Most overrated tonewood?

[ikravchik]

In my opinion it's Adirondack spruce. I have heard a lot about it's coveted place in guitar building, it's history and its hefty price.

Through personal experience I have come to a conclusion that Adirondack is really a one trick pony, it works well only with heavy plectrum picking. I recently got a custom Taylor 514ce with Adi top and bracing (yes, I bought into the hype). Because of its stiffness or as Bob Taylor likes to put it "springiness" it sounds very mellow when finger picked - the tone is very round, not many highs or lows. The same carries on when played with a softer wooden pick. The only time when this guitar shows it's full tonal spectrum is when I hit it with a 1.20mm plastic pick. Then it really growls with a cool natural overdrive and reverb. So while the guitar shines in that aspect it falls short on versatility. In this case the humble Sitka is much more diverse.

Another overrated tonewood in my opinion is Koa. I've played some really nice guitars with it (just today I played a really beautiful Kronbauer at Guitar Rodeo), but I've also played some duds that sounded very mediocre. For the luxury price tag I think Koa doesn't always deliver.

[billgennaro]

I like all tonewoods that are used on great sounding guitars. It's the tonewoods on bad sounding instruments that I don't like.

Now that I've gotten that out of the way let me say that I like Adirondack quite a bit. And I don't play aggressively with a pick. So it just goes to show ya!

[Bowie]

Rosewood. It's great but, because it's usually an up-charge, people tend to think it's somehow "better". Granted, I do love rosewood, but I don't consider it to be superior in the way many people tend to.

Actually, I'll change that. Koa. Looks great but I don't care for the sound.

[ikravchik]

Originally Posted by billgennaro

I like all tonewoods that are used on great sounding guitars. It's the tonewoods on bad sounding instruments that I don't like.

For the most part, I like Adirondack quite a bit. And I don't play aggressively with a pick. So it just goes to show ya!

People say that Adirondack sounds great once it's "broken in" and opens up. I don't know how long I need to wait. To me it's a bit like paying extra for a Corvette, but the dealer telling you it will only go up to 60 mph in the first couple of months.

[Bruce Sexauer]

How interesting that you have chosen Adirondack and Koa as your poster children! These are two of my top favorite materials, though for slightly different reasons. I love Adi as a top wood, and with Koa it is the all-Koa construction that floats my boat, not so much when it is used for back and sides alone (though in that case nothing beats an Adi top).

But in either of these cases many guitars I've seen fail to fullfill the promise implied, and this is (IMO) because greater skill is involved realizing their potential. In other words, it is my opinion that the majority of guitars I've seen made from either of these materials are overbuilt. There are just a handfull of makers, living or dead, who get the results that are responsible for the reputation these materials have. Many come close enough to suggest that there is something to the reputation, and many others merely produce evidence to support those who think it is all a myth. But the guitars that realize the potential are what make me put one foot in front of the other.

[Grand Symphony]

Originally Posted by ikravchik

In my opinion it's Adirondack spruce. I have heard a lot about it's coveted place in guitar building, it's history and its hefty price.

Through personal experience...

So through your personal experience of ONE guitar made by a company that does not voice their tops you have come to the conclusion that Adirondack Spruce is an overrated tonewood.

[ikravchik]

Originally Posted by Bruce Sexauer

How interesting that you have chosen Adirondack and Koa as your poster children! These are two of my top favorite materials, though for slightly different reasons. I love Adi as a top wood, and with Koa it is the all-Koa construction that floats my boat, not so much when it is used for back and sides alone (though in that case nothing beats an Adi top).

But in either of these cases many guitars I've seen fail to fullfill the promise implied, and this is (IMO) because greater skill is involved realizing their potential. In other words, it is my opinion that the majority of guitars I've seen made from either of these materials are overbuilt. There are just a handfull of makers, living or dead, who get the results that are responsible for the reputation these materials have. Many come close enough to suggest that there is something to the reputation, and many others merely produce evidence to support those who think it is all a myth. But the guitars that realize the potential are what make me put one foot in front of the other.

Interesting reply. Great to have a guitar builder give his opinion. To my understanding an Adi top needs to be extra thin to yield good results.

[ikravchik]

Originally Posted by Grand Symphony

So through your personal experience of ONE guitar made by a company that does not voice their tops you have come to the conclusion that Adirondack Spruce is an overrated tonewood.

Through MY experience of owning ONE Adi topped guitar and playing MULTIPLE others I have come to a conclusion.

[wcap]

Regarding Adirondac tops...

I've not played all that many guitars with Adirondac tops, but one such guitar surely ranks among my favorite guitars I've ever played. It was a Martin Ditson 111. It was a simply fabulous guitar (I almost bought it - wish I had done so). And at that time I was pretty much exclusively a fingerstyle player who was used to playing a very nice Spanish made classical as my main guitar. That Martin Ditson was responsive, sensitive to a light touch, and had a huge dynamic range. I thought it was a fabulous guitar.

So, based on that small data point, I'm convinced that Adirondac spruce CAN be wonderful.

