Electric guitar body TONEWOOD - Myth or Fact? Judge for yourself here!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2017
- The type of wood of an acoustic instrument has a huge influence on tone, but what about electric guitars? This is sometimes referred to as the Tone Wood Debate. In the guitar community there is no clear consensus on this issue. In this video the exact same guitar neck, pickup and hardware are assembled to two bodies of identical dimensions and density. One is Mahogany and one is Maple.
Also a third body made of Pressure treated Fir, from Friday's clip, is included in the comparison, that one has different dimensions and density though.
Amp setup: 1977 Marshall Super Bass into 2x 1971 Marshall 1960A and 1960B 4x12 Cabs, miked by Unidyne IV 548 close mic and AKG C414 BXLII room mic.
Dimensions Maple and Mahogany bodies: 510x120x21mm, density for both 650 g/m3
Dimension Pressure treated Fir: 415x120x27, density 920 g/m3 
Видеоклипы
Ok, I'll admit it. The clean sound does sound quite different.
As a side note, this is the most civil guitar community I've ever seen.
+Parker Bilbro Thanks Parker! Glad to hear that :-)
Parker Bilbro That's odd. I heard more difference in the dirty riffs.
Parker Bilbro even i'm always on my best behavior on Johans channel,other good guys with channels i like are Steve from Boston,Marty Swartz.
It is! And I love it. I gave the “sheck it” Swede a follow.
@@duster71 check out Paul Davids
I was suprised how much I liked the pressurized fir .
Exactly )) A guitar made of it will weight a ton though.
Me too
I guess I'll join the "me too" movement here. I wonder though if its because the plank is smaller? Which raises another comparison question. If using the same wood, how much does body size affect tone? Maybe the magic is in a smaller body?
He's just picking the strings in a different place. Probably because of the difference in weight but mostly because there' a huge variance in tone available in your fingers and picking, you really have to eliminate that. There's no such thing as tonewood. Plus he said how important getting the same setup of pickup etc is but obviously didn't have all 3 built so he could reference each of them side by side. And it's more or less impossible to use subjective human senses as a measure of 2 things. You know if I make you a cup of coffee in a yellow mug vs a red one many will say the red cup tastes stronger even if the coffee is identical from the same batch. You'd really need to do a more complicated and rigorous experiment to eliminate the things that we already know are the biggest factors in tone and measure the output with something that can compare it objectively. But, in the meantime we should have all seen by now that you can make a guitar without any wood, no neck or body, and it sounds the same as one with wood. Thus if you believed wood is contributing to the sound coming out the amp why it doesn't it disappear in the 'air guitar' ? I think the other thing the guy who set up the air guitar should have done is simply to show how easily he could have got different tones whilst playing. Just in the same way you can give the same guitar setup to 3 different people and they'll sound different through it. Jeez, about 70% of practise for anyone above beginner level should be focused on the tone of what you're playing. How hard are you picking, where are you picking, what are you picking with etc etc. If you're just following tab and holding the right fret and string and picking it roughly the right time as though playing guitar is like a more complicated version of 'guitar hero' then, sure, it's going to sound roughly like the piece of music maybe people will recognise it, but if you really want it to sound musical and good then you have to consider the quality of every note and passage. And you'll find a huge variety of tones even on the exact same settings, you're not switching pickup or volume or twiddling knobs on the amp or any pedals, you're just changing the way you play. But that nuance is difficult to control. It's why playing the guitar is difficult to master. It's specifically difficult to play something exactly the same way twice. So why anyone would think they could build 3 different guitars and see how the tone changed between them makes little sense. He could have got the same result without actually changing the wood.
Mahogany - more of a full sound
Maple - more punchy
Muhfkn pressure treated hardware store fir - surprisingly crunchy.
Honestly I'm really surprised at how good the hardware store wood sounded.
When i use the same guitar and play the same song a few times, the recordings will somehow sound different. I don't think my guitar changed, just the slight difference in the way i play or record the sound can make a perceivable difference. This slight variation makes more difference to the sound than the wood. On the same guitar i can make it sound like 3 different guitars simply by changing the position where your pick hits the strings even by a mere half cm or 1/4 inch.
^^^^^^^^^ Spot on.
People who don't think it makes a difference have only ever played at low volumes. You're an idiot if you've played through a dimed stack and you don't think the different density wood is going to vibrate differently. So yea, "No tonewood" = "I'm a bedroom player for life"
WHY is the mahogany reliably the warmest sounding out of all of them? Jesus Christ you're stupid.
@@romancultist6089 Nice generalization! Please explain how on earth the tone of the wood is transmitted to the pickup. Your string is taught between the nut and the bridge. It's not even touching the wood. The only thing the pickup can "see" is the string and it's vibrations and the guitar wood cannot affect the strings vibration when the string does not come in contact with the wood. It's simple physics. The pickup(magnets, wire type, #of winds and #coils), the pickups location relative to the bridge, the scale length, string(gauge, material) and the pick(material, force and where on string plucked) are the only things physically able to influence the signal coming out of the guitar output jack. I won't even get into the phycology aspect and your inherent biases.
I know you will argue and say well such and such wood provides great sustain. BS the only thing the wood could do is absorb energy thereby reducing sustain.
Now an acoustic instrument is a whole different ball game.
Maybe you should actually read a book and understand how a electric guitar actually works.
Bill Robinette just stfu, bedroom player
Definitely, the pressure treated fir sounded best. I'm definitely going to take apart my deck and build a new bass!
Hopefully you'll play the appropriate Queen song...
Not "best", just different.
@@f1amezof no, best
@@nhayes927How you quantify that exactly when they are electrified at all, I'm not sure. But have at it..
The thickest Gothenburg accent ever on RUclips. Love it!!!
+griiseknoen hahaha! Glad to hear that! :-)
"Guitohr"
griiseknoen aha Gothenburg good to know! 👍👍👍😅
"Today we're gonna sheck out" is my new favorite thing
Ola is also a Swede and shecks gear too
"LET'S GO!"
metal571 “today we’re gonna compare it” :-)
Check out CS guitars. Scot brogue....
You forgot “Hi”.
Actually really surprised how much a difference there was. Riff3 seemed the most prominent. Great job as always.
dude... it´s the microphone place not the wood hahahah do the same with direct line recording..
Just when we thought that we might be getting on top of the tone wood debate Billy Corgan declares that colour affects a guitar's tone.
Haha
Billy Corgan also believes in chemtrails, I wouldn't put too much stock in his views on science.
Billy gotta a point (but he doesn't know it.lol). As long as colours affect our emotions and behaviors, a colour may impact the way we play. And the guitar tone is in our fingers.
