Major Manufacturers And The Wood They Use

[Maiden69]

I don't know if you have been reading Melvyns posts, but that, unless I'm wrong was made in a sarcastic kinda way!

And Wood, DO make tonal difference... but it makes more in the case of the acoustic, like he noted...

And not all tone woods are the same! I have tried 3 guitar bodys, same shape, woods, even with the same neck and they all sounded different... This is why I think that the point of buying a piece of wood over the internet is a bllind science. Unless you are buying for "looks" only like the case of figured woods, unless you are buying from a luthier or somebody that knows about making guitars, you don't know what you are getting...I'm sure Gilmer have a great selection of wood, but what tells you that they will have a nice sound to it? Like somebody posted a few days ago on a nice quilt sapele for an acoustic, that was beautiful but had the tap tone of cardboard...

[fryovanni]

Melvyn, Thanks for the responce. There is no better source for info than someone who has been there and done that(and I appreciate your input). I see a lot of people experimenting and doing different testing on acoustics, but solid bodies not so much. I think a lot of the techniques out there can just be flavor of the day "concepts"(that sound reasonable most of the time, but generally are not confirmed by honest test results). Being able to take a step back in time and see some of the concepts or theories that were accepted in the not so distant past helps keep things in perspective. Same holds true with wood and supplies. Seems like the marketing gimmicks can really drive a lot of our beliefs. Of course a person who is building their first guitar is probably going to emulate a model they could not afford or would really like to own.

As far as calling it "tonewood". To quote myself from a post a while back."We have "Tonewoods" because most people don't know enough about "wood" to know what to choose or how to properly prepair it for use.".

You started it though-" But remember you still have to fit it all together properly and a bad truss rod fit will suck more 'tone' out of your guitar than any amount of laminations.". "suck tone".... I guess that is better than "killing tone"

Thanks again for the responce. Your insight is much appreciated

Peace,Rich

[Melvyn Hiscock]

In a way I wish you wouldn't call it tonewood... I have some Brazilian rosewood fingerboards left and no, you can't have any!...

Hate to burst your bubble, but I seriously doubt out of ALL people Rich needs your BRW... or would ever ask.

That was meant as a tounge in cheek comment for everyone. Sorry if it touched a nerve. Perhaps I should use one of those annoying smilies that seem to be everywhere.

Also, as for your comment on tonewood... does alder, mahogany, or ANY electric guitar wood affect the guitars tone... I'd definately say so, hence.... wood that makes a tonal differences= TONEWOOD. The big companies are all calling electric woods tonewoods (ex: Gilmer), and Rich is one of the most woodly knowledgable people around here/that I know.

To me tonewood is that which generates most or all of a guitar's tone in a situation where the vibration of the top is the principle means of generating the sound of an instrument, be it guitar, violin, dulcimer etc. Wood used on electric guitars does have a function in the overall sound of the guitar but is not the principle means of generating the instrument's sound. Next we will hear of 'Tone truss rods' or 'tone inlays'. (insert annoying smilie thing for those that misunderstand) I get your point but I still feel the word 'tonewood' used to describe woods for electric guitar is marketingspeak and misleading to people new to the sport.

Times a-change Hiscock,

Agreed, I have been around long enough to see a lot of that and some of it changes back. Change is also not always correct!

[Melvyn Hiscock]

Melvyn, Thanks for the responce. There is no better source for info than someone who has been there and done that(and I appreciate your input). I see a lot of people experimenting and doing different testing on acoustics, but solid bodies not so much. I think a lot of the techniques out there can just be flavor of the day "concepts"(that sound reasonable most of the time, but generally are not confirmed by honest test results).

Even some of the 'scientific' research is not that well judged. Firstly, as we all know, wood can, at times, seem infinitely variable. One sample can be completely different from another sample taken from the same log. It depends on many things such as prevailing winds where the tree grew, the slope it grew on, the disposition of the branches on the tree, how the wood was cut, stored and dried and many other factors. Well all know that yet some research seems to centre on providing a 'standard' which is never going to be achieveable.

About twenty years ago there was a feature on a UK TV programme about a University that had been studying the effects of vibration on acoustic guitar tops so they could predict the sound of the guitar before it was made. Fine in theory but they took a guitar top, hung it in an acoustic booth and generated different frequencies into the top through the bridge position and photographed it with some clever light source that showed where the top was vibrating. Fine.

Except,

The top was not on a guitar and was therefore not in compression in front of the bridge and tension behind it, the top was also not attached to a guitar and so was unsupported around its sides and there was no bridge providing a certain amuont of damping to the top. There was also, as far as I could see, no way of measuring anything but the fundemental, the harmonics seemed to be forgotten.

There is some interesting stuff here: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/music/guitar/intro_engl.html and some work is being done in Wales at the University of Cardiff but, as we have said, little or nothing on electrics.

Even if there were the simple fact that guitars are different shapes and therefore different masses will make a difference. The best way of determining what you want is still to experiment and try it, as I said earlier, and use the subjective research that has been done by others.

Being able to take a step back in time and see some of the concepts or theories that were accepted in the not so distant past helps keep things in perspective. Same holds true with wood and supplies. Seems like the marketing gimmicks can really drive a lot of our beliefs.

Absolutely. Remember twenty years ago no one referred to 'Swamp Ash" that is a marketing term now that grew out of a nickname. It is no different to using the word 'deal' to desribe various types of pine. It is just a nickname, not a species. In the late 1970s, heavy was all. Try lifting one of those Yamaha SG2000s, they weigh a ton. Framus made the Jan Akkermann model out of solid maple and Hagstrom made the 'swede' out of it too. Imagine a Les Paul-sized guitar made of solid maple! Even so you have to remember that Sweden has a lot of European maple growing, they used what was available and economic, just like Leo Fender did.

