Do woods matter as much with electric guitars?

[Pnewsom]

An explanation of induction is fine, but it's not the whole picture. The strings hear everything that happens to the guitar and they resonate in response to thumps, finger squeaks, as well as notes played.

The strings can be considered analogous to the diaphragm of a microphone, it flutters because of sound pressure and the magnetic coil converts it to current. What you make that diaphragm from and how you suspend it are important. Even the material of the body of a microphone has its effect on the sound.

Since the strings are attached to the wood body and neck, the density and every other imaginable thing about wood affects them...which is reflected in the sound coming from the amplifier.

You can't just isolate the magnetic coils in guitars any more than you can in a microphone when discussing what affects sound reinforcement.

But a better test is to simply go play $200 Tele, and a $4000 Custom Shop Tele. There will be a difference acoustically and it is my experience that the differences will be reflected when amplified. You get what you pay for.

[moon]

A more interesting comparison would be to remove the cheapest and worst models from the test. To say that the very best guitars are better than the very worst is not saying much.

Suppose instead we were to limit the test to any "reasonably well-made" instruments starting from the Classic Vibe and working upwards in price. I bet you'd find plenty $500 guitars that would sound equal to or even better than some $4,000 guitars if they were fitted with the same pickups etc.

[alnico5]

Originally Posted by Pnewsom

An explanation of induction is fine, but it's not the whole picture. The strings hear everything that happens to the guitar and they resonate in response to thumps, finger squeaks, as well as notes played.

The strings can be considered analogous to the diaphragm of a microphone, it flutters because of sound pressure and the magnetic coil converts it to current. What you make that diaphragm from and how you suspend it are important. Even the material of the body of a microphone has its effect on the sound.

Since the strings are attached to the wood body and neck, the density and every other imaginable thing about wood affects them...which is reflected in the sound coming from the amplifier.

You can't just isolate the magnetic coils in guitars any more than you can in a microphone when discussing what affects sound reinforcement.

But a better test is to simply go play $200 Tele, and a $4000 Custom Shop Tele. There will be a difference acoustically and it is my experience that the differences will be reflected when amplified. You get what you pay for.

But THE TEST is to hear them and pick out the $200 from the $4K blindfolded & on a consistent basis. Give me one of each and I will sure form an opinion before a note is played that the $4K guitar just HAS to be better.
Especially if I just dropped $4k on it.

(I can't tell much difference in mics either)

[Alter]

But in the end, if the 200$ guitar sounds better then the 4000$ one, would you say its the electronics that make it so, or is it because the woods on the particular guitar happen to play better?

[royd]

Originally Posted by Pnewsom

An explanation of induction is fine, but it's not the whole picture. The strings hear everything that happens to the guitar and they resonate in response to thumps, finger squeaks, as well as notes played.

The strings can be considered analogous to the diaphragm of a microphone, it flutters because of sound pressure and the magnetic coil converts it to current. What you make that diaphragm from and how you suspend it are important. Even the material of the body of a microphone has its effect on the sound.

Since the strings are attached to the wood body and neck, the density and every other imaginable thing about wood affects them...which is reflected in the sound coming from the amplifier.

You can't just isolate the magnetic coils in guitars any more than you can in a microphone when discussing what affects sound reinforcement.

But a better test is to simply go play $200 Tele, and a $4000 Custom Shop Tele. There will be a difference acoustically and it is my experience that the differences will be reflected when amplified. You get what you pay for.

yes...

I might go so far as to say an electric guitar is closer to a synth than an acoustic guitar

That strikes me as a bizarre statement.

so what is an acoustic instrument? It is one that creates mechanical energy. It vibrates when a string is struck, breath is blown into a mouthpiece, a membrane is hit. That vibration causes sound waves which we perceive as sound. It may be more efficient like a violin or less so like a solid body guitar, but it vibrates. An electric guitar vibrates... and it is the characteristics of that vibration that gives it its own sound. A pickup responds to those vibrations in its own characteristic ways but does not create them in any way. It merely translates the mechanical energy of a string vibrating in a magnetic field into electrical energy. Every means of amplifying or recording sound changes mechanical energy into electrical. In the case of a microphone, you need first to turn the sound waves back into mechanical energy as a membrane or diaphragm or something vibrates as an analog to the original instrument and changes that mechanical energy into electrical which can then be amplified or recorded.

An electronic instrument like a synth creates no mechanical energy. Nothing vibrates at the beginning of the process.

