Same Old Q: Maple vs Rosewood

Yeah, I know – it’s probably a weekly question – at least it is over on the strat site - the eternal question of “does maple sound different than rosewood?”

Some folks say they hear a difference – others say no, it’s more a looky/feely thing.

Problem with the strat is that there are a few more components involved – therefore more factors that can alter the final outcome.
For instance, maple generally sound more defined to my ears, but one of the warmest strats I own is a maple/alder model. On the flip side - one of the brighter sounding strats in my collection is a rosewood/Northern Ash model - there is less note-to-note definition within chords, but it has more cut and sizzle (from the Ash body I'm sure.)

Since I’m new to teles I was wondering if, since it’s a simpler construction, if you can hear the difference between the two fretboard materials any more or less - or does it basically boil down to what feels and looks better to you?

Yeah, I know – it’s probably a weekly question – at least it is over on the strat site - the eternal question of “does maple sound different than rosewood?”?

It really is... (http://www.tdpri.com/forum/search.php?searchid=5777551)

... and the subject "which looks better on which guitar" is frequently popping up too.

Snake oil. Cork-sniffery. Silly over-precious piffle. There are so many other factors that affect your tone more than fretboard material--pickups, strings, amp settings, attack, room acoustics, what you had for breakfast, which end of your amp your cat is sleeping on. Any effect a rosewood fretboard might have is going to be so tiny as not to matter.

I have a slight preference for rosewood myself because I like feeling wood under my fingers. Also, it looks nice. What it "sounds" like, I couldn't tell you.

It really is... (http://www.tdpri.com/forum/search.php?searchid=5777551)

... and the subject "which looks better on which guitar" is frequently popping up too.

Yeah, I only went back twelve pages in my search - apparently not far enough.

There are so many other factors that affect your tone more than fretboard material--pickups, strings, amp settings, attack, room acoustics, what you had for breakfast, which end of your amp your cat is sleeping on. Any effect a rosewood fretboard might have is going to be so tiny as not to matter.

That's how I generally feel about the difference on strats - maybe there's a 5% or less difference in sound, which means you've got 95%+ of every other factor overpowering it.

Again, I was just wondering if it was the same with Tele's as with strats...

Since I’m new to teles I was wondering if, since it’s a simpler construction, if you can hear the difference between the two fretboard materials any more or less - or does it basically boil down to what feels and looks better to you?


So what if I can hear a difference and you can't ??

Who would be right ??

So what if I can hear a difference and you can't ??

Who would be right ??

I fully recognize that some folks have sharper hearing than others and can pick up on subtle differences - kind of like some folks have better eyesight than others.
It's not a question of "right" or "wrong" - I just wondered (for those of us who CAN hear these things) if the difference in sound was any more (or less) noticable on a tele than a strat...

If you think the tonal effects of 1/4" of fretboard material are important you don't know much about guitars.

My problem with questions like this is that you can't just change a fingerboard and have everything else stay exactly the same. So when you swap a neck that is probably about 10% fingerboard why expect that if a difference is heard, it's from the fingerboard change? Wood is inconsistent by nature - 2 different pieces of maple may sound very different from one another.

I know that most of us have opinions on how certain things are 'supposed' to sound, but these generalities have little to do with any specific instrument. It's still all fun, but I'm increasingly of the opinion that 'tone just happens'. If you're trying to steer it in a certain direction by messing with fingerboard wood species or body finish or bridge and saddle material it may be a losing battle unless you're satisfied with very subtle changes.

So back to the original question - I don't think a Tele is anymore revealing of its fingerboard material than a Strat might be. And I do choose fingerboard material for looks/feel rather than what I expect it to do tone-wise. When I'm trying to nudge tone a certain way, I now direct my attention to the pickups, pot/cap values and strings. I get more predictable results with those kinds of changes.

But then again, this is just my opinion - if someone believes that they can hear these things I'd be the last to tell them that they can't.

The fretboard is all about feel and looks. The maple feels harder the rosewood feels softer. One is dark, one is light colored.

Maybe the attack is slightly faster on the maple? Idk.

If you think the tonal effects of 1/4" of fretboard material are important you don't know much about guitars.

Smaller things than that can make bigger changes.

