Does body wood make a difference to the sound of a bass guitar?

[White Cloud]

Honestly....I really don't care. I just enjoy playing the bass.

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='White Cloud' timestamp='1413635724' post='2580375']
Honestly....I really don't care. I just enjoy playing the bass.
[/quote]

It may still affect you. If luthiers use fancy (and expensive) woods because 'the market' won't accept a high-end bass made of cheap materials, then you end up paying more for a certain quality of bass than you would be able to if 'the market' was more accepting of different types of wood. Not a problem, I would expect if you're buying custom made basses, as you can choose the wood. But, if you're buying higher quality off the shelf products, this may affect you.

If you're concerned about ecology, then 'the market' also has a tendency to value woods of endangered species over and above more common, less endangered, species.

[PlungerModerno]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1413638016' post='2580400']
It may still affect you. If luthiers use fancy (and expensive) woods because 'the market' won't accept a high-end bass made of cheap materials, then you end up paying more for a certain quality of bass than you would be able to if 'the market' was more accepting of different types of wood. Not a problem, I would expect if you're buying custom made basses, as you can choose the wood. But, if you're buying higher quality off the shelf products, this may affect you.

If you're concerned about ecology, then 'the market' also has a tendency to value woods of endangered species over and above more common, less endangered, species.
[/quote]

You're on to something there. What if an unscrupulous builder / company uses wood of an exotic or rare tree to promote an instrument - but the woods rarity means less than ideal pieces are used, even though ideal pieces of a run of the mill tree as available.

You get less of a bass for the money, while helping drive the depletion of some wood that could be extremely useful in the future.

Some builders / companies have the total opposite angle: [url="http://www.warwickbass.com/en/Warwick---The-Difference--Our-woods--CITES-.html#current_site_id"]http://www.warwickbass.com/en/Warwick---The-Difference--Our-woods--CITES-.html#current_site_id[/url]

Even if I think wood is a tiny part of what makes a solid body instrument sound as it does - I love wood and "wood" hate to see wooden instruments fall out of favour.

[Beer of the Bass]

[quote name='PlungerModerno' timestamp='1413640541' post='2580435']
You're on to something there. What if an unscrupulous builder / company uses wood of an exotic or rare tree to promote an instrument - but the woods rarity means less than ideal pieces are used, even though ideal pieces of a run of the mill tree as available.
[/quote]

My brother is a classical guitar builder, and I get the impression that this is what the demand for Brazilian Rosewood is doing in the classical and acoustic guitar world. The good stuff is mostly gone (at least through legal routes), but some luthiers will use wild-grained pieces just to have the cachet that goes with it. While Indian Rosewood is demonstrably not the same (being less dense and having a duller tap tone) and arguably inferior, there are plenty of other more sustainable hardwoods with similar properties and tone.

[White Cloud]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1413638016' post='2580400']
It may still affect you. If luthiers use fancy (and expensive) woods because 'the market' won't accept a high-end bass made of cheap materials, then you end up paying more for a certain quality of bass than you would be able to if 'the market' was more accepting of different types of wood. Not a problem, I would expect if you're buying custom made basses, as you can choose the wood. But, if you're buying higher quality off the shelf products, this may affect you.

If you're concerned about ecology, then 'the market' also has a tendency to value woods of endangered species over and above more common, less endangered, species.
[/quote]
If bass feels right, sounds right and looks right (to me) ....then it is right.

How and why doesn't concern me tbh.

[PlungerModerno]

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1413641425' post='2580451']
My brother is a classical guitar builder, and I get the impression that this is what the demand for Brazilian Rosewood is doing in the classical and acoustic guitar world. The good stuff is mostly gone (at least through legal routes), but some luthiers will use wild-grained pieces just to have the cachet that goes with it. While Indian Rosewood is demonstrably not the same (being less dense and having a duller tap tone) and arguably inferior, there are plenty of other more sustainable hardwoods with similar properties and tone.
[/quote]
If a reputable classical instrument builder (and it's an if, at least regarding the reputable ones!) chooses significantly inferior wood - purely for the name - that's sick. AFAIK (and I'm no classical instrument builder/player) the traditional instrument needs to be kept carefully to last - e.g. case humidifiers in dry environments. An instrument made with odd wood parts might have lots of issues - not only spoiling a luthiers reputation, but perhaps causing massive upset and lost earnings to a performer / teacher. Some people can't do without a given instrument. To risk them losing it, from the builders side, is exactly the opposite of what they should be striving for.

I'd be optimistic that as long as cedar, spruce, or other suitable wood for a soundboard is available, we'll have many centuries of great sounding & playing instruments.

[quote name='White Cloud' timestamp='1413641620' post='2580454']
If bass feels right, sounds right and looks right (to me) ....then it is right.

