Fretboard woods: can anyone genuinely FEEL the difference?

Sambostar · April 2016

Stevepage said:

The frets on my guitars are so big I don't feel the wood. If you've got callus' on the tips of your fingers you're not really going to feel the wood anyway

Disagree. My technique is probably overly heavy and uses loads of vibrato and bends, to me that is all the guitar is about, otherwise play the piano or something. I've got massive callouses and rough builders hands. Lacquer makes a huge difference to bare wood, both on the fretboard and on the neck. It's slower, hard and glassy, less interactive and sticky.

When it comes to distinguishing the feel between different fretboard woods though, I kind of agree though.

If you play a widdly guitar like it is scalloped with an efficient and lighter technique, I shouldn't think it wouldn't make any difference, but it doesn't give you the right to be an authority on it. Just as the way I play doesn't make me one either.

Tone wise, warm valves, pickups, tactility of the thing and even mood and air pressure and humidity and immune systems have an effect, it's a very personal thing, but I think we all try to get something that we can pick up off the bat and get that instant perfect ambience, so it brings out the best in us, so we get some sort of satisfaction from it.

I'm no guitar snob and do everything on the cheap. But expense does work for some, quality and expense for most and quality for the rest of us.

That is the beauty of the guitar though, it is a four dimensional instrument and extremely interactive, dynamic and responsive instrument and that is why I was attracted to it and started playing it. and all these things, along with the player have an affect on the fourth dimension.

Why do we use wood for anything? It's cheap, it works, it's durable, it's easily worked and it looks and feels nice and it's sustainable and takes minimal effort and resources to produce.

Why do we wear cotton and wool when we could be wearing 100% synthetic materials?

Why are jeans still so popular?

Why do I get crotch rot working in 50% polyester trousers?

It's all about the same thing.

My favourite frets are the narrow vintage Fender ones, but I wear them out to the point of needing a refret in a year.

johnonguitar · April 2016

Sambostar;1034528" said:
Stevepage said:

The frets on my guitars are so big I don't feel the wood. If you've got callus' on the tips of your fingers you're not really going to feel the wood anyway

Disagree. My technique is probably overly heavy and uses loads of vibrato and bends, to me that is all the guitar is about, otherwise play the piano or something. I've got massive callouses and rough builders hands. Lacquer makes a huge difference to bare wood, both on the fretboard and on the neck. It's slower, hard and glassy, less interactive and sticky.When it comes to distinguishing the feel between different fretboard woods though, I kind of agree though.If you play a widdly guitar like it is scalloped with an efficient and lighter technique, I shouldn't think it wouldn't make any difference, but it doesn't give you the right to be an authority on it. Just as the way I play doesn't make me one either.Tone wise, warm valves, pickups, tactility of the thing and even mood and air pressure and humidity and immune systems have an effect, it's a very personal thing, but I think we all try to get something that we can pick up off the bat and get that instant perfect ambience, so it brings out the best in us, so we get some sort of satisfaction from it.I'm no guitar snob and do everything on the cheap. But expense does work for some, quality and expense for most and quality for the rest of us.That is the beauty of the guitar though, it is a four dimensional instrument and extremely interactive, dynamic and responsive instrument and that is why I was attracted to it and started playing it. and all these things, along with the player have an affect on the fourth dimension.Why do we use wood for anything? It's cheap, it works, it's durable, it's easily worked and it looks and feels nice and it's sustainable and takes minimal effort and resources to produce.Why do we wear cotton and wool when we could be wearing 100% synthetic materials?Why are jeans still so popular?Why do I get crotch rot working in 50% polyester trousers?It's all about the same thing.My favourite frets are the narrow vintage Fender ones, but I wear them out to the point of needing a refret in a year.

