Interesting article on guitar wood

[JoeCharter]

Originally Posted by fazool

I offer a dissenting opinion:


I think the difference between an all mahogany and a spruce/rosewood guitar is huge and blatantly obvious. Is he talking only back and sides now or is he including soundboards as well?

I partly agree with you -- that's why I mentioned that the author went a bit far.

I think the spirit of his claim is that if you take a random recording or sit in front of a random guitar player, you won't know what woods the guitar is made of. In my opinion, that is mostly accurate.

Now, I agree that if we sit down in a quiet spot and A/B a standard Taylor 814 against a standard 514, we will hear a difference for sure.

However, going back to the author's claim, playing music typically does not involve a couple of guys sitting around in a quiet room trying to compare two guitars and dissect them to no end. In most musical contexts, either the 814 or the 514 will do just fine.

[Alan Carruth]

Another chance to post my usual take:

Every piece of wood sets limits and offers possibilities. It's up to the builder to realize the possibilities and come close to the limits.

Top wood matters far more than B&S wood.

Every species of wood varies through a wide range, and there's a lot of overlap. You can find examples of many woods that are supposed to be much different that will be nearly alike, and pieces from the same species that are wildly different.

Factories work to averages, and probably a little on the heavy side to avoid warranty issues. The successful examples of any particular model will display the average characteristics of those woods. The pieces that are far from average will end up making poor guitars.

Luthiers work more to the piece. They can be more consistent, and tend to built 'their' sound.

If you're buying a factory guitar, the wood will be a decent predictor of the sound of the good examples of any particular model. If you're looking for a hand made, find the luthier who makes the sound you like, tell them what emphasis you want, and let them pick the wood.

I read that article when it first came out. There's a lot of truth in: "Give 'em volume and they'll hear tone". Otherwise I suspect he knows as well as anybody that different woods tend to sound different, but that he was, in part, getting in a salvo at the 'magic wood' discussions.

[fazool]

Originally Posted by billgennaro

This article just seems to repeat what we hear on the AGF about 20 times per day. First, that "the luthier has more to do with the tone and quality of a guitar than the woods used in construction". Secondly, that "different tonewoods will color the sound in subtle ways".

I like it said this way...........short and sweet and to the point.

[theEdwinson]

Applause for everything Allan said above!
There is an extraordinary amount of hyperbole around woods used in guitar making. And certainly there are many grades and qualities of wood; some will make better guitars than others, as a natural effect of their inherent qualities.

But by far, the most important factor deciding a guitar's quality is the skill, judgement, and craft wisdom of the person (or persons) who make the guitar. There are SO MANY factors that go into the whole process, that it takes a great deal of INTELLIGENCE to merge and combine these factors into a successful result.

This is the single biggest reason why a person would pay a master luthier a five-figure amount for a custom instrument, rather than spending a couple thou on a very decent Taylor or Martin.
As Allan said, factory guitars are built to averages; and a high degree of consistency from one to the next helps assure this. But they simply don't have the time or the budget to thoroughly optimize every instrument.

Here in the AGF Custom Shop section, we see some vivid examples of that line of demarkation.
Yeah, quality of wood and other materials matters a great deal. But it won't matter one iota if the quality of the BUILD is less than excellent.

By the way, I've always admired John Calkin's curmudgeonly honesty. I don't always agree with him, but he calls it as he sees it, and his opinions were earned the hard way-- through years of experience.

[JoeCharter]

People often argue about tone woods because at the end of the day it remains a matter of perception.

Take any two guitars from any given builder -- and ask a bunch of people whether they think the guitars sound alike or not. The answers would be all over the map. People may hear differently and/or analyze the factors differently and/or express what they hear in different terms.

I had a very similar discussion with Keith the other day and we actually disagreed. I sent him a note saying we can still be friends and he just laughed it off.

Overall I think we do have a consensus that the builder is the most important factor in the sound equation.