How and why doesn't concern me tbh.
[/quote]
A very reasonable view to take - especially for solid body instruments built for a life on the road.
I'd be more worried about more delicate designs (extremely slim tilt back headstocks on heavy basses, some hollowbodies without centre blocks, etc.) - especially cheaper versions that are more likely to have unstable wood in them (stresses, moisture, grain flaws in unfortunate structural spots).

[Beer of the Bass]

[quote name='PlungerModerno' timestamp='1413647124' post='2580529']
If a reputable classical instrument builder (and it's an if, at least regarding the reputable ones!) chooses significantly inferior wood - purely for the name - that's sick. AFAIK (and I'm no classical instrument builder/player) the traditional instrument needs to be kept carefully to last - e.g. case humidifiers in dry environments. An instrument made with odd wood parts might have lots of issues - not only spoiling a luthiers reputation, but perhaps causing massive upset and lost earnings to a performer / teacher. Some people can't do without a given instrument. To risk them losing it, from the builders side, is exactly the opposite of what they should be striving for.

[/quote]

Yeah, it's weird, but players keep asking for it and even when it's crazy-grained flatsawn wood extracted from a tree stump it attracts a premium. The builders are just responding to demand, after all. FWIW my brother won't use Brazilian Rosewood at all - I think he's working with FSC certified African or Malaysian Blackwood at the moment.

[stingrayPete1977]

My double bass has deprived a couple of nice solid topped guitars from being built

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='White Cloud' timestamp='1413641620' post='2580454']
If bass feels right, sounds right and looks right (to me) ....then it is right.

How and why doesn't concern me tbh.
[/quote]

I think you have missed the point of my post.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1413619906' post='2580143']
If there is variation between identically specified basses, then all you need to do is compare a number of basses of one wood type versus a number of basses of another wood type. In that way, variation within a single wood type would be handled, and we could see if the different species makes a significant difference. Statistical techniques can be used to calculate how many 'a number' should be.
[/quote]

I think you are missing my point. When the average wood glue is supposedly stronger than the wood it is joining it, then IMO it will have a significant effect on how a body made from several pieces of wood glued together reacts, when compared with a body made from a single piece of wood, and going further the number and position of these joins may well also have an effect.

AFAIK bodies that are not designed to make a feature out how of the multiple pieces are used, do not have any consistency to them regarding the number of pieces used and the placement of the joins, and therefore your method has already introduced too many variables to give any meaningful results, no matter how big your sample size is.

[White Cloud]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1413652035' post='2580603']
I think you have missed the point of my post.
[/quote]
The real point of the post is that there is no point......

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1413654928' post='2580644']
I think you are missing my point. When the average wood glue is supposedly stronger than the wood it is joining it, then IMO it will have a significant effect on how a body made from several pieces of wood glued together reacts, when compared with a body made from a single piece of wood, and going further the number and position of these joins may well also have an effect.
[/quote]

Yes, I didn't spot that you had branched out significantly from the core topic of this thread. In that you're now comparing basses with the same species of body wood (you haven't been clear on that, but I assume that's what you mean from what you write), but either a solid piece of wood, or a number of pieces of wood stuck together with glue.

However, I think you're making a similar error to those who claim that the species of body wood makes a noticeable difference in body tone. You can say that logically it should make a difference because the two bodies are quite different. But, that doesn't mean that the differences between the bodies are enough to make a significant (e.g. detectible) difference in the tone of a solid body electric bass. Without proper experiments, all a logical argument such as yours can do is make it plausible that the way that the body is constructed could make a difference. That is very far from providing enough evidence to say that it either should or does make a significant difference to the sound.

[quote]
AFAIK bodies that are not designed to make a feature out how of the multiple pieces are used, do not have any consistency to them regarding the number of pieces used and the placement of the joins, and therefore your method has already introduced too many variables to give any meaningful results, no matter how big your sample size is.
[/quote]

I disagree. If we are performing a proper experiment to see if body wood species makes a significant difference to the tone of a solid body electric bass, then the basses in the experiment should differ only in the factor being investigated. In this case, the species of wood should differ. All other factors must be identical, to remove the 'other variables' that you mention.

I'm not sure why you raise the issue of bodies being stuck together by glue, because it hasn't been mentioned here that I noticed. If there were to be experiments on body wood species of basses, it would seem to be common sense to use solid one piece bodies. If the effects of multi-piece bodies were to be investigated, then that would be a different experiment for another time.

Edited October 18, 2014 by Annoying Twit

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='White Cloud' timestamp='1413655374' post='2580652']
The real point of the post is that there is no point......
[/quote]

My point was that even if you don't care about the species of the wood used for the body, you may be affected by other people being more choosey.

[stingrayPete1977]

Not many basses are made from solid fancy wood though are they, also these claims are often made when its only a top added that has supposedly altered the tone, "spalted woodius wormus top adds amazing top end zing compared to my book matched rotten knotted hazelnut one" etc

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1413661884' post='2580749']
Not many basses are made from solid fancy wood though are they, also these claims are often made when its only a top added that has supposedly altered the tone, "spalted woodius wormus top adds amazing top end zing compared to my book matched rotten knotted hazelnut one" etc
[/quote]

If the wood species of the top alone could change the sound, then you'd expect the wood species of a solid one piece body to make an even bigger difference. Hence, that would seem to be the logical experiment to try first.