Of course a person who is building their first guitar is probably going to emulate a model they could not afford or would really like to own.

which is always going to be the best way (we have probably both said before) and to listen to the stuff that is on forums like this. This sort of information was SO hard to get back when I started (you lucky, lucky people)

"suck tone".... I guess that is better than "killing tone"

Well it would be for the tone . . .

[Mattia]

Have you ever run across any research on laminated necks being stronger? I guess it would be best to clarify. An increase in strength due to the fact the neck has been laminate(not by laminating stronger woods to weaker woods, but simply the process of glueing pieces together). This is a subject that comes up occasionaly and I have never seen a bit of research that could support the idea. Along the same lines what about the idea that laminating pieces improves dimensional stability. My gut tells me yes within reason, but I have never seen a bit of research that confirms it.

It is the same as for bodies. Lots of opinion backed up with zero research. Pretty much like a lot of stuff really (Violin making has more than it's fair share of this too)

The contrasting thing came in with Alembic. It does mean that you don't have to find big pieces of good wood and can use the smaller pieces that are better quality. I like laminating as I use smaller pieces.

Amen to that. I can buy into stability (to a point) being gained from grain orientation choices when laminating, but strength is a function of the woods used. Heck, I've seen numbers (from reputable sources) showing that flatsawn wood is often stronger and stiffer than quartered stock, but stability's the key there. Besides, we're stringing up with strings, not 2" thick steel cable...

The main reason I never build non-scarfed necks is that I cannot bring myself to waste the rest of the wood. That, and I like the joinery, and like the advantages of no short grain.

In a way I wish you wouldn't call it tonewood. That has come in over the last few years to describe wood used on solids. As far as I am concerned tonewood is spruce and the like used on guitar tops.

I agree, really. The rest shades and colours tone slightly, and I'll choose a piece that has a nice ring to it over one that doesn't (if only because I have a feeling/have noted that pieces with cracks/flaws tend not to ring out quite so well), but on an electric guitar I'm really not going to get too fussy.

Wood is easier but the quality has gone down a little. It is hard to find Alder in the UK at the moment. Good mahogany is very expensive and hard to get. I have some Brazilian rosewood fingerboards left and no, you can't have any. For me to be able to shop anywhere in the world for anything is as far away as possible to what was going on the early 1970s.

I used to have to get whatever wood I could from the local woodyard. Maple was out as there was nowhere anywhere near that stocked it. Most of my early guitars were mahogany-types as that was what I could get. It was only when I discovered David Dyke and Touchstone Tonewoods in the late 1970s that it started to get easier as they could also cut the stuff. I think my early customer number at Touchstone was in the early 20s!

However, alternatives always come along. At Giffin's we made some guitars from jelutong.

Indeed. I build electrics with what I find locally, for the most part because shipping body blanks gets stupidly expensive quickly, but I'll go far and wide for acoustic stuff or difficult to find stuff, simply because I'm a wood nut. Black limba's sort of irresistible, like. There's also something a lot more satisfying about sifting through 15' boards in the rough than surfing eBay for pretty pieces of maple, although I certainly like to do both....

Edited November 10, 2006 by Mattia

[fryovanni]

Melvyn, Thanks for the responce. There is no better source for info than someone who has been there and done that(and I appreciate your input). I see a lot of people experimenting and doing different testing on acoustics, but solid bodies not so much. I think a lot of the techniques out there can just be flavor of the day "concepts"(that sound reasonable most of the time, but generally are not confirmed by honest test results).

Even some of the 'scientific' research is not that well judged. Firstly, as we all know, wood can, at times, seem infinitely variable. One sample can be completely different from another sample taken from the same log. It depends on many things such as prevailing winds where the tree grew, the slope it grew on, the disposition of the branches on the tree, how the wood was cut, stored and dried and many other factors. Well all know that yet some research seems to centre on providing a 'standard' which is never going to be achieveable.

About twenty years ago there was a feature on a UK TV programme about a University that had been studying the effects of vibration on acoustic guitar tops so they could predict the sound of the guitar before it was made. Fine in theory but they took a guitar top, hung it in an acoustic booth and generated different frequencies into the top through the bridge position and photographed it with some clever light source that showed where the top was vibrating. Fine.

Except,

The top was not on a guitar and was therefore not in compression in front of the bridge and tension behind it, the top was also not attached to a guitar and so was unsupported around its sides and there was no bridge providing a certain amuont of damping to the top. There was also, as far as I could see, no way of measuring anything but the fundemental, the harmonics seemed to be forgotten.

There is some interesting stuff here: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/music/guitar/intro_engl.html and some work is being done in Wales at the University of Cardiff but, as we have said, little or nothing on electrics.

Even if there were the simple fact that guitars are different shapes and therefore different masses will make a difference. The best way of determining what you want is still to experiment and try it, as I said earlier, and use the subjective research that has been done by others.

It is so true that wood varies a lot from bit to bit. Making a lot of statements about the effect of a particular species on tone a pretty subjective thing. Yet, I guess with everything you have to have somewhere to start. Most of the reports or studies I have read by the US forest service note that the wood used for testing is all straght grain clear wood, and their testing is quite basic. When you bring more variables to the research such as the studies you pointed out. It really becomes more challenging to truely get meaningful results. I think we can try to make the best of the information, but clearly it is not completely reliable in all cases. This is why I place such high value on historical information. We build on the works of past masters, but we have to understand as much about what led them to make some of their choices. This is why I really like trying to understand more about what was happening when.... Why did they choose Mahogany? Why use that bridge? Was it by design or making the best of what was available. What was marketing, and what was innovation.

All fun stuff to think about.

Peace,Rich