When I changed one of my maple neck strats to a nearly identical rosewood neck I could hear the difference.
Was it a huge change - a deal breaker kind of change? No - but a change none the less. Not better or worse - just different - mainly in the higher frequencies and the note attack.

BUT - let me make this clear - from my 20+ years experience with strats I find (like alot of you) the difference in feel to be more of a dramatic, deciding factor - and that when it comes to difference in timbre you're talking such a small percentage of the overall sound that most folks will find imperceptible.

I'm assuming the same is true of a tele and just looking for confirmation.

No love for Ebony?

No love for Ebony?

I have a Gretsch Country Gent and also a vintage LP Custom and also think those ebony fretboards are fantastic.

For some reason I play both of them better than my tele - I think because of the difference in scale and fretboard material.

There are so many other factors involved, so for me it comes down to the question of look and feel.

I went with a pau ferro board on my latest Tele, just because it's gorgeous and feels great.

The fretboard is all about feel and looks. The maple feels harder the rosewood feels softer. One is dark, one is light colored.

Maybe the attack is slightly faster on the maple? Idk.

And yet rosewood scores higher than maple on the Janka wood hardness scale (about 1780 for rosewood, to about 1450 for hard maple).

I think a lot of the perceived hardness of a maple fretboard comes from the fact that it has been finished. Rickenbacker lacquers their rosewood boards - they feel just like maple.

One problem with maple is that you can't see the treble strings against it if your eyes are bad. They show up against rosewood or (better) ebony. If you never need to look at your left hand, it's not a problem.

When I changed one of my maple neck strats to a nearly identical rosewood neck I could hear the difference.



Probably the new strings.

And yet rosewood scores higher than maple on the Janka wood hardness scale (about 1780 for rosewood, to about 1450 for hard maple).

I think a lot of the perceived hardness of a maple fretboard comes from the fact that it has been finished. Rickenbacker lacquers their rosewood boards - they feel just like maple.

Yes I actually read that somewhere recently that rosewood is harder than maple. I guess it is the finish over it that makes it feel harder. Rosewood is more porous so maybe that adds to the softer feel?

No love for Ebony?

Yeah. Right here.
I just put together a Telehawk with an ebony fingerboard. And it's already become my favorite guitar. It's a 25 1/2" scale "C" shaped neck with a 10" radius.And it's not finished with poly or nitro. Just stained & finished with oil.
So I can't swear to the ebony being what makes it play as nicely as it does.

I also agree with whoever commented on maple feeling harder because of the finish.
I have several of each fingerboard & it usually just depends what mood I'm in as to which one I prefer at any given time.

Probably the new strings.

I always use the old strings when I install new hardware so that the "new strings thing" doesn't skew my observation - and the rosewood actually made for a slightly softer, less defined attack - new strings would have made it sound brighter.
BUT - it was NOT a HUGE difference - listening closely through a dry amp, and comparing it to the original sound that I was very familiar with from playing a maple neck on that guitar for over 12 years - I detected only slight changes in timbre.
But once the amp is cranked and you add in effects to the mix, etc - then add in a full band around you - that level of subltety was erased and the only difference I noticed was the feel...

I always use the old strings when I install new hardware so that the "new strings thing" doesn't skew my observation - and the rosewood actually made for a slightly softer, less defined attack - new strings would have made it sound brighter.
BUT - it was NOT a HUGE difference - listening closely through a dry amp, and comparing it to the original sound that I was very familiar with from playing a maple neck on that guitar for over 12 years - I detected only slight changes in timbre.
But once the amp is cranked and you add in effects to the mix, etc - then add in a full band around you - that level of subltety was erased and the only difference I noticed was the feel...

Probably a difference in trussrod tension.

See where I'm going here? :mrgreen:

