The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 04-22-2009, 02:43 PM
TaylorGA8 TaylorGA8 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 213
Default adirondack vs sitka spruce

What is the difference in tone?

Is either better?

Is there a price difference?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-22-2009, 02:52 PM
690MBCOMMANDO 690MBCOMMANDO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,620
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TaylorGA8 View Post
What is the difference in tone?

Is either better?

Is there a price difference?
Adi is one of the stiffest - excellent projection, power and resonance. Generally more expensive than sitka (especially master grade tight grained, perfectly quartered, silked, no runout, creamy englemann looking stuff)

Spruce is softer - slightly more expressive, still powerful. I think it gets an unfair rap and is highly underrated since it's more "common" but an excellent tonewood nonetheless.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-22-2009, 03:04 PM
banpreso banpreso is offline
Bang for the Buck Guitars
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 3,556
Default

there is a price difference, adi being more expensive

adi would have more volume, clearity, and overtone.

stika would be a bit warmer sounding
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-22-2009, 03:25 PM
Eugenius Eugenius is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,915
Default

Every top is different though.

I've played many adi tops that were no different or better than sitka. A lot of the time adi is overrated, and more than often sitka is underrated.

Take it on a case by case basis for any top material. My uncle pounds on a 000 cedar topped Collings that defies all of the hindering characteristics of cedar, and 000's for that matter!

They all can make great tops.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-22-2009, 03:25 PM
Matt Mustapick Matt Mustapick is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 2,002
Default

What is the difference in tone?
Perhaps there is a very subtle difference, some of the time. But the difference is so subtle that counterexamples to any tone generalizations you might hear about are nearly as common as confirming examples. That said, it may be that a Sitka guitar is more likely to have more warmth and fullness in the midrange, while an Adirondack guitar is more likely to have more separation and more treble projection.

Is either better?
Absolutely not. Adirondack spruce tends to have more fans, and a bit of ooh-la-la, because it generally costs a bit more.

Is there a price difference?
Usually. Adirondack is often more expensive. Price discrepancies across different varieties of woods are determined by supply. The fact that Adirondack costs more (or any other wood that costs more), is often mistakenly associated with some imputed notion of merit.

I think Adirondack and Sitka are both fine choices, so long as the wood is really nice.

Last edited by Matt Mustapick; 04-22-2009 at 03:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-22-2009, 03:32 PM
Jeff M Jeff M is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Not where I thought I was going, but probably where I need to be.
Posts: 18,603
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Mustapick View Post
What is the difference in tone?
Perhaps a very subtle one some of the time, but the difference is so subtle that counterexamples to any tone generalizations you might hear about are nearly as common as confirming examples. That said, it may be that a Sitka guitar is more likely to have more warmth and fullness in the midrange, while an Adirondack guitar is more likely to have more separation and more treble projection.

Is either better?
Absolutely not. Adirondack spruce tends to have more fans, and a bit of ooh-la-la, because it generally costs a bit more.

Is there a price difference?
Usually. Adirondack is often more expensive. Price discrepancies across different varieties of woods are determined by supply. The fact that Adirondack costs more (or any other wood that costs more), is often mistakenly associated with some imputed notion of merit.

I think Adirondack and Sitka are both fine choices, so long as the wood is really nice.
Says it well.
Neither is "better".
Chinese vs Italian.
As with food, it depends on what you like.

Played/owned guitars made with Adirondac, and others made with Sitka.
My favorite has a sitka top.

Different builders designs tend to lend themselves more to one or the other.
Big generalizations here;
An Adirondac top (tends to be "bright", "sharp" sounding) on a Taylor (tend to be "bright", "sharp" sounding already) may be too much for some.
Adirondac on a Martin (tend to be "darker" sounding,) can balance it out nicely.
__________________

"Use what talents you possess; the woods would be very silent if no birds sang except those that sang best."
Henry Van Dyke


"It is in the world of slow time that truth and art are found as one"
Norman Maclean,

Last edited by Jeff M; 04-22-2009 at 03:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-22-2009, 04:41 PM
min7b5's Avatar
min7b5 min7b5 is offline
Eric Skye
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 7,668
Default

I generally prefer adi. I feel like just more head room for players that play a little harder, like myself. Seems to just have a little more punch and clarity.

I’ll have to dig around here because a few months ago I made some recordings of two SCGC 00’s with the difference being adi vs sitka. Tried to be somewhat scientific about it, and felt like the adi just was hitting the mics a little harder. But it’s honestly pretty darn close.

