Electric guitar body TONEWOOD - Myth or Fact? Judge for yourself here!
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2024
- The type of wood of an acoustic instrument has a huge influence on tone, but what about electric guitars? This is sometimes referred to as the Tone Wood Debate. In the guitar community there is no clear consensus on this issue. In this video the exact same guitar neck, pickup and hardware are assembled to two bodies of identical dimensions and density. One is Mahogany and one is Maple.
Also a third body made of Pressure treated Fir, from Friday's clip, is included in the comparison, that one has different dimensions and density though.
Amp setup: 1977 Marshall Super Bass into 2x 1971 Marshall 1960A and 1960B 4x12 Cabs, miked by Unidyne IV 548 close mic and AKG C414 BXLII room mic.
Dimensions Maple and Mahogany bodies: 510x120x21mm, density for both 650 g/m3
Dimension Pressure treated Fir: 415x120x27, density 920 g/m3
Ok, I'll admit it. The clean sound does sound quite different.
As a side note, this is the most civil guitar community I've ever seen.
+Parker Bilbro Thanks Parker! Glad to hear that :-)
Parker Bilbro That's odd. I heard more difference in the dirty riffs.
Parker Bilbro even i'm always on my best behavior on Johans channel,other good guys with channels i like are Steve from Boston,Marty Swartz.
It is! And I love it. I gave the “sheck it” Swede a follow.
@@duster71 check out Paul Davids
The thickest Gothenburg accent ever on CZcams. Love it!!!
+griiseknoen hahaha! Glad to hear that! :-)
"Guitohr"
griiseknoen aha Gothenburg good to know! 👍👍👍😅
I was suprised how much I liked the pressurized fir .
Exactly )) A guitar made of it will weight a ton though.
Me too
I guess I'll join the "me too" movement here. I wonder though if its because the plank is smaller? Which raises another comparison question. If using the same wood, how much does body size affect tone? Maybe the magic is in a smaller body?
He's just picking the strings in a different place. Probably because of the difference in weight but mostly because there' a huge variance in tone available in your fingers and picking, you really have to eliminate that. There's no such thing as tonewood. Plus he said how important getting the same setup of pickup etc is but obviously didn't have all 3 built so he could reference each of them side by side. And it's more or less impossible to use subjective human senses as a measure of 2 things. You know if I make you a cup of coffee in a yellow mug vs a red one many will say the red cup tastes stronger even if the coffee is identical from the same batch. You'd really need to do a more complicated and rigorous experiment to eliminate the things that we already know are the biggest factors in tone and measure the output with something that can compare it objectively. But, in the meantime we should have all seen by now that you can make a guitar without any wood, no neck or body, and it sounds the same as one with wood. Thus if you believed wood is contributing to the sound coming out the amp why it doesn't it disappear in the 'air guitar' ? I think the other thing the guy who set up the air guitar should have done is simply to show how easily he could have got different tones whilst playing. Just in the same way you can give the same guitar setup to 3 different people and they'll sound different through it. Jeez, about 70% of practise for anyone above beginner level should be focused on the tone of what you're playing. How hard are you picking, where are you picking, what are you picking with etc etc. If you're just following tab and holding the right fret and string and picking it roughly the right time as though playing guitar is like a more complicated version of 'guitar hero' then, sure, it's going to sound roughly like the piece of music maybe people will recognise it, but if you really want it to sound musical and good then you have to consider the quality of every note and passage. And you'll find a huge variety of tones even on the exact same settings, you're not switching pickup or volume or twiddling knobs on the amp or any pedals, you're just changing the way you play. But that nuance is difficult to control. It's why playing the guitar is difficult to master. It's specifically difficult to play something exactly the same way twice. So why anyone would think they could build 3 different guitars and see how the tone changed between them makes little sense. He could have got the same result without actually changing the wood.
Mahogany - more of a full sound
Maple - more punchy
Muhfkn pressure treated hardware store fir - surprisingly crunchy.
Honestly I'm really surprised at how good the hardware store wood sounded.
"Today we're gonna sheck out" is my new favorite thing
Ola is also a Swede and shecks gear too
"LET'S GO!"
metal571 “today we’re gonna compare it” :-)
Check out CS guitars. Scot brogue....
You forgot “Hi”.
Definitely, the pressure treated fir sounded best. I'm definitely going to take apart my deck and build a new bass!
Hopefully you'll play the appropriate Queen song...
Not "best", just different.
@@f1amezof no, best
@@nhayes927How you quantify that exactly when they are electrified at all, I'm not sure. But have at it..
I feel like the fir was kinda mid-focused, mahogany was warm and rounded, and the maple was bright and scooped
Just when we thought that we might be getting on top of the tone wood debate Billy Corgan declares that colour affects a guitar's tone.
Haha
Billy Corgan also believes in chemtrails, I wouldn't put too much stock in his views on science.
