seeking advice on tone woods

[Lafayette]

Hello to all. I am getting ready to order my first USA Custom Guitars telecaster. I am seeking advice, feedback, consultation from experienced builders/players on several aspects of the instrument, the first of which is the body's wood(s):

I'm interested in the body wood combination of an alder back with a swamp ash top. Tom Anderson's website has the following description for this wood combination:

"...this combination sort of produces the sonic characteristics of both Ash and Alder? What it really has is the tighter bottom and fuller low mids of alder without losing some of those beautiful sparkling highs inherent in ash. Of course the weight is very light but the color selection is a bit more limited, than the ash/ash combination, only because the backing wood can look darker than the top wood with lighter transparent shades."

Does anyone have any experience with this combination of wood? How thick would the alder and swamp ash have to be (assuming the combination was valid)?

I've done a search on several sites and have repeatedly come across posts from experienced builders/players who are of the opinion that the body wood(s) are a minimal variable in the tone equation. Would I be better off saving a few bucks and just going for a swamp ash body?

I'm well aware the body isn't as much of a factor as the neck, pickups (to say nothing of the amp/cabinet).

Any feedback, advice, insight would be greatly appreciated.

-Lafayette Hankins

[skydawg]

First off, Welcome to the TDPRI from a fellow hoosier! I was in Lafayette last Friday. I had a strat plus deluxe that featured an ash topped alder body. To be perfectly honest, it sounded identical (to my ears) to another strat plus I had that was entirely alder. I didn't even notice a difference in weight although I never weighed either one. They do take stain differently though. This created a "burst" effect on the deluxe. I guess I don't understand what Fender was after when they built the sandwich bodies.

[japasul]

The wood on the body is to me very important, specially in a guitar like the Telecaster, that you usually dont play with a lot of distortion, you play it close to clean. This means the characteristics of the wood will show...

What are you looking for?

[tonewoods]

"Tom Anderson's website has the following description for this wood combination...."

I would highly value Tom's opinions about how certain woods affect tone in a Tele....
His guitars are CNC'd, and are basically identical (if everything else is identical) except for the woods, and he closely pays attention to how they sound....

"Would I be better off saving a few bucks and just going for a swamp ash body?"

All that being said, it's hard to beat a good chunk of ash in a Tele body, both visually and sonically....
It's tried and true, and cheap compared to a lot of options (curly maple, koa, etc. etc.)...

Luck!

[Balladeer]

You have the best chance of having true twang with a light-weight swamp ash body. Additionally, having a vintage style bridge with 3 barrel-shaped, brass saddles contributes to the standard Tele tone.

I have parts Strat made with light-weight alder and a juicy, fat maple neck (both body and neck are USAGC). Even with very nice vintage pickups, this Strat has never had a tone as big or complex as my 52 RI Tele.

Furthermore, I once built an alder bodied Tele, and, though it sounded very nice, it just didn't have true twang.

[Durtdog]

Originally Posted by Balladeer

You have the best chance of having true twang with a light-weight swamp ash body.

In my experience, this is an internet myth.

I've put together more than several partscasters of swamp ash, alder and basswood. Wood type does not seem to be the defining factor. One has just as good a chance as "true twang" as the other.

I currently have an MIM poly finished guitar that will twang with the best of 'em. I also have a lightweight swamp ash from Guitarmill finished in a very thin coat of nitro that has a much darker tone. It twangs nicely, but no better than the MIM, no matter what pickups are in either guitar.

[mellecaster]

Pine My Man...Pine !....That's what this Cabinet is made of !....and will make just about ANY Tele...sound like a Tele !....I know...I know....way to simple for some, but try it....It Works most Every Time........

[skydawg]

Time to get out the blindfold for the ultimate A/B test. I don't think tonewood will be a determining factor.

[Mark Davis]

Originally Posted by skydawg

Time to get out the blindfold for the ultimate A/B test. I don't think tonewood will be a determining factor.

I agree 100%.

You cant listen to a guitar and tell what the body or neck wood is. You can only guess.

The species of wood doesnt matter as much as all the myths will lead you to believe.

There is no such thing as one type of wood is better than another.

Some types of wood do look better than others but as far as sound each piece of wood has its own sound.

I could build 2 Teles both out of light swamp ash and use all the same parts on each guitar and they wouldnt sound identical.

[Robert H.]

What Mark said........

