how Gibson picks tone wood.

[Garthman]

However, it is rumoured that some people still believe that the Earth is flat. I must emphasize that this is not trolling. It is merely an observation that some people prefer to believe things which have no foundation in scientific fact or for which there is no scientific evidence.

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Oh I can hear the difference in tone between different bits of wood when you knock them - no problem. I just think magnetic pick-ups don't have that ability.

Induction pickups don't have that ability but the wood and construction does, to some degree, influence the way the strings vibrate. That influence may not be as great as some assert but it is enough to be audible in some cases. By audible I mean that the pickups do reproduce the difference in the way the strings vibrate as a function of wood species and guitar construction.

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Oh I can hear the difference in tone between different bits of wood when you knock them - no problem. I just think magnetic pick-ups don't have that ability.

I'm sure you have spent lots of money on buying "good" wood and you very much want the hype to be true. Ah well - I'm sure there are lots of people who believe in "intelligent design" too.

Actually the hype is the expensive pickups. Getting good wood is just a matter of testing lots of guitars in shops. Effort, trial and error. Just keep trying them out until you get a good one. It's a hype-free process, just graft and hard work. No-one makes any money out of it. Like I say, three Korean Strats were on the wall, all the same price, one just happened to be out of this world tonewise. The wood on cheap guitars varies wildly (not so much of a tight selection process, cheaply sourced etc etc), so you will get a wide range of sounds from budget guitars. But every now and then, you get a corker for a couple of hundred pounds.

[Chalz]

Originally Posted by Garthman

This is nonsense and is precisely why people get the wrong idea about wood making a difference.

An electric guitar is not a quiet acoustic guitar. An electric guitar works because a vibrating (ferrous metal) string causes a flux in the magnetic field of the pickup which is converted into a small electric current by the pickup coils. That current is then amplified and the sound transmitted via the amp loudspeaker.

A magnetic pick up does not and cannot amplify sounds generated by the wood of the guitar. When you play an electric guitar unamplified the vibrating strings (and to a much lesser extent the body of the guitar) causes air molecules to vibrate which carry the sound to your ear. A pick up does not do that. When you "hear" an amplified electric guitar you are actually hearing the amp loudspeaker.

Not to be sardonic, but if the above is true, then if you put Gibson PAF pickups in a Gittler guitar and played it through a JCM800, then you could get BB King's signature guitar tone. Unfortunately that is not the case, as if it were, there would be no reason whatsoever to continue making electric guitars out of wood.

I understand by your post that what I just said might make very little sense to you, but it's a pretty simple concept. If a string alone were strung taught between two given points, floating in the air with no obstructions, if it were plucked there would be no resonant vibrations, there would be no solid substance to increase the sustain, and there would be no mass to color the tone of the note that was plucked. Attach those same two given points to a block of wood, however, and the vibrations will transfer along the wood as well as the guitar.

It's all based on physics, particularly sympathetic resonance. It's easy to become confused, as the fact that the electronic signal is based on a string vibrating in a magnetic field might give someone the tendency to believe that is where all the sound is coming from.

What people tend to forget is that even though the sound from the amp is coming directly from the string vibrating in the field, the way the string vibrates is very much dependent upon the wood. Thus, when you change the wood, you change the way the string vibrates, thus changing the sound.

Are the sounds VASTLY different? Sometimes, sometimes not. Some people hear the differences better than others. What will say is that it is not possible to get an all maple Telecaster (for example) to sound exactly like a mahogany Telecaster, even with the same exact electronics.

Gibson knows a lot about different woods. While they might exaggerate a little bit on how vast the differences are, they are correct that the wood can have a pretty drastic effect on the sound of even electric guitars. (Despite not being as drastic as perhaps an acoustic)

TL;DR - When it comes to electric guitars, there are a LOT of variable that will dictate the tone. From the fingers and pick, to the amplifier, speakers, and shape of the room, EVERYTHING has the possibility to shape the tone. Wood, electronics, pickups, wiring, construction...all variables. The wood, however, is the first part of that chain after your fingers/pick, and the wood used will most certainly be a big factor in shaping the tone.



EDIT: On a side note, I find it to be extremely surprising that someone who claims to have played and repaired guitars for nearly 50 years is having trouble with the concept. I don't want to come off as insulting, but I'm truly sitting in a slight bit of amazement at this point.

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by Chalz

Not to be sardonic, but if the above is true, then if you put Gibson PAF pickups in a Gittler guitar and played it through a JCM800, then you could get BB King's signature guitar tone. Unfortunately that is not the case, as if it were, there would be no reason whatsoever to continue making electric guitars out of wood.

