huh? That, a fourier transform can never decide for you, and that is sort of the point. You go for what you like, end of.

[Afghan Dave]

I find it frustrating that there is none when its needed. For my two cents (based on 18 years playing, gigging and recording using electric guitars) I know that pickups, strings and amp are the key to good tone. If the wood has any effect it is virtually redundant, and varies so much from tree to tree that describing a guitar based on the type of wood used is no use to anyone because you cant really tell how much or how little it affects the rest of the guitar...

Is it needed?

If provided wouldn't it upset you that you've been completely confused for over 18 years playing, gigging and recording using electric guitars?

Maybe none of this is real and we are brains in jars?

Is this topic an eleborate Turing test?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvB5dQHvRSc

[Zaned]

 C'mon now BigB... You talk about sensible arguments and then call me a troll because I want to see some scientific evidence that proves wood has an effect on the tone, something that's worth paying extra money for.

I find it frustrating that there is none when its needed. For my two cents (based on 18 years playing, gigging and recording using electric guitars) I know that pickups, strings and amp are the key to good tone. If the wood has any effect it is virtually redundant, and varies so much from tree to tree that describing a guitar based on the type of wood used is no use to anyone because you cant really tell how much or how little it affects the rest of the guitar...

No trolling on my part, just a search for hard evidence and complete shock that none exists.

Still the 'if'. Maybe you have mentioned it and it has escaped my eyes, but are you searching the measured scientific info to somehow respond to this guys research, or are you searching for it to have it tell you whether the woods make a difference?

If the latter answer is the correct one (or are they both?), then maybe after 18 years of playing just trust you ears. If your ears don't tell a difference when all the other electronics are the same, then good for you. You'll save money as all you need is to find cheap guitars with good playability and maybe upgrade some parts :) Or better, buy used and someone already has done that.

I don't need that evidence. I have fought with guitars enough trying to get them to sound the way I have wanted them, it's irrelevant to me whether someone does a scientific study about the woods effect on electric guitars tone. I already know it has. And it isn't believing in myths, or wood god or anything like that. It's believing my ears, simple as that :)

You're right, it's hard to know exactly what a guitar will sound like, just based on the specs. E.g. an alder+maple+rosewood strat can be many things. Like has been said, there is a certain box that it pretty much stays in, but still the tone varies. Might have a spanky top, might not, etc. If you order pickups for a guitar you don't yet have, it's always a bit risky. Me and my brother both ordered strats (bit different wood specs) from the same custom guitar company. On the bridge of his strat, a Nailbomb works beautifully. On mine, it didn't. Aggressive edge on the top that grew to irritate me, now the guitar has a Holy Diver.

EDIT: I was again slooooow.

-Zaned

[itamar101]

I agree with MDV here.
Just saying, I'm heavily atheist, so I would almost always back David's mindset but in my opinion he is using it in the wrong context.
This is not a case of 'wanting to believe' that wood effects the tone, I sure that everyone would be happy if all woods didn't effect the tone when plugged in because its save them a lot of money.
The point is that we can hear a difference and, most importantly, feel a difference and MDV has already given a very good reasoning.
The difference between my brother's MIM Strat with across wood board and my friends MIM Strat with a Maple fretboard is night and day... And that's with the stock pickups.

Furthermore, this study does not seem to have been carried out accurately and seems more like the sort of experiment that you'd do on a rainy Saturday morning with your mates.

Sorry, but this is hardly comparable with a religious debate and has very little to do with belief.

[WezV]

anyway, who says theses wood used by the electric guitar companies are expensive - I have just been given enough mahogany for at least 2 guitars for free.   That is actually 6 guitars worth of free mahogany for me in the last year and one blank i paid for because i needed a cut one quickly.  all reclaimed (even the one i paid for), all at least 30 years old and most likely honduran.

i will keep using it because its there, it works well and i can sleep well at night ;)

[Philly Q]

C'mon now BigB... You talk about sensible arguments and then call me a troll because I want to see some scientific evidence that proves wood has an effect on the tone, something that's worth paying extra money for.