[gtech]

The tone of wood is only a myth.

As is the brand of strings you use.

As is the type of wood used for the fingerboard.

etc...


But I like myths...

These days, I like a fatter neck with a softer wood like pine or soft walnut.

That's my Mojo.

Gilles

[0le FUZZY]

Originally Posted by skydawg

Time to get out the blindfold for the ultimate A/B test. I don't think tonewood will be a determining factor.

...YUP!!! and watt Mark typed.






(deranged internet-based alter ego, with my own lexicon and all.)

Please visit my page

[japasul]

Of course two pieces of the same wood are not the same! Just as the hair on two identical twins is not the same!!!

And i agree that there ISNT a better wood than another, but they DO alter the tone of the instrument.


But, in the end, it all comes back to what sound YOU like the best, so yeah, blindfold A/B test is great!

Cheers
André Ripoll

[CC]

Lafayette,

If you're looking for classic Fender tones, stick with the traditional woods Fender used to make their bodies. If you're looking for something different, then consider going with the laminated top. Unless you've actually played the alder / ash combo, you can never be certain how it will sound.

There's no way I can tell you what type of wood was used in a recording, but I believe wood matters. If it didn't, guitars that are built identically would all sound the same. Perhaps it's not so much of an issue as to what type of wood is being used as opposed to how dense the wood is... I believe density effects tone, sustain and presence. If you take a hundred new re-issue teles, then seperate them according to weight (really heavy vs. super light). You might notice the heavier ones tend to sound a certain way and vice versa.

Use the search function here and read all the opinions you can, then draw your own conclusions. I will say though, there's no way I can tell if I'll like a guitar until I plug it in.

Disclosure: I'm not a builder. Just a guy who has friends in the business (buying, selling, repairing guitars). My experience comes from just being around the many guitars over the years.

Here's a few discussions on TGP that might also help.

http://www.thegearpage.net/board/sho...d.php?t=276549
http://www.thegearpage.net/board/sho...d.php?t=277394
http://www.thegearpage.net/board/sho...d.php?t=276041
http://www.thegearpage.net/board/sho...d.php?t=276432

[Buckocaster51]

The Old Buckocaster tends to paint most of his guitars.

Other than almost always being able to see the grain in ash...regardless of the amount or style of grain filler I use...once a guitar is painted...I can't remember which is made of what wood.

I KNOW I have a mahogany body around here some place...but without yanking a neck I have no way of knowing which it is.

The Buttercaster is poplar...but I only remember that by looking at the archives of the Buttercaster project.

I think that goes a long way towards telling us something about the sonic qualities of body wood...I'm using alder these days...just because it is easy to work with and paint.

But then I'm an old coot!

[CrazyManAndy]

I do believe the term "tonewood" has been way over-hyped. While the wood you use will affect tone, it will be to a much smaller degree on an electric guitar than on an acoustic. Especially if you are talking about bodies. The electrical components (pickups, wiring, etc.) would be one of the biggest factors in tone, IMHO. Not to mention amps and effects.

CMA

[blacklinefish]

Originally Posted by japasul

But, in the end, it all comes back to what sound YOU like the best, so yeah, blindfold A/B test is great!

Bom dia! Well, if there was a place to A/B test, it must be in Sr. Ripoll's home country. Hey André, the next time you get itchy for a guitar build you should build two at the same time. Make one with some choice Brazilian mahogany, and the other out of the cheapest stuff you can find.

What else is winter for? Tchau!

--gh

[Balladeer]

All I will say is: I personally have experienced the difference between alder and lightweight swamp ash in a Tele. And my first parts guitar (circa 1992) was a Strat in mahogany with beautiful flamed maple top. I had three single coil pickups in the guitar. It looked nice but sounded cold and brittle. Tone is very much affected by the wood.

It is commonly recognized that lightweight swamp ash has a scooped midrange frequency response. That scoop contributes to what I call twang. You may have a different definition of the word twang. From my experience an alder body has a different sound than lightweight swamp ash - everything else the same. I characterize the difference as "twang". To me, "twang" goes hand in hand with country and the way people in the south speak. Have you noticed how southern speech patterns may turn one syllable into two? This is similar to what I hear from the scooped midrange of lightweight swamp ash. I cannot comment on heavier ash as I have no experience with it. Whatever you call it, there is a difference in sound. At loud volumes, with distortion, it may be imperceptible. Even with clean playing it will be slight, but it is there.

