Look up Jim Lill's video "Tested: Where Does The Tone Come From In An Electric Guitar?" All the guitar builders are full of BS. Now sustain is another topic.
@@guyfromnj Yes, and I can always hear a difference on my own comparisons too. I just preach that it isn't something worth fretting over :) The "wrong" type of wood will not ruin your tone, and likewise, the "right" type of wood will not make you sound magically amazing - only practise does that! Comfort, balance, neck profile, and overall playability are much more important in an Instrument. With a good amp, and knowledge of EQ, any tone is available to a player regardless of what type of wood is on the guitar!
I agree also, it's not huge but the differences are there. I watch all your vids Darrell. I wasn't being accusatory or anything like that. I was just curious of your thoughts because I've heard you laugh about tonewood before and the heated debates are laughable. It's not that big a deal people. I stick with the tonewoods are subtractive idea. Alder eats up low frequencies making it sound bright. Mahogany can do the opposite. The real test is taking different density wood of the same species and showing the difference that can make. A really light piece of alder is going to sound different than a heavy dense piece also. But again, it's not huge differences but as you play and train your ear it becomes very apparent.
I played in a counry rock band and I played a tele . The other guitarist played a Gibson 335. We switched guitars one gig for one set. A few songs into the set we all couldn't believe he had that tele sounding like his 335 just by adjusting the tone ,volume knobs . I'll never forget that.
@@smokenfire teles are magical, if you've never owned one, buy one. I have yet to know someone with a decent tele who didn't love it or doesn't miss having it.
@@death32815 never played one, actually. Teles are everywhere, but somehow neither me nor any of my friends ever owned one. I suddenly find it really weird.
So you’re saying that the mahogany body has more sustain and probably better for harmonics? The reason I watched this video is because I’m tired of dull tone response and harmonic response and the wood and materials on the wood. I wish they would’ve had a solid maple body or at least one with a veneer top. Thank you for your detailed response.
Bro, that had to be so much work, but it made an very high quality, accurate comparison! Thank you for taking the time to make this, first vid of yours I've seen. Subbed for your dedication to quality content!
Thanks for this video. I have a trebly tone naturally from my hands. I became a believer in body tone wood differences years ago. I had a very thick Alder bodied guitar with a rosewood fretboard that has always had fat thick tone even under my hands. I bought a new very thin super strat guitar that had the same pickups as my thick alder guitar but a swamp ash body. That night I brought along my new baby to my gig and noticed my solos in particular sounded very very bright compared to my other alder guitar and convinced myself it was in my head until my bass player came over and said that my new guitar was like a buzz saw. I eventually set up different profiles for the different tones. Years later, I switched the swamp ash body out for mahogany body I got in trade and "bam" the tone changed to a more mid bass heavy thick tone with all of the same electronics. Several years after that, I learned about the "tonewood" debate and went "Oh yeah!".. Having said that most of the differences can be compensated for with the amp or pickup selections., For teles and country, I lean towards swamp ash, for hard rock and humbuckers I am a mahogany, limba or alder guy.
Done as it should be, a controlled experiment with minimal variables - great job!! I'd love to see this done again to include all of the core wood choices you offer: Basswood, Maple, Walnut, Roasted Swamp Ash, Roasted Alder, Poplar, Black Korina, and again Mahogany, Ash and Alder - it'd be the go video for choosing a tone wood :-)
great video. this this the kind of comparisons worth watching. 3 of the most popular wood types for guitar and exact conditions to test sound. most people just don't/can't do that type of testing. great stuff. for me, on the swamp and alder i didn't hear much difference on the clean but once distortion was added, the swamp was more warm and creamy. the alder had more mid with distortion. the mahogany was brighter and brittle clean and had more crunch when distorted. anyway, that's how it sounded to me. this video was very useful and anyone considering these wood options for their next build should watch this.
I was happy that your editing made the swaps quite seemless... it's the first time I've seen this in comparison videos. Because of this I was able to hear those subtle differences, just like you heard. Thanks
Difference to me was negligible, especially when you consider how many other factors contribute to the end sound in a real-world scenario. But I give you MASSIVE respect for having gone through so much trouble to give us as honest a side-by-side comparison as could ever be possible. Seriously, setting this up must have been so much work, and I really appreciate it 🙂
Every discussion & demonstration I've ever seen on the subject convinces me that "tonewood" is a ridiculous concept. It _is_ the perfect youtube content though - guaranteed to be controversial, with no real stakes or problematic opinions. Guitar players are a superstitious bunch, and tone is a strange sorcery arising from arcane incantations and mystical spell components.
Most of them are subtle differences indeed. The crowd wont notice and even the best ear wont notice on a blind test. Still there are part of the character, response and overall DNA of every instrument. You might notice how certain tracks on a daw might sound "better" to you with one instrument over the other. Another thing to notice is that this type of videos get compressed and eq by youtube. This is something that you really have to test by yourself with your own setup.
@@mallninja9805 This actually is one of the things I greatly appreciate about RUclips. It removes the sorcery aspect for those of us that are willing to be objective. That has been useful for me on numerous occasions, and I laugh at some of the stuff I used to believe just because some musician I respect said it. On the other hand, this niche comparison is helpful for those of us that are building a tele and need to first choose the body wood. Sorcery.or no sorcery, I still have to make that decision, along with a number of other decisions. I'm sure Warmoth gets asked for advice on body wood choices every day they are open!
@@juankyman8404 Well said. Ultimately it is only the Player that need be inspired by the instrument they are playing. Be it color, age, scale length or whatever, whatever works to inspire the player is what is important.
Agreed. And I think ash is good at distinguishing the note of each string. The more gain is used, the more it will become noticeable. To my understanding, that's because ash is solid and dense, so less transient attacks are "absorbed".
@@PJSOFTagreed, the swamp ash really has clarity in the highs and minds mid cuts through and also mains great bottom end... I have a sungkai body solar guitar and from what i have read online (which unfortunately is hard to find info on) - but Sungkai is some form of Indonesian swamp ash I believe. Anyway, whatever it is, it's the best guitar for metal that I have, especially for getting those highs and mids to seemlessly cut through the lows and the bass, giving great distinction between notes and chords. Does anyone have any info on Sungkai for electric guitars as I prefer it's metal tone and clarity even when heavily, heavily distorted, even compared to my esp which is solid mahogany. Anyway thanks for reading.
To me, the alder body had an overall compressed sound, without any kind of mid scoop. After decades of playing Fender and Fender-style basses with swamp ash bodies and alder bodies, I’ve come to prefer alder bodies for just this reason. Swamp ash to me has fat lows and crisp sounding highs, but there’s typically a bit of a mid scoop, which doesn’t work for me in live playing. But for recording, the more lively tone of swamp ash is great. The mahogany body’s tone blows my mind. It wasn’t at all what I expected. I only own one bass with a mahogany body, which is an Alembic. Alembic’s electronics are very versatile and responsive. I’ve always assumed the pickups and electronics outweighed the body wood’s contribution to tone. Now I’m thinking differently. To my ears on the video, the mahogany body had a little more of everything. Very impressive.
If I take ash as the base, alder had more 'twang' but was more limited in range - must work great in a band context- , and mahogany had the best lows, more pronounced and warm, at the cost of some of the high-end. That being said, I agree that the difference was quite subtle, and I required a couple of takes to denote each wood. Maybe the neck's wood have a more dramatic effect.
@Leon thecat "Immune"? Nope. A DiMarzio Tone Zone, for example, will retain most of its qualities going from body wood to body wood but will sound tighter in Swamp Ash vs Mahogany, muddier in Mahogany vs Swamp Ash, more compressed in Maple versus Alder etc when all other variables gave been taken out of the equation (shape, construction, neck material, pickup height, string guage/action, room acoustics etc). I can attest to "immunity" not even being the case with ACTIVE pickups (an 85 sounds clearer in Ash vs Mahogany etc). There's a fair bit of bullshit in the instrument world and it's good to call it out, but you can clearly hear differences in this video.
@Leon thecat Preconceived TERMS, yes. It's how the English language works. How else would I be able to describe subjective experiences of sound to somebody else without a (largely) uniformly-understood glossary of terms to base it off of? It's far easier to say "muddy" than "too much in the 200-350hz range". I've done plenty of blind A/B/X testing my life (guitars, amps, mp3 vs WAV...), presicely to get rid of the confirmation bias aspect. I've had friends test me while I wasn't looking etc. When watching THIS EXACT VIDEO, I didn't look at the screen. I'd be deeply concerned if you failed to hear any differences in this video and that the differences weren't consistent across examples. Maybe Aaron had the door closed every time he played the mahogany guitar?
@Leon thecat You seem to be avoiding all of the pertinent questions. Did you hear a difference in this video? If so, how do you explain them- in particular the consistency of tone change from wood to wood? (I actually know, but I'll assume you've studied both sides of the argument). As I said earlier, I conducted this test blind. You can choose to disbelieve me, of course, but it's the truth. If you do the same and still can't hear differences then I'll be surprised.
@Leon thecat Negligible, yet you heard a difference nevertheless. Good. Did you do the test blind, write down notes as to the qualities of each example (riff example, not wood example obviously) and what was your listening setup? (Smart phone; PC w/desktop speakers; run through a hifi setup etc).
This is the first time I have seen and heard a legitimate test of woods compared side by side. I think it definitely revealed noticeable differences between the different woods used. The most distinctive difference that I noticed was with the mahogany body. For my playing style, I prefer the mahogany, than the alder and swamp ash. The differences between the latter woods was not as pronounced, but much more subtle than it was with the mahogany. It would be interesting to see and hear a similar test with additional woods and some exotic woods as well. Thank you very much for the demonstration! Please have an excellent and awesome day! 🙂
I'm going to have to echo the same sentiments others have shared. This is probably the best tone comparison video out there. This is a good starting point for deciding what you want your sound to be like.
thanks for the careful, balanced comparison with clear, repeated musical phrases for each setting on each wood type! this answered a lot of questions I had about how these woods contribute to tone. mahogany definitely sounded warmer, something resonant about that in the low/mid frequencies. the alder had an interesting almost flangey sound when distorter, and swamp ash (which I thought would be muddled) seemed just a bit brighter and snappier in tone, especially with the clean sounds.
