Author Topic: The difference of woods (Read 554 times)

angelboy · « **on:** February 25, 2004, 03:30:23 AM »

What does wood sound like?

Bit vauge.............what I mean is, can anyone explain the sound characteristics of different woods. I keep playing around with the custom quotes and when I get down the wood section I'm totally lost on what I'd get.

Does anyone know of the sound of a combination of wood?

Bit of a tricky one I guess?!?

palembic · « **Reply #1 on:** February 25, 2004, 04:59:13 AM »

Brother Paul the Aaaaaaaaaaaaargh one!

How are you?
When I was young (on this club -my 24th post) I wrote this:

The difference in the applied woods is best audible in neck-throuhg body basses. A high contrast in top woods lies between maple (very bright) and Vermillion (very warm).
Mahogany as body by far the most neutral wood. Maple body's are getting brighter, the same with Ash and Cherry.
Walnut as body gives a more dark sound.

Maybe the following list (top woods) can be of some guidance:
Pappel: deep basses, soft mids.
Basswood: idem
Mahogany: lots of bass, warm mids, lot of punch.
Alder: round and present mid, clear tone.
Walnut: round basses, good and pronounced mids.
Ash: dry and compressed bass-sound.
Soft Maple: Pronounced bass and mids. High Harmonics.
Hard Maple: Present bass. Brilliant. Good pronounciation.
Koa - Goncalo Alves: Transparant sound. Pressing bass. Good pronounciation.
Mutenye - Ovankol: very pressing bass. transparancy, high harmonics.
Padouk: Transparancy, pressing bass, brilliant.
Amaranth (purple hearth): Brilliant, clear, direct and hard.
Bubinga: Brilliant, clear bas, good pronounciation.
Palisander: Brilliant, present bass and mids
Wenge: dry, hard and brilliant.
Ebony: hard, brilliant, compression.

It comes from different sources but the main source was a booklet made by a Belgian builder Ed Collier.
For what it's worth.
MIca and Susan are wood-authorities (apart from Treebeard of course).

Paul the bad one

811952 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 25, 2004, 05:09:24 AM »

Ahh, Treebeard... I'd like a Series II with some of those elven-ring position markers and the one eye laser LEDs, made out of Entwood, bookmatched to center... I imagine the ents are crushing my house right now just for typing that...
John the moving to the Shire soon one

rami · « **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2004, 06:35:42 AM »

The most dramatic sounding Bass I ever played was my Dark Prince featured custom Rogue. All Ebony & Purpleheart with a 36 scale. Extremely bright and will sustain to the next day. I don't know how to compare it to anything else because there's never been anything else made like that (to my knowledge).

Mica is probably the best authority on wood combinations and can certainly describe it better - She has tried the Dark Prince as well.

Rami

811952 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2004, 08:19:23 AM »

Rami,
Would you say it is brighter and sustains comparably to graphite? How does the 36 scale feel? Quite a bit tighter I would guess..
John

angelboy · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2004, 08:40:41 AM »

Paul TBO: Maybe one day in another 1054 posts I will pass on 'The knowledge of the wood' to some young up-start like myself - and so the circle continues!

I wonder what a Jarrah wood bass would sound like........

Paul TAO

rami · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2004, 10:42:33 AM »

Hey John,

Designing the Dark Prince involved looking for all the ingredients to build the king of sustain.
The hardest, heaviest woods, and the super long scale.

Actually, the Purpleheart body was Mica's idea after I suggested the Ebony and Purpleheart neck.

It actually sustains better than any graphite neck bass I ever tried. Bright, super clear sound with endless sustain. It also has a super heavy fundamental. Those low notes hit you in the gut like a shotgun blast.

I call it the ultimate Bass. The next one in the works is a fretless with Series II electronics. Can't wait!

Rami

valvil · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2004, 12:35:09 PM »

Paul TAO,

we actually have a slab of Jarrah burl in the shop, but we haven't made any basses with it yet, so we don't know what it would sound like.
It does look gorgeous; Bob Nelson, Mica's uncle and the man who does the finish(and much more) on all your instruments, is also an amazing wood turner. I got a stunning bowl made of Jarrah burl from him, that is now one of my most treasured possessions. I'm supposed to take some pictures of it for him, so I'll try to post them in the future; that way you can all see how lovely Jarrah looks.
Incidentally, in case you are wondering, a Jarrah burl top is 1200$.