"Andreas Segovia should fuck off and play piano"- Sambostar

octatonic · April 2016

Sambostar said:

Stevepage said:

The frets on my guitars are so big I don't feel the wood. If you've got callus' on the tips of your fingers you're not really going to feel the wood anyway

Disagree. My technique is probably overly heavy and uses loads of vibrato and bends, to me that is all the guitar is about, otherwise play the piano or something. I've got massive callouses and rough builders hands. Lacquer makes a huge difference to bare wood, both on the fretboard and on the neck. It's slower, hard and glassy, less interactive and sticky.
When it comes to distinguishing the feel between different fretboard woods though, I kind of agree though.
If you play a widdly guitar like it is scalloped with an efficient and lighter technique, I shouldn't think it wouldn't make any difference, but it doesn't give you the right to be an authority on it. Just as the way I play doesn't make me one either.
Tone wise, warm valves, pickups, tactility of the thing and even mood and air pressure and humidity and immune systems have an effect, it's a very personal thing, but I think we all try to get something that we can pick up off the bat and get that instant perfect ambience, so it brings out the best in us, so we get some sort of satisfaction from it.
I'm no guitar snob and do everything on the cheap. But expense does work for some, quality and expense for most and quality for the rest of us.
That is the beauty of the guitar though, it is a four dimensional instrument and extremely interactive, dynamic and responsive instrument and that is why I was attracted to it and started playing it. and all these things, along with the player have an affect on the fourth dimension.
Why do we use wood for anything? It's cheap, it works, it's durable, it's easily worked and it looks and feels nice and it's sustainable and takes minimal effort and resources to produce.
Why do we wear cotton and wool when we could be wearing 100% synthetic materials?
Why are jeans still so popular?
Why do I get crotch rot working in 50% polyester trousers?
It's all about the same thing.
My favourite frets are the narrow vintage Fender ones, but I wear them out to the point of needing a refret in a year.

guitars4you · April 2016

Sporky said:

guitars4you said:

To Octatonic - my comments about resin wood, plastics, carbon fibre etc are not aimed at your or any true luthier - It is a comment to those who disbelief that real tone woods do not exists and cheap wood sounds just as good in an electric guitar as true tone woods

But what is a "true tone wood"?

It's just a bit of wood that ends up in a guitar that sounds good. If you'd used that same bit of wood but stuffed up the construction the guitar wouldn't sound as good, and you wouldn't claim that it was a true tone wood.

As for the claim that everyone can tell a £200 guitar from a £2k in a double-blind test, citation most definitely needed.

I will agree with you that 'tone wood' is a generic term that has to much of an open ended understanding about what it actually is

Many say mahogany is a tone wood but as we know with all woods, some ring and some don't - I suppose loosely speaking all wood has a tone but is it a good tone or bad tone - I'm sure tht as players and builders we know what it is meant to mean

Maybe the phrase should indicate 'hand picked wood for tonal character'

Many discerning boutique luthiers and builders will hand pick wood from an appropriate source with weight, aesthetics and resonance as key criteria and this approach will also throw up a few surprises as time goes on with different woods - I know companies like Collings work closely with timber yards to select the right grade 'planks' etc, but how much wastage they acquire I'm not so sure

Large companies like Gibson are fortunate that they can keep the best planks and blanks for say True Historic top end Custom Shop models and move less graded blanks down the range, even onto sub £600/700 models as required - I'm sure they dictate to their suppliers lesser grade blanks as required, but the point is that if it ain't good enough on a 4K LP it can go on a 2K Lp - same applies to any major builder with different price points

guitars4you · April 2016

Sporky said
As for the claim that everyone can tell a £200 guitar from a £2k in a double-blind test, citation most definitely needed.

no citation possible - To me my ears are the test - I recently acquired a used £150 Yamaha Pacifica that far exceeded its price tag - Low end production now is better than ever before, but if you could try 10 or 20 new Pacificas I bet you would not find one as good as this was - Just very very good and sold it in days - But generally a £200 copy will not sound as good as a 2K regarding resonance - I regularly get to hand pick Fender Custom Shop Strats and Teles for stock and after playing 10 or 20 you'll find a few that just don't have some mojo - maybe they are not poor, but they don't quite do it - But the ones that do are special