@@franknstein4340 Absolutely not. If you use a pair of decent studio monitors, you can easily ear the difference (and note that I don't use the verb "feel") in a blind-eyed test. Also, if you analyze the spectrums, mahogany has clearly a more compact spectrum which translates, indeed, in a warmer sound.
I built a Strat with a mahogany body back in '89. As a performing musician using mostly a Gibson SG, I really loved mahogany. Having said that I will say that it is really tough to hear the difference in tone between the same guitar of different woods when the guitar is highly overdriven ... and if there is a chance to hear a difference ... it will most likely be heard with the guitar being played clean. On the clean clip with the neck pickup, I heard the most difference between the mahogany tele and the other two. Nice video ... thank you.
That’s the best and most accurate comparison I’ve ever seen or heard. Excellent job. I preferred the ash. I was pleasantly surprised on the mahogany. The Alder was thinner and third place, even though I liked it. For my taste, the ash took the sonic qualities of the other two and gives you the best of both worlds.
Agreed! The snob in me wanted the Alder to win. The Ash surprised me. What also surprised me was the bodies of original sort-after Fender Teles. They are made from ‘humble’ Pine. Now then!
The mahogany body sounded just slightly warmer and the alder body had a balanced sound but I could barely hear the differences. I'm saving up money for a Stratocaster build, picking Swamp Ash just for the grain really. Thanks for the video!
I'm wearing good headphones and wow, I was really surprised at how much I could tell the difference! I liked the mahogany with the distortion, The alder had a more mellow, almost muted tone that sounded great with clean arpeggios. While the swamp was more sharp. Great job!
This is a really great comparison thank you so much for creating it for us all. I noticed the differences very clearly between all 3 guitars. The Mahogany body was the most phat and solid sounding to me, and the Alder seemed more thin and less character. Overall I would go with the Swamp ash as I think it was the most unique and interesting sounding with its own distinct character to the tones.
The differences were very subtle but they are there. Mahogany seemed a tad more focused or midrangey and the ash seemed a tad brighter and louder. At least to me. yep, just watched your conclusions and I agree. Even tho they are slight, it's there and so.... thx!
INDEED spot on to be honest, also depends alot on your current sound system/headphones but im using a cheap ass flat EQed headphone. still I hear the same as you. the mahogany seems punchy and a bit more midrange. swamp ashp certainly plays well with the single coils.
@@adzbox Different pieces of wood WILL sound different. You'd have to be scientifically illiterate to deny it. People say "tonewood is a myth" and then dumb people blindly repeat it. The original "Tonewood is a myth" was in reference to the ads in guitar magazines. I don't recall which company coined the term "tonewood", but the spiel was about them using species of tree that sound better...for some reason. Which IS utter bollocks. The tone is affected by the stiffness, density, etc of the wood. NOT the species of the tree. If a guitar string is attached at each end to an infinite, immoveable mass, then you will be hearing just the sound of a string vibrating in air. Putting anything else between those points, will attenuate energy from the vibrating strings, and it will do so differently at different frequencies, depending on the properties of whatever is holding the ends of the string in place. So yes, "tonewood" is a myth. But yes, the wood does affect the tone. Even the amplified tone. There just isn't a rule that beautiful wood from a 5000 year old tree in a tribal graveyard in Bongo-bongo land, has to sound better or worse than a slab of ash or a couple of sheets of plywood glued together
Nice video, thanks for the shootout. I’m a luthier. My honest opinion? I heard subtle differences. They may make a difference to some people, but to me they were inconsequential. Maybe 5-10% of the sound was affected by the use of the wood. I’d say 90% of tone is pickup selection. Building guitars, I use wood choice more for weight. Swamp ash and mahogany are great. I love pawlonia. I see no problem with resin! My hu,blue opinion.
2 videos later and it explains why "I've always wanted an Alder Tele with a Rosewood board (instead of or in addition to my longtime '52 RI Butterscotch Tele) , and explains why I just built one - from parts including a very very old Warmoth body - and I knew from the moment I strung it up that it was going to be the best Tele I've ever had, and it is.
Putting on headphones makes a world of difference. Also confirms that I love swamp ash. It sounded the most open and full to my ears, similar to what you said. EQ could get them all sounding very similar, but it's still cool to hear a good example of what the differences are. The tone wood opinion wars will rage on, but I'm sure many will find this helpful when thinking about their next instrument.
Honestly, they were very subtle, 1 thing I really noticed, Telecaster and Stratacaster - Body doesn't mean much unless you are a pro master level player with higher level equipment to make the nuances more pronounced to make a difference, Now partial hollow body or LP style guitars the wood actually seems to make a pronounced difference from the get go. From what I gather its due to the shape and amount of wood used, obviously ANY hollow instrument wood will matter 100% more for the reverberations through the chamber.
Yeah, I hear a very subtle difference. Emphasize the word subtle. I’m listening using AKG k712’s. I’m sure playing in person the difference would be more noticeable. But the takeaway is that the differences aren’t as pronounced as most would believe…
Wow, that's what I was waiting for! Very interesting, thanx a lot, Aaron. Actually no big surprises, except that the difference in sound of the three bodies was smaller than I had expected. Mahogany is my favorite tone wood for guitar bodies. That unique 'bite' in higain sounds simply makes the difference for a great rock'n'roll tone for me.
Thank you. As with the companion video which compared chambered and solid bodies, the difference between these woods is negligible and appears to be more noticeable with overdrive because the overtones are amplified somewhat and there’s some sort of compounding going around. I think the good news is you can make guitars with just about any good quality of a certain type of wood.
Wait...there IS a video comparing chambered and solid bodies? YES!!!! I (and others in here) were commenting that he should do that video hahaha! Going to find it now.
Absolutely. I agree. It was like performing a 1dB frequency sweep across the spectrum while mixing to find the frequencies you want to accentuate or diminish. The funny thing is that I thought each sounded better than the others while in its element. Depending on what you were playing, I tended to prefect a different wood. Now I’m going to have to buy even more guitars. Lol Thanks for doing the comparison.
Another really cool comparison. I agree with trevordeke. So many noodle crazy players. That was really straight ahead and clear. I loved that Alder body tone. It did seem to have a brighter sound to me. As you mentioned in the video you did comparing the F hole, vs chambered vs solid Tele's - it's so true that it's really difficult to discern what you're feeling and hearing, especially when you're playing a guitar unplugged, just to see how it feels, snaps, etc. And no 2 teles play/feel the same way. I recently tried a Tele parts-caster at a local guitar shop in my city, and it had a 51' thick U shaped MIM neck. The guitar played so well. It was snappy, bright, immediate, focused and acoustically loud. Very easy under the fingers. I don't know if the tone could be attributed to the thicker neck, or just that particular piece of maple that it was made from - on that body. But it felt really good to play, and I think that's really important to most of us.
On the clean tests, they all sounded fairly close to me; however, when you hit the gain, the mahogany walked away from rest. On Test 4 it genuinely sounded like you tweaked the reasonance and presence controls on the amp when the mahogany came on.
This is one of THE BEST demos of how the wood of a body effect tone. Massive differences. I love the Swamp Ash for cleans, but the Alder for the dirtier overdriven tones.
"Massive" differences? Ever heard of the term "confirmation-bias"? If you don't actualy _look_ at the video and just go by ears; your verdict would've turned out quite differently.
@@dildojizzbaggins6969 I did do this blind and the difference is pretty obvious to me when all three are played in rapid succession. My wife who was across the room could also easily identify the differences as well. The point is, just because you can't differentiate the tones doesn't mean the differences don't exist. Different people have different levels of sensory perception. For instance, women have more rods and cones in their eyes than men do so they simply see colors more accurately than I do. It's not a knock on you that you can't hear a difference -- quite a lot can't either. But, you should try to accept the idea that your perception levels aren't the only ones in the world.
@@dildojizzbaggins6969 "massive" is a bit of an exaggeration as the differences represent relatively small EQ changes. The point is that the differences are noticeable to the untrained listener
@@maciejduda5257 Not all ears are the same. I've consistently been astonished in situations like this or testing out different guitars at music stores when tonal differences that were very obvious and pronounced to me went unoticed by friends and bystanders. They would often argue with me and insist there was no difference.
Thanks for this excellent and focused comparison. I've A/B'ed several pairs of solidbody guitars that were identical except for their body (or neck) woods, and I always hear a huge difference. Having recently acquired Tele-style guitars made from ash and mahogany bodies, I hear why Leo Fender chose ash for the original Tele's and Strats. It's really the most flattering and balanced tonewood for Fender-style guitars. Ash brings out out a bit more of everything, and also brings out the classic Fender whistle and howl that we love.
This test reaffirms the stereotypes of each wood to me - swamp ash scooped, alder more upper mids, mahogany more lower mids (I'm oversimplifying as I heard other different nuances). They all sound great, can all just be EQ'd to personal taste. I personally loved the distorted bridge pickup on swamp ash, great classic hard rock tone. Made me want to bash out some big Malcolm Young chords.
Ha ha, but don't fall for all that pickup hype. You can dunk the pickups in snake oil by the light of a full moon, but they all are designed to sound the same, with moderate high-end cutoff.
Outstanding! I have been looking for a comparison like this for a while. What I heard was the Mahogany was as expected more pronounced at the low and mid-range frequencies with the high frequency tones sounding a bit attenuated. The Alder body left much to be desired in the low frequency range, seemingly flat frequency response in the mid-range frequencies, but twangy at the high-frequency tones. The Swamp Ash was the more "metal sounding" body wood with accentuated low-frequency response and flat high-frequency tones, but it sounds like the mid-range frequencies were naturally scooped. In conclusion, if you're going for the rock n' roll classic tone then definitely mahogany; whereas, the Alder body seems best for more lead style tones, and the swamp ash is best for chunky modern metal (especially drop-tuned tones), but definitely lacks the tonal character needed for articulation for lead tones heavily reliant upon mid-range frequencies. Great video dude, and extremely helpful. I'm 41 years old, and I've owned more guitars than I can count, but I've never been able to purchase a pre-built guitar that had EVERYTHING I wanted for MY TONE. So, I decided to spend the cash to get my custom build, and while I was already leaning toward swamp ash, this video made it clear that is the best choice for me.