Valentino

valvil · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2004, 08:45:40 PM »

valvil · « **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2004, 08:51:13 PM »

The picture does not do it justice, & I haven't got around getting a polarizing filter to eliminate reflections, but still, you get an idea...

Valentino

mattheus · « **Reply #10 on:** February 26, 2004, 01:25:12 AM »

Who makes the first bid............

; )

angelboy · « **Reply #11 on:** February 26, 2004, 03:47:54 AM »

valvil: I used to be artist coordinator for Brady Drums a few years ago so I've managed to take a stock of a few Jarrah snares. The most noticeable thing about Jarrah, in drums, is the volume. There's plenty of other amazing qualities for Jarrah drums, including the looks. Chris Brady used to have this amazing, and totally Australian philosophy, with regards the wood he used. Basically, he'd go out into the bush for a few days and chop down loads of different trees, then go back to his factory and make some drums out of them. I guess he tried a few woods that were terrible but found loads more that were great.

I imagine it's a little harder to make a bass in the same way as this but it would be interesting to try some of the woods Chris uses like, Wandoo, Lemon-scented gum, Gimlet, sheok and loads more I can't remember.

I'm sure when the time comes and the finances allow I'll be stretching the envelope of acceptable bass materials!

Paul TAO

jure_the_second · « **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:53:11 AM »

Hey, Rami. I thought the long sustain formula was light wood, not heavy.
Example: My friends fender is indeed lighter and has more sustain than mine. Same comparison with my Jazz and Alembic.
I guess it's not JUST about how much the bass weiights...

Jure

rami · « **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2004, 09:14:59 AM »

Hey Jure,

There are alot of factors that contribute to sustain such as neck through construction and the stiffness of the woods. The softer and lighter the wood, the more (I find) it absorbs the string vibrations, hence the less sustain.

I've got a few great sounding Jazz Basses too, but there's no comparison to an Alembic. It's just the physics of the construction. Harder woods produce better sustain. Neck through construction is always superior for sustain than bolt-on too. Bolt on necks have less surface contact between the body and neck (not to mention the air gaps), as well a neck through body will never shift.

Rami

effclef · « **Reply #14 on:** February 26, 2004, 09:34:36 AM »

Valentino, that bowl is BEAUTIFUL. I imagine you don't keep Doritos in it.

Jure - the lighter wood may have nothing to do with it. When you think of a bass (or guitar) string vibrating, the best sustain happens when both ends are securely locked in position. With an open string, this means the nut and the bridge.

If a bolt-on neck can shift, even slightly, it creates a wobble against the string motion and you dampen the vibrations.

A through-neck bass SHOULD have more sustain than a bolt-on, but there are other factors in construction which can influence sustain.

For instance - if the nut has slots which are bigger than the strings, and perhaps the slots are not clean, that means the string is riding on dirt and can wobble side-to-side with string vibration. Same for the slots in the bridge. The pull downwards at the bridge (from the tailpiece) and at the nut (from the string tree on a Fender, or better yet, the tilted headstock of an Alembic) makes the string contact at both places firm - but dirt and slop in the shape of the pieces can affect tone and sustain.

On a fretted note, the shape and condition of the frets can make a difference also.

Get one of the Erlewine guitar repair/setup books. I found it great reading especially where he gives many tips about increasing performance of Fender style bolt on guitars. Armed with his info, I wonder if you could do an expert setup, neck shim, etc. etc. on a cheap Squier and make it play wonderfully.

The bridge construction can affect sustain as well. Alembic's bridge seems solid enough (how can you argue with success?) and seems to stop side to side wobble by the bridge saddles being threaded into the intonation adjustment screws and also the tolerance on the slider rod seems very very tight. Short of a lockscrew for the saddle like on some bridges I would think this is about the best Alembic can do.

I also wonder if the perceived sustain difference on the Fenders may be because they are using passive pickups and perhaps the input on the amp is turned up higher to compensate?

EffClef