@@adairfernandes Billy's favourite guitar for many years was a yellow Strat and he spent 20 years pining for it when it got stolen. My favourite guitar is a yellow Tele. The funny thing is that we both hate yellow!
He's right!
I have two exact same model/year Ibanez RG570's, both '91, I put the same pickups, pots and caps into them and they sound totally different!
Sort of.
I think.
And it is because one is Brick Red and the other is Black Cherry.
The Black Cherry one sounds darker so clearly a darker colour makes a darker sound right?
I didn't actually check the cap/pot/pickup's for measurement values but they should all be spot on right?
That 10-15% tolerance on everything wouldn't affect the output right?
Right?
Love your guitar design. How much for a custom build? I'd like a Mahoganycaster 24x8x2
do you want the price in linear footage?
Ngl, I would love to have one of these with an EMG and a standby switch. I would use it for shows.
@@shift307 it's not like you can distinguish anything with an active pickup, so it I'll probably to turn out well
I’d actually prefer the Maplecaster, with the Mahoganycaster pickup and neck.
There are subtle differences in sound. But at least with the pressure treated Fir Wood you won't have termites.
+Dave Monty hahaha, that's certainly a plus! ;-)
Johan Segeborn LOLOLOL! I've got a Mahogany Acoustic - that I just love. Ibanez AC340OPN - and man, that thing growls on the Bass strings. I just love it. But then I have a Maple Hollow-body & I love that too. Different woods for different applications.
Yeah, but the debate has NEVER been about acoustics, just electrics.
Dave Monty , hahahaha!!! I was not expecting this comment,funny!!!
I agree that it's subtle.
At the end of the day, the difference between different wood types is minimal. I found that the overall tone was just about the same, but things like sustain and “snappiness” varied.
Once you add gain, a lot of the those differences vanish. Pick your wood types based on weight and aesthetics instead.
dude i bet the guy who mixes your guitar would disagree. Each of those has a pretty significant EQ change imo
@@djangomaxfield
1. The guitars were not held the same each time.
2.The location where you picked is not identical
3. There is no mention of the pickup height being identical.
ruclips.net/video/n02tImce3AE/видео.html
@@djangomaxfield thats not true. I've heard plenty of recording engineers say that tonewood on electric guitars is bullshit
@@brent3086 I knew MANY of the recording engineer that worked in the 1980's. You are correct. What makes a bigger difference in sound than 'tone wood' was the type of microphone, mic placement and the recording console.
Yep, what actually matters on an electric guitar is in this order.. Pickups > Pedals (If you're using them) > Amp > Pedals Again (If you're Using an FX Loop) > Cabinet
Man, you're one of the coolest guitar channels on RUclips. I always love when one of your videos pops up!
Thanks, that’s so good to hear! Cheers!
Clamp the maple on top of the mahogany.... makes a Les Plank..... maybe in reverse too... it all sounds good! Keep it up.... love the channel!
+Michael Riley Thanks Michael! ;-)
Michael Riley yes do this
Dude, you make the craziest videos. I love them. This is great.
+John Danek Thanks John! It's really good to hear that! :-)
I agree. I know wood makes a difference because I took a Strat and changed the body and everything else the same. Absolutely different sound and attack properties.
Thanks Johan for all your work here.
It’s been a pleasure not only watching your playing but the well thought out concepts for videos, well executed and documented.
I’ve often wondered what the difference would be with electric guitars and if it would roughly follow what I’ve experienced in acoustic guitars.
I heard a distinct difference between all three woods. I was actually surprised how good the cheap for board sounded in some of the clips.
Here are the tone prints as I perceived them:
Mahogany:
Bass - 8
Low Mid - 7
High mid - 5
Treble - 5
Maple:
Bass - 5
Low Mid - 6
High mid - 7
Treble - 7
Fir:
Bass - 7
Low Mid - 4
High mid - 7
Treble - 8
+Kelvin Jenkins Thanks man, that’s great feedback!
Anyone else feel like they could totally rock any of these guitars on stage?? The mahogany one sounds especially great to my ears! I love everything about the shape of just a neck plus board!!
Thanks , it’s great to hear that! :-)
The old tale of bad guitar good amp. Sounds really good for an epi neck.
That Mahogany plank sounds really good!
+Pingshan Luan Thanks! :-)
Others simply call a mahogany plank a Gibson SG!
@@JohanSegeborn Guitar bodies aren't made out of Maple Einstein, & run a loop, like someone actually serious about tone comparisons would do, so your inconsistent playing doesn't effect the data. Fail.
@@JeighNeither you can't run a loop if you're changing the guitar...
Interesting, I wasn't expecting to hear such a difference. The maple seemed to sound a tad brighter and snappier while the mahogany sounded deeper and throatier. Also, the fir piece sounded pretty good too. Didn't expect that at all.
+Davy Coningx Thanks! :-)
I thought the Fir was the worst of the bunch. Didn't like the sound at all. I guess that's why we all like different thing! The Mahogany sounded great to my ears.
Yeah, I'm loving the mahogany sound too but the fir had something interesting going which I didn't expect. Given the choice though, I would go for the mahogany.
Davy Coningx I kinda agree on this...
Its interesting though. On its own I'm mahogany all the way. But once you get a band behind you, all bets are off. The Fir didn't do it for me, but I'm sure a Fir guitar could be built that makes my juices flow...Just not this particular plank guitar ahhahah I'm 100% convinced that wood makes a difference, but I'm also 100% convinced that any wood can make a great guitar. Diversity in sound is why we don't all just own one guitar and leave it at that.
Johan, the only man that can make a 2x4 sound absolutely perfect
Actually anyone can do that for about the price of a nice pup and bolt on neck. Solid body electric guitar bodies are a structural element as demonstrated most effectively by Jim Lill; who manages to make two bleeding tables sound like a tele; ruclips.net/video/n02tImce3AE/видео.html
Timestamps for comparing! *Tapping Wood:*
1:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir
2:02 - Maple
2:08 - Mahogany
*Guitar:*
Acoustically:
2:15 - Mahogany
2:20 - Maple
2:25 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Electrically:
Riff 1:
2:32 - Mahogany
2:38 - Maple
2:51 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 2 (Strumming:)
2:57 - Mahogany
3:05 - Maple
3:14 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 3 (just played with 2 bottom strings, and High E:)
3:23 - Mahogany
3:35 - Maple
3:47 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 4 * :
4:17 - Mahogany
4:31 - Maple
3:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir (yes, they're out of order in the video.)
Pressure-Treated Fir sounds more harsh to me at times, especially here.