Great comparison video. Thank you for doing all this work and for sharing it too! I have a few Strats but the only one with a Mahogany body has what you found, an emphasis on the lower mids. My swamp ash 72 Strat has a definite snappiness to the high notes but no real low notes emphasis - I just ordered a replacement maple neck from Warmoth for my 72 as the frets on the original neck are down to about 15-20% life left and I want to save the neck as is after 50 years of playing it on and off
With this test, I would also be more interested in which body type had the better sustain. I liked the sound of the Mahogany and it sounded like it had better sustain than the Ash and Alder. But a sustain test should have also been done.
Slight differences, but differences nonetheless. Mahogany is chunkier in the low mids, alder has the most articulate high end and clarity, whereas the swamp ash was direct and immediate. Thanks for making the video as thoughtfully as you guys did
@@Hornet135 Everything else was identical. Even the neck with the frets, tuners, nut and the pickups, pots and bridge. So what besides the body changed between the guitars?
@@221b-l3t Even using the same neck, there’s no guarantee the neck pockets are cut the same. Differences there affect neck angle and thus string height over the pickups.
@@Hornet135 Not by much unless the guitars were very badly made. But what is your argument, wood makes no difference but microscopic differences in shape do? That's in the margin of error once you play the neck bends and the pickup height is not fixed perfectly anymore, plus the strings vibrate so really it's a range of pickup heights the size of the amplitude of the note being played. So even if there is a tiny neck angle difference it's way less than normal flexing during playing, which constantly changes so there wouldn't be a consistent difference between the guitars just each take sounding slightly different. Which is the case anyway because a human can't play the same thing twice exactly perfectly the same.
Now THIS is how you do a tone test. I hear a difference - but it is extremely small. I'll describe what I hear but these are very very minor differences - I'm writing this after listening to the samples the first time through and before hearing his opinion in the what I heard section or reading any of the other comments. The swamp ash clips all have a beefier low end and a pretty bright top end, and less midrange. The Ash was all top end and high mids, less low end. The mahogany had a midrange component I didn't hear in the other two. That surprised my because I expected the mahogany body to have a beefier low end than the other two.
I don’t think I hear any difference. Sometimes I think I can but then I wonder if it’s psychological, I.e the changing of the body on screen triggers a response in my brain. I’m quite dismayed by this as I feel I have ok ears but now doubting this. With pitch I’ve done tests and my hearing there seems about average for a musician, according to the literature on the matter.
I watched this with headphones on and yes, there actually is a tone difference between the three bodies. As to which one is better, that's totally up to you. I think they all sounded great but would choose the alder for the neutrality that it has.
The expected: in electric instruments, the sound changes a little, but not enough to worry about it. I think there are things that we give less importance to, and yet they make bigger differences, such as the strings, the adjustment of the guitar, the way of playing, the pot levels, etc ...
To me, Mahogany separates itself the most. Also, it seems to improve all aspects of the tone. Warmth, separation, almost eliminates harshness. But does not diminish the highs. It just seems to add low miss and bass. I’d love to hear it with older fender staggered pole piece pickups and electronics.
@Memu And You’re not listening at all. Each time it went from brighter to darker . Mahogany sounded best with distorted bridge . Idk if you’re listening on your phone, laptop or have undeveloped ears for frequencies as many guitarists do. But the Differences are obvious t
well there *is* a tiny difference, but anyone who thinks it's significant enough, or completely insignificant enough to start arguments are just no bueno. end of the day just go with what makes you happiest, any tone difference can be dialed in or out with EQ, it ain't magic.
Without question the mahogany sounded more resonant. Very deep full bodied sound. My pick of the three. Update: I have since purchased a mahogany body. It should pair well with the humbuckers and i hope it will sound half as good as this.
Great video ! Darrell Braun Guitar led me to this site & I have now subscribed. One "Tuber" said the only reason most "old" electric guitars were made of mahogany & maple is due to the fact that in USA in those days mahogany & maple were plentiful & cheap. I remember seeing & hearing an electric guitar with the function of changeable pickups that has an aluminum body & it sounds great ! (Darrell, surely you remember that one ?) I own a 1972 Strat copy made in Taiwan, when I installed Dimarzio pickups, Fender wiring, pots & good hardware I found the body is actually a matrix of plywood compressed & glued together at different angles & then was cut into a guitar shape, routed etc. Oh yeah, the sound ? Just as good as a "real" Strat ! I think sound is mostly good pickups, then hardware, pots & wiring. With respect to all, because everyone has their own opinion & taste, we're all different, as for the sound comparison in this video ? I liked the mahogany a little more than the alder & ash, but that's only my opinion, & therein lies my point, it's all subjective . All the best to everyone in these hard times.
Its subtle. Extremely subtle. The wood isn't going to make the guitar not sound like what it was built to be. IE, A Tele is going to sound like a Tele. A strat will sound like a Strat. An LP will sound like an LP. Design and electronics will always make a bigger difference. That said, for driven sounds I prefer the Mahogany. The added lower mids and the fact that it seems to add to the same harmonic range as the OD from the amp makes it seem a little more muscular than the others. The Alder would probably be best all around and sounds clearer. But I feel like the Mahogany would push through a mix a little easier without the extra low or high frequencies of the other woods.
I agree with your assessment. My experience is based on having more than 100 electric guitars made of various tonewoods. And that's not just ash, alder and mahogany bodies. I've also had/have electric guitars made of acrylic, agathis, basswood, candlenut (kukui), Chinese elm, maple, paulownia, plywood of various types, and poplar for bodies. For fretboards I have experience with ebony, maple, indian laurel, maple, pau ferro, rosewood and several different wood/resin composites. For necks I've seen mahogany and maple with or without other woods layered in like walnut, rosewood and other woods I have not identified yet. When speaking specifically about ash, alder and mahogany. I think your descriptions of the woods tones are spot on. Ash is the brightest one of the three that still exhibits a good overall tonal response. Alder is very similar to Ash tonally except it is a bit more well balanced overall with a focus more towards the lower midrange as opposed to the Ash slight focus on the upper mid range to lower top end. Both ash and alder really works well with single coils although I think alder works a bit better than ash with humbuckers. That said I think humbuckers are not alder's strengths and ash is an even poorer match for HBs. Mahogany has a noticably more warmer tone than alder that favours a more girthy resonant tone in the lower ranges that REALLY works well with the humbuckers. Final note to mention is that tonewoods are a critical part in determining an acoustic guitar's tone. 95% contribution to the tonal end reults. OTOH, in solidbody electric guitars, tis the other way around, the biggest determinant of an electric guitar's tone is the amalgamation of the effects of the pickups, electronics and the setup of the strings' physical interaction with the pickups' magnetic fields. The body/neck/fretboard woods' contributions to the guitar's overall tone is much smaller. It's more of a subtle addition of the woods' tonal flavoring into the basic matrix of the electro-mechanical components' tone.
Mahogany definitely has more attitude in the tone regarding Volume. I will say however, i feel the difference is more felt than heard however. Mahogany feels so much more resonant to me personally.
The problem with statements such as "Mahogany definitely has more attitude in the tone regarding Volume", is that woods are like humans, everyone is different. Mahogany and sub species of it, are grown virtually all over the world in vastly different climates and ground conditions. Are we talking old growth Cuban mahogany or plantation mahogany grown in Indonesia? An acoustic guitar builder will tell you that two trees of the same species growing next to each other will sound different when chopped up and made into guitars, even wood from the same tree will have different sound characteristics. If nothing else the variation in trees of the same species makes the whole tonewood thing just plain silly. Ask a cork sniffing Gibson Les Paul aficionado whether his $100K late fifties guitar is made from Honduran or Cuban mahogany and he won't be able to tell you because Gibson bought both types in that era and never kept records of which guitar used which mahogany. Ash or Fraxinus has up to 65 different species, grown all over the world, any ash tree that is dragged out of, or growing near a swamp is called 'swamp ash' regardless of which species of ash it belongs to, or where it's grown, they're all probably going to sound a little different, how does one identify, 'true' swamp ash? Here's a story about Alder, when Leo Fender built proper paint facilities in his factory, he looked around for a cheaper wood than Ash, because he was going to start painting all his guitars, and didn't need a nice looking wood anymore because no one was going to see it, he went to Alder because it was CHEAP, no other reason.
Fascinating! I could clearly hear the differences. The way I'd describe the sounds are; Swamp Ash - well-rounded, strong Basses, clear but not overpowering tops. Alder - thinner generally, with weaker Basses, scooped mids, very bright tops. Mahogany - generally fatter sound, strong Basses & mids, clear but mellower tops.
100% agree. I prefer Alder bodies for bass guitars, especially P bass as it's a bit more "woody" sounding and the bass end doesn't get as "tubby" as Swamp Ash and generally seems to sit better in the mix. That's what I was expecting to hear and that's what I heard. The Mahogany - I wasn't sure what to expect, but being a denser wood it made sense that it had a fatter sound, but really clear as well.
Finally, there is a video that shows the difference, well done! Surprisingly, the Alder has pretty obviously less bass resonance than swamp ash and mahogany. I thought it may be similar to Ash but not even close... the difference is too obvious And the mahogany is not that "dark" or muddy in our stereotype but actually has a fair amount of clear high-end. To my ear, Swamp Ash won.
Minor differences, but...... only minor. To me, they aren't so different that I would absolutely have to have one over the other, especially when you consider different pickups, pots, amp, strings, neck, etc etc etc. But yeah... they do sound different. But I liked all of them.
I appreciate the effort. I think using raw bodies was very important to remove the confounding variable of the finish. Ditto for the weight of the body as well. Honestly through RUclips and headphones sounded the same to me.
Absolutely agree with all of the sound differences you pointed out, great comparison! I definitely hear the lower mid "mud" in one of my guitars which is made from mahogany!
