Electric Guitar and Tonewoods

[redir]

Originally Posted by Hot Vibrato

Well that, and the specific type of guitar is often mentioned in these kinds of discussions. "Strat", "tele", and "Les Paul" all have their own specific sound that we hear in our heads instantly when we hear these guitar names mentioned. When somebody says they need a tele sound for a particular song, nobody asks, "ash or alder?", or "maple or rosewood fingerboard?". When it comes to tone, these distinctions are irrelevant to anyone except obsessive guitarists with overactive imaginations.

Yes definitely and I think that has to do more with the pickup types and arrangement. The 2 humbucker Les Paul or 3 single coil Strat kind of thing, not so much the wood. A Strat is a Strat is a Strat - for the most part, due to that pickup arrangement, scale length, tone controls and so on.

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by Hot Vibrato

Well that, and the specific type of guitar is often mentioned in these kinds of discussions. "Strat", "tele", and "Les Paul" all have their own specific sound that we hear in our heads instantly when we hear these guitar names mentioned. When somebody says they need a tele sound for a particular song, nobody asks, "ash or alder?", or "maple or rosewood fingerboard?".

Except producers and sessions guitarists.

When it comes to tone, these distinctions are irrelevant to anyone except obsessive guitarists with overactive imaginations.

Except professionals who are attempting to craft a particular sound for a recording. And perhaps discerning listeners. My wife can hear the difference between guitars.

Bob

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Except producers and sessions guitarists.Except professionals who are attempting to craft a particular sound for a recording. And perhaps discerning listeners. My wife can hear the difference between guitars.

Bob

I can hear the difference between guitars too. They all sound different. But nobody I've met can reliably identify the sound of a rosewood fingerboard vs. maple, or an alder body vs. ash. Of course a session guitarist knows the differences in tone of their own guitars, and a producer may ask a session guitarist to audition a few different guitars to find the right sound, but I don't believe that any producer ever has rejected a guitar without hearing it, simply because of the fingerboard wood, or because it's ash and not alder.

Like I said, my impression is that many guitarists who have similar guitars made out of different woods assume the tonal differences are only because of the wood, while there are many other variables which cause them to sound different.

Does a mahogany strat sound different from a maple strat? Sure it does. Does an ash strat sound different from an alder one? Probably. Is there anyone who can listen to several guitars, and reliably identify the woods that they are made from? I don't believe anyone can unless it's their own guitars being compared. And I don't believe that anyone can reliably identify fingerboard woods just by listening.

[JeffreyAK]

Originally Posted by Hot Vibrato

When it comes to tone, these distinctions are irrelevant to anyone except obsessive guitarists with overactive imaginations.

Well then, I guess we have our definitive answer. Good to know what The Truth is.

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by JeffreyAK

Well then, I guess we have our definitive answer. Good to know what The Truth is.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I'm detecting a hint of sarcasm in your post.

This is a forum for expressing our opinions, right? It wouldn't make for much of a discussion if we all had the same opinion, would it?

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by Hot Vibrato

Is there anyone who can listen to several guitars, and reliably identify the woods that they are made from? I don't believe anyone can unless it's their own guitars being compared. And I don't believe that anyone can reliably identify fingerboard woods just by listening.

In my example that is a difference that makes no difference. The point isn't whether you can reliably identify the particular specie of wood in a guitar. What is important is whether you can reproduce a sound. When a producer asks for a really "poppy, bright Strat sound" I don't immediately look for a way to EQ whatever Strat is laying around but start from the wood combination that will most reliably satisfy that request, and that is typically ash or alder with maple neck. If I were asked for a twangy, spanky country Tele sound I'd immediately think "ash/maple." If I were asked for a rock Tele sound I would think "alder/mahogany." Why? In my experience those combinations most reliably supply the sound described.

