"Tonewood" of solid body guitars (ugh)

[Italuke]

I frequent a couple different instrument forums. Mainly a bass player for years, one is talkbass.com, which is a really wonderful forum in many ways.

But check this out: what do "we" all (acoustic-oriented folks, especially luthiers) think about using the term "tonewood" to describe a solid slab used for the body of a solid body instrument?

https://www.talkbass.com/threads/ton...-bass.1532676/

Let's have some fun with this one, shall we?

[Shuksan]

This is what I think of it.

[IMG][/IMG]

[The Bard Rocks]

I am always taken aback at first when I hear this. Then I reflect: I know nothing about electrics. Maybe there is something to it other than appearance. Something I don't know. (There are lots of things I don't know.)

[Wade Hampton]

The wood that solidbody electric guitars are made of definitely has an impact on the sound. You can play several electrics unplugged, note the differences between them, then plug them in and hear those differences again, only louder.


whm

[Italuke]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

The wood that solidbody electric guitars are made of definitely has an impact on the sound. You can play several electrics unplugged, note the differences between them, then plug them in and hear those differences again, only louder.


whm

Wade, I don't disagree. That it makes SOME difference. But what happens in these discussions is that it morphs into taking for granted that it has the SAME degree of impact as for example, spruce vs. cedar as an acoustic soundboard. IMO, the two comparisons are just not in the same ballpark.

And they call it "tonewood," which also bugs me. To me, a slab one or two inches thick is not a "tonewood" in the sense that, again, acoustic instruments are built with.

[brandall10]

Originally Posted by Italuke

But what happens in these discussions is that it morphs into taking for granted that it has the SAME degree of impact as for example, spruce vs. cedar as an acoustic soundboard. IMO, the two comparisons are just not in the same ballpark.

The difference can be rather shocking actually... here's an example of a shredder guitar w/ super high gain pickups, basswood/maple vs. torrefied ash:

https://youtu.be/U7v1UlfrMW0?t=294

There's a sizable attenuation in the highs that goes way beyond unit to unit variation and pot drift.

The difference between something more subtle, like alder vs. ash on a strat, is also pretty dang obvious to my ears.

[jp2558]

There’s a reason why a Les Paul Custom has a hog body with a maple top.

[GCWaters]

Originally Posted by Italuke

Wade, I don't disagree. That it makes SOME difference. But what happens in these discussions is that it morphs into taking for granted that it has the SAME degree of impact as for example, spruce vs. cedar as an acoustic soundboard. IMO, the two comparisons are just not in the same ballpark.



And they call it "tonewood," which also bugs me. To me, a slab one or two inches thick is not a "tonewood" in the sense that, again, acoustic instruments are built with.

I disagree…the difference between a swamp ash Strat and an alder one, for example, is very noticeable

[YeOldRocker]

Wood matters on electric guitars, on both the neck and body (the neck may be even more important). Different woods affect the vibration and sustain of the instrument and therefore the strings, which in turn affects the sound amplified by the pickups. The difference(s) can be heard acoustically, although it's clearly the interplay between the pickups and the wood that determine its tone.

Not sure why you'd think acoustic guitar is the only arbiter of tone woods, nor do I understand why the idea disturbs you so much.

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

The wood that solidbody electric guitars are made of definitely has an impact on the sound. You can play several electrics unplugged, note the differences between them, then plug them in and hear those differences again, only louder.


whm

But there's a big problem: a pickup works quite different from a piezo or an SBT. Piezos and SBT CAN. . . pick up from the wood; pickups don't.

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by YeOldRocker

Wood matters on electric guitars, on both the neck and body (the neck may be even more important). Different woods affect the vibration and sustain of the instrument and therefore the strings, which in turn affects the sound amplified by the pickups. The difference(s) can be heard acoustically, although it's clearly the interplay between the pickups and the wood that determine its tone.

Not sure why you'd think acoustic guitar is the only arbiter of tone woods, nor do I understand why the idea disturbs you so much.

But that's not "tonewood." The difference between, say, a Les Paul and a Strat don't have anything to do with wood and more from pickups, electronics, scale, etc. Electric guitars, particularly solidbody ones, work different from an acoustic.

[Wade Hampton]

I don’t want to get into “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” territory and I’m not claiming that the wood in electric guitars has anywhere near the impact that the wood in an acoustic has.

But the individual set of wood in a solidbody electric guitar definitely has an impact.


whm

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

I don’t want to get into “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” territory and I’m not claiming that the wood in electric guitars has anywhere near the impact that the wood in an acoustic has.

But the individual set of wood in a solidbody electric guitar definitely has an impact.


whm

My point is sustained when, for example, you A/B a Les Paul Standard and a Les Paul Special.

[justonwo]

I believe the wood has an impact, though not as significant an impact as with acoustics. The pickups and amp play a huge role as well.

[Brick is Red]

Originally Posted by Italuke

"[W]hat happens in these discussions is that it morphs into taking for granted that it has the SAME degree of impact as for example, spruce vs. cedar as an acoustic soundboard. IMO, the two comparisons are just not in the same ballpark.

And they call it "tonewood," which also bugs me. To me, a slab one or two inches thick is not a "tonewood" in the sense that, again, acoustic instruments are built with.

It's not clear to me that you've accurately described what truly happens in these "discussions". Specifically, I doubt that that there's earnest argumentation of there being a "SAME degree of impact . . . ." Show me and I'll gladly be proven wrong. It's simply not a credible position, even for the most infamous of these dolts.

What you've described is, in my view, a transparent laying of a foundation for a strawman argument. It's a cheap rhetorical device by which one (person A) ascribes an absurd argument to an ostensible opponent (person B), thereby allowing A to refute an exaggerated argument that B had not made.

The sadly predictable result, when people take the bait, is angry wack-jobs typing at each in rapidly heightened polemics.

Seriously, why should ANY of this "tonewood" debate bug you?

When Gibson procures mahogany (swietenia macrophylla) at a premium for use in musical instrument production, a portion will be used to make electric guitar bodies and necks in Nashville, while the remainder is used in Bozeman for acoustic guitar backs & sides (primarily) and necks. Is the idea here that wood going to Montana is rightfully called "tonewood" while the mahogany in Nashville is suddenly something other than "tonewood"? Call it what you want, I suppose. But, as I've described it, it is a distinction without a difference.