Great video! Your analysis is inline with my expectations and recent observations... so if I'm looking to standout in a mix, the clear choice then seems to be Alder. Especially with Fender announcing Swamp Ash is out, maybe itès not that bad. But had a bit of time with this corona thing and decided to analyze your source. Listening many times in Logic Pro X and using Pro-Q3 you can hear and see slight differences. Ash and Alder both consistently peaked around 2.4kz and 4.8kz, but more of these mid peaks were generally present in Alder. Ash had a bit more bottom resonance at around 50hz to 100hz and some interesting highs. As for Mahogany, the sound is "larger" in most frequencies and even an additional peak around 11kz and deeper resonance around 50hz - 100hz compared to Ash and Alder - so more resonant in general. This has been mentioned many times through the years and specifically by Paul (PRS) as they use mahogany as their wood of choice in bodies...
Swamp ash: Bright clean Alder: Bright, tight, pronounced Mahogny: Darker, richer but not as pronunced Thats what I hear - VERY nice test - thank you ;)
@@smokinjoe4709 I record music 3 days a week. I listen and mix a lot. I play the piano and sing myself. If you seriously CANNOT hear the difference you should not even be debating it. A lot of people can easily hear the difference. If thats not enough for you then play the sounds in a music program and compare the EQ. At that moment you will realise your ears are being fooled and science has won through recorded waves. Simple really........when sound waves travel through material - that material will affect the waves - imagine sound going through solid steel, glass, water, really soft wood and extremely hard wood.
@@AdjecantHero Run it through an analyzer and view the out put wave - they are identical. A non conductive material cannot affect an electromagnetic wave.
Agreed with you 100% Aaron! I could hear it all thru my iPhone X. Interesting how mahogany was the fattest sounding one. Thanks for the demo! Well done
This was without a doubt the best video on this subject, and I commend you for the professional way in which it was conducted. No gimmicks like trying to simulate a neckless guitar. Just real world stuff. Case closed, as far as I am concerned!
I heard subtle differences between the three woods. The Swamp Ash body seemed a little warmer. The alder body was well defined and had slightly less output. The mahogany body sounded a little more aggressive with just a little more output and nice midrange tone. Do you have the unaltered audio clips on your website? It would be nice to hear the sounds without RUclips alterations.
I heard the same thing.. Exactly. I just ordered a mahogany tele body and I'm ok with that but I might have gone with Swamp Ash had I heard this first.
Thank you. Your test was a lot work and analysis. I’m also sorry to say that my loss of hearing over my 74 years couldn’t hear an appreciable difference in the woods.
That swamp ash looks amazing unpainted. With just a little clear coat to seal it it’d be gorgeous. Also. Thanks for making this video! Difference is very subtle but definitely the mahogany has a little something in the mids.
The first time you switched to mahogany, my jaw dropped in disbelief. I think this should just about settle any "tonewood makes no difference at all" discussions. Nicely done!
it doesn't, solid body and electric makes no difference in "tone" sustain yes, tone no. it is a placebo effect yo believe it therefore it is. tone woods are only true on hollow and semi hollow instruments. the only way to get a true test is use a computer that graphs the "tone" the human ear cannot be used to accurately determine truth or falseness. I personally have done the same test above with swamp ash, mahogany, and maple and I heard no "tone" difference, but I did notice a difference in the "sustain"
@@lordraptor11 So the difference in tone everyone but you can hear is a placebo effect? And we should all take your word for it over our own ears...because reasons...and stuff? And all of the videos that clearly show a difference in tone should be disregarded...because more reasons and more stuff?🤣🤣🤣 Wouldn't a more likely scenario be that you are tone deaf?
@@NuclearGrizzly let me explain again for your tone deaf ears. the human ear cannot effectively notice small tonal differences like the ones found on a solid body instrument, hollow and semi hollow will be easier to distinguish but still minute that most will never notice and 99% of the persons saying they can hear a difference are mistaken. for those that claim to be able to hear a difference only a blind test would be an accurate test, otherwish it is simply of oh it is that wood and I know from x person/vid/etc. it sounds better. fyi I did a test in high school science on this particular subject and using the tech of the time and using some guinnea pigs from local bands to fellow students and in a blind test not a single one could tell a difference in tone only a difference in length of sustain. on ( again tech of the time) in studio and recording atmosphere the computers could notice a difference but it was miniscule if any. but for persons like you that wouldn't belive it because you are a slave to the placebo of tone woods in a solid body guitar everything I just stated will go in one ear through the air in your head and out the other. another prime example to prove what I am saying can be put into another aspect which is the fact that you never see a real controlled blind test on this subject matter, you can say but I saw a bunch on youtube, which would be a fair and valid argument if the vid in question wasn't from a store using vids to sell product and video editing wasn't possible. but again go right ahead and believe what you want facts are facts and not one person has shown any fact in a legitimate real world scientific method, only people like warmoth that make and sell guitar bodies and necks and as such cannot be considered a credible source for such a test. reason for saying not credible? easy, they sell guitar bodies. so now they make a vid with 3 bodies ( above) and you know what woods they are, you listen and based on your preconceptions of x wood is a great tonewood the test is already skewed right there but then they go on to reinforce your opinion on the subject and you then want that body for your next project which they will be more than happy to sell you. lastly the idea of tonewoods was around LONG before solid body guitars ever exsisted and was a term used for the construction materials of HOLLOW body violins, cellos, etc. and it was based on air vibrations exiting a sound hole, tell me then since you think you know so much where is the air escaping on a SOLID body instrument I mean I sure do not see any place unless it is via a control ot pickup cavity which is covered and not much air vibrating in those locations anyway.
Oh my goodness, I didn't expect it to be such a big change! I want to love the ash, it just isn't as clear as the alder.. and I think I understand all the hype for mahogany now.
I had a hard time telling the diff between any of them until test #4 w/ bridge pickup, but even then, it was just slight (to me). The swamp ash seamed a little brighter/snappier to me, which I like. But again, I can get this slight difference by simply playing with my amp settings. The lesson for me...pick the wood you like and don't sweat it.
This is the best tone wood comparison video I've seen .
Thanks bro it was my 💡
Oak has a nice resonance to it too. It reverberates well.
ruclips.net/video/n02tImce3AE/видео.html Check this one out if you haven't already.
Look up Jim Lill's video "Tested: Where Does The Tone Come From In An Electric Guitar?"
All the guitar builders are full of BS.
Now sustain is another topic.
True, and l am a guitar builder.
Body wood has no influence on electric guitar.
Superb job Aaron!
Just like your nickel vs stainless test, you knocked it out of the park!
Hey Darrell, did you hear a difference?
Thanks Darrell. It feels good to finally have this debate settled. ;)
@@guyfromnj Yes, and I can always hear a difference on my own comparisons too. I just preach that it isn't something worth fretting over :)
The "wrong" type of wood will not ruin your tone, and likewise, the "right" type of wood will not make you sound magically amazing - only practise does that!
Comfort, balance, neck profile, and overall playability are much more important in an Instrument.
With a good amp, and knowledge of EQ, any tone is available to a player regardless of what type of wood is on the guitar!
I agree also, it's not huge but the differences are there. I watch all your vids Darrell. I wasn't being accusatory or anything like that. I was just curious of your thoughts because I've heard you laugh about tonewood before and the heated debates are laughable. It's not that big a deal people. I stick with the tonewoods are subtractive idea. Alder eats up low frequencies making it sound bright. Mahogany can do the opposite. The real test is taking different density wood of the same species and showing the difference that can make. A really light piece of alder is going to sound different than a heavy dense piece also. But again, it's not huge differences but as you play and train your ear it becomes very apparent.
I personally prefered mahogany and alder tones. But yes you can notice a huge difference between them all.
I played in a counry rock band and I played a tele . The other guitarist played a Gibson 335. We switched guitars one gig for one set. A few songs into the set we all couldn't believe he had that tele sounding like his 335 just by adjusting the tone ,volume knobs .
I'll never forget that.
Tele magic.
@@death32815pretty-much-any-guitar "magic" 😂
@@smokenfire teles are magical, if you've never owned one, buy one. I have yet to know someone with a decent tele who didn't love it or doesn't miss having it.
@@death32815 never played one, actually. Teles are everywhere, but somehow neither me nor any of my friends ever owned one. I suddenly find it really weird.
John 5 is a testament to what the Tele can and will do. 😂
I really appreciate how you play simply, rather than burn through a load of cheesy licks. Makes it much easier to hear the guitar. Awesome!
Every demo ever needs very rarely are they done though. Thanks
HEY! The 80s were entirely built on cheesy licks and even cheesier lyrical hooks!
what I learnt is that its better I spend more time on my playing abilities than worrying about the frequencies of wood.
You're right. Get practicing. :)
I wood agree.
absolutely right ...
"stop obsessing and just play"
Well good for you. For us looking to make an educated purchase this video is gold.
test setting PU time wood
1 clean bridge 1:24 swamp ash
1 clean bridge 1:33 alder
1 clean bridge 1:42 mahogany
2 clean middle 1:52 swamp ash
2 clean middle 2:05 alder
2 clean middle 2:18 mahogany
3 clean neck 2:34 swamp ash
3 clean neck 2:44 alder
3 clean neck 2:55 mahogany
4 gain bridge 3:07 swamp ash
4 gain bridge 3:24 alder
4 gain bridge 3:40 mahogany
5 gain neck 4:00 swamp ash
5 gain neck 4:12 alder
5 gain neck 4:23 mahogany
So you’re saying that the mahogany body has more sustain and probably better for harmonics? The reason I watched this video is because I’m tired of dull tone response and harmonic response and the wood and materials on the wood. I wish they would’ve had a solid maple body or at least one with a veneer top. Thank you for your detailed response.
Bro, that had to be so much work, but it made an very high quality, accurate comparison! Thank you for taking the time to make this, first vid of yours I've seen. Subbed for your dedication to quality content!
Awesome job! Removed all variables except the tone woods. I don't think I've seen anyone be that precise. Excellent!