When a producer plays me an example and asks for a sound, I scan my mental gear Rolodex and look for the item that will most closely deliver. So this isn't as much a question of academic specie identification but instead of analyzing the sound you are hearing and then figuring out how you can deliver it. At the pointy end of the session call, all the corksniffery in the world matters not one whit. The very pragmatic question, "What all do I have to transport to this session to satisfy the producer" is the question at hand. After doing this enough you can forensically identify what is needed and put your kit together.

Can you see the difference I'm pointing out?

Bob

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

In my example that is a difference that makes no difference. The point isn't whether you can reliably identify the particular specie of wood in a guitar. What is important is whether you can reproduce a sound. When a producer asks for a really "poppy, bright Strat sound" I don't immediately look for a way to EQ whatever Strat is laying around but start from the wood combination that will most reliably satisfy that request, and that is typically ash or alder with maple neck. If I were asked for a twangy, spanky country Tele sound I'd immediately think "ash/maple." If I were asked for a rock Tele sound I would think "alder/mahogany." Why? In my experience those combinations most reliably supply the sound described.

When a producer plays me an example and asks for a sound, I scan my mental gear Rolodex and look for the item that will most closely deliver. So this isn't as much a question of academic specie identification but instead of analyzing the sound you are hearing and then figuring out how you can deliver it. At the pointy end of the session call, all the corksniffery in the world matters not one whit. The very pragmatic question, "What all do I have to transport to this session to satisfy the producer" is the question at hand. After doing this enough you can forensically identify what is needed and put your kit together.

Can you see the difference I'm pointing out?

Bob

Sure. I get it. But I contend that a session guitarist could show up to a session with one telecaster, and one strat, and be able to dial in the tones that the producer wants.

For instance, a few years back when I tracked this song: https://soundcloud.com/slimdixie/fair-weather-friend, I wanted a tele sound for the solo and lead fills. I literally chose the tele that was "laying around". It wasn't my guitar - I had recently refretted it and set it up, so it just happened to be the one that was available, and it worked perfectly. I think I could've dialed in pretty much the same tone on just about any decent tele, regardless of whether it was alder or ash, or a rosewood or maple neck.

Do you see my point?

[JeffreyAK]

Originally Posted by Hot Vibrato

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I'm detecting a hint of sarcasm in your post.

This is a forum for expressing our opinions, right? It wouldn't make for much of a discussion if we all had the same opinion, would it?

Have you ever sat down in a music store and played a variety of otherwise-identical Strats, say, with different body wood, different fingerboard wood, either unplugged or through the same amp with the same (clean) settings? I think you will have your answer. Telling people they are obsessive and delusional is not conducive to discussing any topic on any forum.

[moon]

If that experiment were tried as a double-blind test, I think the results would surprise a lot of people.

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by JeffreyAK

Telling people they are obsessive and delusional is not conducive to discussing any topic on any forum.

Jeez dude, I never said "delusional", so don't put words in my mouth. And none of us would be on this forum if we weren't obsessive, so it wasn't meant as an insult. We're just discussing guitars here, so there's no need to get offended. I suggest that you read my other posts, and you'll see that I never claimed that all guitars sound the same. If you have anything else to add to the discussion, I'm willing to discuss it rationally. Thanks.

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by moon

If that experiment were tried as a double-blind test, I think the results would surprise a lot of people.

Originally Posted by JeffreyAK

Have you ever sat down in a music store and played a variety of otherwise-identical Strats, say, with different body wood, different fingerboard wood, either unplugged or through the same amp with the same (clean) settings?.

When I worked at a music store, we all took turns playing strats and teles while the others listened. Some of us were darn good players, but nobody could reliably identify the woods for any of the guitars. We were all just guessing, and we were all mostly wrong.

[alnico5]

Electric guitars work via electromagnetic induction, the vibration of a string in a magnetic field. This electric signal does not become acoustic until the speaker vibrates air molecules. Of course a Telecaster has acoustic properties, as does my Taylor, the bones in my ear, the walls of my den, and the ground, but the pickup (electromagnet) does not sense acoustic vibrations, only the interruption of its magnetic field.

