Wood Grain for Newbies

[pablogilberto]

Halu folks!

I wanna understand more about the wood type / wood grain used in guitar bodies, neck, fretboard.

Is there a good resource on this? 

Some specifics:

- how to choose wood type
- the pros and cons of each
- their effect on tone
- how to identify the wood  (visually or any other method)
- how to differentiate cheap vs expensive wood and what's the main difference?
- the effects of processes like the roasted maple thing?
- how to do simple and effective testing / analysis (aside from listening tests) so that my comparison will be valid and objective.

Thank u!

[newey]

The "tone wood" debate is never-ending, and all subjective. As far as electrics go, IMO the wood type has only a minimal contribution to the overall sound. Acoustic guitars are another matter entirely.

- how to differentiate cheap vs expensive wood and what's the main difference?

By its price?

- the pros and cons of each

If one is building one's own bodies or necks, then the wood's hardness and "workability" will be a prime consideration. Harder woods will be more difficult to work with, and will require better-quality tooling. If one is buying a finished guitar, see above re: "tonewood" debate.

I guess durability also plays a part- Fender's old pine-bodied Teles got chipped and dented pretty easily, the wood was so soft.

Nowadays, one must also consider the source and sustainability. Many exotic types of wood, particularly ones sourced from rainforests, will have limited availability due to import restrictions- and the prices rise accordingly. For some species, once any existing supplies are sold off, no more will be forthcoming.

[gckelloch]

I’ve been researching this topic a lot myself for at least 10 years. Yes, the common response from luthiers is that wood species doesn’t matter for electric guitars because the acoustic tone is not transduced by magnetic pickups. While that’s true, the guitar structure does absorb various freq’s through damping and resonance, and those freq’s are reduced in the strings to varying degree.

Generally, harder & denser woods absorb less, but hard woods with large closely-spaced pores absorb more than those with smaller or less large pores. Softer woods with very small pores will generally absorb more highs, but less midrange than some harder woods with large closely-spaced pores. Still, the vibrations from the strings have to be strong enough to vibrate the fiber bunches between those pores. That’s partially why I think an Indian RW fretboard absorbs more of the mids to highs of the stronger transients via resonance absorption than Ebony, and possibly more highs than lacquered Eastern Maple.

Warmoth has done some well-conducted experiments with body and neck woods with unsurprising results. They also rate many different woods with regard to the high end absorption, but that should only be considered a guide because the damping factor of any wood species can vary a lot, and some of their results may be based on whether a fretboard was lacquered or not. For that reason, I don’t think Eastern Maple should rank quite as high on the brightness scale as it does. An unfinished Eastern Maple FB will likely absorb considerably more highs than something like Ebony, but the bridge saddles and guitar circuitry would have to produce enough high end to determine the difference, and a thick lacquer over the frets of any wood will reduce absorption.

You won’t be able to get quite your expected results by choosing various woods, but some woods may be more consistent than others. My take is the wood structure up closest to where the strings anchor matters a lot, but FB wood is generally hard dense stuff anyway. From brightest to darkest “raw” FB wood, I’d say it goes: Ebony, Pau Ferro, Ziricote or Purpleheart, and either Indian RW or Maple. Again, Indian RW will likely absorb more of the stronger transients than Eastern Maple, so it’s hard to tell. I assume the other Warmoth wood rankings are generally reliable.

For body woods you of course don't want something too heavy, and the thickness and length will affect the results. Studies have shown that string damping via the neck and the wood from the neck pocket to the bridge matter more than damping via a hard dense bridge. Modulus of elasticity is a big factor in damping. Maple has high sugar and resin content, so it may actually damp more in some ways than Mahogany. Roasting hardens the resins and opens, yet seals the pores more. That should reduce damping, but may increase resonance. Tonal results with necks seem to be a bit brighter. There may be more midrange resonance loss, but the truss rod type also limits that. DA rods create a more rigid structure. Such a neck might be better matched with a more midrange resonant body wood like Limba, but roasted Alder or SA might be just fine too. I’d go with the roasted version of those two woods just because there will be less liquid damping, and it may add some nice response complexity. Limba is kind of ideal as is – maybe like a cross between Mahogany and SA, and generally not too heavy. Black Walnut is apparently like Mahogany with a bit more articulate midrange, but it can be very heavy like Northern White Ash. Basswood is like softer/lighter Red Alder. It can lack low and high end, but a hard/heavy top wood can address that to some extent. Still, the response character will be limited by the properties of the wood the neck is attached to.

I just assembled a baritone “Jagmaster” with a Black Limba body and a Roasted-Maple neck/Pau Ferro FB with DA truss rod, and I really like the response character. It’s just under 7lbs with a “springy” feel, great sustain, warm bass, guttural midrange and detailed highs. Not for metal styles, but would make a nice blues machine in a standard scale S-type. I actually plan to use my Lexan neck pocket bracket when I reassemble it to broaden the tonal range a bit. I think S-type trem systems reduce warmth and increase upper-mid clarity, so a denser wood than Alder might be better with those. Warmoth had some midweight Walnut bodies for sale that might be great if you think Alder might lack bass warmth with a trem system. I think it can. Warmoth forum members rave about their Walnut body guitars. It’s a fairly dark wood. A trans finish would look nice. Maybe Turquoise? Go for a Ziricote FB if you think Pau Ferro might be too bright. The difference may be negligible anyway.