I understand by your post that what I just said might make very little sense to you, but it's a pretty simple concept. If a string alone were strung taught between two given points, floating in the air with no obstructions, if it were plucked there would be no resonant vibrations, there would be no solid substance to increase the sustain, and there would be no mass to color the tone of the note that was plucked. Attach those same two given points to a block of wood, however, and the vibrations will transfer along the wood as well as the guitar.

It's all based on physics, particularly sympathetic resonance. It's easy to become confused, as the fact that the electronic signal is based on a string vibrating in a magnetic field might give someone the tendency to believe that is where all the sound is coming from.

What people tend to forget is that even though the sound from the amp is coming directly from the string vibrating in the field, the way the string vibrates is very much dependent upon the wood. Thus, when you change the wood, you change the way the string vibrates, thus changing the sound.

Are the sounds VASTLY different? Sometimes, sometimes not. Some people hear the differences better than others. What will say is that it is not possible to get an all maple Telecaster (for example) to sound exactly like a mahogany Telecaster, even with the same exact electronics.

Gibson knows a lot about different woods. While they might exaggerate a little bit on how vast the differences are, they are correct that the wood can have a pretty drastic effect on the sound of even electric guitars. (Despite not being as drastic as perhaps an acoustic)

TL;DR - When it comes to electric guitars, there are a LOT of variable that will dictate the tone. From the fingers and pick, to the amplifier, speakers, and shape of the room, EVERYTHING has the possibility to shape the tone. Wood, electronics, pickups, wiring, construction...all variables. The wood, however, is the first part of that chain after your fingers/pick, and the wood used will most certainly be a big factor in shaping the tone.



EDIT: On a side note, I find it to be extremely surprising that someone who claims to have played and repaired guitars for nearly 50 years is having trouble with the concept. I don't want to come off as insulting, but I'm truly sitting in a slight bit of amazement at this point.

I agree 100%.

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Oh I can hear the difference in tone between different bits of wood when you knock them - no problem. I just think magnetic pick-ups don't have that ability.

That's because you don't have knowledge of - or refuse to accept - the laws of physics as applied to guitar construction whereby if you stretch a string between two points that are anchored or resting on a wooden frame/carrier, that the resonance and complex harmonics and overtones of the wooden frame will be imbued upon the string's vibration pattern; the string does not just simply resonate at a given frequency, it has HARMONICS and OVERTONES imbued upon it from the wood. This complex wave is THEN picked up by the pickup. The pickups see/collect the data overtones and all from the string and pass the signal to the amp, adding their own colour in the process. Simple as that. But, there really is no argument here, we're talking about known, proven physics!

If you've been a repairman for 50 years, frankly you should know that.

[Garthman]

Originally Posted by steveyam

That's because you don't have knowledge of - or refuse to accept - the laws of physics as applied to guitar construction whereby if you stretch a string between two points that are anchored or resting on a wooden frame/carrier, that the resonance and complex harmonics and overtones of the wooden frame will be imbued upon the string's vibration pattern; the string does not just simply resonate at a given frequency, it has HARMONICS and OVERTONES imbued upon it from the wood. This complex wave is THEN picked up by the pickup. The pickups see/collect the data overtones and all from the string and pass the signal to the amp, adding their own colour in the process. Simple as that. But, there really is no argument here, we're talking about known, proven physics!

If you've been a repairman for 50 years, frankly you should know that.

Well. I've heard this arguement many times but, alas, the proponents never quantify the effect. I can quite readily accept that some string vibration is passed to the body of the guitar but the mass of the body is so great in comparison to the (freely) vibrating string that the amplitude of the sympathetic vibration in the body is insignificant. Moreover the string itself is producing harmonics that will be far, far greater in amplitude than any possible body-generated ones. Add to this the close proximity of the pick-up to the string (and the fact that any vibrations within the guitar body cannot be detected by the pick-up directly) and it can be safely said that an effect of this nature is so small that it can be ignored for all practical purposes.

Now if you have any data that proves me wrong I would be happy to consider it. Until then I shall just tweak my tone control a fraction.

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Well. I've heard this arguement many times but, alas, the proponents never quantify the effect. I can quite readily accept that some string vibration is passed to the body of the guitar but the mass of the body is so great in comparison to the (freely) vibrating string that the amplitude of the sympathetic vibration in the body is insignificant. Moreover the string itself is producing harmonics that will be far, far greater in amplitude than any possible body-generated ones. Add to this the close proximity of the pick-up to the string (and the fact that any vibrations within the guitar body cannot be detected by the pick-up directly) and it can be safely said that an effect of this nature is so small that it can be ignored for all practical purposes.