BTW: I'm not saying that you think that the wood species of the top will make a difference, I'm just talking about what the most logical experiment to perform first would be.

Edited October 18, 2014 by Annoying Twit

[discreet]

[quote name='White Cloud' timestamp='1413655374' post='2580652']
The real point of the post is that there is no point...
[/quote]

You're right - there isn't!! As far as solid-bodied electric guitars and basses are concerned, the type of wood used to make those bodies has little or no bearing on the sound that those instruments make!! The Congo has deep, fertile soils and a population of approximately 75 million. Thank you and goodbye.

Edited October 18, 2014 by discreet

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1413662540' post='2580757']


If the wood species of the top alone could change the sound, then you'd expect the wood species of a solid one piece body to make an even bigger difference. Hence, that would seem to be the logical experiment to try first.

BTW: I'm not saying that you think that the wood species of the top will make a difference, I'm just talking about what the most logical experiment to perform first would be.
[/quote]
Even then what are we going to measure, no one here can agree exactly what, darker, clanky, growly, thin, boomy, brittle, etc is can they?

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1413663879' post='2580783']
Even then what are we going to measure, no one here can agree exactly what, darker, clanky, growly, thin, boomy, brittle, etc is can they?
[/quote]

Easy. If the question is "Does the species of body wood make a significant difference?", then what we should measure is whether or not people can tell the sound made by basses of two different body wood species apart. E.g. you could have an experiment where there are three basses. Two have the same body wood species, and one has a different body wood species. The experimental subject would be asked to identify the pair of basses with the same body wood. Repeat this for a population of experimental subjects and randomly chosen sets of three basses for each experiment.

If the experimental subjects can identify which is the pair of basses with the same body wood species at a frequency greater than would be expected from random guessing, then body wood species does make a difference. If they can't, there isn't.

There's no point looking into more detail of what the differences in sound from different body wood species are (e.g. your "darker, clanky, growly, thin, boomy, brittle") unless it's actually been established that there is a difference to be characterised. First things first.

Edited October 18, 2014 by Annoying Twit

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1413660788' post='2580728']
Yes, I didn't spot that you had branched out significantly from the core topic of this thread. In that you're now comparing basses with the same species of body wood (you haven't been clear on that, but I assume that's what you mean from what you write), but either a solid piece of wood, or a number of pieces of wood stuck together with glue.

However, I think you're making a similar error to those who claim that the species of body wood makes a noticeable difference in body tone. You can say that logically it should make a difference because the two bodies are quite different. But, that doesn't mean that the differences between the bodies are enough to make a significant (e.g. detectible) difference in the tone of a solid body electric bass. Without proper experiments, all a logical argument such as yours can do is make it plausible that the way that the body is constructed could make a difference. That is very far from providing enough evidence to say that it either should or does make a significant difference to the sound.
[/quote]

But what I am saying here is that there is no proper research done to see whether the wood used or the construction have the most impact on the changes in sound (or even if both are equally important or irrelevant).

When people say that wood species X has more "growl" in the tone than species Y what we don't know is all the other characteristics of the basses that are being compared. It might just happen that it is possible to get blanks of species X that allow the bodies to be made in two parts whereas species Y blanks are narrower and the bodies need three parts and what people are actually hearing is the difference between a two piece and three piece body.

That's why we need to go right back to basics and start with single piece bodies and work from there [b]CHANGING ONE THING, AND ONLY ONE THING AT A TIME[/b]. And do it with a decent sized sample group.

Until then I'll have to maintain that everything is simply personal opinion, and there is no conclusive evidence for any of the claims being made.

[stingrayPete1977]

I've got three stingray 5s, one is ash and a trans finish the other two are solid, I'll just grab a chisel and report back..........

[waynepunkdude]

My body wood made a baby.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1413668350' post='2580837']
I've got three stingray 5s, one is ash and a trans finish the other two are solid, I'll just grab a chisel and report back..........
[/quote]

Excellent! ;-)

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1413669493' post='2580847']


Excellent! ;-)
[/quote]
it's all in the name of science, I've no idea what the others are made of actually or from how many pieces of wood, the Classic is a single slab of ash.

[White Cloud]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' timestamp='1413660899' post='2580731']
My point was that even if you don't care about the species of the wood used for the body, you may be affected by other people being more choosey.
[/quote]
Fair enough, point taken!

[stingrayPete1977]

The one fly in the ointment is the mahogany Stingray 30th anniversary model, everyone has agreed that it sounds different to every other Stingray made of the more usual,ash,alder or poplar. More punchy comes up everytime?