Hey there... alright they make different guitars for different people and trying to convince someone different than what they beleive is damn near impossible so what i am saying is merely a statement of what I beleive to be absolute fact.. (dislclaimer) :) Wood absolutely makes a difference to the tone of a guitar and an electric guitar at that, there IS a different between Indian rosewood and Brazilian rosewood and cocobola, ebony, maple..alder ash, mohogany..each is a link in a chain and each will affect your tone whether you can hear it or not..as an idividual. The problem is that people have so much crap between there guitar and amp and built in effects and pick ups that colour tone that over the years I could agree that the wood can't be heard as well.. I beleive when the electric guitar was first being designed they were shaping the characteristics of the tone with the wood and were trying to amplify the natural resonace of the the wood.. thats why Leo tried different things like pine and moved on to ash and alder..Also with the les paul they used Honduras mohogany with a 1/2" maple cap just for looks right:roll: they used that thick maple to brighten the tone otherwise they would have used a super thin veneer produce it cheaper..like they do with the present day epiphone guitars..Les paul used honduras with a maple cap and a brazilian board in his '59 les pauls just because..no tonal qualities there..they would have produced it out of chambered plywood (for weight) and a maple veneer cap for looks or something like that if it didn't make a difference in tone.. Also I heard recently an electric guitar could be made of plastic and it wouldn't make a difference because it was electric.. come on folks does anyone actually believe this..I think at the end of the day you can play or you can't and what you choose to use as a guitar is awesome enjoy it.. but please don't say that wood makes no difference because the sum of wooden parts makes a difference..This is not cork sniffery:roll: or snake oil:roll: I think sometimes people take these opinions to justify what they have..and like I have already said enjoy what you have..

See where I'm going here? :mrgreen:

That it's pointless to try and convince a colorblind man of the difference between red and green? :wink:

I agree that there is very little difference between fb woods - but do not agree that there is NO difference.

^ Bingo

As for the tone part of it, I couldn't say one way or the other since I have never had 2 identical guitars (except for the fingerboard material) to compare.

The look and feel are certainly going to be different, but that's just a matter of personal preference.

One thing I can tell you though, in my experience rosewood boards wear out faster than maple. Because of the finish on the maple? I don't know, I just know the rosewood does wear faster so just for that reason I prefer maple.

.. I beleive when the electric guitar was first being designed they were shaping the characteristics of the tone with the wood and were trying to amplify the natural resonace of the the wood.. thats why Leo tried different things like pine and moved on to ash and alder..

While I agree that absolutely everything makes a difference, I would argue about the extent. I guess we can all differentiate between a masonite bodied Danelectro and an ash bodied Tele on all those old recordings, right?

And it is well documented that Leo wasn't interested in tone when he switched from pine to ash. He did it simply because his customers complained how soft and easily damaged the pine was. Leo chose his woods based on availability and price. Tone never came into it.

Then why would he have used brazilian rosewood..and swamp ash also he switched the strat to alder stictly for price..not tone..what would be the point, but he let the tele stay as ash.. why would he and les paul go through the trouble of using exotic woods to build these out of..So why wouldn"t all electric guitars be made out of the same cheap material if it made no difference or very little..I have a hard time believing Leo Fender or Les Paul had no interest in how there instrument sounded..I am not going to argue the point much longer because it is an unwinnable arguement...Like I said in my first post this is what I believe..just so happens I am right:grin::lol:


Opinions are opinions everyone is entitled to theres..

If the whole neck were rosewood there would be an real difference in the sound. Even in an rosewood fingerboard neck the most of the neck is maple.

Then why would he have used brazilian rosewood..and swamp ash also he switched the strat to alder stictly for price..not tone..what would be the point, but he let the tele stay as ash.. why would he and les paul go through the trouble of using exotic woods to build these out of..So why wouldn"t all electric guitars be made out of the same cheap material if it made no difference or very little..I have a hard time believing Leo Fender or Les Paul had no interest in how there instrument sounded..I am not going to argue the point much longer because it is an unwinnable arguement...Like I said in my first post this is what I believe..just so happens I am right:grin::lol:


Opinions are opinions everyone is entitled to theres..

In the 50's the woods you speak of - like Brazillian rosewood - weren't really exotic. They were readily available and used by most most guitar makers. Leo used alder simply because it was cheaper than ash, and if the guitar was to be painted a solid color, or even a burst, few people would care. Alder is much easier (and therefore cheaper) to finish as it's a closed pore wood and doesn't require the extra steps of grain filling like open-pored ash. Leo kept ash for the Tele as it was a more traditional guitar, with a blond finish as standard. Blond doesn't look so good on alder as it doesn't have a pronounced grain.

And Les Paul didn't build many guitars - I think you mean Gibson. In their case they wanted to stick with traditional tonewoods as their heritage went back a long time, well before amplified instruments...unlike those upstarts from Fender who painted their guitars with the same gaudy colors as GM and Ford cars :shock:

Oh, and just to add...the very first production solid-bodied electric guitar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frying_pan_%28guitar%29) was made in 1931 by the company that became Rickenbacker. The body and neck were made from cast aluminium.