I have never heard anyone state that their acoustic guitar string sends vibrations into the wood, the wood alters the string's vibration and sends the altered vibrations back into the string producing the characteristic tone of the guitar. Electric guitarists seem to be saying this; vibrations from the wood feed back into the string, it vibrates differently and the pickup "hears" the difference. I don't see any physics to back this up, but I know YMMV.

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by alnico5

Electric guitars work via electromagnetic induction, the vibration of a string in a magnetic field. This electric signal does not become acoustic until the speaker vibrates air molecules.

And here is the essential fallacy. The magnetic pickup is a transducer and the speaker is a transducer. Both take energy and change it to another form of energy. The speaker transforms electrical energy to acoustical energy. The pickup transforms magnetic velocity of the strings to electrical energy. But the strings, as a mechanical system, are operating separately from the transduction system. Their energy is conserved or radiated based upon the suspension system they exist within. Therefore they function exactly the same as acoustic strings, only without the diaphragmatic guitar body to amplify them. The fact that the energy is passed by magnetic induction to the electrical system doesn't primarily affect the mechanics of string vibration within the system.* The mechanical system is operating exactly the same, both mechanically and acoustically, as an acoustic guitar system, only much more quietly. Rigidity, reflectivity, and resonance of the string suspension system are at play in both systems separate from the magnetic transduction system and must be considered separately from the means of transduction.

Bob



* There are a couple of exceptions:
1. There can be acoustic feedback induced into that vibration system as a result of a loud amplifier/speaker vibrating the string suspension system. We'll ignore that to keep the discussion simple.
2. It is possible for the magnetic pickups to be raised to the point where their magnetic fields dampen vibration of the strings. We'll ignore this to keep the discussion simple.

[Wozer]

A plucked string has rather complex properties, so much so that rather complex math is required to 'explain' them.

I think most everyone will agree that a plucked open A at 440 is much more than a sine wave representing a simple frequency of 440Hz.

I will further argue that an analyzed pluck string will exhibit parameters that are beyond the order of harmonics associated with the primary frequency...I believe that is called timbre.

Yes, the pickup is sensing the vibrations of the strings, but I think it is fantastical to argue that said vibrations are not affected by the woods used. Too boot, if one pushes up the volume on the amp then the energy being created by the air being moved by the speakers will also begin to have an effect on the sound of the electric guitar.

[Scotso]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

And here is the essential fallacy. The magnetic pickup is a transducer and the speaker is a transducer. Both take energy and change it to another form of energy. The speaker transforms electrical energy to acoustical energy. The pickup transforms magnetic velocity of the strings to electrical energy. But the strings, as a mechanical system, are operating separately from the transduction system. Their energy is conserved or radiated based upon the suspension system they exist within. Therefore they function exactly the same as acoustic strings, only without the diaphragmatic guitar body to amplify them. The fact that the energy is passed by magnetic induction to the electrical system doesn't primarily affect the mechanics of string vibration within the system.* The mechanical system is operating exactly the same, both mechanically and acoustically, as an acoustic guitar system, only much more quietly. Rigidity, reflectivity, and resonance of the string suspension system are at play in both systems separate from the magnetic transduction system and must be considered separately from the means of transduction.

Bob



* There are a couple of exceptions:
1. There can be acoustic feedback induced into that vibration system as a result of a loud amplifier/speaker vibrating the string suspension system. We'll ignore that to keep the discussion simple.
2. It is possible for the magnetic pickups to be raised to the point where their magnetic fields dampen vibration of the strings. We'll ignore this to keep the discussion simple.

whoa....ok. So on an electric either the string vibrates over the pup or the pup vibrates under the string or both. That is the only way that mechanical energy is transformed to electrical. But then i have only have 6 yrs of undergrad and post grad physics with a focus on wave theory. I may not have had enough to understand you.