Riff 5:
4:51 - Mahogany
4:56 - Maple
4:46 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 6:
5:12 - Mahogany
5:23 - Maple
5:04 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 7 * :
5:38 - Mahogany
5:49 - Maple
x:xx - Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Riff 8 * :
6:16 - Mahogany
6:02 - Maple
x:xx - Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Individual Strings * :
6:55 - Mahogany
7:21 - Maple
6:31 - Pressure-Treated Fir
* = This is a section where the clips weren't put in the same order as they were originally. I changed the locations of the timestamps in the list, to keep consistent.
*Personal Thoughts:*
For the Acoustic Parts of this video (both wood tapping and acoustic playing,) I'm not convinced that the camera angle was consistent enough.
For the Electric Parts, it did convince me that that the body wood does matter for electric tone. It's present, but it's a bit more subtle than obvious differences between Strat Pups and Gibson Humbucker Pups. Another video, from new Perspectives Music, also convinced me of this:
ruclips.net/video/EM7wDZENKEM/видео.html
I've always been in favour of mahogany bodies, but this was interesting!
In my opinion, this is what I heard ...
Maple - higher frequencies, lack of bass, more harmonics, almost twangy.
Mahogany - woolly, lack of definition of high/mid range, muddier sound.
Pressure treated fir - all frequencies clear, but midrange out in front, high resonance, lots of high end definition.
Nice video, thanks for all your effort!
Umm, well I can hear a difference between the different woods, but I could not say one was better then the other. They were just different. I am sure slightly different tones could be used for different styles, but frankly a few times I thought the treated fir sounded best, so I guess what wood you should go with is determined by what you want the guitar to be best at.
Thumbs up well said
It is exactly the point of the video .
And partially why guitars are now made of different and exotic woods. Other than esthetics
And well the biggest reason we buy more than one
IMHO
Cheers
Some people won’t hear it, some will. Peeling back harmonics is a real litmus test for ear detection
@@BobBob-dv2qh i bet you change your tune when you watch this.
ruclips.net/video/n02tImce3AE/видео.html
It's a trade-off it's just like the necks on bass guitars older body matches up great with a maple neck for Rock but not for blues and Ebony neck with older body sounds better same way with pickups summer brighter summer lower pitch the pressure treated with it everybody seems to be commenting on you perceive it as sounding better because it has more high end but does that sound better to a 20 year old that has a lot better hearing and has not lost his high end like myself it sounds very brittle even though I'm in my fifties but my ears are good I usually go with older bodies and maple on Maple necks for Rock Lindy Frailand pickups
I am blown away by this guy! Johan has tested every folklore about famous amps and guitars. I think I've watched most of them because the history of rock guitar has been preserved here in these videos. I have learned so much from your videos! Johan, I love your videos, man.
When it comes to a solid guitar body, it is very much about subtleties, the body weight determines more than tree type in my opinion.
My philosophy and experience is that the neck has significantly greater influence than the body "especially in attack and sustain and to some extent resonance.
The most important however, in my opinion, is the actual construction and the sum of the parts!
Another extremely important aspect, of course, is the hearing of the individual, which is totally subjective and determines everything in the end.
"Of course you must have pickups amplifiers and speakers that can pick up those subtleties and deliver that information to the ears"
THIS
👍YESSS!
100%
Wrong ruclips.net/video/n02tImce3AE/видео.html
Preferred Mahogany, fir, maple in that order. Differences are very subtle but do appear to exist in your excellent demonstration. Guitarists have been debating this forever. Thanks Johan for taking the time to do this experiment.
+Lesjaye Thanks, really good to hear that! Cheers Johan
Just watched this the way any tonewood comparison video should be watched: with my ears, so without looking at the screen, plus in this case while doing something else altogether. I only heard minor differences during the plugged in part. And I certainly couldn't tell whether I was listening to a mahogany plank or premium American bayou driftwood. Factor in some overdrive/distorsion, mixing, production work, other instruments, and any difference would likely end up being totally negligible. Now I want to build my plankacaster too ;)
+R. S. Anthony A guitar is made up by many small contributors. Cheers RS
I feel that those minor differences you hear determine if the guitar sits with the rest of the instruments the way it should to achieve a good sound. I wouldn't underestimate it :)
Picking at different riffs at varying distances from the pickup with various degrees of pressure applied to the strings while playing an amp at various times produces too many variables, all of which likely account for the minor difference in tone between the samples. Even slight pick angle differences will change tone.
Does Wood Affect Electric Guitar Tone (Part 4) The Blind A/B Test
"In this video I create a blind A/B test between two different electric body materials. The body materials are Ash and Acrylic."
Result? People can't tell the difference between acrylic and ash bodied electric guitar.
ruclips.net/video/5vgwaiScrwA/видео.html
Violinists can’t tell the difference between Stradivarius violins and new ones
blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/01/02/violinists-cant-tell-the-difference-between-stradivarius-violins-and-new-ones/
That's one way to look at it, but another way to look at it is that every one of these small factors will impact your final tone. Yeah, you could make the maple guitar sound dark using those other factors, but if you wanted a darker sound then the mahogany would probably work better.
Like, you could use your point for any of the factors. "Two distortion pedals sound different? Well when you factor in the guitar, pickups, cable, mic, mic pre's, you won't be able to tell!" Of course there's a lot of factors that make up tone, the point is that they're all important when you're picking your tone.
R. S. Anthony The plankcaster sounds like fun!
Hi Johan !
Thank you for the honest and plain effort to tackle myths and legends,and, at the same time showing what really affects what in a guitar. Keep on !
+Pedro Leal Thanks man! Cheers Johan
I mean it's the same thing it's always been, everything effects the sound it's just a question of how much. In an accoustic instrument the flexing and vibrating of the wood in the body is what actually produces the sound waves that we hear, so wood is very important. In an electric the sound is produced by the pickups based on the vibration of the strings. As such, so many different things have more effect than the wood. Taking out the obvious things, like your amp, pedals, knobs and dials on the guitar, etc... the pickups have the most effect, followed by your strings, the nut and bridge, the stiffness and frequency response of the neck, then the body material. This is not even taking into account that a lot of tone comes from how you play, seeing as your hands are the things directly interacting with the strings.
Wood is basically not worth considering unless you've figured out the rest of your build (your favorite strings, pickups, bridge, bone or synthetic nut, etc...). Check all of Fender's non-artist models. From the cheapest to the most expensive they're all alder bodies and maple necks. Squire is mostly poplar bodies and maple neck. If the master luthiers at Fender don't give a shit about tone wood then it probably won't matter to you until you hit a very high level of skill.
Of course, if you want to get a specific wood then go for it, it's your guitar make it the way that you want, but don't try to play it off as if it's some huge deal.
