lespaul123 Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 I was wondering what your idea of the ultimate tonewood would be. Also what the best looking wood to you would be. And I think for the best looking category we should have a figured and un figured choice. For me the ultimate tone wood would be Brazilian Rosewood Best looking wood would be ...Snakewood Unfigured would be maybe Desert Ironwood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 let me tell you about the best tonewood combination i ever heard. 3 piece laminated set neck...the 2 outside strips were maple,the middle strip honduran mahogany.the frtboard was pau ferro...and the body wings were alder. the thing had an absolutely singing tone...unfortunately it was a 7 string and i found out the wide neck hurts my hand. and flamed redwood/quilted bubinga look the best... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 Ultimate tonewood for what? Best looking depends on theme.. Quilted-Mahogany,Maple,Sapele,Purpleheart are cool Flamed- Just about anything can look cool. Landscape-Zircote, RW(braz. Mad. Coc, Pal.,Bois de Rose) Satin wood has the most amazing golden color and shine(very nice) Snake wood is cool Tiger Myrtle is crazy cool Sapele's copper color is great Amboyna burl has great color and texture Tzalam has a great color The list could be endless. Just depends on color and texture combinations. I would love to try a Ceylon Satinwood and turquois, bloodwood theme. If you hav ever finished Satin wood you would know what I mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prs man Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 I get the best tone from alder or mahogany with maple or ash used as top wood. I have 1 strat and I tele that is all alder and they seem to be the best sounding [warm and sweet clean or dirty] for neck laminated 2 or 3 piece mahogany or maple or a combination of the 2 works well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 Mahogany's my nomination for best tonewood. Lovely stuff, great for acoustics, electrics, whatever. Good spruce is a close second. Neither is terribly exciting looking, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 in my estimation these days a good paint job is more exciting thanactually seeing the wood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lespaul123 Posted December 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2006 in my estimation these days a good paint job is more exciting thanactually seeing the wood woah west thats bold statement. In my humble opinion I think paint is rather boring compared to wood. Specific woods are rare have age and history with it paint can never achieve that kind of movement and luster wood expresses. Dont get me wrong though there is a a time and place for paint. BUt for me a never seem to get that take ur breath away effect with a painted guitar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted December 18, 2006 Report Share Posted December 18, 2006 Yeah, but Wes is a metalhead. Which explains a lot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegarehanman Posted December 18, 2006 Report Share Posted December 18, 2006 (edited) Yeah, but Wes is a metalhead. Which explains a lot Yes, like his appreciation for guitars with paint that resembles the color of blood. x2 Edited December 18, 2006 by thegarehanman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted December 18, 2006 Report Share Posted December 18, 2006 you guys forget that i used to be in love with wood grain as well.but now every cheap ass schecter and bc rich has a nice quilted maple or flame top...i am sick of looking at a great top on a mediocre guitar. a good custom paint job is just as tough and more pleasing to me.you guys will tire of wood grain as well some day soon.go to guitar center..look at what they have laying around for $400 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted December 18, 2006 Report Share Posted December 18, 2006 you guys forget that i used to be in love with wood grain as well.but now every cheap ass schecter and bc rich has a nice quilted maple or flame top...i am sick of looking at a great top on a mediocre guitar. a good custom paint job is just as tough and more pleasing to me.you guys will tire of wood grain as well some day soon.go to guitar center..look at what they have laying around for $400 I know what you are saying, but looking at a lot of those cheap guitars are like looking at cheap furnature with paper thin veneers and what have you. They will look like what they are in a few years, but the quality materials will last. Paper thin shell purfling and inlay is kinda the same thing, but it does not deter my dig-ging the look. In the 80's everyone was all over the air brushing, then it is more the wood, and then the mono or industrial look and faux finish. It does kinda cycle I guess. I like it all. Peace,Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lespaul123 Posted December 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2006 you guys forget that i used to be in love with wood grain as well.but now every cheap ass schecter and bc rich has a nice quilted maple or flame top...i am sick of looking at a great top on a mediocre guitar. a good custom paint job is just as tough and more pleasing to me.you guys will tire of wood grain as well some day soon.go to guitar center..look at what they have laying around for $400 you def. got a point there sir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doeringer Posted December 18, 2006 Report Share Posted December 18, 2006 Well, I'm 42, been playing since I was 13 and have been in love with wood grain the entire time... just when does one start to tire of good looking wood? I agree about the cheap veneers. I definately can appreciate a good paint job, even some of the graphic jobs i've seen are really cool. There are people on here (like paint-it and others) that are true artists, I love the stuff and would be proud to own it. But for my weary eyes, you can't beat woodgrain! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnewman Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 (edited) I dunno... I'm going to get going one of these days on a guitar with a black limba and wenge body with an Indian rosewood neck and Macassar ebony fretboard... I think they're all pretty good looking and I have high hopes for the sound . I understand the other point of view, but I'd rather look at wood, and I haven't seen a Schecter yet with a limba body and rosewood neck . Edited December 26, 2006 by jnewman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unklmickey Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 i'm gonna make a statement that will probably be seen as incendiary. but what the heck, i've been known to throw gasoline on a fire from time to time. for an acoustic, the type of wood (and construction methods) has a huge effect on the tone. on a solid-body electric, not-so-much. on a solid body, choose the wood for LOOKS. the bridge and pickups will have more effect on the tone, than the wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southpa Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 First and foremost is the precision incorporated into the guitar's construction. As far as I'm concerned, nice wood and paint doesn't really impress me. I've seen enough brightly colored lemons in the store where it looks like all the effort has been put into making it look nice but they play like crap. If you are going to start building guitars concentrate most on making sure it is tuneable, will stay in tune and the setup remains constant after rigorous playing. Thats the real art in this business and makes for dependable guitars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 i'm gonna make a statement that will probably be seen as incendiary. but what the heck, i've been known to throw gasoline on a fire from time to time. for an acoustic, the type of wood (and construction methods) has a huge effect on the tone. on a solid-body electric, not-so-much. on a solid body, choose the wood for LOOKS. the bridge and pickups will have more effect on the tone, than the wood. It ain't that incindiery; the key lies in that one little word, 'more'. Wood has its effect, but it's nowhere near as prominent as most seem to think it is, IMO. Even on acoustics, is mostly the top wood, and the shape and construction (bracing, etc) is more important the the wood choice: A dreadnaught will sound like a dreadnaught, no matter the woods, and an OM will NEVER sound like a dreadnaught, no matter what the woods are. With electrics, there's also the consideration that the amp used makes a massive amount of difference. Construction (neck joint, chambering, not chambering), working to tight tolerances, and pickups are more important than wood choice on an electric. Not sure I can get on board with the magickal properties of a bridge (although it has its effects; might as well start talking about tonal effects of tuning machines, at a certain point), really, but wood certainly does colour everything else. You can probably counteract certain 'wood tone attributes' with careful pickup selection, but an all-mahogany tele is never going to sound like a maple necked ash tele, even with the same pickups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 i'm gonna make a statement that will probably be seen as incendiary. but what the heck, i've been known to throw gasoline on a fire from time to time. for an acoustic, the type of wood (and construction methods) has a huge effect on the tone. on a solid-body electric, not-so-much. on a solid body, choose the wood for LOOKS. the bridge and pickups will have more effect on the tone, than the wood. It ain't that incindiery; the key lies in that one little word, 'more'. Wood has its effect, but it's nowhere near as prominent as most seem to think it is, IMO. Even on acoustics, is mostly the top wood, and the shape and construction (bracing, etc) is more important the the wood choice: A dreadnaught will sound like a dreadnaught, no matter the woods, and an OM will NEVER sound like a dreadnaught, no matter what the woods are. With electrics, there's also the consideration that the amp used makes a massive amount of difference. Construction (neck joint, chambering, not chambering), working to tight tolerances, and pickups are more important than wood choice on an electric. Not sure I can get on board with the magickal properties of a bridge (although it has its effects; might as well start talking about tonal effects of tuning machines, at a certain point), really, but wood certainly does colour everything else. You can probably counteract certain 'wood tone attributes' with careful pickup selection, but an all-mahogany tele is never going to sound like a maple necked ash tele, even with the same pickups. Sounds reasonable to me. Even on an acoustic final brace shaping has a much greater effect than the soundboard wood. There is a point though when you hold a certain design to a spec(hardware P/U's and all). Then Choice of wood is certainly a variable in two equally made guitars. peace,Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikbojerik Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 