#16
|
|||
|
|||
Bridge plate: Yes! Huge effect on tone!
Bridge material: Maybe, but maybe not discernable. Saddle & Nut material: Aboluly! Fingerboard: RW vs. Ebony, no effect on tone but effects on playability. On electrics, maple vs. RW, yes maple is brighter! Purf & Binding: No effect on tone. None whatsoever. Neck material: Yes! But many woods identical or nearly identical, so limited impact. YMMV! My theories and opinions based on personal experience not scientific data, but I'll give the pepsi challenge to any takers and make big wagers I'm proven right Edit: Note, Dan Roberts & SCGC were talking about the depth of cut not material of purf. Even tho they have a bias towards herringbone, I am 100% convinced there are many materials available that would match HB in terms of function & tone. So, I hold my belief that the purf material does't really effect tone, but the way its used can. Last edited by Augustwest2012; 12-06-2012 at 04:29 PM. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Absolutely true ! |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
The bottom line question on all of this is: "how do you know?" People say that one thing or another has a huge effect, and cite an example. The question then it, why did it change _that_ guitar so much, and maybe didn't change another to speak of, or even had the opposite effect?
In some ways guitars are balanced on the point of a pin. Ultimately, it's the way the different parts work together, and, in particular, the way the resonances line up, that accounts for much of the 'voice' of the guitar. Sometimes changing a particular resonant pitch by a small amount, a couple of Hz, can alter the timbre of the guitar noticeably, as things that used to reinforce each other strongly no longer do, or vice versa. It might not take much of a change to affect this sort of alteration. I've seen guitars whose sound was changed noticeably by swapping out metal tuner buttons for wood ones, and have measured changes in the response of a guitar from adding a couple of grams to the bridge, less than the change in mass of going from plastic to bone bridge pins. But not _all_ guitars will be changed in the same way; a change that makes one much better might make another much worse, and on a third would be indistinguishable. And, of course, a lot depends on what you like: a change that one person would be very happy with might ruin the guitar for somebody else. In some cases we can predict the nature of the change you could expect. Swapping out plastic bridge pins for bone ones will add mass to the bridge. All else equal, you'd expect this to cut down the power of the guitar a little, and more so in the treble than the bass. It's likely to sound 'bassier'. Or maybe not. Different people use these tone descriptors differently, and what sounds 'bassier' to me might sound 'clearer' to you , because there is less power in the upper partials to confuse things, or 'tubby' to somebody else, who likes lots of high end. Bridge pin swaps are easy, of course. How do you swap out the neck wood, or the binding, and leave everything else the same? You could try to build two guitars that are 'the same', except for the neck wood or the binding, but that's not as easy as it sounds. Believe me; I've tried. To really be_sure_ you'd need to build a hundred or so of each, with quality control that's a bit better than Martin or Taylor can manage, and look at the lot statistically. I'd be willing to bet that, except for things like changing the species of the woods used for major parts, and the top in particular, or a big change in top bracing or bridge mass, you would not find much difference even in a test like that. Neck wood?: maybe. Binding? That's pushing, I think. Finally, you have to remember 'Feynman's Dictum', as I call it, from his essay "Cargo Cult Science": "You are the easiest person for you to fool". That, in a nutshell, is the reason behind all the statistics and double-blind studies; people hear what they want or expect to hear, based on what they've been told or have seen. If 'everybody' says that Fossilized Dingo Dung bridge pins sound wonderful, you'll probably hear that when you try them. If I swapped them out without your knowing it, and you tried the guitar blindfolded, you might well not hear the same thing. It's no good telling yourself that you're to smart for that: you're not. Nobody is. So there you have it. It's easy to say that one thing or another _might_ have an effect, or _ought_ to, but very hard indeed to say for sure whether it actually does. To go further, and generalize that it will _always_ have a given effect is really pushing things, particularly when it comes to basing your judgement on subjective impressions of 'loudness' or 'clarity' or 'balance'. In the end, all we can do is try to understand how these things work, so that we know what the biggest drivers of tone are, and then, at least, we can say with more confidence that changing the top wood is more likely to affect the sound than changing the binding, or whatever. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Of course everything affects the sound chain, and does it in all different ways. So, in this instance, more effect on the sound would have your holding and gripping the guitar than binding the neck. GO FOR IT If you like it. It's more of an aesthetic thing. Best regards, Wojtek.