As with many others here, I dont need scientific evidence for everything I think.

Hooray!  Well said, MDV.

We're talking about musical instruments here.  Musical instruments, not scientific instruments.  Why all this insistence on hard evidence?


Instead of all this talk about different instruments, different timbers, supposedly being the same, try a different test:

Go and pick up five guitars which are supposed to be exactly the same.  Five new Strats, five new Les Pauls.  The hardware will be the same, the pickups will be the same (or near as dammit), the variable thing will be the wood - because wood is not consistent.  That's the beauty of it.  Now play those five new guitars - will they sound exactly the same?  You know they won't. 

Evidence schmevidence.

[Dmoney]

As they say in Finland... "Ribs is Ribs"

I'm just hear to break it down for y'all.

[DaveyHoran]

OK, Ok ok :-) so I'll stop being devils advocate and admit that I too believe that the woods has some effect on tone... I think my swamp ash gibson SG voodoo was a muddy slug when compared to my Silberburst or my natural burst, even with an ebony fretboard...although the voodoo was 10% lighter...I also think the hotter gibson pickups played a part in the muddy sound...the cleans really didn't cut it.

Also big respect to everyone here for not getting agro, in fairness it shows that people are considering their responses...

I do think more research is needed because knowing more about wood, would mean that guitar manufacturers could continue to improve the tones, or at least improve the accuracy of the type of guitar tones they are aiming to produce.

[FELINEGUITARS]

so the free vibrating neck would be my first thing to replace.

Who is giving away FREE vibrating necks? :lol:

[TheyCallMeVolume]

OK, Ok ok :-) so I'll stop being devils advocate and admit that I too believe that the woods has some effect on tone... I think my swamp ash gibson SG voodoo was a muddy slug when compared to my Silberburst or my natural burst, even with an ebony fretboard...although the voodoo was 10% lighter...I also think the hotter gibson pickups played a part in the muddy sound...the cleans really didn't cut it.

Also big respect to everyone here for not getting agro, in fairness it shows that people are considering their responses...

I do think more research is needed because knowing more about wood, would mean that guitar manufacturers could continue to improve the tones, or at least improve the accuracy of the type of guitar tones they are aiming to produce.

Are you saying that because it's what you truly believe, or are you just saying that so people get off your case? If it is what you believe, why lead us on for 7 pages that you don't believe it anymore? I don't think anyone's intent on this forum is to shoot people down, forums are a place of opinion and you have an opinion. No need to go back and forth  :D

Like Philly said, music is much different than science. I don't need a guy in a labcoat and goggles telling me that this guitar sounds better than that. I'll leave that to all the forumites out there!

[AndyR]

BigB - that was Andy R, not me!

Andy R - I think you should try a whole new/different neck on Strat #1.  Frets will make little difference, same for a different body of the same wood, so the free vibrating neck would be my first thing to replace.

:lol: Yep, I thought that as I was reading - hey that was me! I was quite proud of that one...

And I think you're right, if I ever was to do anything about it, my belief is that it will be the neck that changes things most (when I stripped the lacquer off the back of it a few years back, that had an amazing - and very surprising - effect, I wasn't expecting that to happen, I stripped it just for feel, but it did give me a little bit more top). I probably won't replace it though because I rather like it (and it's a guitar the missus bought me).

so the free vibrating neck would be my first thing to replace.

Who is giving away FREE vibrating necks? :lol:

YOU, hopefully, if I did decide to replace it! :lol:

I might be talking to you about refretting the existing one soon, though (again, for feel rather than anything else - I've pretty much grown to appreciate and love the rounder tone of this one anyway).

[DaveyHoran]

Are you saying that because it's what you truly believe, or are you just saying that so people get off your case? If it is what you believe, why lead us on for 7 pages that you don't believe it anymore?

