Does the wood used for the back and sides realy make a difference?
 

I've owned dozens upon dozens of guitars in my career and tried even more in guitar shops during some of my tours. There were cases in some of these stores where there were two of the same model; one using mahogany and another rosewood.

Along with all the other variables that go into making a guitar, there were times I found it quite difficult to distinguish the differences between the wood being used. To my ears, if an instrument sounded good to me I didn't quite care what kind of materials were used.

What's your experience?

I feel exactly the same way, however from experience I've found that guitars with mahogany back and sides sound better in my hands. I still try out guitars made from other materials because there are always exceptions.

I also do not really care what wood is used and go only by how it sounds to me

That said: I think everything in the physical elements used in the construction effects the sound,,,, now how much "difference" or how noticeable that difference is,,, I suppose is an endless discussion

I will say that among the fairly different materials (and configurations) in the 6 I own, there are some pretty noticeable differences .

Yes. Of course it makes a difference. It's wood ..... wood has acoustic character. The same model of acoustic guitar, with the same sides and back doesn't sound like another one, that is supposedly identical.

When you find that ONE among the many (of a particular model) that just sings, what do you suppose the difference is???



Turtle

…I think there are differences but that design and construction variables can mitigate and in some cases cancel those differences….I think the same applies to top woods as well…

Being I've played/owned both, I hear a difference,,,Rosewood has a more defined note separation...
It's like Microphones

Dynamic is like Mahogany
Condenser is like Rosewood

For me Rosewood is acquired taste as it can be off-putting the notes jumping out at you,, you almost hear to much :)
Where Mahogany has a smoother note separation ..

But of course it's only my .02 :)

I care. But I have reasons in addition to tone. As far as tone goes, the bulk of it comes from the top and all of it is heavily influenced by the maker/builder. To me, the B&S woods are like spice in food. They don't change what it is but do alter the taste.

Now, my other reasons. 1) Appearance. 2) Physical properties. Some woods are lighter or heavier, dent less (or more), prove more or less apt to crack or change color, hold glue better, bend easier 3) Aroma, something I remain aware of and enjoy when it is present

If you put a blindfold on me and handed me a rosewood J-45 and a
mahogany J-45, I bet I could... tell that they were different.

It's like the coke/pepsi test. When they give you a cup of each, they
ask you which one you like better, they don't ask you to tell them which
one is coke...

-Mike

If I like the sound of a guitar I will consider buying it. Doesn't matter to me what the back and sides are made of. The back and sides are there to polish the sound produced by top.

That being said, I have guitars with Maple, Mahogany, and Walnut backs and sides. To my ear anyway, the darker woods have a warmer, more balanced tone (Walnut). The lighter woods (Maple) are brighter.

When I compare my Takamine GD93 dreadnaught (Walnut) and my Takamine GJ72CE jumbo (Maple), the GD93 has more bass than the GJ72CE.

mmm, I have five flat tops with EIR, and four with mahogany B&S.

They are all good and all individuals.

I confess that my last two purchases were adi/EIR, and mainly because I prefer the Martin style trim that goes with EIR (X28 style (although they aren't Martins).

I have on flat top (Waterloo WL12) with a maple B&S and that sounds very different -as is intended.

I have two Collings 12 fret dreads of very similar age, and they sound quite different, but I love them both.

I used to have two Collings DS2h both identical sitka/EIR, one built in '98. and one built in 2008. They sounded very different.

There are so many small variables to a box with a neck and strings but ..... a good guitar is ...a good guitar!

It makes less of a difference than people like to claim it does. Especially on internet forums :) That said, there are real tonal differences. It is often the most visible difference between a pair of guitars so I understand why people make such a big deal about it. Top and most importantly design and build have far more to do with the sound of the instrument.

There is a difference in back-and-sides tonewood tone but I may not always be able to tell which is which if I was blindfolded. Take, for example, Mahogany and Rosewood. If blindfolded, I'd try to listen for a bass register blooming and a mid-range smoothness in the tone that might indicate I'm hearing rosewood. Then again, I often hear a nice full bass on a mahogany guitar. Frankly, like others have indicated, my main criterion for guitar tone is how pleasing the guitar sounds regardless of its tonewood combination.

I've noticed a big difference between mahogany and rosewood. My ears tend to prefer hog for its warmth but I like both. Walnut is the wildcard. It has clarity and woody tone that's lacking in the others, but perhaps that is in the build as well.

:) Tonewoods make all the difference in the world. "Sounds good to me" just means you are not interested in producing but one basic projected sound for everything you play. I have a dozen different guitars ready at all times to produce all the different tones I'm after at any given time. It would be like eating the same exact foods every day because you like the way they taste.

At one time I ended up with two Larrivee "forum 3" guitars. They were LS-03 models. The 03 series is satin finished with limited bling. I ordered a all mahogany model and ended up buying a rosewood model from another guy. The rosewood had an Italian Spruce top.

This allowed an interesting comparison of the two guitars with the same build specifications except for the back &

My conclusion was that the mahogany version sounded much more "woody" while the rosewood copy had a much more metallic sound. A difference that was readily apparent when playing the guitars side-by-side. But it was subtle enough that I'm not sure it would be noticed if just playing one of the guitars by itself...unless you have better auditory memory than I do...