[ZekeM]

"I like Taylor guitars as a yardstick to measure by - their automated manufacturing is notoriously consistent. Go into a shop and try two models of different body woods and decide for yourself."

Try two of the same body woods and you will hear a difference as well. The fact that they consistently build to the same specs assures that the guitars will sound different. They are building to dimensions on a set of blueprints. That doesn't account for the variation of stiffness and density found in EVERY price of wood. You can't have consistent results when your manufacturing doesn't account for these factors.

[Tony Done]

I think it is a great article, and I have a lot of empathy with his views on psychoacoustics and alternatice timbers. Though I'm more inclined to think in terms of wikitruth and urban legend. But this is from someone who thinks his plywood Maton is the best thing since sliced bread.

[printer2]

Oh this article (Decided I had an extra four minutes or so in my life after reading the rest of the posts). I never had a problem with the author's style, actually reminds me somewhat of my writing style in one of my more lucid moments.

I think this article was part of the reason I tried Pine for my back and sides. And for those that are curious, as the author said, yes it sounds like a guitar. Now given my limited experience making guitars my saying that using pine does impart its own tone on the guitar can be suspect. I find the back imparts quite a bit of resonance to the sound being that it is not much difference in stiffness or weight than the top. Mind you, if I braced it differently that may not be the case.

Either way I am inclined to take his word on the more common woods such as Oak, Cherry, Birch and Walnut being perfectly acceptable for guitar building. That and they will not cost me an arm and a leg will probably see me make a few more guitars in the future. Might save the couple of pieces of Mahogany I have for necks, maybe just do one all hog for myself. Need for some good cheap fretboard material though.

[random works]

Well, the various tonewoods at least make very different looking guitars!

I read this article a good while back and it was one factor in my sending a 40+ year old Stella off to a respected luthier to to have it X braced ( it was ladder braced). It is all solid birch with a mahogany neck. If you played it blindfolded you would most likely fall in love with the tone. I know, I know, it's birch and I have two spruce topped guitars and one cedar topped. So, the wood does affect the sound, but the luthier made the affect work for the best.

[random works]

Well, the various tonewoods at least make very different looking guitars!

I read this article a good while back and it was one factor in my sending a 40+ year old Stella off to a respected luthier to to have it X braced ( it was ladder braced). It is all solid birch with a mahogany neck. If you played it blindfolded you would most likely fall in love with the tone. I know, I know, it's birch and I have two spruce topped guitars and one cedar topped to compare it to. So, the wood does effect the sound, but the luthier made the wood work for the best.

[Howard Klepper]

http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/f...ghlight=Calkin

http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/f...ghlight=Calkin

http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/f...ghlight=Calkin

http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/f...ghlight=Calkin

http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/f...ghlight=Calkin

http://69.41.173.82/forums/showthread.php?t=113742

I left several out.

[Bruce Sexauer]

So . . . . history actually does repeat itself. The conversation in this thread is like discussing philosophy for me; nothing much may be accomplished, but it is enlightening and entertaining none the less. And then there are those to whom Calkin's work is actually news, they always exist, and their education is much of the point here.

[iim7V7IM7]

The last philosophy class that I took, I got caught cheating looking into the soul of the student who sat in front of me...

Originally Posted by Bruce Sexauer

So . . . . history actually does repeat itself. The conversation in this thread is like discussing philosophy for me; nothing much may be accomplished, but it is enlightening and entertaining none the less. And then there are those to whom Calkin's work is actually news, they always exist, and their education is much of the point here.

[Alan Carruth]

Then there was the college president who was complaining about the budget of the Science department. "Why can't you people be like the Math department; all they use is pencils and erasers! And the Philosophy departement doesn't even use the erasers!"

This discussion will go on until the sun turns into a red giant, and swallows up the earth.

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by iim7V7IM7

The last philosophy class that I took, I got caught cheating looking into the soul of the student who sat in front of me...

You not only cheated, you got a wrong answer.