Yeah, all the differences in wood for electric guitars can be removed by very very slightly changing the EQ a bit. It'd be pointless wasting money on an expensive wood for a guitar when you're playing it through an amp. For acoustic guitars though, as you say, the wood can make a huge difference, because the wood itself is acting as a loudspeaker. The wood moves in the same way speakers do, they wobble up and down. And so of course wood affects the tone greatly on an acoustic. Unless you're plugging the acoustic in too because it has a piezo on it. Record it with a microphone instead of a piezo.
Maybe the best tone on an acoustic guitar I've ever heard was one made with bog oak. Yes, oak, as a tone wood. Search for it on RUclips, the bog oak acoustic guitar. Bog oak just means the oak was found in a bog/swamp and recovered and dried, and built into a guitar. It just the most juicy and glassy and smooth tone I've ever heard. Too many acoustic are very very bright and tinny and nails-on-a-chalkboard these days, especially with young guitarists insisting on putting on brand new strings right before a gig/recording. Acoustic guitars sound best with weeks old strings. But some things help achieve that sound even with new strings. Apparently bog oak is one of them. Now I have a new thing I can't afford that I want to buy. Because bog oak is extremely rare and expensive, it's not like you can just make it up yourself by leaving it in a man-made pond or something. Bog wood is usually ancient, hundreds or thousands of years old, preserved in the bog. So yeah. What I want instead is an all mahogany or all rosewood acoustic, which are expensive but realistically expensive, not re-mortage your home level expensive.
Another thing I do is use flatwound strings. They sound less trebly and tinny when brand new too, although they're much much closer to normal roundwound strings as I thought it'd be. They are still bright, really. But definitely better than normal roundwound strings, not THAT trebly.
And flatwound strings last much much longer too. I assume it's because they have no grooves in which for sweat to fall down into, collect in those grooves, and make the string begin to rust or break down so that it becomes a weak point where it'll snap. But yeah I use flatwound strings on everything now, even my electrics, and I don't play jazz. They're definitely still bright enough for when you want them to be bright, say for a genre like funk for example. But the mere fact they just last a lot longer is great.
Flatwound strings even last a lot longer than Elixir strings. I've tried Elixir strings so many times, and yet they've never really lasted any longer than normal strings do.
Air sounds as good as wood. ruclips.net/video/n02tImce3AE/видео.html
Please run the same test with 3 planks of the same wood. 3 maples 3 mahog 3 fir etc. The resonance in the same species should close the gap a bit more. IMHO!
+WoahBoomshakalaka Yeah, we do indeed need to do that, to get some idea about variation within one wood
That is what I wanted to know. anyway, thanks johan you are the man!
I'm looking forward to that! (In this test, I could hear something very distinct in most, if not all, of the mahogany sound-bites. Anyway, many thanks for the video.
It would be nice if you could do a frequency analysis as well, just to stop people using meaningless terms such as "fat" or "warm".
All of my this.
The sound may be different or may be not, but this shows you can take any wood for a solid body electric guitar, if the pick ups are good, the guitar will sound good.
A palm mute or a tone knob has WAY more effect than this nonsense.
Nope. My old 62 "Les Paul" sounded worlds better than modern SGs and putting a good set of PAF copies made it sound a bit better. The same PAF copies in a modern SG sounded nowhere near as good as the 62 with garbage pickups.
@@FPChris Judging by your videos I can definitely understand how you'd think this. For your purposes, the difference would clearly be negligible; for more dynamic players, these types of differences are massive.
Johan: you have the world's best job, playing all these different bases and guitars. This was a great idea! Everybody talks about the differences between tonewoods but you've actually cooked up a good comparison test. Even my old ears could clearly hear the difference, with the Mahogany being warmer and more evenly balanced and the Maple having more high harmonic content. It does confirm what many of us have suspected all along. I think that much of the difference we are hearing is in the decay characteristics of the different woods. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks Jim, I’m glad to hear that!
O sheeet didn't expect it to actually change the tone but it really did, to me the mahogany sounded much fuller than all the other woods here
Another FANTASTIC experiment!!! You really could hear a sleight difference starting already with the tap test. The fir has a great sound but the throaty fullness of the mahogany is my favorite!
+Blues Bengan Thanks Bengan! Glad to hear it. I preferred the Mahogany too.
I agree, the mahogany has the fullest tone. As heard in the Commanding tone of most Les Paul's
I can hear the difference. The mahogany sounds best to me.
+Scott Locaputo Thanks, that was my favorite too
The mahogany sounds open and musical. The maple sounds bright and compressed.
You can really hear the difference on riffs 3 and 4. The maple and fir planks sound like crap! The mahogany sounds like Angus Young's SG! I have really great speakers hooked up to my computer, and well trained ears. Some people may not have that luxury. The mahogany sounds warmer and more harmonic.
Scott Locaputo I agree.
maybe this is telling us thickness and volume of wood are less important than the wood
It depends most on your own starting point and what you have expected. I personally am surprised that you could hear a difference, so good, not least in this medium. Thank you for this effort!
Thanks Micke!
Thanks Man, that's gold. I've got a really good ear, but without looking, it's practically impossible to tell imo which is which. What's certain is that pickups, amplifiers, & tone stages of each have infinitely more influence than the type of wood.
So glad I found your channel Johan. Great content brother. Thank you
+Randy Spear Thanks my friend, Cheers!
Hey Johan! Just wondering, have you ever thought about glueing a "maple cap" to a piece of mahagony like you had in this video and than compare the mahagony only with the capped one? Would be interesting for sure!
Maybe watch this then decide. ruclips.net/video/n02tImce3AE/видео.html
This was the most amazing AB comparison I've ever seen about this subject. There is absolutely nothing to complain about, you've successfully eliminated every possible variable that could affect the sound. Hands down amazing, great work.
1:57 We can clearly hear a ground note and a major third one octave above. Is the low note the actual note of the wood, and the high one is the sound made by knocking?
I am pretty sure this is how Les Paul started figuring out which wood combinations would give him the tone he was looking for, you don't really need to build a complete guitar to sense the main differences in tone coming from the wood acoustically, but alas then you get a pickup involved and an amp and things get really complicated!
Loved the video I have an unused guitar neck that I will put to good use as a travel guitar copying our friend here, thanks for the video!
When will they be available to order?
+1965fatbob haha! Soon, but they'll be extremely expensive ;-)
I'm ready to order my lumbercaster and plankcaster.
Joke aside, I'm sure there are people who'd pay for that body design if there's that golden Bender logo on somewhere and of course some quality pickups. Then they'll complain about ergonomics-ONLY.
fortj3 LOL!
It'd likely be a Gimpson logo as a reissue of the infamous Les Paul LOG. And they'd just glue some ES wings onto it when people complained about ergo, just like last time.