That was my point really, prior to electrifying these instruments these woods were being used to create tone acoustically wouldn't it stand to reason that the pick-up was really a microphone amplifying the natural sound of the acoustic intrument not to colour the tone..If that conclusion was made and the pick ups were supposed to neutral wouldn't it be safe to assume that the same was trying to be acheived by amplifying a solid body..I don't think they were trying to make the wood less important..Maybe I am hearing fiction and they were using wood just as a vessel for electronics but I truly don't believe that..I simply don't beleive that the tone thats created by these different woods and how pleasing they are when everything is right is an accident by leo and the boys..Anyways one again just as i won't change your mind you won't change mine..Long live nice ultra light alder and ash bodies and brazilian rosewood..mmmm Tone :) Thanks for the nice conversation..
Existing brazilian boards anyways...save the rainforest everyone..the exotic woods aren't worth that crap..and on that point I am not kidding..

If the whole neck were rosewood there would be an real difference in the sound.

But in the real world there's no real difference even then. My brothers rosewood tele (that used to be mine so I know it inside out) sounds just like any regular tele.

That was my point really, prior to electrifying these instruments these woods were being used to create tone acoustically wouldn't it stand to reason that the pick-up was really a microphone amplifying the natural sound of the acoustic intrument not to colour the tone....

Thanks for the nice conversation.....

But pickups are not microphones. They respond to the magnetic properties of the vibrating strings. Now, you may argue that the woods influence those vibrations, but because the interaction with the pickups is magnetic, the wood's influence is slight. Have you ever listened to a recording and said to yourself, "sounds like an ash bodied guitar with a rosewood board to me" with any confidence?

And thank you too. I enjoyed the conversation :cool:

My theory is that every component effects the tone of the instrument to some degree. I've noticed differences in tone & sustain when using different tuners, saddles, nuts, etc.
the tonal differences between one guitar & another comes from the sum of the differences in all of these areas.
Then we go & plug them in & the pickups & pedals & amps can potentially override everything else.
But if you go straight into the amp & clean up the sound & do an A_B comparison using the same settings it'll still be the sum of all the differences I mentioned that make each guitar sound different.
It may be more or less noticeable depending on what differences in materials there are.
But the other thing that matters to me, probably more than just the tone, is the fact that the different feel between certain fingerboard materials & neck finishes can change the way I play. Sometimes drastically.
So I generally pick something I like the feel of & try to achieve the tone I want with my amp & pedals.

But pickups are not microphones. They respond to the magnetic properties of the vibrating strings. Now, you may argue that the woods influence those vibrations, but because the interaction with the pickups is magnetic, the wood's influence is slight. Have you ever listened to a recording and said to yourself, "sounds like an ash bodied guitar with a rosewood board to me" with any confidence?


But I can hear the difference in a hollowbody a mile away.

No love for Ebony?

I love ebony. Once you go ebony, you don't go back.

(Are we still talking about guitars?)

...but do not agree that there is NO difference.

Never said there was no difference. Those are your words, and I agree with them.

I said, "If you think the tonal effects of 1/4" of fretboard material are important you don't know much about guitars."

In an ABX (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test) test (if you removed the rosewood off a neck and glued on maple and refretted with the same frets) I would put $1000 on you not picking the difference.

We talk of differences in a thin strip of wood on a neck and in blind tests, experts can't tell the difference between whole acoustic instruments! Check it out - it's all been done. Perception is all in your head (and hands), not in your ears.

This thread asked the same old Q; I've given the same old A. People think it matters, it doesn't.

.....but if you guys could just give me the definitive answer I would know exactly which to get, and I would obviously be rocketed into guitar stardom. I wouldn't have to waste all this time on the internet reading posts on a forum to get better......


:mrgreen:

People think it matters, it doesn't.


Au contraire my friend;

It does matter, just because for some reason, people think it matters, like a lot of things, and they need to hear other people agree with them that it matters, so they can say it matters.

:razz:

Au contraire my friend;

It does matter, just because for some reason, people think it matters, like a lot of things, and they need to hear other people agree with them that it matters, so they can say it matters.