I have never ever plugged a guitar into an amp when buying it for myself - Not once - Feel and acoustic properties take initial priority and whilst I agree you don't get to know a guitar inside out in 1 our, 1 week or 1 month you can often disregard it in 10 to 20 seconds

Regarding a blind fold test - Yes I'm sure it would through up a few surprises for many of us - Can I tell the difference in feel between a Strat with maple or rosewood board - I'm not so sure - There is something in the tone, but after buying, playing and selling plenty my own personal taste always goes rosewood - Same applies when playing and trying an LP Custom or LP Standard - My choice has always been Std - does there need to be a reason - Do I have a preference between ash or alder body ? - Not really - My preference is 10/20 second after playing it as does it have some magical mojo in there

octatonic · April 2016

^^^ Mark, what do you mean by 'resonance' in the statement 'But generally a £200 copy will not sound as good as a 2K regarding resonance'.

The terms gets misused, I just want to make sure we are talking about the same quality.

I'll respond once you do.

richardhomer · April 2016

Stevepage;1034444" said:
The frets on my guitars are so big I don't feel the wood.

Analogous to something my ex-wife once said to me....

guitars4you · April 2016

octatonic said:

^^^ Mark, what do you mean by 'resonance' in the statement 'But generally a £200 copy will not sound as good as a 2K regarding resonance'.

The terms gets misused, I just want to make sure we are talking about the same quality.
I'll respond once you do.

is it a case of easier to show rather than explain ? -- I'm talking electric guitars as well - Sounds like I'm back at school in an exam and now trying to write down what is easier to say and discuss - I'm always open to a chat, debate and be educated by the way

I play say a big open E chord and listen to it ring - some guitars sound like the card board box they are shipped in with a dull lifeless vibe - Others ring - Fully appreciate that the resonant frequency they ring at is different and that itself is not good or bad - Tap the body of say 5 Strats and you can hear a different natural pitch and I dare say this reflects in the finer nuances of the guitars tone - Some ring and are more springy/lively, some ring with more depth - But essentially I'm talking about the electric guitars natural acoustic vibe

Similar to trying a £200 acoustic with laminates or a 2K acoustic with solid woods

I've tapped quality fingerboard blanks in the past inc Brz Rosewood and some ring like a tuning fork others sound dead and maybe should become a mantle piece - Maybe the term should be is there any sign of life in there

Happy to hear a reply

octatonic · April 2016

guitars4you said:

octatonic said:

^^^ Mark, what do you mean by 'resonance' in the statement 'But generally a £200 copy will not sound as good as a 2K regarding resonance'.

The terms gets misused, I just want to make sure we are talking about the same quality.
I'll respond once you do.

is it a case of easier to show rather than explain ? -- I'm talking electric guitars as well - Sounds like I'm back at school in an exam and now trying to write down what is easier to say and discuss - I'm always open to a chat, debate and be educated by the way

I play say a big open E chord and listen to it ring - some guitars sound like the card board box they are shipped in with a dull lifeless vibe - Others ring - Fully appreciate that the resonant frequency they ring at is different and that itself is not good or bad - Tap the body of say 5 Strats and you can hear a different natural pitch and I dare say this reflects in the finer nuances of the guitars tone - Some ring and are more springy/lively, some ring with more depth - But essentially I'm talking about the electric guitars natural acoustic vibe

Similar to trying a £200 acoustic with laminates or a 2K acoustic with solid woods

I've tapped quality fingerboard blanks in the past inc Brz Rosewood and some ring like a tuning fork others sound dead and maybe should become a mantle piece - Maybe the term should be is there any sign of life in there

Happy to hear a reply

Ok, every mechanical system has a resonant frequency where it responds more than it does at other frequencies.