With my eyes open the mahogany sounded deeper and richer, with my eyes closed towards the end I could hear no difference. I wonder if seeing the wood allows the brain to follow it´s preconceptions. I have to say I liked all three sounds! Who needs an expensive guitar? The knocking test obviously showed different tones from the 3 samples. Love your fast hammer technique Johan, I could have used you in my Blacksmithing business before I retired. Fascinating stuff, well done.
+Christopher Jeneson Thanks my friend ;-)
I agree. I was listening while reading the comments, and I couldn't hear a difference that would have made me select one wood over the other. I'd love to hear 2 different Planks of the same wood.
Exactly Christopher! There was no difference and the people who commented that they could hear a difference with their eyes shut are self delusional!
Well, there it is gentlemen, I said honestly what I heard and it seems that you agree. Thanks. CJ
"I wonder if seeing the wood allows the brain to follow it´s preconceptions." Absolutely. Google " McGurk effect". This is the kind of shit that let's "audiophiles" spend $1000 on a cable. Just knowing they have an expensive cable makes it sound better to them. To truly know what's happening requires blind studies.
You are a fine craftsman and a really passionate one! I really appreciate the time and effort you put into making these videos. Keep up the good work my friend. 😎👍🏻
with a good headphone, it makes a huge differents .the mahogany is warmer. the maple is clearer with separated strings note,
and the pressure treated fir ,the sound is dull and unlived. i really appreciate your videos . i hear two often ,people saying that
wood does'nt affect the sound on electric guitar(of course ,if we use high gain set up it's not gonna work!).keep making your excellent videos!
Thanks Yohann!
The fir sounds like a cheap manufactured guitar and you can clearly hear differences in the open chords positons
The difference is bigger in the way of playing.
Exactly lol. I was like. But he keeps picking differently. I can hear it like....
@@crashdummy40 I know. It boggles the mind that people are sat watching this on the internet - a source for all humanity's knowledge and understanding - and yet they are still ignorant to basic science. 'Tonewood' belongs in the flat earth pile of woo-woo.
I was listening to you tap the woods, and I noted something interesting. When you tapped on the fir, it had basically one frequency to it. The other two, however, had two particularly loud frequencies to them. While the intervals aren't perfect, I heard an octave plus a major third on the maple, and an octave plus a fifth on the mahogany. I'd be interested in knowing if this quality of the sound of the woods as you tapped them could be used to help indicate the potential quality (not the final quality, of course) of the guitar that could be built from a particular piece of wood?
I ask this cuz in your demos, I found the mahogany to be the most pleasant; and the interval I perceived for it was close to a fifth. A perfect fifth is often considered the most pleasant non-unison interval in music. The mahogany guitar didn't "tap" a perfect fifth, to my ears, but it was pretty close. The maple guitar had a particularly harsh quality to it, both acoustically and electrically. This was surprising to me, since I normally like maple bodies. The fir didn't sound too bad, but it did seem to lack something that the mahogany and maple had, and I'm guessing that the two "peak" tones I mentioned above might have something to do with that.
Assuming that my observations are correct, that would imply that a piece of wood could be "tuned" for tone through density and dimension. This has always made sense to me, but this is the first time I've seen it demonstrated in such a compelling way.
You can probably guess that I'm a bit of a novice when it comes to this subject. I'd love to hear your thoughts on what I've said. In any case, thanks for the demo!
Indeed, the mahogany sounded the most pleasant!
Timestamps (some may go slightly earlier than they most ideally should, but this might be as good as I can do:)
*Tapping Wood:*
1:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir
2:02 - Maple
2:08 - Mahogany
*Guitar:*
Acoustically:
2:15 - Mahogany
2:20 - Maple
2:25 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Electrically:
Riff 1:
2:32 - Mahogany
2:38 - Maple
2:51 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 2 (Strumming:)
2:57 - Mahogany
3:05 - Maple
3:14 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 3 (just played with 2 bottom strings, and High E:)
3:23 - Mahogany
3:35 - Maple
3:47 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 4 * :
4:17 - Mahogany
4:31 - Maple
3:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Pressure-Treated Fir sounds more harsh to me at times, especially here.
Riff 5:
4:51 - Mahogany
4:56 - Maple
4:46 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 6:
5:12 - Mahogany
5:23 - Maple
5:04 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 7 * :
5:38 - Mahogany
5:49 - Maple
Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Riff 8 * :
6:16 - Mahogany
6:02 - Maple
Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Individual Strings * :
6:55 - Mahogany
7:21 - Maple
6:31 - Pressure-Treated Fir
* = This is a section where the clips weren't put in the same order as they were originally. I changed the locations of the timestamps in the list, to keep consistent.
*Personal Thoughts:*
For the Acoustic Parts of this video (both wood tapping and acoustic playing,) I'm not convinced that the camera angle was consistent enough.
For the Electric Parts, it did convince me that that the body wood does matter for electric tone. It's present, but it's a bit more subtle than obvious differences between Strat Pups and Gibson Humbucker Pups. Another video, from new Perspectives Music, also convinced me of this:
ruclips.net/video/EM7wDZENKEM/видео.html
I usually hate these tone wood debates, but since you’re able to show rather than tell, I found this really interesting. Would you be able to do the same kinda test for high gain metal tones?
Keep it up!
The Mythbuster of music. Great!
+Vinicius Antunes de Proença Thanks man :-)
Hey mate, I pulled around the hose for you and called the fire dept. You'll need them when the flames erupt;-) (loved the vid)
+Woodeso's Guitar Mods Thanks man ;-)
I love it. Sounds fucking great! I'm about to make a guitar like this for a main instrument! That mahogany sounds amazing. How much did the wood cost you? And where you get it?
He lives in Sweden, but if you live in the US any decent hardware or Lumberyard should have it in stock
rbagel55 like home Depot has a piece of mahogany wood like that?
Well it depends on how thick you want you body to be. I don't know how thick the board Johan is using,
it appears to be around 3/4 or 5/8 inch. If you want thicker, then you can laminate 2 boards together, that would be cheaper than trying to find a 1 piece the thickness of a Les Paul. If Home Depot doesn't have it
then a good Lumberyard should have it. I can't quote you a price, all I know is the bigger and thicker the piece is, the more $$$ you are going to pay it.
This is an excellent comparison! Nicely done!
I've been a bit confused by the "tonewood debate." It gets pretty nasty in online arguments, and it's a weird thing for everyone to get so emotional about. You did an excellent job of giving a fair comparison while doing a pretty good job of controlling for differences. It's impossible to completely control all of the variables, of course, but this easily one of the most "unbiased" comparisons I've seen.
10/10
I think I can hear a difference, but I'm completely aware that it could be the placebo effect.