Thanks for this video. I have a trebly tone naturally from my hands. I became a believer in body tone wood differences years ago. I had a very thick Alder bodied guitar with a rosewood fretboard that has always had fat thick tone even under my hands. I bought a new very thin super strat guitar that had the same pickups as my thick alder guitar but a swamp ash body. That night I brought along my new baby to my gig and noticed my solos in particular sounded very very bright compared to my other alder guitar and convinced myself it was in my head until my bass player came over and said that my new guitar was like a buzz saw. I eventually set up different profiles for the different tones. Years later, I switched the swamp ash body out for mahogany body I got in trade and "bam" the tone changed to a more mid bass heavy thick tone with all of the same electronics. Several years after that, I learned about the "tonewood" debate and went "Oh yeah!".. Having said that most of the differences can be compensated for with the amp or pickup selections., For teles and country, I lean towards swamp ash, for hard rock and humbuckers I am a mahogany, limba or alder guy.
Literally one of the best videos on youtube. Thank you!
Done as it should be, a controlled experiment with minimal variables - great job!!
I'd love to see this done again to include all of the core wood choices you offer: Basswood, Maple, Walnut, Roasted Swamp Ash, Roasted Alder, Poplar, Black Korina, and again Mahogany, Ash and Alder - it'd be the go video for choosing a tone wood :-)
great video. this this the kind of comparisons worth watching. 3 of the most popular wood types for guitar and exact conditions to test sound. most people just don't/can't do that type of testing. great stuff. for me, on the swamp and alder i didn't hear much difference on the clean but once distortion was added, the swamp was more warm and creamy. the alder had more mid with distortion. the mahogany was brighter and brittle clean and had more crunch when distorted.
anyway, that's how it sounded to me. this video was very useful and anyone considering these wood options for their next build should watch this.
Aaron, that was STELLAR work. Best video on RUclips covering this touchy subject.
I was happy that your editing made the swaps quite seemless... it's the first time I've seen this in comparison videos. Because of this I was able to hear those subtle differences, just like you heard. Thanks
What an amazing job you've done here mate!
As always a real useful and interesting vid, not only does Warmoth do parts properly, they do tests properly, thank Aaron!
I have a pretty decent ear, and after watching this, I will be choosing ash over alder for all future teles. To each their own though! Thanks again!
Difference to me was negligible, especially when you consider how many other factors contribute to the end sound in a real-world scenario. But I give you MASSIVE respect for having gone through so much trouble to give us as honest a side-by-side comparison as could ever be possible. Seriously, setting this up must have been so much work, and I really appreciate it 🙂
Every discussion & demonstration I've ever seen on the subject convinces me that "tonewood" is a ridiculous concept. It _is_ the perfect youtube content though - guaranteed to be controversial, with no real stakes or problematic opinions. Guitar players are a superstitious bunch, and tone is a strange sorcery arising from arcane incantations and mystical spell components.
Most of them are subtle differences indeed. The crowd wont notice and even the best ear wont notice on a blind test. Still there are part of the character, response and overall DNA of every instrument. You might notice how certain tracks on a daw might sound "better" to you with one instrument over the other. Another thing to notice is that this type of videos get compressed and eq by youtube. This is something that you really have to test by yourself with your own setup.
@@erikwellerweller8623 I could definitely hear the differences also.
@@mallninja9805 This actually is one of the things I greatly appreciate about RUclips. It removes the sorcery aspect for those of us that are willing to be objective. That has been useful for me on numerous occasions, and I laugh at some of the stuff I used to believe just because some musician I respect said it. On the other hand, this niche comparison is helpful for those of us that are building a tele and need to first choose the body wood. Sorcery.or no sorcery, I still have to make that decision, along with a number of other decisions. I'm sure Warmoth gets asked for advice on body wood choices every day they are open!
@@juankyman8404 Well said. Ultimately it is only the Player that need be inspired by the instrument they are playing. Be it color, age, scale length or whatever, whatever works to inspire the player is what is important.
saying "swamp ash " sounds more rock n roll. therefore the winner!
Ash has more of a transient attack on the high end and punches while alder softens those attacks. Mahogany brings out the low mids more.
Agreed. And I think ash is good at distinguishing the note of each string. The more gain is used, the more it will become noticeable. To my understanding, that's because ash is solid and dense, so less transient attacks are "absorbed".
Spot on
This is the best sumarisation I've found. Each would be best for specific use cases.
@@PJSOFTagreed, the swamp ash really has clarity in the highs and minds mid cuts through and also mains great bottom end... I have a sungkai body solar guitar and from what i have read online (which unfortunately is hard to find info on) - but Sungkai is some form of Indonesian swamp ash I believe. Anyway, whatever it is, it's the best guitar for metal that I have, especially for getting those highs and mids to seemlessly cut through the lows and the bass, giving great distinction between notes and chords.
Does anyone have any info on Sungkai for electric guitars as I prefer it's metal tone and clarity even when heavily, heavily distorted, even compared to my esp which is solid mahogany.
Anyway thanks for reading.
Exactly what I hear.
To me, the alder body had an overall compressed sound, without any kind of mid scoop. After decades of playing Fender and Fender-style basses with swamp ash bodies and alder bodies, I’ve come to prefer alder bodies for just this reason.
Swamp ash to me has fat lows and crisp sounding highs, but there’s typically a bit of a mid scoop, which doesn’t work for me in live playing. But for recording, the more lively tone of swamp ash is great.
The mahogany body’s tone blows my mind. It wasn’t at all what I expected. I only own one bass with a mahogany body, which is an Alembic. Alembic’s electronics are very versatile and responsive. I’ve always assumed the pickups and electronics outweighed the body wood’s contribution to tone. Now I’m thinking differently.
To my ears on the video, the mahogany body had a little more of everything. Very impressive.
Interesting as I found the Alder had a scopped mid in this test.
If I take ash as the base, alder had more 'twang' but was more limited in range - must work great in a band context- , and mahogany had the best lows, more pronounced and warm, at the cost of some of the high-end.
That being said, I agree that the difference was quite subtle, and I required a couple of takes to denote each wood. Maybe the neck's wood have a more dramatic effect.
They’re all the exact same.
Tone wood is a myth.
Very well said... I couldn't agree more.
I agree with you 100%.
definitely heard differences but nothing that couldnt be shifted away with a slight adjustment in eq
I buy ash bodies because I like the way they look. That's it.
@Leon thecat "Immune"? Nope. A DiMarzio Tone Zone, for example, will retain most of its qualities going from body wood to body wood but will sound tighter in Swamp Ash vs Mahogany, muddier in Mahogany vs Swamp Ash, more compressed in Maple versus Alder etc when all other variables gave been taken out of the equation (shape, construction, neck material, pickup height, string guage/action, room acoustics etc). I can attest to "immunity" not even being the case with ACTIVE pickups (an 85 sounds clearer in Ash vs Mahogany etc). There's a fair bit of bullshit in the instrument world and it's good to call it out, but you can clearly hear differences in this video.
@Leon thecat Preconceived TERMS, yes. It's how the English language works. How else would I be able to describe subjective experiences of sound to somebody else without a (largely) uniformly-understood glossary of terms to base it off of? It's far easier to say "muddy" than "too much in the 200-350hz range". I've done plenty of blind A/B/X testing my life (guitars, amps, mp3 vs WAV...), presicely to get rid of the confirmation bias aspect. I've had friends test me while I wasn't looking etc. When watching THIS EXACT VIDEO, I didn't look at the screen. I'd be deeply concerned if you failed to hear any differences in this video and that the differences weren't consistent across examples. Maybe Aaron had the door closed every time he played the mahogany guitar?
@Leon thecat You seem to be avoiding all of the pertinent questions. Did you hear a difference in this video? If so, how do you explain them- in particular the consistency of tone change from wood to wood? (I actually know, but I'll assume you've studied both sides of the argument). As I said earlier, I conducted this test blind. You can choose to disbelieve me, of course, but it's the truth. If you do the same and still can't hear differences then I'll be surprised.
@Leon thecat Negligible, yet you heard a difference nevertheless. Good. Did you do the test blind, write down notes as to the qualities of each example (riff example, not wood example obviously) and what was your listening setup? (Smart phone; PC w/desktop speakers; run through a hifi setup etc).
This is the first time I have seen and heard a legitimate test of woods compared side by side. I think it definitely revealed noticeable differences between the different woods used. The most distinctive difference that I noticed was with the mahogany body. For my playing style, I prefer the mahogany, than the alder and swamp ash. The differences between the latter woods was not as pronounced, but much more subtle than it was with the mahogany. It would be interesting to see and hear a similar test with additional woods and some exotic woods as well. Thank you very much for the demonstration! Please have an excellent and awesome day! 🙂
Yeah it showed differences that weren't because of the wood.
I'm going to have to echo the same sentiments others have shared. This is probably the best tone comparison video out there. This is a good starting point for deciding what you want your sound to be like.
thanks for the careful, balanced comparison with clear, repeated musical phrases for each setting on each wood type! this answered a lot of questions I had about how these woods contribute to tone. mahogany definitely sounded warmer, something resonant about that in the low/mid frequencies. the alder had an interesting almost flangey sound when distorter, and swamp ash (which I thought would be muddled) seemed just a bit brighter and snappier in tone, especially with the clean sounds.
It only sounded "warmer" because you imagined it did.
@@franknstein4340 or you're not listening enough
@@franknstein4340 Absolutely not. If you use a pair of decent studio monitors, you can easily ear the difference (and note that I don't use the verb "feel") in a blind-eyed test. Also, if you analyze the spectrums, mahogany has clearly a more compact spectrum which translates, indeed, in a warmer sound.
I built a Strat with a mahogany body back in '89. As a performing musician using mostly a Gibson SG, I really loved mahogany. Having said that I will say that it is really tough to hear the difference in tone between the same guitar of different woods when the guitar is highly overdriven ... and if there is a chance to hear a difference ... it will most likely be heard with the guitar being played clean. On the clean clip with the neck pickup, I heard the most difference between the mahogany tele and the other two. Nice video ... thank you.
That’s the best and most accurate comparison I’ve ever seen or heard. Excellent job. I preferred the ash. I was pleasantly surprised on the mahogany. The Alder was thinner and third place, even though I liked it. For my taste, the ash took the sonic qualities of the other two and gives you the best of both worlds.
Agreed!
The snob in me wanted the Alder to win. The Ash surprised me.
What also surprised me was the bodies of original sort-after Fender Teles. They are made from ‘humble’ Pine. Now then!