When I am tuning a soundboard I use a process where I make the soundboard vibrate using a sweep sine wave and a probe microphone to record the responses across the entire frequency spectrum.

People frequently use glitter to show were nodes and antinodes are located on the soundboard- these are called 'Chladni patterns'.

Chladni patterns looks something like this: http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/guitar/patterns_engl.html

You can see the patterns are different at different pitches.

This is because the nodes (points of minimal movement at a frequency) and antinodes (maximum movement at that frequency) move about depending on what frequency it responds to.

Every component in the guitar has its own resonant frequency but because an acoustic guitar is a helmholtz resonator not every component has as great as impact as the soundboard, but to a greater or lesser degree any musical instrument is the sum of its components.

Something else to consider is the thinner & lighter a piece of wood is the lower the resonant frequency- when tuning a soundboard if I am finding the resonant frequency to be too high in pitch I shave away some of the mass in order to lower it.

What I am actually doing here is trying to even out some of the acoustical resonances. For example, I might have a soundboard that responds quite dramatically at 196hz- lets say a 3db peak right where I want to put the bridge.

196hz just happens to be the note G3 (3rd string) so you could find that note is unevenly pronounced when playing the instrument.

So if I have a soundboard that has a pronounced frequency I will tend to try to even that out by taking away some of the wood so that the soundboard responds less at that frequency.

When people talk about resonance they aren't talking about acoustic or mechanical resonance- at least not in the way I have just described it.

If it was then you'd have a very unbalanced instrument.

If the electric guitar 'system' was resonant at a particular frequency (lets say 3db at 196hz) then the note G would be nearly twice as loud as the other notes.

This wouldn't be musically desirable.

When people talk about an electric guitar being 'more resonant' than another electric guitar they aren't really talking about acoustical resonance. It is, as you say, a series of different qualities- lively, boxy, loud, soft, thin, fat, bright, bassy etc.

This has a bit to do with acoustical resonance but often it could be something as simple as the guitar being badly set up.

As an example a poorly cut nut, as is often the case with cheap guitars, can kill the sustain in a guitar- it can make the guitar sound thin and lifeless.

Replacing the nut on this instrument can transform the guitar.

To say that a £200 electric guitar is inferior than a £2k isn't particularly controversial- but it is mostly because of other factors.

The pickups, electronics, hardware, setup, finish all contribute to the whole.

To put it down to wood choice is missing the point as to why a guitar costs £2k compared to another that costs £200.

It is mostly hardware and labour costs.

Here is a test.

I have made a small recording of 3 guitars with different woods and identical middle pickups, and almost identical hardware (they all have floating trems).

I play the note G open at the 3rd string with roughly the same force.

The guitars have the same gauge of string on them although the last one has quite old strings on it (so it sounds a bit duller).

http://www.jamesrichmond.com/moved/3g.m4a

The guitars all have different woods- one is basswood with a maple cap, one is alder, one is ash.

2 are expensive 'boutique brands', one is a cheap guitar (a 1970's Arai).

All of them have been given the treatment by me (because they are my personal guitars) and are set up and playing well, albeit not with the newest strings in one case.

See if you can establish which ones are the expensive guitars, and which one is the cheap guitar.

I'll argue that all 3 sound close enough to one another that the wood species makes virtually no difference.

The pickups are identical in all cases (Suhr ML middle) and played through a Two Rock amp with G12-65 speaker.

Elx · April 2016

@ Octatonic, just listened to it, it's the same guitar, admit it

octatonic · April 2016

Elx said:

@ Octatonic, just listened to it, it's the same guitar, admit it

It really, really isn't.

I'm trying to make a serious point here and I won't undermine it by lying to you all.

Elx · April 2016

octatonic said:

Elx said:

@ Octatonic, just listened to it, it's the same guitar, admit it

It really, really isn't.
I'm trying to make a serious point here and I won't undermine it by lying to you all.

I was joking...:)

octatonic · April 2016

I know.