I believe the wood makes a difference but that the difference is difficult to measure, unlike pickups or an amp or effects where there is a massive difference...and with heavier modern music the tone produced is probably 95% amp/pickup/effects and maybe 5% wood so that 5% is probably something we can live without...especially when we're talking about live sound and random PAs and their EQ. I also believe that most woods overlap in terms of the tone they can offer so what sounds like mahogany could be agathis or something else... and because of that overlap, considering a guitars wood when buying comes down to other factors such as feel (like smooth ebony fretboards vs rougher rosewood for example) and the look of the wood grain.

[Lucifuge]

I saw some research a while back that claimed to prove that wood did in fact have an effect on tone.

Someone had done 2 sets of measurements with otherwise identical guitars - I think they were Teles, one with an ash body and one with alder.

There were some graphs (might have been fourier transforms, or whatever) that showed that while the basic waveforms produced by both guitars were the same (as you would expect, as they were both playing the same notes,) the detail in the small jaggedy bits of the waves were different.

This was used to "prove" that ash sounds like this, while alder sounds like something else. Of course it didn't really prove anything because with only one example of each wood it's impossible to say that all alder bodies would have the same kind of effect - they could have got similar results by using two different alder bodies or two different ash bodies.

All I can say from personal experience is that changing the material components of an electric guitar does alter the sound - though I only have direct experience of changing bridges and saddles as I don't have a whole load of different bodies and necks lying around.

As for making guitars I have to agree with those who say there is no "better" or "worse," only different. I have a plywood guitar that I love the sound of and I'm sure a lot of people have got great tones from Danelectros made from some kind of composite.

[Zaned]

Are you saying that because it's what you truly believe, or are you just saying that so people get off your case? If it is what you believe, why lead us on for 7 pages that you don't believe it anymore?

I believe the wood makes a difference but that the difference is difficult to measure, unlike pickups or an amp or effects where there is a massive difference...and with heavier modern music the tone produced is probably 95% amp/pickup/effects and maybe 5% wood so that 5% is probably something we can live without...especially when we're talking about live sound and random PAs and their EQ. I also believe that most woods overlap in terms of the tone they can offer so what sounds like mahogany could be agathis or something else... and because of that overlap, considering a guitars wood when buying comes down to other factors such as feel (like smooth ebony fretboards vs rougher rosewood for example) and the look of the wood grain.

Yep, the more distortion you add, the more compressed the sound becomes and the less difference you hear between guitars. And when changing playing touch. What you have left eventually is the voice of the amp, heavily on top of the masked personality of the guitar.

That's why I tend to use only the amount of distortion that I feel I need, and have lately gravitated towards lower output pickups. They have a dynamic and woody tone, and allow (to my ears) more of the guitars own tone through.  And I play hard rock most of the time, with bluesy stuff thrown in. That 5% for me is the difference between good and great  8) The guitars with the last 5% have what I call 'personality'. The thing that brings a smile to my face when playing  PDT_002 The audience most probably couldn't tell the difference, but the happier I am, the happier they will be. Most of the time  :lol:

The way I consider wood when buying a guitar is not 'this is mahogany and that's alder and..'. I go for the ones that sound and feel good. Simple as that. If it sounds like ass (not literally, hopefully) acoustically, I don't plug it in. Custom shop instruments usually feature woods that have been both aesthetically and sonically tested and approved to the best 5% or 10% by the luthiers. Still sometimes the guitar just doesn't sound as good as the price tag promises. And on the other hand, you might just get lucky with a cheaper one.

Because of this, I very rarely buy an instrument without trying it first.

-Zaned

[BigB]

BigB - that was Andy R, not me!

Err, actually, yes... My Bad  :?

:lol: Yep, I thought that as I was reading - hey that was me! I was quite proud of that one...

You can indeed be proud of yourself, as that was  - "from scientific evidence"  - the most obvious explanation :mrgreen:

I believe the wood makes a difference but that the difference is difficult to measure, unlike pickups or an amp or effects where there is a massive difference...

Don't forget the strap, man   8)