Chappers and the Cap'n get two guitars that are identical (other than wood), and test them out against eachother.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLxE8iDWD_w
EDIT: Also, mustaches.
Posted Nov 24, 2013, 5:22 PM UTC
[deleted]
I think this debate springs from people missunderstanding how an electric guitar works.
There is no doubt that wood affects how a guitar sounds unplugged.
The trouble is, a guitar pickup does not pick up sound, it picks up changes in a magnetic field, it picks up the vibrations from the string, not the sound that is emitted and an electric guitar body is such a massive and stiff structure that it wont have any significant effect on that.
There exists electric guitars made from aluminium and stone, if i put on a recorded soundclip and told you it was a gibson les paul you would have no reason to protest, it sounds like a normal guitar.
As for the study, i think i know what you mean, and it's just silly, it shows a complete lack of understanding even the basic issue.
I think it is a very common misconception that anyone who supports the idea that the body wood type has a effect on the sound of a electric believes it is a acoustic effect, most of us (I would hope) understand that pickups are not microphones, they cannot pick up sound.
As far as the whole cement guitar thing, I saw the youtube video and all it really proved to me was that you can make a guitar body out of just about anything and it will still sound (more or less) like a electric guitar in the very generic sense.
I think that video also did a blind test, I don't personally think blind tests are helpful in this debate because one does not need to know one from the other to hear a difference, more to the point, that video was of such low quality that it was difficult to really hear much of anything in terms of subtle differences.
Don't get me wrong, I fully understand that there are a bunch of different elements that all come together to form the sound you hear when you strum the strings, the pickups and how they are wound are a very large part of that sound, that is why changing pickups often results in some pretty massive differences.
Likewise, I understand that there are specific variances between different electronic components, I understand that will have a effect on tone as well.
That being said, I have a hard time believing that there is no difference between alder and mahogany in terms of amplified sound, the reason I say this is because it has always been my experience (having actually owned a mahogany stratocaster and and alder ones, as well as other mahogany guitars) that mahogany has a specific sound, a certain "overtone" (for lack of a better word) that you can hear no matter what type of guitar you are playing, it could be a Strat, or a Hamer doublecut, either way, there is a element to the sound that is consistent.
Likewise, alder has a sound that is consistent across multiple guitars, pickup configurations, etc.
It is not a super huge difference, a inexperienced ear might not hear it (by that, I mean a non-musician) but it is there.
I can only speak for alder and mahogany, those are the body woods I have the most personal experience with.
The problem with personal experience like this is that unless the test is done blind, there is no way for you to know if the difference is real, or if it's there because you expect mahogany to sound a certain way.
The test would also have to be either from recordings, or at a volume where the acoustic sound of the guitar is completely drowned out ( louder than you might think).
If you got a friend to record 20 guitars with the same amp, 10 of them alder and 10 of them mahogany, do you think you could pick out the mahogany guitars? If mahogany has an element that is consistent across different configurations this should be possible right?
With that we come to another issue, what kind of mahogany has a consistent sound? .Mahogany is one of the woods many people attribute a certain sound to, but there are lots of species called mahogany in the guitar world, and the difference in physical properties between 2 mahogany species can be as much as between alder and pine.
I think I am not crazy about blind tests because they often become more about the listener knowing the exact wood being used for each sample and not really just listening for a difference.
I would absolutely love a experiment where someone builds a rig that holds a guitar and strums it (in the same place, with the same amount of force).
Then, you would have two different bodies, same dimensions but one would be alder and one would be mahogany.
Once you have all that, you can grab a bold on neck, a loaded pickguard and all the hardware needed and swap them between bodies (paying careful attention to pickup height, setup and so on).
Run the whole thing through a couple of times, testing the mahogany body and then the alder one with a mic'd amp in another room entirely, no effects, no reverb, no overdrive, just a very clean signal.
Heck, even use a solid state amp, just so you can eliminate the expected public outcry that "tube amps are not consistent enough!"
Carefully record all the data, sound files and everything into a proper scientific report and then release it to the public.
You can even do a blind test between the two but the goal is not to point at the test taker and say "which is which!" but instead to ask "were they different and if so, how?"
That would get you real results.
There is no doubt that wood affects how a guitar sounds unplugged. The trouble is, a guitar pickup does not pick up sound, it picks up changes in a magnetic field, it picks up the vibrations from the string, not the sound that is emitted and an electric guitar body is such a massive and stiff structure that it wont have any significant effect on that.
Your assumption is that people believe it's the sound being transferred, and this is not the case. The wood of the guitar body impacts the resonance of the strings, absorbing vibrations at certain frequencies. If you've ever had a guitar with a dead spot you'd understand the issue. It makes a very minor difference, but there is a difference. A common cure for dead spots is to add mass to the headstock - you can add a brass plate behind the tuners or some people add small metal slugs into the wood under the tuners (there's a good tutorial on removal here). That page is mostly about necks, but body wood can have the same impact, especially on a neck through/set neck instrument.
The vibrating string sets the wood in motion, and the wood radiates certain frequencies and absorbs others better, this does not make the frequencies disappear from the string however, you just don't hear them as well acousitcly, so it should not have any effect on what the pickup picks up.