We know from experience that while a pickup does shape what we hear by the way it reacts to the particular vibrations of an instrument, it can only pick up what is already there. No amount of EQ will put a 40hz note in my guitar. No pickup will pick it up. It's not there. Take that exact same magnetic pickup and put it in another guitar and it will sound different. Period. If that was not the case, we'd all spend $500 on a set of amazing pups and put them on that $40 korean strat clone and be done. But it still would sound like crap. The hardware matters because it transfers the mechanical energy or not. The wood matters because it transfers the mechanical energy or not. The particular mix of transference and attenuation gives that instrument its character. If there is no mechanical energy, those $500 pups don't pick up anything. Anything not there in that mechanical energy - the particular mix of frequency response, envelope, etc. - isn't there down the line. When the note dies... the note has died. You can hold your finger on the string till next week, but the note is gone (unlike a synth). If the frequency isn't there (and that includes the overtone series), the frequency is not there. The pups can't add it. The amplifier can't add it (after all isn't an amplifier supposed to amplify what is sent to it? Either might be more or less sensitive to some of those characteristics, but they must be there in the first place.

Of course the amp colors things by the way it responds to what it receives as it favors some characteristics and ignores others. A pup "sees" what it sees and so colors the end result as well... but it cannot "see" what isn't there.

So back to the original question... does wood matter? Yes. Everything matters but it all begins with the mechanical energy of the instrument and that is colored in critical ways by the wood. Does that mean a more expensive guitar is "better?" Not necessarily. We know that from acoustic guitars. Expensive wood doesn't necessarily tell us the end result. But good wood does tell us we're more likely to get excellent results.

So my question... would you rather have a guitar that in your hands is lively, great sustain, responsive to your touch with mediocre pups or a guitar that as you play it unplugged has no sustain, no overtones, poor response but has expensive pups? I maintain, you'd get much better results with the first guitar. Replace the pups and you're even better. There is nothing to replace in the second guitar except the guitar.

[moon]

It depends just how bad the guitar is. Again, it doesn't mean much to compare expensive instruments with pieces of junk - we've fixed the results before we've even started. The ineteresting comparison is with instruments which aren't expensive but where the manufacturer has genuinely made an effort to do a decent job - like the Classic Vibe Tele.

I'd choose the "mediocre" guitar with excellent pickups over a great guitar with bad ones every time. No question. Even if the natural sound of the expensive guitar is genuinely a little better, bad pickups won't hear it but better pickups will capture all the goodness in the mid-range instrument.

My philosophy with electric guitar is you absolutely must have a good amp and good pickups. No compromises there - DIY or buying second-hand can make them a bit more affordable. After that, the best instrument you can find with whatever you've got left to spend.

[000-18]

I firmly have to believe wood matters. Otherwise, why would a Strat and an SG Standard, with very similar bridge pickups, sound so incredibly different?

I suppose scale length could affect some the tonal differences I'm hearing though. Then again, before I sold my Les Paul, I only sold it because I thought my SG sounded better overall -- and both shared similar pickups.

Amps though can really change the tone of an electric, perhaps even for the worst. For example, Mesa/Boogie produces some high quality amps, but with their overabundant gain channels, many guitars lose their individual characteristics and end up sounding like one another.

[Garthman]

Originally Posted by moon

It depends just how bad the guitar is. Again, it doesn't mean much to compare expensive instruments with pieces of junk - we've fixed the results before we've even started. The interesting comparison is with instruments which aren't expensive but where the manufacturer has genuinely made an effort to do a decent job - like the Classic Vibe Tele.

I'd choose the "mediocre" guitar with excellent pickups over a great guitar with bad ones every time. No question. Even if the natural sound of the expensive guitar is genuinely a little better, bad pickups won't hear it but better pickups will capture all the goodness in the mid-range instrument.

My philosophy with electric guitar is you absolutely must have a good amp and good pickups. No compromises there - DIY or buying second-hand can make them a bit more affordable. After that, the best instrument you can find with whatever you've got left to spend.

A superb post, Moon. It's 100% correct and spells it out exactly as it is.

And the comment you made earlier ("I bet you'd find plenty $500 guitars that would sound equal to or even better than some $4,000 guitars if they were fitted with the same pickups etc".) is perfectly correct too.

[alnico5]

Originally Posted by royd

yes...