My completely un-scientific (anecdotal evidence based) opinion is that tonewood does matter, but it's probably among the smallest factors in the sound of an electric guitar. Having that been said, it's entirely possible that I'm imagining the difference. These things are pretty much impossible to get a 100% accurate answer on, since you'd need some guitar obsessed scientists with a good experimental design to get a definitive answer. I'd imagine this topic ranks pretty low on the list of things scientists are eager to explore, so people will probably be arguing about the wood a guitar is made of for the foreseeable future.
This was one of the most efficient videos I've seen on youtube. I learned much from this man....outstandingly presented!!!
Thanks Don, I’m so glad to hear that! Cheers Johan
It's a great idea for an video - love it. Now you should start a Segeborn brand and sell those "stump" models. Simplest design ever! ;)
Thanks! ;-)
Johan Segeborn i agree. A travel guitar line hahaha. And Segeborn sounds like a badass guitar brand. Like Segeborn Lester would be a good name for an LP type guitar hahaha
They both sound pretty incredible the maple has a lot more pop and snap to it the mahogany has that deep richness that we so dearly love obviously Gibson had a great idea by capping mahogany with Maple to get the best of both worlds
+Sam Fosdick Thanks Sam! Cheers :-)
I think you are right and Johan's efforts here could confirm the usual consensus about Maple (bright and snappy) and Mahogany (warm und punchy). But the difference is smaller than I thought it would be. Seems like the construction and the PUs are more important than the type of wood?
I have seen the light! I used to be a tonewood naysayer, but I hear a difference. A minor difference, but it's there.
Mahogany is my preference, but it's like the difference between a Super Bass and a Super Lead - horses for courses.
Nice one Johan this is very good as it's clearly evident that differing grain densities and modulus of elasticity are big factors in how the strings vibrate which is reflected by the pickups.I've been researching this for a new patent from the knowledge gained and hoping to have a product in the near future.I manufacture audio products already BTW.Cheers
I had been planning on chambering out a strat body to lighten it, you have given me a different idea. Awesome
The Maple and Mahogany sounded more warm and round tonally, but sounded pretty much the same to me through my speakers/headphones. The Fir sounded a bit more brittle and thin, but it could probably be EQ'd out in a mix. And the tonewood debate rages on! ;-) Happy Monday Johan!
+jcoulter43 Thanks man ;-)
We get to see "behind the scenes" of the "hand made" Segeborn factory in it's early stages. When do you outsource and make "The Plank" in S. Korea or China to save production costs? Ha ha ha!
what debate? it sounds different, hence tone wood is real.. it doesn't mean you agree that spending $1000 on a piece of mahogany is going to sound $1000 better than a $60 piece.
End of a stupid debate. Thanks Johan.
+Sum 1 Thanks ;-)
I don't think it will end the debate. It will shift it to: "Yes, there is a slight difference. But is it predictable and significant?"
It's not the end of any debate. All anyone would have to do is blind the test and suddenly, every single moron in this comment section who thinks the 'debate is settled' would be reduced to excuses.
I'm the one who understands what happens here. You're not, ergo, you're the idiot, not me.
Ape you mean that in a blind test the sound from both guitars will suddently change and be the same? If yes, you are an idiot.
What I hear is 3 different sounding guitars - this is some great information because if you have pickups in your Mahogany guitar that are too dark sounding it seems like you could put them in a maple guitar and get a brighter tone... LOVE this video - great job!
ripzappa1 that is interesting. you'd end up with maple tone, which is a bit bright ( and might just make you very happy with the tone). Another option is to keep the same pickups, and get a better bit of mahogany. That way, you could keep your ' mahogany' tone, which in, in my opinion, has far more depth to it. ( zeppelin, guns and roses, gary moore , acdc etc etc etc) I have played mahogany guitars made with fast grown Samoan wood that have very little tone, they sound like theyre made of cardboard, and I have played a 59 reissue custom shop les paul which sounded super sweet, super fruity. Remember here that pickups have no tone, they generate no tone. They amplify whats in the wood, they may add more mids , more bass etc, but they generate absolutely no tone of their own, theyre microphones.
Amazed you can put the necks and bridges together with such accuracy using those methods(thought the tolerances would be in the micron range). The mahogany sounds bassier but the maple has a nice tone that suits the music you're playing. Great upload!
Thanks man, I would probably opt for a more stable and precise neck joint in a permanent guitar ;-)
Love that video, thanks Johan Segeborn. Surprisingly all sounds good, and may be that mahagony sounds the best.
Thanks Dan, glad to hear it!
Personally I liked the Mahogany best.
Then the Fir.
Lastly the Maple.
me to and i have new mahogany body guitar
Mahogany sounds warm, pretty nice tone
This is a classic. I've probably watched it four times now. The fluency of your English has really improved.
Impressed, I reviewed that other Vid with the custom again, and you are so right! So now me playing a Lp Sudio HP (2016) since some of your last vids I am a bit handicapped! Played the tush and other riffs this morning and noticed that brightness to my guitar vs vintage. That triggered an question now..I purchased 2 sets of pure nickel for my tele and my strat, but not yet made it to do a sound check..would it be an idea to restring that Gibson ( with maple cap) and get more warmth thru this remedy? I have no old instruments ( other than my beloved ibanez Roadstar 2 from 84) but like that vintage sound a lot..maybe a dilemma? My set up for Vintage would be HT 5 ( less treble, high gain) and into a 1 x 12 celestion open box..or ( you never tested this) a Hughes and Kettner 36 Tubemeister with the same speaker arrangement..( this has 3 channels, and you can run like 1, 10 and 36 Watts) run it on 1 Watt full cranked..it feels like you are im front of the Zz top stage., just the laser show they did missing...also very good vintage results with Kt 66, or 6L6 or the KT 88..( anyway if I imcrease headroom it comes near plexi) so what might be your experience in terms of warmth, and vintage and the influence of guitar board material vs string types ( knowing you did lots of Pick up, amps, cabs, box, and interestingly also distortion box vids..here I agree with one other writer, I use the tube screamer into a chrunched amp..sounds brilliant).. Have you got a vid on, getting the Gibson "full mahagony body, vintage sound" with newer guitars and which parameters may bring the true sound.... already?
Thanks! A Les Paul Studio can sound almost identical to the Custom shop guitars. The main source of the tone in my videos are the vintage Celestion Pulsonic Greenbacks, which have a very balanced tone so you can use pretty bright settings on the amp and still not have a harsh top end. The Nickel strings can help to warm up the tone too. You can change the pickups in the studio to some PAF style humbucker which also gives a more balanced tone. The bridge of the guitar can often make it sound harsh and could be changed to some softer material. On the amp I always crank the master and try to keep gain low since it often takes away a bit of the low end. Cheers Johan
Thanks for your efforts Johan. I want to say your videos confirmed what I had in mind for a long time. That the different between the tonewood is not huge but subtle. That I prefer humbucker PAF type on Mahogany and single coils on Maples. And more importantly, not to fuss too much about 'tone' and get better at playing instead. Cheers!