Now if you have any data that proves me wrong I would be happy to consider it. Until then I shall just tweak my tone control a fraction.

We're moving you in the right direction Garth!

[Garthman]

Originally Posted by steveyam

We're moving you in the right direction Garth!

LOL. My position is firmly rooted in common sense.

Proof?

[Pnewsom]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Well. I've heard this arguement many times but, alas, the proponents never quantify the effect. I can quite readily accept that some string vibration is passed to the body of the guitar but the mass of the body is so great in comparison to the (freely) vibrating string that the amplitude of the sympathetic vibration in the body is insignificant. Moreover the string itself is producing harmonics that will be far, far greater in amplitude than any possible body-generated ones. Add to this the close proximity of the pick-up to the string (and the fact that any vibrations within the guitar body cannot be detected by the pick-up directly) and it can be safely said that an effect of this nature is so small that it can be ignored for all practical purposes.

Now if you have any data that proves me wrong I would be happy to consider it. Until then I shall just tweak my tone control a fraction.

You may be confusing tone with dynamics. A tone control attenuates the frequency response of the pickup, dynamics deal with the generation and decay of a note. Once the string stops vibrating its all over. Wood has everything to do with this.

Tap a pickup with a non-ferous object, such as a guitar pic. You will hear the taping clearly through an amp. This proves that magnetic coil pickups are affected by more than just the strings alone. Some older pickups become so microphonic that they have to be re-dipped in hot wax(potting) to stop the squealing that can occur under high gain. I have heard such pickups actually pass the human voice through the amp when spoken into at a very close distance.

Finally, go compare a Gibson 335 to a Les Paul. They both have the same pickups, same scale length, and similar hardware. According to your theory they should sound the same....but they don't. Not even close.

If that's not close enough, compare a Les Paul Studio model to a Les Paul Standard. The Standard has a maple cap on it's mahogany body, the studio does not. Everything else is the same. You will hear a difference acoustically and amplified. It can only be the wood coming into play.

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Well. I've heard this arguement many times but, alas, the proponents never quantify the effect. I can quite readily accept that some string vibration is passed to the body of the guitar but the mass of the body is so great in comparison to the (freely) vibrating string that the amplitude of the sympathetic vibration in the body is insignificant. Moreover the string itself is producing harmonics that will be far, far greater in amplitude than any possible body-generated ones.

You haven't quantified the sympathetic body vibration yet you declare it insignificant.

You either are not considering that the body vibration affects how the string vibrates or are denying that the body vibration affects the string. Surely you'll concede that the body's resonant frequencies, if excited, would not not necessarily be insignificant and would affect string vibration in return.

Taylor's solid body guitars with replaceable pickups would make it easy to illustrate the extent to which the body's construction and wood species affects amplified tone by eliminating the variable of differences between individual pickups. One has but to try a Taylor Classic then remove its pickup system, place it in a Taylor Standard body and note any tonal difference in the output of the pickups.

[David Eastwood]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Now if you have any data that proves me wrong I would be happy to consider it.

One could just as easily turn this around, and ask *you* to provide the proof that those of us who take a contrary view are wrong.

Until then I shall just tweak my tone control a fraction.

I'm beginning to harbour a suspicion that you might be tweaking our tone controls

[Chalz]

Originally Posted by eatswodo

One could just as easily turn this around, and ask *you* to provide the proof that those of us who take a contrary view are wrong.

What are you talking about? This is America and it's 2011. Don't you know that isn't how debate works anymore? The rules changed. Now what you do is dispute a fact with opinion, and every time someone provides additional facts you simply say it's invalid, or ignore it completely.

The days of those who wish to prove something contrary to all empirical evidence actually doing the work are long over. It is now the responsibility of the person defending the facts to prove the facts wrong for the person questioning them.

[David Eastwood]

Originally Posted by Chalz

What are you talking about? This is America and it's 2011. Don't you know that isn't how debate works anymore? The rules changed. Now what you do is dispute a fact with opinion, and every time someone provides additional facts you simply say it's invalid, or ignore it completely.

The days of those who wish to prove something contrary to all empirical evidence actually doing the work are long over. It is now the responsibility of the person defending the facts to prove the facts wrong for the person questioning them.

Silly me

[skyver]

Originally Posted by Garthman

Now if you have any data that proves me wrong I would be happy to ignore it.

There. Fixed that for you.