:razz:

Now the word "matters" sounds all funny.

Matters. :mrgreen:

You're right. I'm not trying to kick the crutch out from those who need one, more provide the antithesis that's required in all unanswerable topics, especially those of faith. Musical instrument tone shares a lot of similarities with faith.

You can offer scientific rationale, but that won't change some people's minds. Good on people for believing fretboard wood makes a significant difference. I don't.

Some people see deities in their french toast.

I don't think there's any tonal difference between fretboard woods that isn't negated by other factors... the perceived correlation between feel and tone throws any attempt at experimental control out the window, thus rendering true objectivity impossible.

Tone and feel effect how you play and consequently sound, but they aren't mutually inclusive.

My question has been answered –and I think we actually agree Nick - that in general the difference in timbre of fretboard material makes as little difference on a tele as it does on a strat – which to most ears is no difference at all.
Also as stated, there are so many other factors that come into play - it's not an easy swap that you can put in a true-bypass loop and A/B the difference.

I do not agree, however, that if someone claims to hear a difference that it’s somehow all just their imagination and/or their preconceived notions - that they are merely "seeing dieties in their french toast."

If every human being had identical levels of sensory perception then you would have a point – but we don’t.

My brother-in-law has freakishly good eyesight - like, fighter pilot good - and can spot deer in a heavy wood while driving in a car doing 70mph.
No way I can do that - but I've seen him proved right enough times to believe him when he says he sees something; just because I could not spot it doesn't mean it wasn't there.

When it comes to hearing, I have pretty sharp ears and have used blindfold ABX testing often – usually in the realm of effects testing – and have heard things that others didn’t and was often able to correctly recognize differences in blindfold testing.

But I have also met and worked with people who’s hearing was light years beyond mine – one producer who heard a squeaky bass drum pedal in the playback of a full board mix of a 7 piece band with 6 part harmony vocals over the top (we all thought he was crazy as he swore he heard something – he went track by track till he found it, and sure enough, there it was – a barely audible squeaking sound on the bass drum track.)

Someone would could hear and recognize that level of minutia I’d think would have a better than average chance of winning that $1000 bet.

As for my preconceived notions, in my experience sometimes they played out – just as many times the final result were different than expected, and I accepted the new information and moved forward with a different view - I did not force the results to conform to my original wishes and hopes.


I believe those who say they don’t hear differences on these types of topics – be it fretboard material or hardware upgrades - but I also can’t pass judgment on those who claim they can, because I cannot climb inside their head and use their unique set of ears.
One can only say “From my experience and to my ears, this is what I hear,” and, as cliche as it sounds, qualify it with a "YMMV."
IMHO of course... :roll:

I don't think it matters at all. Play the one you like best. :mad:

That will make more difference than any of the "tone voodoo" you guys are so fond of talking about. The picks you use make a much more dramatic difference in the sound. :shock:

Find a guitar that you love to play, and can't stand to be away from. That is going to be your best tone and best playing. The rest is snake oil and smoke 'n mirrors. :wink:

Ummm..like I said opinions..it is not smoke and mirrors..make em out of cheap hollow plastic and be done with it..wood and resonance effect tone as does every other component of a guitar including picks, bridge, guitar cord, your grip amp setting..the room your are in, the voltage coming out of the wall no one thing gives you "the tone" but it is the sum of all the things which will get you there..All links in a chain and the point cannot be won or lost...I choose to believe it matters and other people don't..its nice to talk about it though.. But at the end of the day I don't care because I just wanna play and hear other people play as well..enjoy what you have thats the whole point in my opinion..

Ummm..like I said opinions..it is not smoke and mirrors..make em out of cheap hollow plastic and be done with it..wood and resonance effect tone as does every other component of a guitar including picks, bridge, guitar cord, your grip amp setting..the room your are in, the voltage coming out of the wall no one thing gives you "the tone" but it is the sum of all the things which will get you there..All links in a chain and the point cannot be won or lost...I choose to believe it matters and other people don't..its nice to talk about it though.. But at the end of the day I don't care because I just wanna play and hear other people play as well..enjoy what you have thats the whole point in my opinion..

I could talk about the parallels between paragraphs and phrasing, but I won't. This is a subject about finesse, and the subtleties of guitar tone, not the answer.

For to find the answer is the end of the journey.