How much do B&S tone wood affect sound?

[gibbyguy]

I came across an interesting article, some of you may have already stumbled across. John Calkin, Formerly built 3000 bodies for Huss & Dalton and makes this statement:

Why do we even need alternative wood species for musical instruments? That's a perfectly valid question, and the answer is that we don't. Rosewood, mahogany and maple have served us well for centuries , we know what to expect of them, and our customers have already come to accept them as trustworthy and will pay for them. So why look further?

You can read the rest of the article here:
Heretic's Guide to Alternative Lutherie Woods, By John Calkin.

I'd love your opinions on this, since most guitar purchasers are concerned about the B&S woods of their guitars.

Thanks, Ed

[Haans]

considering rosewood and mahogany are in fact getting more difficult to get, that leaves maple.
that's like saying why look at wind and solar energy when we have oil.

[justonwo]

Well even if there weren't a compelling argument from a finite resource standpoint, one can simply make an argument based on variety. Just because rosewood and mahogany are the most common back and side materials doesn't mean you can't get something that sounds stellar with some other type of wood.

[gibbyguy]

I might add since John Calkin built so many bodies for H&D - I'm sure that Huss & Dalton would want a disclaimer from John's bold comments. However, I'm not in the position to question his statements no doubt based on repeatable experience.

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by gibbyguy

I came across an interesting article, some of you may have already stumbled across. John Calkin, Formerly built 3000 bodies for Huss & Dalton and makes this statement:

Why do we even need alternative wood species for musical instruments? That's a perfectly valid question, and the answer is that we don't. Rosewood, mahogany and maple have served us well for centuries , we know what to expect of them, and our customers have already come to accept them as trustworthy and will pay for them. So why look further?

You can read the rest of the article here:
Heretic's Guide to Alternative Lutherie Woods, By John Calkin.

I'd love your opinions on this, since most guitar purchasers are concerned about the B&S woods of their guitars.

Thanks, Ed

Many things in this article are wrong; some are even self-contradictory. The author is determined to demonstrate his bold hereticism. It gets discovered by someone on AGF regularly.

[gibbyguy]

Originally Posted by Howard Klepper

Many things in this article are wrong; some are even self-contradictory. The author is determined to demonstrate his bold hereticism. It gets discovered by someone on AGF regularly.

Thanks Howard. I should have done a search on it first. I was just captivated by the bold assertions and didn't know quite what to think of them. I would entertain some of his tests, such as the blind test to see if someone could tell the difference between mahogany, rosewood, or maple only based upon sound.

Have such tests been done with experienced ears by anyone on AGF?

[Rod True]

Considering there are several different types of Rosewood and Mahogany, each of which will offer a different sound, along with differences in density even among the same species (Indian Rosewood for example) the sound possibilities are endless.....let alone the look of the particular piece of wood....

Why look further? Because we can

Thank goodness someone convinced Henry Ford that there are other colors out there besides black

[rgregg48]

To answer the question..... B&S must account for something,, there is so much
of it here. oh - the &


rickr

Dear moderator, i am being nice.......... its just a silly quip

[arnelson]

Originally Posted by Haans

considering rosewood and mahogany are in fact getting more difficult to get, that leaves maple.
that's like saying why look at wind and solar energy when we have oil.

+1 on that. That's just a great analogy.

[Haans]

to answer the original topic question, the answer varies among builders, my own personal estimation is around 20-30%. some think around more like 10%.
to my way of thinking about it, the top sets the tone and the back modifies that tone. for instance, red spruce generally has the characteristic of being fundamental sounding (few overtones), while a spruce such as german or engelmann tends to be more complex. good red has a huge amount of headroom, while engelmann generally does not, and my experience with good german is that it is very strong, but maybe not as strong as red.
take a good red spruce top with the characteristics above, and a good mahogaby back will lend warmth to the tone. change that to good brittle brw and it will add a brilliance to the basic fundamenalness of the tone. change out the top and back to say german/brw and you will get a rich, complex brilliance.
this is a basic way that the builder shapes the tone to the customer's tonal desires. of course this is speaking in generalities, but the nice thing about exploring different back woods is that it opens up a wider range of tonal possibilities.

[TuckerRE]

B&S woods make a guitar more fun...with a world of possibilities out there. Steve Kinnaird build an awesome guitar out of 40,000 year old ancient Kauri...talk about unique and a conversation piece topped with a Maori warrior inlay by Larry Robinson ... But it was the B&Ss that started the concept!!

[Wade Hampton]

Originally Posted by Howard Klepper

Many things in this article are wrong; some are even self-contradictory. The author is determined to demonstrate his bold hereticism. It gets discovered by someone on AGF regularly.

Right. His whole "last honest man" routine - callin' 'em as he sees 'em while the rest of us go our self-deluded ways - gets tiresome very quickly.


whm

[slianto]

Originally Posted by Haans

to answer the original topic question, the answer varies among builders, my own personal estimation is around 20-30%. some think around more like 10%.
to my way of thinking about it, the top sets the tone and the back modifies that tone. for instance, red spruce generally has the characteristic of being fundamental sounding (few overtones), while a spruce such as german or engelmann tends to be more complex. good red has a huge amount of headroom, while engelmann generally does not, and my experience with good german is that it is very strong, but maybe not as strong as red.
take a good red spruce top with the characteristics above, and a good mahogaby back will lend warmth to the tone. change that to good brittle brw and it will add a brilliance to the basic fundamenalness of the tone. change out the top and back to say german/brw and you will get a rich, complex brilliance.
this is a basic way that the builder shapes the tone to the customer's tonal desires. of course this is speaking in generalities, but the nice thing about exploring different back woods is that it opens up a wider range of tonal possibilities.

interesting haans, i agree. and i believe we're talking about solid wood b/s.
but is this apply to laminated b/s?
IMHO a laminate b/s will give less contribute, maybe around 10% or less. and for example laminated mahogany maybe will give less warmth to the tone, compared the solid one. Is it true?

[Haans]

i have no experience with laminated back and sides, so i can't comment on that. i do believe that the ribs have little to do with the total tonal qualities of an instrument although i realize some using lam sides believe the rigidity contributes to transmit vibs from top to back. personally, i tend to believe that since they often use a different wood on the inside of the ribs, what they are made of is pretty insignificant.
as far as lam backs, i might suggest the glue plays a role in changing the tonal qualities of the back as compared to solid wood.

[slianto]

i do agree, maybe laminated had different in tone because of those factors (2 different woods and 'glue'.)

i wonder what wood used on the laminated?

apart from personal taste in tone.
why some luthier/company making a laminated guitar for lower price guitar?(the price is significant compared to the solid)

i mean..the mahogany (solid) is not cost that much,compared to the total selling price of a finished guitar.
since it's add more work such as cut the mahogany/rosewood in half or so, then cut another wood and then glue them together.

sorry for my question (and my bad english), i just curious about it, and this is my viewpoint from non-luthier person like me.
i love watching the building progress of many luthier posted here and want to know more about it