+danyjr Thanks, yeah I couldn't agree more. Cheers Johan
Amen
The "LOG" lives..les paul would be so proud..lol..keep up the great videos..all the best from Australia.
Love your vids man! Just a thought: all planks were different lengths, and it's this length that's determinant of the wood "note" at the beginning of the video, not the wood type itself.
Hey! VERY COOL! And surprising. Thanks for taking the time to do this.
Its amazing how much electronics can change your tone
Im completely shocked people can't hear any difference. Bad speakers? Too much loud music? Lol hey I can't blame anyone for the latter.
Thanks for the vid. Fun and valuable
I’m sold, my next guitar I creat will be mahogany, body and neck. Love the deep dark woody sound. Thanks you sir. For this very insightful video.
I'd love to hear basswood next. Love your videos Mr. Segeborn!
The Mahogany sounds darker and fuller.
+kj053910 it did indeed :-)
The best fair comparision video, well done!
Thanks, I’m really glad to hear that
@@JohanSegeborn It would be better not to have the room mic and the guitar many feet away from the cab mic. You are bringing in the acoustic properties into the recording. Those properties should be taken out of the equation as no one can hear the acoustic properties in a band setting. I'd also do a blind test wood 1, wood 2 and wood 3. ask the user to take notes and choose which wood is which before the reveal at the end.
@Tod Dot lol! I’d like a double blind test so biases can be excluded. That’s how testing works!
I think it would make a bigger difference if you had a full body construction, more wood means more tone. The difference was obvious to me, maple had a punch to it and the mahogany had a warmer tone. And thanks for the video!
This popped up in my feed today. Great vid. subbed. will watch more of your experiments. ;)
Thanks Joe, welcome to the channel!
The mahogany [guitar] could be played as is. I have heard guitars that cost a lot of money sound worse lmao. Great job man.
+Wile e. Coyote Thanks, yeah the Mahogany was my favorite
Haha true!
The mahogany to me seemed like the high end was rolled off slightly compared to the other two. But I think they all sounded pretty good. Probably because they were in the right hands going into the right amp.
Spectacular difference. 1) Fat and warm in clean/distorted chords for Mahogany, 2) thinner/twangier overall for Maple and, at least in my impression, 3) the Fir fared quite badly tonewise - though it did have better note clarity.
That did surprise me, as for the "toc tocs" in the beggining would indicate that the Pressed Fir should be even darker and mellower than Mahogany.
Wonderful, as always, Johann. Saudações brasileiras.
I'm not an expert on wood nor vibrations but I'm currently taking a class on machine vibrations (if that means anything to the world). I'd imagine the wood's mass, spring coefficient, and dampening properties will most definitely have an effect on what frequencies the guitar will 'ring' at. You can think of it as manufacturing tuning forks from different materials. A steel tuning for will sound much different from a brass. But also note that the shape of the guitar will also make a big difference!
Differences are subtle unless you are listening for them but to me Mahogany sounded the the warmest, fir was a little tighter, and maple was had the brightest and tightest sound.
I really think your channel is one of the very best guitar related channels here at youtube. Love your shootouts and your sometimes unconventional approach ;-)
+Steven van Demsky Thanks Steven, it's really good to hear that!
Great Videos as always Johan. There is a difference in the "after" tone, especially between maple and maghogny. The Mahogny leaves out a bit of highs and warms up in the middle and lows. where as the maple is less bassy, Dont know if it makes any sense. Cheers!
I could hear differences in the cleans & in the acoustic playing. There were differences in them electrically but slightly. With distorted tones I don’t believe anyone would notice in a mix. I’m certain that the differences in pickups would be noticeable. Like between a single coil, P90, humbucker to Jazzmaster.
*EDIT*
Your videos are always awesome! I loved your video with swapping of a Fender & Gibson neck.
simply, the best video, the video that destroys myths, the video that goes into all theories of building music instruments, a video that is very fun
Thanks, I’m really glad you liked it!
This is actually the first time I hear a noticeable effect, which speaks volumes to the way you went about this experiment. Well done! I have always been on the side of wood affects tone, but mostly for reasons I have not often heard discussed. This reason is how waves work, you know, the ones that travel from the strings to the body. While those waves might not be picked up by the pickups so much, they definitely have a cancellation effect back to the strings. Any waves that are offset from each other will have a cancelling effect on each other, which is why types of wood will each have a distinctive effect on the way the final guitar will ultimately sound. This is very much how phase works in music recording, where if microphones aren't placed correctly, the input of one will take out the energy of the other, which is why you would flip the phase of a bottom snare mic for instance.
+The Ape Machine Thanks! Maybe we can visualize that in some way in an upcoming clip.
There is actually an online tool to do this, but I can't find it at the moment, I might have to get back to you on this, but you can start here: www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/superposition/superposition.html
thank you for explaining it so simple.
This took a HUGE amount of work. Thanks. I do hear differences.
Besides the wood, there are other factors that govern the subtle differences between electric instruments as well. The bridge (tailpiece, individual saddle mass) and its mass, how it is installed into the body, the strings (composition, age and linear density), the wood of the neck, the windings of the pickup (number of windings, scatterwound or precisely wound, narrow or wide profile of windings), the configuration of the pickups (single coil, humbucker, piezo), the location of the pickups along the strings, the number of pickups (more pickups = more magnetic pull on the strings to reduce sustain), the bevel profile of the polepieces (this will affect the shape of the magnetic field that the string cuts through), the pickup magnets (alnico type, neodymium), the geometry of the pickups (big pole pieces vs. small ones, laminate core in pickup to "squeeze" the tone as in the case of Hagstron BiSonic bass pickups), the tone knob setup (potentiometer value, linear or nonlinear taper, low-pass or Stellartone circuit), active or passive circuitry (active has additional EQ parameters), type of pick (thickness, material, texture profile, etc.), and wood sealant of finish (nitrocellulose, varnish, polyurethane...).
Any change to any of these parameters will alter the sound. It's all physics, but the choices we make in a guitar of all of these factors to decide its final sound is art. And on top of all that, there is the player's nuances and idiosyncracies as well as the guitar instrument cable (longer ones will tend to have impedance issues where bass frequencies and treble frequencies will go out of phase, bass leading the treble--making the sound muddy), guitar amp, proximity of guitar to amp (feedback), room geometry, signal processors (stomp boxes), and neck profile (affects HOW the guitarist plays the guitar--fat neck vs thin neck makes a huge difference).