[Bowie]

I think, for this thread not to implode, people need to be mature and respect that we don't all have the same tastes. Just because I think cheddar cheese is disgusting doesn't mean anyone needs to be offended or that they need to defend cheddar. Likewise, you don't need to like the same tonewood someone else does.

AND, keep in mind that you can have a favorite and still consider it overrated. Overrated just means it's given too much hype.

[Grand Symphony]

Originally Posted by ikravchik

Through MY experience of owning ONE Adi topped guitar and playing MULTIPLE others I have come to a conclusion. Are you happy now? Did you stick it to me the way you intended? Do you feel a bit more superior?

So through your experience of playing MULTIPLE Adirondack topped guitars, you "bought into the hype" (your words) and purchased a guitar with an Adirondack top, despite the fact that these previous multiple experiences of you playing Adirondack tops obviously gave you the impression that it is a "one trick pony" (again, your words).

Did you stick it to those who like Adirondack the way you intended? Do you feel a bit more superior than those who find it to have a coveted place in guitar building?

[Phelonious Ponk]

The guitar world has nearly as much mythology and wishful thinking as the audiophile hobby, which has rejected science in favor of believing in magic, as long as it justifies their purchases and elevates their preferences.

I had Adi in the myth column myself until I bought an Adi guitar that sounds full, rich and intimate when played softly, big and aggressive when played hard. Of course it could still be a myth. This piece could have been well-used by the builder, or could simply have been the right piece at the right time. Maybe exactly the same result would have come from the right piece of Sitka.

Whatever the case, I wish you better luck next time.

P

[NEGuy]

Originally Posted by wcap

I've not played all that many guitars with Adirondac tops, but one such guitar surely ranks among my favorite guitars I've ever played. It was a Martin Ditson 111. It was a simply fabulous guitar (I almost bought it - wish I had done so). . . . That Martin Ditson was responsive, sensitive to a light touch, and had a huge dynamic range.

I have had experiences like the OP’s with adi-topped guitars, but I have had experiences like wcap’s as well.

I played an adi-topped, rosewood, 12-fret custom-built dread once that was also “responsive, sensitive to a light touch, and had a huge dynamic range” – one of my personal favorites.

I think, when braced and built properly, adi-topped guitars are tough to beat.

The guitars I have played with the best clarity and headroom have always been adi-topped (just my experience).
.

[stephenT]

So the OP thinks that because he paid the uncharge he's going to get a great guitar,..

Just because a guitar has upgraded woods, it doesn't guarantee an exceptional guitar. Every major brand builds duds and there are plenty of boutique duds out there as well.

How about "The False Premise of Upgrades", just because you pick out fancy wood there is no guarantee you will end up with a great guitar.

Note to OP: Not every player will benefit from an adirondack top and not every player will be able to get the most from that extra stiffness.

[Silly Moustache]

The large majority of my instruments have sitka tops because I am old and poor.
However the guitars with sitka were built by an outstanding small factory maker and are a delight for me.

I have ONE adirondack topped guitar, identical to one of the sitkas apart from an additional sunburst.

These make a fairly good comparison. So I did :



It is my belief, that there are two challenges that face us poor misguided guitarists:

1. We assume that because something costs extra - then it is better. That is not (always) true.
We pay extra for a certain wood, or a certain finish (varnish being the current fashion) or extra to have less lumps of wood holding the things together, and of course whether your dream guitar was stuck together with a modern woodglue or old melted down cows.

Why? Fashion! and an eternal search for something better than we have now. That is probably why got your last car, TV, wife (!?)

2. Let's just take top spruce top-wood.
So many variables: -
a) species/source: Adi, sitka, Englelmann, "German" (which is actually European/Russian/Eurasian - all the same species - but tends to be shipped via German ports. and there are other spruces - in the far east, etc.
b) The age, and condition of the source tree.
c) the way it was dried, seasoned, cut/sectioned.
d) The way it was thinned, fashioned.
e) what it has been attached to.
f) How we play it - what is right for you may not be right for me.
g) WHAT WE PAY FOR IT - because if it costs three times as much it has to be three times better ....doesn't it?
h) There is no rule 6.

There are a few of us who like our guitars old, battered and cheap because they sound a little like the old, battered cheap things that our blues heroes used. (Prime quality - cheap!)

There are those of us who have perfectly good guitars but the longing for a prettier, better one persists.

We all have ears and fingers - these used with thought and caution can detect and discern a good guitar, regardless of the wood it is made of. Surely that is the skill that we should be cultivating.

P.S. I have played a '30s Martin dreadnought in adi/BRW - it sounded terrible.
I have played a 1973 D35 - sitka/EIR (some say the worst possible vintage for Martins) - it sounds and continues to sound wonderful, and the swine I sold it to - still gets compliments about it (like I used to!)

Most of my guitars are sitka/EIR and Sitka/Hog - they all sound wonderful (to me and my band members and our audiences and that's all that matters to me). The common factor ? The people who built them.

There are some headstock names that I would buy sight unseeen. There are others which are 2brands" and the name means nothing.

Many Far-eastern guitars with all sorts of fancy brand names are made in the many "Samick" factories.

Go for the guitar.















.