I'm editing in something else. You can disagree, and I simply ask you to prove it. I can prove what I am saying so I fervently believe it. If you have never experienced the difference than you would not necessarily believe it is true. Please don't piss off someone by throwing water on their advice unless you are factually sure that the advice is horsecrap. I was simply trying to share my findings through experience - not by reading - with someone who asked for advice.

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by Balladeer

All I will say is: I personally have experienced the difference between alder and lightweight swamp ash in a Tele. And my first parts guitar (circa 1992) was a Strat in mahogany with beautiful flamed maple top. I had three single coil pickups in the guitar. It looked nice but sounded cold and brittle. Tone is very much affected by the wood.

It is commonly recognized that lightweight swamp ash has a scooped midrange frequency response. That scoop contributes to what I call twang. You may have a different definition of the word twang. From my experience an alder body has a different sound than lightweight swamp ash - everything else the same. I characterize the difference as "twang". To me, "twang" goes hand in hand with country and the way people in the south speak. Have you noticed how southern speech patterns may turn one syllable into two? This is similar to what I hear from the scooped midrange of lightweight swamp ash. I cannot comment on heavier ash as I have no experience with it. Whatever you call it, there is a difference in sound. At loud volumes, with distortion, it may be imperceptible. Even with clean playing it will be slight, but it is there.

I'm editing in something else. You can disagree, and I simply ask you to prove it. I can prove what I am saying so I fervently believe it. If you have never experienced the difference than you would not necessarily believe it is true. Please don't piss off someone by throwing water on their advice unless you are factually sure that the advice is horsecrap. I was simply trying to share my findings through experience - not by reading - with someone who asked for advice.

Then please prove what you are saying.

Dan

[teleguitar]

I'm sure I have much less experience with different guitars and tonal variations compared to most on this forum but a couple of years ago I had an experience which puts electric guitar sound in perspective for me.

I have a 1980's MIJ basswood Tele and play through a 1960's Reverberocket, which I have always thought sounds great and which people consider to be a very decent amp. I was picking up my guitar at the repair shop and the guy suggested I try it out through a 1959 Tweed Champ that he had in. I did and could not believe the beautifully rich, warm sound that came out of that little box which did not even have a tone control.

So I wouldn't worry too much about getting the right combination of alder/rosewood/nitro/hardtail/brass/bone/humbucker etc. etc. Just save your money and buy an old tweed amp - you'll be in tone heaven.


i

[Durtdog]

Originally Posted by Balladeer

And my first parts guitar (circa 1992) was a Strat in mahogany with beautiful flamed maple top. I had three single coil pickups in the guitar. It looked nice but sounded cold and brittle. Tone is very much affected by the wood.

You are confusing an independent event with cause and effect. Just because it happens once, twice or three times doesn't mean it will happen every time.

Originally Posted by Balladeer

It is commonly recognized that lightweight swamp ash has a scooped midrange frequency response.

Recognized by whom? Experts on the internet?

Originally Posted by Balladeer

You can disagree, and I simply ask you to prove it. I can prove what I am saying so I fervently believe it.

You made the assertion that alder doesn't give "true twang" so the burden of proof is on you...prove that all those Telecasters made for years and years don't twang. If you can prove that there's a difference in twang in woods in general, you'll be the first in history to do so.

Originally Posted by Balladeer

Please don't piss off someone by throwing water on their advice unless you are factually sure that the advice is horsecrap. I was simply trying to share my findings through experience - not by reading - with someone who asked for advice.

And don't asssume that just because someone else's experience and opinion differs from yours that they're attacking you and trying to piss you off. It's a subjective topic, you will hear different opinions. If you think you posess the ultimate truth on this and you actually DO prove it scientifically, my hat will off to you sir.

[0le FUZZY]

I'm editing in something else. You can disagree, and I simply ask you to prove it.

...I kant prove it either weigh but I kin say I haff had 40+ years of werkin on hunnerts and hunnerts of TELECASTERs and many different wood and metal bodd-deez and alst I noe iss wonce yew plug em in yew kant say fer sure neither.

...From iss ri cheer:



...Tew wiss ri cheer:



...Tew wiss ri cheer:



...An wonce its turnt up the difference iss hard tew define specially whence yew change out the lectric parts and it duz make a hoe buncha difference.






