alder vs swamp ash - thoughts

[Lucas]

Hi,
As swamp ash and alder are one of the most popular tonewoods in the industry, there`s several misleading information, theories as well as different opinions about how those specific woods shape your tone.
Along with mahogany and maple, swamp ash and alder have sculpted and created last decades of music, leaving us chasing our tone based on thousands of records performed using those tonewoods.

but what is the difference? Did Leo Fender move from swamp ash used in early Broadcasters and Teles to alder for a reason or only an availability and price have forced him to take that step?

Long story short, what are your thoughts, opinions, observations about swamp ash and alder? How do those two woods compare tone-wise?

As far as Im concerned swamp ash due to it`s open grain is a little bit more musical, with little bit more mids and 'snap' at the same time still retaining balanced tone. Also a bit 'woodier' (open grain?).
Alder is more focused, defined with less mids. Slightly clearer with more articulate top end. But it`s only my observation based on YT clips ect. Never had any experience with Swamp Ash (have alder body Ibanez copy only).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QK14tjMz24

here`s nice comparison

but anyway, let`s share some more expert opinions...

cheers

[Twinfan]

Fender moved to alder because it was cheap, the same reason he used 4ohm speakers etc.

Personally, I prefer Swamp Ash as it always sounds a bit harder to my ears - more attack and snap to the tone.  This is between Teles that I've owned.

[darkbluemurder]

Did Leo Fender move from swamp ash used in early Broadcasters and Teles to alder for a reason or only an availability and price have forced him to take that step?

Yes. Alder was cheap and plentiful at that time. It was not especially sought after in the furniture industry since it often has a boring grain pattern and knotholes - no problem at all with the opaque finishes popular in the 60s. Leo was a radio technician and businessman, not a luthier.

Apart from the fact that each block of wood sounds different - even from the same species - the general consensus seems to be that alder has more mids than ash or swamp ash, which tends to be a bit scooped in the midrange. Too scooped, however, and it will be dark, as is one of my swamp ash bodied guitars.  On the other hand, I also have a dark sounding strat with an alder body but I suspect the neck is the culprit here as I tried it with another alder body - same tonal result.

Cheers Stephan

[dave_mc]

Personally, I prefer Swamp Ash as it always sounds a bit harder to my ears - more attack and snap to the tone.  This is between Teles that I've owned.

I wonder is that because they're teles? I haven't done anything like a scientific test but I always fancied I preferred teles which were ash (where, like you, I also appreciate the snap and attack), but strats (and possibly superstrats too) which were alder.

Then again I had a Lag strat for a little while which was ash and it sounded just fine. So I dunno. Though it had noiseless single coils, so maybe that took away slightly from the ash's snap (plus 24 frets which affects the pickup positions and tones).

[Lucas]

Apart from the fact that each block of wood sounds different - even from the same species - the general consensus seems to be that alder has more mids than ash or swamp ash, which tends to be a bit scooped in the midrange. Too scooped, however, and it will be dark, as is one of my swamp ash bodied guitars.  On the other hand, I also have a dark sounding strat with an alder body but I suspect the neck is the culprit here as I tried it with another alder body - same tonal result.

Cheers Stephan

funny enough, I was always thinking the other way. Swamp ash has more mids.
Anyway, would the difference between those two be dramatic and really noticable or generaly speaking alder and swamp ash sound quite similar?

From that video I prefer Swamp Ash which souds less 'sterile', woodier and more musical.

Correct me if Im wrong.