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Faith Mars FRMG Faith Neptune FKN Epiphone Masterbilt Texan |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
The closer to the center of the the top, the more difference "it" makes. There for the bridge is more important than the binding. I have not been able to hear or predict a difference between Ivoroid binding and Ebony binding, for instance, assuming it is equally well bonded. The bridge makes a dramatic difference to response and tone, which I attribute mostly to weight differences between species. Many people seem to hear more difference in bridge pin swapping than I do. I believe that fit (integrity) is more important than just about anything, where tone is concerned.
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
As others have said virtually everything effects tone since everything is part of a "system", although I'm not convinced about binding materials unless there is a large difference in mass.
The one factor not discussed is how subtle changes in truss rod tension effect tone, or rather the way energy is transmitted throughout the guitar. Getting the tension right can make a new guitar sound significantly more relaxed or "played in" without excessively changing the amount of relief. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Bruce Sexauer wrote:
"The closer to the center of the the top, the more difference "it" makes. There for the bridge is more important than the binding. " Yup. If the guitar is to make any sound at all, the bridge has to move. Adding mass or stiffness at the bridge, or the bridge plate, will probably have a larger affect on the overall output than adding the same mass to the binding, or the neck or the headstock. It gets complicated when you start to talk about the 'tone' though. The problem is, in part, that your hearing is not very sensitive to fairly large changes in power at normal levels, but can be really sensitive to the addition of sound at the threshold level. So; if you have a 'pure' sine wave tone at, say, 500 Hz and 60 dB-A, and you double the power (to 63 dB-A, as it happens), you will probably only just hear that as an increase in 'loudness'. You actually have to put in ten times the power (go from 60 to 70 dB-A) for it to sound twice as loud. However, if you start with the same pure tone at 60 dB-A, and add in a harmonic at, say, 2000 Hz, so that the overall sound level increases only 1 dB, you should be able to hear the change in timbre easily. This has to do with the mechanics of the ear, at least in part. What this means is that a lot of stuff that doesn't alter the output of the guitar in any easily measurable way could very well change the tone noticeably. It almost sounds like a paradox, but it's not: some stuff that's easy to hear is hard to measure, and some stuff that's hard to hear is easy to measure. It's one of the things that makes research 'interesting'. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
A question for the luthiers. Just how do you choose neck materials? Weight, looks, mechanical properties, acoustic properties, billet sizes, availability/price? It seems to me that mahogany types have a lot going for them on most the criteria I can think of.
__________________
Tony D http://www.soundclick.com/bands/defa...?bandID=784456 http://www.flickr.com/photos/done_family/ |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
EVERYTHING affects the sound of the guitar. The relative humidity of the air, the thickness of the glue on the braces, the shape of the room, the orientation of the grain of the braces, what type of neck joint, the thickness of the finish, the sweat on your hands, how long it has been since the guitar was last played, whether the bridge pins have a plastic dot in them or an abalone dot, the age of the strings.... EVERYTHING.
Just like when fly ****s on a locomotive, it changes the weight of that locomotive. ......but I doubt that you hear many engineers sitting around discussing that.... There! Now we've taken this topic to its ultimate absurdity. Now we can get back to discussing things that you can actually hear. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Of the components mentioned, I agree that the bridge has the most effect.
Quote:
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
JohnCambo wrote:
" I've swapped multiple bodies and necks on both Telecasters and Strats and find the body wood to be far more of an influence on the tone compared to the neck and fretboard. " The voice of experience: thanks. In you opinion, was it the mass of the bodies that was most important, or something else? |