Sustain can be affected when you hit upon a resonant frequency in the neck, this can make the neck absorb the energy of the string quite fast and you get a dead note. Clamping something heavy on the headstock moves the resonant frequency and this often cures the problem.
This should not affect tone however, only sustain as it absorbs the energy faster. Most people don't claim any significant difference in tone other than the deadnote after a deadspot fix despite the resonance frequency of the entire neck having been shifted.
Dead spots are rare on necks that are stiff enough for their lengths, but more common on the modern thin necks and bass necks.
The vibrating string sets the wood in motion, and the wood radiates certain frequencies and absorbs others better, this does not make the frequencies disappear from the string however, you just don't hear them as well acousitcly, so it should not have any effect on what the pickup picks up.
If the wood absorbing vibrations from the string had no impact on the frequencies amplified by the pickup you wouldn't hear a dead note through the pickups, only acoustically. The point being that this is a good example of how wood can impact vibration in a noticeable way.
Yes! In fact, looking at the graphs in the study actually proves more that there is a difference. Lots of misconceptions about why wood matters (it does!) and an unwillingness to think the whole thing through.
...think the whole thing through.
This is it in a nutshell. The tone of a guitar is the sum of all it's parts. When you pluck a string every piece of a guitar resonates sympathetically. These sympathetic vibrations in turn affect the vibration of the string. Depending on the tonewood (and the bridge and every other part), certain frequencies are either enhanced or diminished. It's a very subtle effect, but it exists nevertheless.
Thank you for getting it!
I look forward to reading about this subject again in 2 days' time.
Saw this when it came out. I'd say this is pretty definitive proof wood type matters and clarifies how it matters.
I can see how some could consider the tonal difference on the subtle side and the difference does diminish with gain, but it is real.
Nice to see another fan. Love their video, thnx for the update. :)
One thing they did not do was sap guitars as well. Subtle differences in attack with the "plectrum" would also affect sound. Would have been nice for a comparison that way as well.
But yes you can hear a difference.
I find it odd how almost every single guitar I've ever played with a maple neck or swamp ash body JUST HAPPENS to sound brighter than the rosewood/mahogany counterparts. What a coincidence right? I truly don't believe that the guys that start this argument actually play guitar.
Please go the fuck away with this shit
[deleted]
Because it's here every single day ans its the same people making the same arguments
Oh jeez. Not this shit again.
Listen. The only way to tell if wood has a significant contribution to tone is to swap EVERYTHING between two bodies (neck, but, bridge, pickups, electronics, neck, strings, EVERYTHING). Pots and caps have +- 20% tolerance, pickups are typically +- 5%, both of which can create very very audible differences in tone (amp input impedance / loading, frequency roll off via tone knob, capacitor charge/discharge time, etc, etc, etc). That means even though electronics may be "spec'ed" the same, they are NOT IDENTICAL. :-P
In then end, it doesn't matter. A guitar's tone is the sum of its current parts. It's tone is unique to itself so find one you like and play the shit out of it.
Yes, in the only test i have heard where they changed everything between 2 identical guitars with different body wood, there was no noticable difference trough an amp.
If you try 10 identical strats with an amplifier and they all sound slightly different, some will be a bit darker, some a bit brighter, most of what you are hearing is the difference in pot value and pickup specs and some difference in setup, a 250k pot can be anywhere between 200 and 300K in value.
Is this on the internet?
Yes, it was on a forum, i can't remember where right now, but they used 2 strats, changed all the hardware between them, including the neck and recorded them trough the same amp with the same player.
Do you remember what body woods they were comparing?
I mean, if they were comparing alder and ash, I don't think you would hear a significant difference (that is why Fender uses both, they sound pretty damn close to one another) but if it was alder and mahogany, I think you would notice a difference to say the least.
Well, there are a lot of different aspects that need to be taken into account as well, like measuring the sound with a device rather than the hearing ability of the individual judge him/herself, etc... If you were to conduct an actual scientific experiment, you would completely remove people from the equation altogether, and properly measure the variance of all the components involved, and the sound produced. It would be long, and expensive to actually conduct this experiment.
Yet, I also would assume that some guitar companies have already done this, but kept the findings in-house in order to preserve trade secrets...
But for today,Chappers and the Captain have done a pretty decent job of doing some fact finding as laymen. Obviously, people should understand that guitars of the same model/make are not necessarily identical, and one should always try before one buys and as such, this debate is more for fun rather than science.
There are no controls. You can't chalk up the audible differences solely to the body wood because nothing was held constant between the two tests. But, there are other people who will say this is definitive because it confirms their beliefs (I'm not putting you into this group, btw :-).
The video can only really say that two different guitars will sound different. :-)
Exaaaactly :)
I agree 100%, the only real, definitive proof has to come from tests that are done without any human element (machines would do the picking, etc) and with a wide variety of body wood types, necks and electronics.
I also agree that the Anderton's video is about the best video we have had on the subject in very general terms, no other video has really ever compared two exact same models with different body woods before (not even that Scott Grove guy).
Is it perfect, no but as you said, it is good in the general sense.