That strikes me as a bizarre statement.

so what is an acoustic instrument? It is one that creates mechanical energy. It vibrates when a string is struck, breath is blown into a mouthpiece, a membrane is hit. That vibration causes sound waves which we perceive as sound. It may be more efficient like a violin or less so like a solid body guitar, but it vibrates. An electric guitar vibrates... and it is the characteristics of that vibration that gives it its own sound. A pickup responds to those vibrations in its own characteristic ways but does not create them in any way. It merely translates the mechanical energy of a string vibrating in a magnetic field into electrical energy. Every means of amplifying or recording sound changes mechanical energy into electrical. In the case of a microphone, you need first to turn the sound waves back into mechanical energy as a membrane or diaphragm or something vibrates as an analog to the original instrument and changes that mechanical energy into electrical which can then be amplified or recorded.

An electronic instrument like a synth creates no mechanical energy. Nothing vibrates at the beginning of the process.

We know from experience that while a pickup does shape what we hear by the way it reacts to the particular vibrations of an instrument, it can only pick up what is already there. No amount of EQ will put a 40hz note in my guitar. No pickup will pick it up. It's not there. Take that exact same magnetic pickup and put it in another guitar and it will sound different. Period. If that was not the case, we'd all spend $500 on a set of amazing pups and put them on that $40 korean strat clone and be done. But it still would sound like crap. The hardware matters because it transfers the mechanical energy or not. The wood matters because it transfers the mechanical energy or not. The particular mix of transference and attenuation gives that instrument its character. If there is no mechanical energy, those $500 pups don't pick up anything. Anything not there in that mechanical energy - the particular mix of frequency response, envelope, etc. - isn't there down the line. When the note dies... the note has died. You can hold your finger on the string till next week, but the note is gone (unlike a synth). If the frequency isn't there (and that includes the overtone series), the frequency is not there. The pups can't add it. The amplifier can't add it (after all isn't an amplifier supposed to amplify what is sent to it? Either might be more or less sensitive to some of those characteristics, but they must be there in the first place.

Of course the amp colors things by the way it responds to what it receives as it favors some characteristics and ignores others. A pup "sees" what it sees and so colors the end result as well... but it cannot "see" what isn't there.

So back to the original question... does wood matter? Yes. Everything matters but it all begins with the mechanical energy of the instrument and that is colored in critical ways by the wood. Does that mean a more expensive guitar is "better?" Not necessarily. We know that from acoustic guitars. Expensive wood doesn't necessarily tell us the end result. But good wood does tell us we're more likely to get excellent results.

So my question... would you rather have a guitar that in your hands is lively, great sustain, responsive to your touch with mediocre pups or a guitar that as you play it unplugged has no sustain, no overtones, poor response but has expensive pups? I maintain, you'd get much better results with the first guitar. Replace the pups and you're even better. There is nothing to replace in the second guitar except the guitar.

It may sound bizarre from one point of view. I stated it from the perspective
that while an acoustic guitar induces sound by a plucked string vibrating air molecules, an electric guitar starts events by inducing a disturbance in a magnetic field via the PU.

I'm not convinced that wood is 5% of the total. Everything matters but some things don't matter very much.

[terrapin]

This discussion is getting a bit pedantic. Isn't the bottom line that yes wood is a component of what you hear, but a minimal one.

[nickinbruns]

This argument has been beaten to death on building forums all around the world.

no resolution has ever been reached.

I fall on the side of believing that the timber is mostly decorative, and the electronics are the decider. I have a mate in NZ who argues the other side. We have decided the best resolution is to have a beer instead......

[Humbuster]

Go play a Tele with a quarter sawn maple neck, tight neck fit and solid ash body.

I have and I am convinced no electric guitar sounds as good.

[6L6]

In the words of Bill Collings...

"Everything affects tone. EVERYTHING."

That's good enough for me.,

[moon]

Sure - but then the next question is how do each of the different factors affect tone and how do you get them all working together to get a great sound? I think it's important to try to figure that out.

[alnico5]

For my final post on this thread I'll just say:

All guitars resonate and have acoustic properties. Listen to unplugged electrics and they will sound different. However, pickups do not "hear" vibrating air molecules, only the magnetic field flux.

The wood may influence the string vibration to a very very small degree. A plucked string on an acoustic sends vibrations through the wood, which then vibrates, air inside and around the guitar vibrates, and we get the sound of that guitar. Does the vibrating wood create a feedback loop to the string that significantly influences the magnetic flux of an electric guitar? I personally don't think it does.

I've played my guitars on different days and had them sound really good or not so good. I put this down to my frame of mind, which has more import than the wood IMHO.

We all want the wood to matter and perception is everything. Great thread with lots of food for thought!