Teetonetal · April 2016

Will have a listen later... my bet is that it's very hard to tell...

octatonic · April 2016

My take on it is that they sound very, very similar- but any differences can be accounted for by slight differences in pick angle, picking intensity and place along the string (it won't be exactly the same from guitar to guitar), component difference (all the pots have the same value but they won't be exactly identical), string age and pickup height.

guitars4you · April 2016

Octatonic

I recall Chladni at school - think we used salt and/or pepper and know the principle

Ref the sound clips - with respect, you don't get to hear the finer detail and maybe the true detail when listening through some budget computer monitors, so there is more of a level playing field - I recall some Bare Knuckle video clip some months ago and showing 2 different Strat pick-ups - I'm sure that in the flesh there would have been a difference, but from a video clip, possibly compressed, there was no difference

I'm sure the discussion of 'tone woods' resonance, acoustic vibration etc can go on and on both, with input from physics, myth and legend as well as a gut feeling and what your ears hear - So let's assume that tone woods are a hype that suits the upmarket electric guitar business so we can sell high end Gibson's, Fenders, PRS, Suhr etc etc and feed the capitalist world - Then why do the small boutique luthiers still utilse many of the same principles and ingredients - why not adopt a policy that goes along the lines of 'look how good my far more affordable hand built guitar is' - I know economies of scale would prevent this,but they effectively still sell the same 'hand picked superior wood' policy - Or indeed companies like Suhr or Anderson who sit in the middle of one man builders and large corporate machines, still adopt the total high end, superior wood approach when they could sit in between mass production from the far east and over priced high end from the USA - We can't all be zoombified and conned into buying a high end guitar that is barely superior can we ?????????????

I can't argue about what I feel and hear it when I play a Squier and a £2000 C/Shop - I'm sure all good guitar techs can optimize the performance of a £200 copy

Builders like Tom Anderson and PRS always talk about an electric guitar is only an acoustic guitar with a sound box - Anderson always talks about the relationship of a human voice and a microphone and an electric guitar and a pick-up in that the electric guitar is the voice and the pick up just amplifies this process - I think ultimately 20/30/40 factors go into the finer detail, but I still rest my case that a £200 guitar unplugged sounds far less lively, and rings far less than most 2K Strats - I can't argue against my ears

I have never built a guitar so you have a big advantage over me on that part and I'm sure lots of experience trying different relationship between various materials etc - But if it don't feel right, play right, or sound right then everything else is garbage

In principle, nothing has changed about a Strat in over 60 years - But there are a lot of crap Strats out there as well as some good ones - The alder, ash, maple and rosewood format is the heart of such guitars so surely if the case was all ash is ash and all alder is alder, then why do the Custom Shop team look for wood that has a lively ring about it and produce a guitar that to many sounds superior

I'm not saying you are wrong, but we clearly have a difference of opinion and I dare say both camps have their followers - But that is good as it produces different ideas - I'm sure Mr Strad, Mr Amati and Mr Stainer and even Lloyd Loar would have many similar and different few points

guitars4you · April 2016

There can be as much tonal variability within two pieces of wood from the same species as there can be between two pieces of wood of different species.

I do agree with you 100% on this matter

As a strong overview, I dare say most guitar players don't care, or understand the science or any logistics that go in any guitar, be it £200 or 2K - That is not meant to be a belittling comment - They just want to buy the best they can and whatever magic or mojo that is in the guitar that they are buying then that is all that matters

I was lucky enough 2 years ago to play the actual Pete Green/Gary Moore LP for 15 mins or so and all I can say is that whatever magic is in that guitar suited Gary, but it sure as hell did not suit me

Sporky · April 2016

guitars4you said:

So let's assume that tone woods are a hype that suits the upmarket electric guitar business so we can sell high end Gibson's, Fenders, PRS, Suhr etc etc and feed the capitalist world - Then why do the small boutique luthiers still utilse many of the same principles and ingredients

Partly, at least, because they're in a marketing arms race. If I'm spending £3k or more on a guitar, I know that a lot of that is the extra labour and expertise of the person I have chosen to make it for me.