That was a good demonstration. There certainly were slight differences with each body materials, but they all sounded great. Keep on picking!
Straight forward and well done! Best tonal wood comparison I've seen! Thanks so much in taking the time to do this! Well done! Liked and Subbed!
I watched this video maybe 10 times already 😂. Keep coming back
The mahogany body sounded just slightly warmer and the alder body had a balanced sound but I could barely hear the differences. I'm saving up money for a Stratocaster build, picking Swamp Ash just for the grain really. Thanks for the video!
I'm wearing good headphones and wow, I was really surprised at how much I could tell the difference! I liked the mahogany with the distortion, The alder had a more mellow, almost muted tone that sounded great with clean arpeggios. While the swamp was more sharp. Great job!
Really appreciate the lengths you went to create this video! Definitely found my findings between the woods to be similar to yours
This is a really great comparison thank you so much for creating it for us all. I noticed the differences very clearly between all 3 guitars. The Mahogany body was the most phat and solid sounding to me, and the Alder seemed more thin and less character. Overall I would go with the Swamp ash as I think it was the most unique and interesting sounding with its own distinct character to the tones.
The differences were very subtle but they are there. Mahogany seemed a tad more focused or midrangey and the ash seemed a tad brighter and louder. At least to me. yep, just watched your conclusions and I agree. Even tho they are slight, it's there and so.... thx!
Yet people deny that there is any difference. He used the same neck and only swapped the body.
Subtle enough to be explained by the subtle differences when playing the same part may be?
INDEED spot on to be honest, also depends alot on your current sound system/headphones but im using a cheap ass flat EQed headphone. still I hear the same as you. the mahogany seems punchy and a bit more midrange. swamp ashp certainly plays well with the single coils.
@@adzbox Different pieces of wood WILL sound different. You'd have to be scientifically illiterate to deny it. People say "tonewood is a myth" and then dumb people blindly repeat it. The original "Tonewood is a myth" was in reference to the ads in guitar magazines. I don't recall which company coined the term "tonewood", but the spiel was about them using species of tree that sound better...for some reason. Which IS utter bollocks. The tone is affected by the stiffness, density, etc of the wood. NOT the species of the tree. If a guitar string is attached at each end to an infinite, immoveable mass, then you will be hearing just the sound of a string vibrating in air. Putting anything else between those points, will attenuate energy from the vibrating strings, and it will do so differently at different frequencies, depending on the properties of whatever is holding the ends of the string in place. So yes, "tonewood" is a myth. But yes, the wood does affect the tone. Even the amplified tone. There just isn't a rule that beautiful wood from a 5000 year old tree in a tribal graveyard in Bongo-bongo land, has to sound better or worse than a slab of ash or a couple of sheets of plywood glued together
@@ashscott6068 yet it's been scientifically proven that it doesn't make a difference. 🤦♂️
Nice video, thanks for the shootout. I’m a luthier. My honest opinion? I heard subtle differences. They may make a difference to some people, but to me they were inconsequential. Maybe 5-10% of the sound was affected by the use of the wood. I’d say 90% of tone is pickup selection.
Building guitars, I use wood choice more for weight. Swamp ash and mahogany are great. I love pawlonia. I see no problem with resin!
My hu,blue opinion.
I would like to see a comparison between the roasted bodies and the regular bodies. And would like to see a roasted mahogany body.
The dryer the wood the more open the mids & highs, & the more attack 2.
I have never seen a roasted body I will have to look that up I have seen roasted necks.
Roasted beef is good to what some carrots and potatoes 😋
The ash was really musical to me. It really vibed with the Tele voice to me.
This is one of the best tonal wood comparison videos.. Loved it
having my first guitar customized soon. this was very helpful!
2 videos later and it explains why "I've always wanted an Alder Tele with a Rosewood board (instead of or in addition to my longtime '52 RI Butterscotch Tele) , and explains why I just built one - from parts including a very very old Warmoth body - and I knew from the moment I strung it up that it was going to be the best Tele I've ever had, and it is.
Great experiment and video by the way. Congratulations!!
Putting on headphones makes a world of difference. Also confirms that I love swamp ash. It sounded the most open and full to my ears, similar to what you said. EQ could get them all sounding very similar, but it's still cool to hear a good example of what the differences are. The tone wood opinion wars will rage on, but I'm sure many will find this helpful when thinking about their next instrument.
Honestly, they were very subtle, 1 thing I really noticed, Telecaster and Stratacaster - Body doesn't mean much unless you are a pro master level player with higher level equipment to make the nuances more pronounced to make a difference, Now partial hollow body or LP style guitars the wood actually seems to make a pronounced difference from the get go. From what I gather its due to the shape and amount of wood used, obviously ANY hollow instrument wood will matter 100% more for the reverberations through the chamber.
Yeah, I hear a very subtle difference. Emphasize the word subtle. I’m listening using AKG k712’s. I’m sure playing in person the difference would be more noticeable. But the takeaway is that the differences aren’t as pronounced as most would believe…
Wow, that's what I was waiting for! Very interesting, thanx a lot, Aaron.
Actually no big surprises, except that the difference in sound of the three bodies was smaller than I had expected. Mahogany is my favorite tone wood for guitar bodies. That unique 'bite' in higain sounds simply makes the difference for a great rock'n'roll tone for me.
Thank you. As with the companion video which compared chambered and solid bodies, the difference between these woods is negligible and appears to be more noticeable with overdrive because the overtones are amplified somewhat and there’s some sort of compounding going around. I think the good news is you can make guitars with just about any good quality of a certain type of wood.
Wait...there IS a video comparing chambered and solid bodies? YES!!!! I (and others in here) were commenting that he should do that video hahaha! Going to find it now.
Absolutely. I agree. It was like performing a 1dB frequency sweep across the spectrum while mixing to find the frequencies you want to accentuate or diminish. The funny thing is that I thought each sounded better than the others while in its element. Depending on what you were playing, I tended to prefect a different wood. Now I’m going to have to buy even more guitars. Lol Thanks for doing the comparison.
Another really cool comparison. I agree with trevordeke. So many noodle crazy players. That was really straight ahead and clear. I loved that Alder body tone. It did seem to have a brighter sound to me. As you mentioned in the video you did comparing the F hole, vs chambered vs solid Tele's - it's so true that it's really difficult to discern what you're feeling and hearing, especially when you're playing a guitar unplugged, just to see how it feels, snaps, etc.
And no 2 teles play/feel the same way. I recently tried a Tele parts-caster at a local guitar shop in my city, and it had a 51' thick U shaped MIM neck. The guitar played so well. It was snappy, bright, immediate, focused and acoustically loud. Very easy under the fingers. I don't know if the tone could be attributed to the thicker neck, or just that particular piece of maple that it was made from - on that body. But it felt really good to play, and I think that's really important to most of us.
On the clean tests, they all sounded fairly close to me; however, when you hit the gain, the mahogany walked away from rest.
On Test 4 it genuinely sounded like you tweaked the reasonance and presence controls on the amp when the mahogany came on.
This is one of THE BEST demos of how the wood of a body effect tone. Massive differences. I love the Swamp Ash for cleans, but the Alder for the dirtier overdriven tones.
"Massive" differences? Ever heard of the term "confirmation-bias"?
If you don't actualy _look_ at the video and just go by ears; your verdict would've turned out quite differently.
@@dildojizzbaggins6969 I did do this blind and the difference is pretty obvious to me when all three are played in rapid succession. My wife who was across the room could also easily identify the differences as well. The point is, just because you can't differentiate the tones doesn't mean the differences don't exist. Different people have different levels of sensory perception. For instance, women have more rods and cones in their eyes than men do so they simply see colors more accurately than I do. It's not a knock on you that you can't hear a difference -- quite a lot can't either. But, you should try to accept the idea that your perception levels aren't the only ones in the world.
@@dildojizzbaggins6969 I'm sorry, but if you don't hear the differences then you're deaf.
@@dildojizzbaggins6969 "massive" is a bit of an exaggeration as the differences represent relatively small EQ changes. The point is that the differences are noticeable to the untrained listener
@@maciejduda5257
Not all ears are the same. I've consistently been astonished in situations like this or testing out different guitars at music stores when tonal differences that were very obvious and pronounced to me went unoticed by friends and bystanders. They would often argue with me and insist there was no difference.
Thanks for this excellent and focused comparison. I've A/B'ed several pairs of solidbody guitars that were identical except for their body (or neck) woods, and I always hear a huge difference. Having recently acquired Tele-style guitars made from ash and mahogany bodies, I hear why Leo Fender chose ash for the original Tele's and Strats. It's really the most flattering and balanced tonewood for Fender-style guitars. Ash brings out out a bit more of everything, and also brings out the classic Fender whistle and howl that we love.
This test reaffirms the stereotypes of each wood to me - swamp ash scooped, alder more upper mids, mahogany more lower mids (I'm oversimplifying as I heard other different nuances). They all sound great, can all just be EQ'd to personal taste.
I personally loved the distorted bridge pickup on swamp ash, great classic hard rock tone. Made me want to bash out some big Malcolm Young chords.
I had the same takeaway as you did all all across the board.
@S JK eyes closed, the original comment seems precise, although Ash and Alder sound fairly similar
Ash sounded bigger to me, Alder seemed kinda thin and boring, mahogany I noticed more upper mids
This is all fine and good...but we’re missing some key details. Where was Venus in proximity to Jupiter for one. Come on!
Ha ha, but don't fall for all that pickup hype. You can dunk the pickups in snake oil by the light of a full moon, but they all are designed to sound the same, with moderate high-end cutoff.