That said, just last night I was playing a Ryan Nightingale with braz and sitka that was pretty darn great sounding, with very good volume.

Incidentally, or maybe I should say, anecdotally, I often prefer the funky looking, wide grained adi over the really expensive stuff. Maybe it has a better strength to weight ratio? Seems like the really perfect looking stuff is tighter sounding.
__________________
Instruction
Youtube
Instagram
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-22-2009, 05:47 PM
Matt Mustapick Matt Mustapick is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 2,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff M View Post
Says it well.
Neither is "better"...Chinese vs Italian.
Given the overlap, I think it may be even more useful to think of it more as the difference between a pizza from Rome or pizza from Bologna. Generally perhaps there are differences...but asking which pizza will be be "better" without knowing anything about the particular restaurants is extremely speculative. In this case, I could appreciate someone saying "I generally seem to like the pizza in Bologna better." But if someone were to say that any pizza slice in Bologna is more than likely to be better than any slice in Rome, then that doesn't make sense to me.

But we agree Jeff...and both are very good, when they're very good.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-22-2009, 05:56 PM
Jeff M Jeff M is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Not where I thought I was going, but probably where I need to be.
Posts: 18,603
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Mustapick View Post
Given the overlap, I think it may be even more useful to think of it more as the difference between a pizza from Rome or pizza from Bologna. Generally perhaps there are differences...but asking which pizza will be be "better" without knowing anything about the particular restaurants is extremely speculative. In this case, I could appreciate someone saying "I generally seem to like the pizza in Bologna better." But if someone were to say that any pizza slice in Bologna is more than likely to be better than any slice in Rome, then that doesn't make sense to me.

But we agree Jeff...and both are very good, when they're very good.
Yep, a better analogy.
Especially if you throw in the fact that WHO is making those pizzas in Rome or Bologna is more important that the actual pizza style.
__________________

"Use what talents you possess; the woods would be very silent if no birds sang except those that sang best."
Henry Van Dyke


"It is in the world of slow time that truth and art are found as one"
Norman Maclean,
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-22-2009, 06:53 PM
markrr markrr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 7
Default

With these comparisons between similar woods (see also the various rosewoods for back and sides) I think the individual piece selected, and more importantly the luthier shaping it, have far more effect on the sound than the particular species.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-22-2009, 06:56 PM
Howard Klepper Howard Klepper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Earthly Paradise of Northern California
Posts: 6,627
Default

I don't build flattop guitars with Sitka. I do build them with Adirondack. I've heard a lot of good Sitka flattop guitars, but I can't recall hearing a great one. I've heard some great ones made with Adirondack (European, too). My interest is in building great guitars if I can. That appears to be much less likely if I were to use Sitka.

I have had very good results using Sitka on archtops, though.
__________________
"Still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest."
--Paul Simon
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-22-2009, 07:30 PM
terrapin terrapin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oceanside, Ca
Posts: 4,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Klepper View Post
I don't build flattop guitars with Sitka. I do build them with Adirondack. I've heard a lot of good Sitka flattop guitars, but I can't recall hearing a great one. I've heard some great ones made with Adirondack (European, too). My interest is in building great guitars if I can. That appears to be much less likely if I were to use Sitka.

I have had very good results using Sitka on archtops, though.
OK, that is acceptable...............SO, we have one builder officially say he thinks Adi is better than Sitka............One builder.......Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-22-2009, 07:32 PM
Cigar36 Cigar36 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 74
Default Is adi worth it?

Adi is the one upgrade I would always get if one can afford it.

I have guitars with Brazilian back and sides and some with rosewood. I would take a rosewood/adi over Brazilian/sitka. But, the best of both worlds is the Brazilian/Adi, of which I only have one.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-22-2009, 07:47 PM
donh donh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrapin View Post
OK, that is acceptable...............SO, we have one builder officially say he thinks Adi is better than Sitka............One builder.......Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Ahem.

There are wayyy more than one.

I'll leave it to you to find the rest, should you desire.
__________________
-donh-

*everything* is a tone control
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-22-2009, 08:11 PM
terrapin terrapin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oceanside, Ca
Posts: 4,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by donh View Post
Ahem.

There are wayyy more than one.

I'll leave it to you to find the rest, should you desire.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm once again. In this thread the ONLY other close to being a one is better was, and I quote, "generally agree".
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=