At that point, spending £100 on the timbers or £500 on the timbers is a relatively small difference, and part of the price difference is the time-cost involved in selecting non-duff timbers (ie they're not full of knots or have mineral stains (unless that's the look we're going for) and they have an appropriate grain. Flatsawn timber is fine for necks - this has been demonstrated ad nauseum - but quartersawn timber has advantages for a bit more money (or a bit more time spent picking out the quartersawn planks - which is effectively money).

It's the same as putting a Hipshot bridge onto a £3k instrument, not one of the perfectly good but much cheaper ones that Axetec (for example) sell. I've used both. They both do the job required. But on a £3k instrument, a lot of buyers won't be happy with a bridge that cost £23 - they'll want one that cost £123 (quick google search for price).

It's a circular marketing thing. Leo used alder and swamp ash because they were cheap and plentiful locally. They machined well and the resulting guitars sounded perfectly good. But 60 years later the sound of a Strat is associated with swamp ash and alder (correct me if I'm wrong there - I'm not a Strat expert) and if you make a guitar that's identical in every respect apart from having a mahogany body, people who are after "a strat" won't entertain it.

WezV · April 2016

You guys need to make more guitars, preferably from a selection of woods.

octatonic · April 2016

guitars4you said:

Octatonic

I recall Chladni at school - think we used salt and/or pepper and know the principle

Ref the sound clips - with respect, you don't get to hear the finer detail and maybe the true detail when listening through some budget computer monitors, so there is more of a level playing field - I recall some Bare Knuckle video clip some months ago and showing 2 different Strat pick-ups - I'm sure that in the flesh there would have been a difference, but from a video clip, possibly compressed, there was no difference

I'm sure the discussion of 'tone woods' resonance, acoustic vibration etc can go on and on both, with input from physics, myth and legend as well as a gut feeling and what your ears hear - So let's assume that tone woods are a hype that suits the upmarket electric guitar business so we can sell high end Gibson's, Fenders, PRS, Suhr etc etc and feed the capitalist world - Then why do the small boutique luthiers still utilse many of the same principles and ingredients - why not adopt a policy that goes along the lines of 'look how good my far more affordable hand built guitar is' - I know economies of scale would prevent this,but they effectively still sell the same 'hand picked superior wood' policy - Or indeed companies like Suhr or Anderson who sit in the middle of one man builders and large corporate machines, still adopt the total high end, superior wood approach when they could sit in between mass production from the far east and over priced high end from the USA - We can't all be zoombified and conned into buying a high end guitar that is barely superior can we ?????????????

How do you imagine a small builder can compete with any of the big companies by making a product cheaper?

By using 'cheaper' wood?

The wood is the least expensive bit of an electric guitar and people like me pay probably 10-20 times what Fender or PRS pay for their 'tone wood' because we don't buy in quantities that give us a discount.

Wood needs to be stable, ideally straight grained (particularly for necks) and at the right water content.

It needs to be kept in conditions that don't allow its water content to change dramatically.

I can't argue about what I feel and hear it when I play a Squier and a £2000 C/Shop - I'm sure all good guitar techs can optimize the performance of a £200 copy

Again, you aren't objective.

You know when you have a £2000 guitar in your hands and when you have a £200 Squier in your hands.

This lack of objectivity taints your perception the situation.

This is what the industry relies upon- a lack of objectivity and a desire to buy into 'the dream'.

Again, and for the final time- I'm not saying that wood makes no difference, but just that the industry heavily markets ideas that cannot be backed up scientifically, or at least have not been backed up scientifically.

I'm going to leave this discussion now, because I've spent quite a bit of time today responding to this thread and said all I have to say.

I actually need to get back to actually building the buggers.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Fretboard woods: can anyone genuinely FEEL the difference?

Comments