12.5 °
Outstanding! I have been looking for a comparison like this for a while. What I heard was the Mahogany was as expected more pronounced at the low and mid-range frequencies with the high frequency tones sounding a bit attenuated. The Alder body left much to be desired in the low frequency range, seemingly flat frequency response in the mid-range frequencies, but twangy at the high-frequency tones. The Swamp Ash was the more "metal sounding" body wood with accentuated low-frequency response and flat high-frequency tones, but it sounds like the mid-range frequencies were naturally scooped. In conclusion, if you're going for the rock n' roll classic tone then definitely mahogany; whereas, the Alder body seems best for more lead style tones, and the swamp ash is best for chunky modern metal (especially drop-tuned tones), but definitely lacks the tonal character needed for articulation for lead tones heavily reliant upon mid-range frequencies. Great video dude, and extremely helpful. I'm 41 years old, and I've owned more guitars than I can count, but I've never been able to purchase a pre-built guitar that had EVERYTHING I wanted for MY TONE. So, I decided to spend the cash to get my custom build, and while I was already leaning toward swamp ash, this video made it clear that is the best choice for me.
Fascinating, I liked the Ash body for the cleaner sounds and the Alder body for the distorted sounds!
Same here
Same, actually also liked ash distorted
A Good Review. I seem to think the Mahogany was warmer and the Swamp ash Brighter and the Alder was in the Middle.
Right on!
Good assessment. I thought the same thing
Great comparison video. Thank you for doing all this work and for sharing it too!
I have a few Strats but the only one with a Mahogany body has what you found, an emphasis on the lower mids.
My swamp ash 72 Strat has a definite snappiness to the high notes but no real low notes emphasis - I just ordered a replacement maple neck from Warmoth for my 72 as the frets on the original neck are down to about 15-20% life left and I want to save the neck as is after 50 years of playing it on and off
With this test, I would also be more interested in which body type had the better sustain. I liked the sound of the Mahogany and it sounded like it had better sustain than the Ash and Alder. But a sustain test should have also been done.
Slight differences, but differences nonetheless. Mahogany is chunkier in the low mids, alder has the most articulate high end and clarity, whereas the swamp ash was direct and immediate. Thanks for making the video as thoughtfully as you guys did
Differences not from wood.
@@Hornet135 Everything else was identical. Even the neck with the frets, tuners, nut and the pickups, pots and bridge. So what besides the body changed between the guitars?
@@221b-l3t Even using the same neck, there’s no guarantee the neck pockets are cut the same. Differences there affect neck angle and thus string height over the pickups.
@@Hornet135 Not by much unless the guitars were very badly made. But what is your argument, wood makes no difference but microscopic differences in shape do? That's in the margin of error once you play the neck bends and the pickup height is not fixed perfectly anymore, plus the strings vibrate so really it's a range of pickup heights the size of the amplitude of the note being played. So even if there is a tiny neck angle difference it's way less than normal flexing during playing, which constantly changes so there wouldn't be a consistent difference between the guitars just each take sounding slightly different. Which is the case anyway because a human can't play the same thing twice exactly perfectly the same.
@@Hornet135 Besides there's a few videos like this and this trend is consistent. It's a small difference but it's there.
thanks for making the sacrifice for science! This is the best comparison video I've seen on RUclips!
Listening in studio monitors I could clearly hear a difference. Not insane amounts, but small differences.
Now THIS is how you do a tone test. I hear a difference - but it is extremely small. I'll describe what I hear but these are very very minor differences - I'm writing this after listening to the samples the first time through and before hearing his opinion in the what I heard section or reading any of the other comments. The swamp ash clips all have a beefier low end and a pretty bright top end, and less midrange. The Ash was all top end and high mids, less low end. The mahogany had a midrange component I didn't hear in the other two. That surprised my because I expected the mahogany body to have a beefier low end than the other two.
Interesting. His "what I heard section" pretty much mirrored exactly what I heard and wrote above.
I don’t think I hear any difference. Sometimes I think I can but then I wonder if it’s psychological, I.e the changing of the body on screen triggers a response in my brain.
I’m quite dismayed by this as I feel I have ok ears but now doubting this.
With pitch I’ve done tests and my hearing there seems about average for a musician, according to the literature on the matter.
I watched this with headphones on and yes, there actually is a tone difference between the three bodies. As to which one is better, that's totally up to you. I think they all sounded great but would choose the alder for the neutrality that it has.
The expected: in electric instruments, the sound changes a little, but not enough to worry about it. I think there are things that we give less importance to, and yet they make bigger differences, such as the strings, the adjustment of the guitar, the way of playing, the pot levels, etc ...
The speaker cabinet.
@@HCkev yeah! That makes a great difference too!
To me, Mahogany separates itself the most. Also, it seems to improve all aspects of the tone. Warmth, separation, almost eliminates harshness. But does not diminish the highs. It just seems to add low miss and bass. I’d love to hear it with older fender staggered pole piece pickups and electronics.
You're definitely listening with your eyes. There is just straight up no difference.
@Memu
And You’re not listening at all.
Each time it went from brighter to darker .
Mahogany sounded best with distorted bridge .
Idk if you’re listening on your phone, laptop or have undeveloped ears for frequencies as many guitarists do. But the Differences are obvious t
@@heythere6983 I am a musician and used good quality headphones. You are just listening with your eyes.
@@Memu_my guess he already owns a mahogany guitar. And he says what he believes to back that up
well there *is* a tiny difference, but anyone who thinks it's significant enough, or completely insignificant enough to start arguments are just no bueno.
end of the day just go with what makes you happiest, any tone difference can be dialed in or out with EQ, it ain't magic.
Best comparison I’ve heard. Excellent!
This is crazy. From my ears, the mahogany body just sounded more resonant.
Without question the mahogany sounded more resonant. Very deep full bodied sound. My pick of the three.
Update: I have since purchased a mahogany body. It should pair well with the humbuckers and i hope it will sound half as good as this.
Uh, me too. Go to their neck shoot out. The mahogany with rosewood fretboard had the same sort of effect.
I’d have to ebony for the board
I liked the Mahogany best, too.
Not crazy. Each sounded unique and in this case the mahogany had more timbre and resonance.
Thanks for going to the trouble of setting this up. Swamp ash was my favourite with mahogany a close second! A very useful test though.
Great video ! Darrell Braun Guitar led me to this site & I have now subscribed.
One "Tuber" said the only reason most "old" electric guitars were made of mahogany & maple is due to the fact that in USA
in those days mahogany & maple were plentiful & cheap.
I remember seeing & hearing an electric guitar with the function of changeable pickups that has an aluminum body & it sounds great !
(Darrell, surely you remember that one ?)
I own a 1972 Strat copy made in Taiwan, when I installed Dimarzio pickups, Fender wiring, pots & good hardware I found the body is actually a matrix of plywood compressed & glued together at different angles & then was cut into a guitar shape, routed etc.
Oh yeah, the sound ? Just as good as a "real" Strat ! I think sound is mostly good pickups, then hardware, pots & wiring.
With respect to all, because everyone has their own opinion & taste, we're all different, as for the sound comparison in this video ?
I liked the mahogany a little more than the alder & ash, but that's only my opinion, & therein lies my point, it's all subjective .
All the best to everyone in these hard times.
The Mahogany definitely has more bottom and thickness. No question. The swamp 2nd and Alder brightest.
it's obvious even if you don't look at the video
Agree with Santella! Listened w Sony noise cancelling headphones..
Its subtle. Extremely subtle. The wood isn't going to make the guitar not sound like what it was built to be. IE, A Tele is going to sound like a Tele. A strat will sound like a Strat. An LP will sound like an LP. Design and electronics will always make a bigger difference. That said, for driven sounds I prefer the Mahogany. The added lower mids and the fact that it seems to add to the same harmonic range as the OD from the amp makes it seem a little more muscular than the others. The Alder would probably be best all around and sounds clearer. But I feel like the Mahogany would push through a mix a little easier without the extra low or high frequencies of the other woods.
I agree with your assessment. My experience is based on having more than 100 electric guitars made of various tonewoods. And that's not just ash, alder and mahogany bodies.
I've also had/have electric guitars made of acrylic, agathis, basswood, candlenut (kukui), Chinese elm, maple, paulownia, plywood of various types, and poplar for bodies. For fretboards I have experience with ebony, maple, indian laurel, maple, pau ferro, rosewood and several different wood/resin composites. For necks I've seen mahogany and maple with or without other woods layered in like walnut, rosewood and other woods I have not identified yet.
When speaking specifically about ash, alder and mahogany. I think your descriptions of the woods tones are spot on. Ash is the brightest one of the three that still exhibits a good overall tonal response. Alder is very similar to Ash tonally except it is a bit more well balanced overall with a focus more towards the lower midrange as opposed to the Ash slight focus on the upper mid range to lower top end. Both ash and alder really works well with single coils although I think alder works a bit better than ash with humbuckers. That said I think humbuckers are not alder's strengths and ash is an even poorer match for HBs.
Mahogany has a noticably more warmer tone than alder that favours a more girthy resonant tone in the lower ranges that REALLY works well with the humbuckers.
Final note to mention is that tonewoods are a critical part in determining an acoustic guitar's tone. 95% contribution to the tonal end reults. OTOH, in solidbody electric guitars, tis the other way around, the biggest determinant of an electric guitar's tone is the amalgamation of the effects of the pickups, electronics and the setup of the strings' physical interaction with the pickups' magnetic fields. The body/neck/fretboard woods' contributions to the guitar's overall tone is much smaller. It's more of a subtle addition of the woods' tonal flavoring into the basic matrix of the electro-mechanical components' tone.
Mahogany definitely has more attitude in the tone regarding Volume. I will say however, i feel the difference is more felt than heard however. Mahogany feels so much more resonant to me personally.
For real. My left hand on the neck of my Les Paul feels the same growl that's coming out of my amp.
@@MotivationAdonis OMG you sneaky little troll ! their is no such thing as a nonce ! they don't exist .
Anyways you don’t know that the sound difference is from the wood
The problem with statements such as "Mahogany definitely has more attitude in the tone regarding Volume", is that woods are like humans, everyone is different.
Mahogany and sub species of it, are grown virtually all over the world in vastly different climates and ground conditions.
Are we talking old growth Cuban mahogany or plantation mahogany grown in Indonesia?
An acoustic guitar builder will tell you that two trees of the same species growing next to each other will sound different when chopped up and made into guitars, even wood from the same tree will have different sound characteristics.
If nothing else the variation in trees of the same species makes the whole tonewood thing just plain silly.
Ask a cork sniffing Gibson Les Paul aficionado whether his $100K late fifties guitar is made from Honduran or Cuban mahogany and he won't be able to tell you because Gibson bought both types in that era and never kept records of which guitar used which mahogany.