And non-guitarists wonder WHY guitarists can't be happy with just one guitar. It's an ongoing quest for the "right one" and keeping the good ones along the way (the ones that help us explore different ways to approach playing and making sounds). Some are happy with just one guitar, but the restless and pioneers among us are constantly seeking out one with a different voice that appeals to our tastes. Same goes for any other instrument. I'm a drummer--always seeking out new textures for my kit. But I also play bass and guitar. And I'm a physics professor, so this stuff fascinates me to no end. Thanks for the test!
Nice to see someone finally take the time to do this test right! You can definitely hear a subtle difference between the different woods. Maybe not enough that the wood alone would make much of a difference in your final sound, but as any good luthier knows, 5% here, 5% there... at the end of the day, after all those minor improvements, you have a substantially better sounding guitar.
+Mrmoonlight76 Thanks, I'm glad to hear that!
Only just discovering this and it's fascinating! The differences are really subtle but there's definitely something there. The mahogany and maple sound pretty similar, except that the maple definitely has a little less bottom end in the sound that's especially apparent on the lowest notes, and a bit more top end, whereas the mahogany has more lows and a bit more punch in the low mid-range, but with a little less top end than the maple. Definitely shows to me why the mahogany/maple combination in a Les Paul works so well, as to me the two tones definitely compliment each other. The fir just had a different resonance in the mid range to me that makes it sound a little scooped and just a bit odd in comparison. They're all such minor differences though, and they're only really noticeable like this when all other variables are removed, but they're still there.
I honestly never understood the idea that the wood of a solidbody makes no difference. Anyone who's played a fully hollow Gibson ES and a solidbody Gibson like a Les Paul or SG knows that, even if the pickups are identical (I know they're not on current production ones but they were on the originals), they sound different. If putting air in the body of the guitar makes a difference, why wouldn't the actual type of wood used make a difference too, if only a small one?
You gave a very professional answer. The combination of the mahogany and maple in a less paul explain why they compliment each other so well
Putting the air in the body is an actual structural difference. You would get a different acoustic response. But solid to solid it’s so close only the extensively trained ear can tell the difference.
If you really want to bend your mind contemplate that different shapes would also have different sound quality. Structure means more than material in something is nearly supporting the microphone.
@@Rotwang72 but then it wouldnt be a les paul it would be less paul. i disagree that they sound close because there a tonal differences from a les paul and a gretch white falcon for comparisson although they are a bit the same tonally i quite see what you mean with eyes blindfolded it is hard to tell the differnce
@@Rotwang72 also and sg and a flying v are both mahogonay and in a comparisson of them they are unique in every aspect but they have exactly the same wood but the sg is solid and the flying v is 2 piece mahogany as showed here
ruclips.net/video/bJXTTOlV4wU/видео.html
here is the white flacon
ruclips.net/video/O-v27jjM18s/видео.html
*Question/ looking for opinions below*
Great content as always Johan! I can clearly hear a warmth or fullness to the mahogany and a brightness light and more open sound to the maple. Most of my guitars are mahogany(I just gravitate towards it since I love the look an feel of all mahogany acoustics) even though I'd love a maple or alder guitar.
**I'm about to buy a bass(Sr300e or an Sr370e) both are ibanez basses but the only difference is one is a mahogany body and the other (sr370e) is maple and they come in different finishes. Both have five peice maple and walnut necks and one has a jatoba fretboard (actually looks and feels nice in my opinion) but I don't know how tge jatoba will do in the long run. The other(sr370e) I think has a rosewood fretboard. I would be happy with either fretboard material what I'm on the fence about it body material. The mahogany is $50 less than the Maple body. Im thinking of getting the Black Planet Matte if its the Mahogany Sr300e or the Sapphire Blue if it's the Maple Sr370e. Anybody have an opinion on which bass they would recommend out of the 2?
Could you do a series of tests with Lignum Vitae, rose wood, american cherry and walnut?
I'm very interested to see the outcome of price vs hardness vs tone comparison.
Very interesting, keep up the good work
he's not gonna do that, but I have and with many other exotic woods as well, and once you go to the very heavy hard dense troptical exotics they all start sounding the same past a certain point, and not for the better. walnut is not an exotic, neither is cherry. After all my crazy wood tests, I came back to the traditional guitar woods.
My brother and I both play guitar. I played the audio starting at the actual playing of the riffs. Afterward I asked him what the difference was with each riff. Without a moments hesitation he said, "Different guitars."
How come he did not said 'different WoOd'.
dude... it´s the microphone place not the wood hahahah do the same with direct line recording...
To my untrained ear the maple had a slightly brighter sound than the mahogany. The treated pine was somewhere in between the two. I’m not musically inclined but I am a furniture maker and use common and exotic woods all the time. Doesn’t make me an expert though, just my opinion. Good and interesting experiment.👍🏻
Thanks, I’m glad to hear that!
Without scanning all the comments to see if someone mentioned this, I would love to hear the mahogany plank with a maple cap! As always, great stuff Johan!
Thanks Bruce, that would be instant Les Paul ;-)
This was alot of work.BUT! A blind test is the best way John. Everyone hear's with their eye's! I think when electric guitar was in its infancy, builders already knew how acoustic instruments sounded with different wood, and they claimed that is why different wood makes the [electric] sound different.The difference is so slight if any, it is not worth arguing over........lol. And can a guitar pick up HEAR? I thought it used the strings vibration to make an electric signal? As usual, cool video John!
I listened to this on my JVC stereo, and I think I like the mahogany better, it was a little warmer Great post Johan as always.
+rbagel55 Thanks man!
Yeah no question the mahogany for sure.
yes mahogany richer tone maple thinner brighter
same for me, Mahogany won.
Mapple dead last, it sounded empty.
rbagel55 Yeah, I loved that big hard mahog plank, just like you guys ...mmmm
The mahogany deffinatly has a warmer tone. Always picked mahogany for my basses.
Big difference according to my ears, plugged and clean. I will always be an admirer of mahogany through a Plexi, it is the raw way the low mids behave when you hit with different dynamics. Thank you for the clean tests with gear and playing that doesn't kill the original signal.
So do you prefer with your ears plugged or with them clean?
When you hit it, and play it acoustically it has a very noticable difference. When it goes through the amp, I suppose there is a difference, it is not big enough to matter, and it can't be chalked down to the wood alone. This is one of the best videos that I have seen on this subject, and it made me chance my thoughts signifigantly. I used to think there was no difference whatsoever. Now I can hear a huge difference acoustically, and a very insignificant difference through the rig.
Thanks, I’m glad to hear that