Not sure I can get on board with the magickal properties of a bridge I've noticed definite differences between a tremed strat and a hardtail. Basically similar bridgeplate and saddles, but the difference in attachment and trem block (metal vs wood....) makes a distinct difference. That classic stratty tone is more muted with the hardtail, at least to my ears. Heck you can even change out the trem block and replace it with different materials, folk claim to be able to hear the difference. But I've never tried this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goat Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 i'm gonna make a statement that will probably be seen as incendiary. but what the heck, i've been known to throw gasoline on a fire from time to time. for an acoustic, the type of wood (and construction methods) has a huge effect on the tone. on a solid-body electric, not-so-much. on a solid body, choose the wood for LOOKS. the bridge and pickups will have more effect on the tone, than the wood. I agree with you Unk 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unklmickey Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 (edited) ...but an all-mahogany tele is never going to sound like a maple necked ash tele, even with the same pickups. sure Mattia, i'll agree to that. and a LP fitted with Fender vintage-wound SCs is never gonna sound remotely like one with P-90s..............no matter what woods you choose for either or both. i'm gonna make a statement that will probably be seen as incendiary. but what the heck, i've been known to throw gasoline on a fire from time to time. for an acoustic, the type of wood (and construction methods) has a huge effect on the tone. on a solid-body electric, not-so-much. on a solid body, choose the wood for LOOKS. the bridge and pickups will have more effect on the tone, than the wood. I agree with you Unk 100% hey Goat, most anyone who knows me, will agree 100%.............................with my second sentence in that post, anyway. Edited January 8, 2007 by unklmickey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattia Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 Not sure I can get on board with the magickal properties of a bridge I've noticed definite differences between a tremed strat and a hardtail. Basically similar bridgeplate and saddles, but the difference in attachment and trem block (metal vs wood....) makes a distinct difference. That classic stratty tone is more muted with the hardtail, at least to my ears. Heck you can even change out the trem block and replace it with different materials, folk claim to be able to hear the difference. But I've never tried this. Yeah, but I call that an essential difference in construction, rather than 'magical bridge mojo'. You mount things on springs, add a ton of mass (block, etc.) and you get a very different sound. Compare various hardtails, and things get far subtler. Change to a bolt-on, a set neck, change strings and scale length, chamber or don't, and things change more. Or can do. Anyway, not sure I disagree with ya, just saying it's a big, big mix; how much each element affects the overall sound depends on the design in question, and the builder's ability to balance the disparate elements and fashion a coherent whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unklmickey Posted January 8, 2007 Report Share Posted January 8, 2007 ...Yeah, but I call that an essential difference in construction, rather than 'magical bridge mojo'. You mount things on springs, add a ton of mass (block, etc.) and you get a very different sound. ... good call Mattia, you're no slouch on a debate. i left that one alone, to see if you'd pick up on it. you didn't disappoint me. in your first post about this, you mentioned a Tele, which is an interesting case on it's own. the bridge pickup is mounted on the same metal plate as the bridge. very special mojo there. but, this further blurs the lines between bridge and construction. if you were to compare a build with hard tailed Strat bridge, and an identical build with a one-piece wraparound bridge, you would be able to gauge the effect that a bridge has on tone. IMHO, the wraparound would sound far different. (and have more sustain) ...Anyway, not sure I disagree with ya, just saying it's a big, big mix; how much each element affects the overall sound depends on the design in question, and the builder's ability to balance the disparate elements and fashion a coherent whole. i think that sums things up pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 Wes, I'm totally with you. I still like natural finishes on some guitars, but the ones I like are invariably plain, unfigured ones. Just plain ol' plain. But really slick glossy paintjobs are eye-catching for me all over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtis P Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 i was in a pawn shop just this weekend, seein if there was any steal of a deal fix-r-up ers, and this old strat copy kind of caught my eye, it was, what looked like all ash just stained a honey colour, the grain didnt "pop" and with the gold hardware it really made it just, butt ugly. Beside it, was an even older, more beat up strat copy, that was painted up kind of decently, a deep deep red with black pickgaurd and white pickups, someone had definetly customized it because there was a hum in the neck and a single in bridge and middle, ask me why, i dont know, So, for me, I will grab a painted guitar over any stained or bursted guitar any day of the week Curtis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.