Ash or Fraxinus has up to 65 different species, grown all over the world, any ash tree that is dragged out of, or growing near a swamp is called 'swamp ash' regardless of which species of ash it belongs to, or where it's grown, they're all probably going to sound a little different, how does one identify, 'true' swamp ash?
Here's a story about Alder, when Leo Fender built proper paint facilities in his factory, he looked around for a cheaper wood than Ash, because he was going to start painting all his guitars, and didn't need a nice looking wood anymore because no one was going to see it, he went to Alder because it was CHEAP, no other reason.
@Gevalt And the type of mahogany.
Fascinating! I could clearly hear the differences. The way I'd describe the sounds are;
Swamp Ash - well-rounded, strong Basses, clear but not overpowering tops.
Alder - thinner generally, with weaker Basses, scooped mids, very bright tops.
Mahogany - generally fatter sound, strong Basses & mids, clear but mellower tops.
100% agree. I prefer Alder bodies for bass guitars, especially P bass as it's a bit more "woody" sounding and the bass end doesn't get as "tubby" as Swamp Ash and generally seems to sit better in the mix. That's what I was expecting to hear and that's what I heard.
The Mahogany - I wasn't sure what to expect, but being a denser wood it made sense that it had a fatter sound, but really clear as well.
You are on point here. This is exactly how I would describe it.
I'd say Mahogany, as the hardest wood gets tastier higher pitch vibrations - seems logical.
But it's the heaviest wood too.
Same same. With some eq settings you can obtain the same sound with the 3 guitars.
1:23 Swamp Ash Bridge 1:33 Alder Bridge 1:42 Mahogany Bridge
Finally, there is a video that shows the difference, well done!
Surprisingly, the Alder has pretty obviously less bass resonance than swamp ash and mahogany.
I thought it may be similar to Ash but not even close... the difference is too obvious
And the mahogany is not that "dark" or muddy in our stereotype but actually has a fair amount of clear high-end.
To my ear, Swamp Ash won.
Top comment!!!
Great work on this comparison! I appreciate your thoroughness!
Minor differences, but...... only minor. To me, they aren't so different that I would absolutely have to have one over the other, especially when you consider different pickups, pots, amp, strings, neck, etc etc etc. But yeah... they do sound different. But I liked all of them.
I appreciate the effort. I think using raw bodies was very important to remove the confounding variable of the finish. Ditto for the weight of the body as well. Honestly through RUclips and headphones sounded the same to me.
What a gem this channel is!!
Absolutely agree with all of the sound differences you pointed out, great comparison! I definitely hear the lower mid "mud" in one of my guitars which is made from mahogany!
Yeah, but it doesn't come from the wood.
Great video! Your analysis is inline with my expectations and recent observations... so if I'm looking to standout in a mix, the clear choice then seems to be Alder. Especially with Fender announcing Swamp Ash is out, maybe itès not that bad. But had a bit of time with this corona thing and decided to analyze your source. Listening many times in Logic Pro X and using Pro-Q3 you can hear and see slight differences. Ash and Alder both consistently peaked around 2.4kz and 4.8kz, but more of these mid peaks were generally present in Alder. Ash had a bit more bottom resonance at around 50hz to 100hz and some interesting highs. As for Mahogany, the sound is "larger" in most frequencies and even an additional peak around 11kz and deeper resonance around 50hz - 100hz compared to Ash and Alder - so more resonant in general. This has been mentioned many times through the years and specifically by Paul (PRS) as they use mahogany as their wood of choice in bodies...
Best comparison vid, nice job dude!
Swamp ash: Bright clean
Alder: Bright, tight, pronounced
Mahogny: Darker, richer but not as pronunced
Thats what I hear - VERY nice test - thank you ;)
nonsense... close your eyes next time.
@@smokinjoe4709 nonsense... open your ears next time.
@@AdjecantHero Sorry to burst your bubble but they sound identical. Close your eyes and do it again.
@@smokinjoe4709 I record music 3 days a week. I listen and mix a lot. I play the piano and sing myself. If you seriously CANNOT hear the difference you should not even be debating it. A lot of people can easily hear the difference. If thats not enough for you then play the sounds in a music program and compare the EQ. At that moment you will realise your ears are being fooled and science has won through recorded waves. Simple really........when sound waves travel through material - that material will affect the waves - imagine sound going through solid steel, glass, water, really soft wood and extremely hard wood.
@@AdjecantHero Run it through an analyzer and view the out put wave - they are identical. A non conductive material cannot affect an electromagnetic wave.
Agreed with you 100% Aaron! I could hear it all thru my iPhone X. Interesting how mahogany was the fattest sounding one. Thanks for the demo! Well done
This was without a doubt the best video on this subject, and I commend you for the professional way in which it was conducted. No gimmicks like trying to simulate a neckless guitar. Just real world stuff. Case closed, as far as I am concerned!
I heard subtle differences between the three woods. The Swamp Ash body seemed a little warmer. The alder body was well defined and had slightly less output. The mahogany body sounded a little more aggressive with just a little more output and nice midrange tone. Do you have the unaltered audio clips on your website? It would be nice to hear the sounds without RUclips alterations.
Randy Kelsoe it’s so subtle it’s in your head
I heard the same thing.. Exactly. I just ordered a mahogany tele body and I'm ok with that but I might have gone with Swamp Ash had I heard this first.
@@MotivationAdonis maybe your head is the broken one if you can't hear the differences
Really great vid Aaron and co at Warmoth! Tone wood matters!
Thank you. Your test was a lot work and analysis. I’m also sorry to say that my loss of hearing over my 74 years couldn’t hear an appreciable difference in the woods.
That swamp ash looks amazing unpainted. With just a little clear coat to seal it it’d be gorgeous. Also. Thanks for making this video! Difference is very subtle but definitely the mahogany has a little something in the mids.
The first time you switched to mahogany, my jaw dropped in disbelief. I think this should just about settle any "tonewood makes no difference at all" discussions. Nicely done!
The Mahogany was definitely my favorite.
@@jimyoung9262 Mine was swamp ash.
it doesn't, solid body and electric makes no difference in "tone" sustain yes, tone no. it is a placebo effect yo believe it therefore it is. tone woods are only true on hollow and semi hollow instruments. the only way to get a true test is use a computer that graphs the "tone" the human ear cannot be used to accurately determine truth or falseness. I personally have done the same test above with swamp ash, mahogany, and maple and I heard no "tone" difference, but I did notice a difference in the "sustain"
@@lordraptor11 So the difference in tone everyone but you can hear is a placebo effect? And we should all take your word for it over our own ears...because reasons...and stuff? And all of the videos that clearly show a difference in tone should be disregarded...because more reasons and more stuff?🤣🤣🤣
Wouldn't a more likely scenario be that you are tone deaf?
@@NuclearGrizzly let me explain again for your tone deaf ears. the human ear cannot effectively notice small tonal differences like the ones found on a solid body instrument, hollow and semi hollow will be easier to distinguish but still minute that most will never notice and 99% of the persons saying they can hear a difference are mistaken. for those that claim to be able to hear a difference only a blind test would be an accurate test, otherwish it is simply of oh it is that wood and I know from x person/vid/etc. it sounds better. fyi I did a test in high school science on this particular subject and using the tech of the time and using some guinnea pigs from local bands to fellow students and in a blind test not a single one could tell a difference in tone only a difference in length of sustain. on ( again tech of the time) in studio and recording atmosphere the computers could notice a difference but it was miniscule if any. but for persons like you that wouldn't belive it because you are a slave to the placebo of tone woods in a solid body guitar everything I just stated will go in one ear through the air in your head and out the other. another prime example to prove what I am saying can be put into another aspect which is the fact that you never see a real controlled blind test on this subject matter, you can say but I saw a bunch on youtube, which would be a fair and valid argument if the vid in question wasn't from a store using vids to sell product and video editing wasn't possible. but again go right ahead and believe what you want facts are facts and not one person has shown any fact in a legitimate real world scientific method, only people like warmoth that make and sell guitar bodies and necks and as such cannot be considered a credible source for such a test. reason for saying not credible? easy, they sell guitar bodies. so now they make a vid with 3 bodies ( above) and you know what woods they are, you listen and based on your preconceptions of x wood is a great tonewood the test is already skewed right there but then they go on to reinforce your opinion on the subject and you then want that body for your next project which they will be more than happy to sell you. lastly the idea of tonewoods was around LONG before solid body guitars ever exsisted and was a term used for the construction materials of HOLLOW body violins, cellos, etc. and it was based on air vibrations exiting a sound hole, tell me then since you think you know so much where is the air escaping on a SOLID body instrument I mean I sure do not see any place unless it is via a control ot pickup cavity which is covered and not much air vibrating in those locations anyway.
definitely heard the differences, that was awesome. I like the swamp ash. Well done.
I was hoping you'd give them a Q test after all the trouble of changing the parts out, but this is also why I don't get invited to parties.
Oh my goodness, I didn't expect it to be such a big change! I want to love the ash, it just isn't as clear as the alder.. and I think I understand all the hype for mahogany now.
I heard the same thing and agree with your analysis of the sound. Such an excellent video.
I couldn't hear much difference between swamp ash and alder. I could hear the extra thump of mahogany.
I felt that alder reduces noise just a little bit
I think Adler sounded a lot worse
And ash and majahony sounded similar
@@maxloyd9682 Toots Thielemans wasn't bad though :D Sorry, couldn't resist!
Probably need better headphones
I had a hard time telling the diff between any of them until test #4 w/ bridge pickup, but even then, it was just slight (to me). The swamp ash seamed a little brighter/snappier to me, which I like. But again, I can get this slight difference by simply playing with my amp settings. The lesson for me...pick the wood you like and don't sweat it.
Yall hear with your eyes
@@asiancairrou6232 this? this was the comment you decided was worthy of mockery?
@@miguelnewmexico8641 lol youre too soft or something
Many thanks for this video. The result surprised me. And therefore your "scientific" videos are very appreciated and very valuable.
This does nothing but show me the tonal difference between a red, black and green t shirt.