(deranged internet-based alter ego, with my own lexicon and all.)

Please visit my page

[jwells393]

I'm with Fuzzy on this one.

Pickups, amplifier, and playing ability ................ that's were the tone comes from. Because of the last item I listed, I'll probably never have great tone.

[japasul]

hee hee

i agree too that amps, pups, and a lot else affects tone, but wood does TOO.

remember that MDF thing Terry posted a couple of months ago? people even tought it wasnt wood (in a certain way it ISNT, because a lot of actual "wood properties" are lost in MDF, like the anisothropy of wood), and, indeed, it DID sound a lot different.


You can say that lightweight woods have a scooped midrange (i believe this too), but it can happen that another guitar, made of great dense wood, has a scooped midrange too because of the rest of the parts. This is why, once built, you cant precise what wood is being used. But you can TRY to achieve a certain tone before building it by selecting some parts (wood included!).

Teleguitar makes a great point: the amp you use will have an ultimate influence in tone and the right amp can even bring to life the crappiest guitar ever!

And, of course, this is a very subjective thread and im just giving my opinion based on what i have observed.


Cheers
André Ripoll

[tonewoods]

"If you're looking for classic Fender tones, stick with the traditional woods Fender used to make their bodies."

Keep in mind that we really don't know what species of ash Fender did use in the 50's...

Or at least I haven't been able to figure this out after quite a bit of snooping around.
Love to hear anything you guys might have dug up over the years....

Leo could have sourced his wood from any number of places that supply ash that originated from any number of regions in North America or Canada.

It could be Fraxinus americana from east of the Mississippi (Maine to Florida), Fraxinus nigra from the Northeast, or Fraxinus pennsylvanica from east of the Rockies....

Hell, it could even be Fraxinus latifolia from the closer-to-Fullerton forests of Oregon....

I've attempted to differentiate the species using a 30x hand-lens and Hoadley's "Identifying Wood", but so far I've come to the same conclusion as Hoadley did.
Namely:

"Wood known as 'white ash' is most often Fraxinus americana, but it is indistinguishable from and often confused with green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica). Both species are widely distributed throughout the central and eastern United States and in southeastern Canada. In addition, the woods of Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) and European ash (Fraxinus excelcior) are essentially similar."

"...I kant prove it either weigh but I kin say I haff had 40+ years of werkin on hunnerts and hunnerts of TELECASTERs and many different wood and metal bodd-deez and alst I noe iss wonce yew plug em in yew kant say fer sure neither."

Yep.....

[Balladeer]

tonewoods -
In your experience do the body wood and neck wood affect:
(1) the vibration of the string
(2) the audible mix of frequencies produced when the string is attacked

I'm not asking whether one can change the natural sound via of electronics.

Thanks in advance for sharing your expertise.

[tonewoods]

Originally Posted by Balladeer

tonewoods -
In your experience do the body wood and neck wood affect:
(1) the vibration of the string
(2) the audible mix of frequencies produced when the string is attacked

I'm not asking whether one can change the natural sound via of electronics.

Thanks in advance for sharing your expertise.

Well, my "expertise" is mostly violin and acoustic instrument related.
I mill wood for those instruments....

But I've played electrics all my life, and have always pondered about how certain woods affect the tone in the various electric designs...

My intuition tells me that the weight of the material in relationship to those designs is huge.

I play a Tom Anderson Strat that is made from curly redwood, and it has a very complex tone that I think derives from that unusual wood choice.
So did Tom....

And we all know that everyone is fighting over the lightweight ash for Teles, including me.
Follow the money. There must be a reason....

But take a Les Paul. Those relatively heavy woods might lend itself favorably to that design....

So yeah, wood choice affects tone.
How do Rosewood Teles sound? (I don't know-I've never played one)....

But I think matching the wood to the design is what a good builder intuitively does....

Leo could have very easily gone with maple, but didn't. It wasn't a cost thing, as the two cost about the same at the time.

Alder was probably a later choice based on paint, and not tone....

Pernambuco for violin bows was a choice that might have been based on the fact that stacks and stacks of the wood were imported from Brazil (named after the abundance of fine brazil wood along its shores, BTW) for the dye industry, and found it's way into violin bows....

The point is that we become accustomed to certain materials working their magic on the designs we love, and become almost as important as the design itself to producing the tones we know and love....

Enough rambling....