Incidentally, Ken Parker once stated that EVO frets are actually harder than the Jescar Stainless frets. They may be harder now, but I doubt it.

[thetragichero]

wood choice? just do as leo did and use what's available, like cabinet doors guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/8957/gonna-make-guitar-body-cabinet



edit: i should also mention that the single p90 toronado-shaped guitar is about to be my only guitar for a bit, as i am packing up a PODS full of gear and most of my other belongings to send in preparation of our move to the great white north (greene county, ny) within the next month or two (also why i haven't been doing fun guitar things and posting about them... i've been in full time 'get the house in saleable condition' mode. on the plus side i'll soon have access to my old man's wood shop, its cnc router, and folks with considerable woodworking skills)

[sumgai]

Jan 10, 2022 10:06:24 GMT -5 thetragichero said:

... i've been in full time 'get the house in saleable condition' mode.

Funny you should mention that....

---

Now, back to on-topic:

PAGING DR. CYNICAL1, PAGING DR. CYNICAL1. Consult needed on Post #1, please. PAGING DR. CYNICAL1.

[cynical1]

In the house.

As stated previously, in electric instruments the wood choice is not so critical. It realistically only contributes about 25%-35% of the tone in any given instrument.

Something else to remember about "tonewoods". Gibson, Fender, Ibanez...etc...are all manufacturing businesses. They need to control their raw material costs just like any other business. Alder, ash, maple, mahogany and for a time ebony were all readily available at a cheap price back in the 50's. Truth be told, that was about it for tonewood research back in the day.

So, don't get your knickers in a twist arguing tonewoods. That said, there are characteristics certain woods will reveal once hammered into a guitar or bass.

Typically, the harder the wood the brighter the tone and the longer the sustain. Softer woods tend to be a bit warmer. Warmer meaning the high ends are muted and the midrange can be more pronounced. Spending some time on Google researching Janka hardness ratings will help.

Mahogany is my favorite wood to work with. It's hard enough to use it for a neck, but it doesn't eat your tooling like purpleheart will.  You never have to grain fill, it glues easily and takes any finish you throw on it.

If you stick with the most common woods used you should be fine. IE: mahogany, maple, ash, alder...and poplar is a great material for a bass. For example, Imbuia, or Brazilian Walnut has a Janka hardness of 970 lbf. Soft maple is about 950 lbf. So, the difference, realistically, is that imbuia is about 40% more expensive than soft maple. OK, it's prettier, but one coat of lacquer and even poplar looks good.

Remember, all the tonewood mojo in the world doesn't fix a sloppy fit or misalignments. You can make a viable guitar out of plywood if the fit is tight enough and everything stays within a tight tolerance.

If you're just starting out, go for the cheapest wood you can find. A significant portion will wind up as firewood in the beginning, so learn on the cheap. It's also easier on your tools and tooling. Once you have it down then source your tonewoods based on what you want the guitar or bass to sound like...or look like, as some of the exotic woods are beautiful.

That help?

HTC1

[gckelloch]

I agree that the contribution of wood types doesn't make all that much difference in tone, and pieces of any wood type can vary substantially. B4 you make a determination of how much even the body wood matters, take a listen to these well-conducted tests:




Fiber hardness/stiffness/rigidity is likely the primary factor regarding high-end damping, but large closely-spaced pores will increase resonance losses in a very hard wood. FI, Wenge is a very hard & heavy wood, but is considered darker sounding compared to hard Maple. Those large closely-spaced pores might explain the damping difference. The Janka Hardness test doesn't really indicate how rigid wood fibers are in such woods. Denser woods with softer fibers might resist a Steel ball more than a harder wood with large pores. Wax, oil, resin, water, mineral or sugar content may also affect how much force it takes a Steel ball to penetrate the same distance. Modulus of elasticity might be a better determinant of fiber stiffness, but it still doesn't take into account pore size and distribution. The commonly used guitar woods are a safer bet for a desired response, but even African Mahogany can vary in weight wildly. Pieces of wood can even interact in ways that increase string damping when they are joined. I assume there's more risk of that with more resonant and lighter-weight woods. If you are looking for premade parts, I'd suggest finding S, T or J guitar style bodies in the 4~5 lb range. Les Paul wanted to eliminate all resonance in his solid body guitars. I've heard a few concrete body guitars that sounded great. The neck was still wood, so there was still substantial damping. OK, so I will belabor the point no further.

[roadtonever]

I think tonal differences between different types of wood is a repeatable, objective thing. For example across multiple independent shoot outs you can hear swamp ash emphasizing mid-mid frequencies when compared to alder or mahogany.

[gckelloch]

Jan 11, 2022 8:34:07 GMT -5 roadtonever said:

I think tonal differences between different types of wood is a repeatable, objective thing. For example across multiple independent shoot outs you can hear swamp ash emphasizing mid-mid frequencies when compared to alder or mahogany.

No "emphasizing" can occur without an active amplifying force. String energy can only be drained or the guitar would be a perpetual motion machine. What I hear in the Warmoth test is the SA actually has less midrange compared to the other body woods, which would coincide with how the softer grain areas would absorb more when excited. It sounds like some mid-bass & upper-mid are reduced with the Alder, and perhaps just some upper-mid is reduced with the Mahogany -- although it actually sounds brightest. Hard to tell without hearing uncolored DI recordings.