Billy gotta a point (but he doesn't know it.lol). As long as colours affect our emotions and behaviors, a colour may impact the way we play. And the guitar tone is in our fingers.
@@adairfernandes Billy's favourite guitar for many years was a yellow Strat and he spent 20 years pining for it when it got stolen. My favourite guitar is a yellow Tele. The funny thing is that we both hate yellow!
He's right!
I have two exact same model/year Ibanez RG570's, both '91, I put the same pickups, pots and caps into them and they sound totally different!
Sort of.
I think.
And it is because one is Brick Red and the other is Black Cherry.
The Black Cherry one sounds darker so clearly a darker colour makes a darker sound right?
I didn't actually check the cap/pot/pickup's for measurement values but they should all be spot on right?
That 10-15% tolerance on everything wouldn't affect the output right?
Right?
Clamp the maple on top of the mahogany.... makes a Les Plank..... maybe in reverse too... it all sounds good! Keep it up.... love the channel!
+Michael Riley Thanks Michael! ;-)
Michael Riley yes do this
When i use the same guitar and play the same song a few times, the recordings will somehow sound different. I don't think my guitar changed, just the slight difference in the way i play or record the sound can make a perceivable difference. This slight variation makes more difference to the sound than the wood. On the same guitar i can make it sound like 3 different guitars simply by changing the position where your pick hits the strings even by a mere half cm or 1/4 inch.
^^^^^^^^^ Spot on.
People who don't think it makes a difference have only ever played at low volumes. You're an idiot if you've played through a dimed stack and you don't think the different density wood is going to vibrate differently. So yea, "No tonewood" = "I'm a bedroom player for life"
WHY is the mahogany reliably the warmest sounding out of all of them? Jesus Christ you're stupid.
@@romancultist6089 Nice generalization! Please explain how on earth the tone of the wood is transmitted to the pickup. Your string is taught between the nut and the bridge. It's not even touching the wood. The only thing the pickup can "see" is the string and it's vibrations and the guitar wood cannot affect the strings vibration when the string does not come in contact with the wood. It's simple physics. The pickup(magnets, wire type, #of winds and #coils), the pickups location relative to the bridge, the scale length, string(gauge, material) and the pick(material, force and where on string plucked) are the only things physically able to influence the signal coming out of the guitar output jack. I won't even get into the phycology aspect and your inherent biases.
I know you will argue and say well such and such wood provides great sustain. BS the only thing the wood could do is absorb energy thereby reducing sustain.
Now an acoustic instrument is a whole different ball game.
Maybe you should actually read a book and understand how a electric guitar actually works.
Bill Robinette just stfu, bedroom player
Man, you're one of the coolest guitar channels on CZcams. I always love when one of your videos pops up!
Thanks, that’s so good to hear! Cheers!
Dude, you make the craziest videos. I love them. This is great.
+John Danek Thanks John! It's really good to hear that! :-)
I agree. I know wood makes a difference because I took a Strat and changed the body and everything else the same. Absolutely different sound and attack properties.
There are subtle differences in sound. But at least with the pressure treated Fir Wood you won't have termites.
+Dave Monty hahaha, that's certainly a plus! ;-)
Johan Segeborn LOLOLOL! I've got a Mahogany Acoustic - that I just love. Ibanez AC340OPN - and man, that thing growls on the Bass strings. I just love it. But then I have a Maple Hollow-body & I love that too. Different woods for different applications.
Yeah, but the debate has NEVER been about acoustics, just electrics.
Dave Monty , hahahaha!!! I was not expecting this comment,funny!!!
I agree that it's subtle.
Johan, the only man that can make a 2x4 sound absolutely perfect
Actually anyone can do that for about the price of a nice pup and bolt on neck. Solid body electric guitar bodies are a structural element as demonstrated most effectively by Jim Lill; who manages to make two bleeding tables sound like a tele; czcams.com/video/n02tImce3AE/video.html
Actually really surprised how much a difference there was. Riff3 seemed the most prominent. Great job as always.
dude... it´s the microphone place not the wood hahahah do the same with direct line recording..
Interesting, I wasn't expecting to hear such a difference. The maple seemed to sound a tad brighter and snappier while the mahogany sounded deeper and throatier. Also, the fir piece sounded pretty good too. Didn't expect that at all.
+Davy Coningx Thanks! :-)
I thought the Fir was the worst of the bunch. Didn't like the sound at all. I guess that's why we all like different thing! The Mahogany sounded great to my ears.
Yeah, I'm loving the mahogany sound too but the fir had something interesting going which I didn't expect. Given the choice though, I would go for the mahogany.
Davy Coningx I kinda agree on this...
Its interesting though. On its own I'm mahogany all the way. But once you get a band behind you, all bets are off. The Fir didn't do it for me, but I'm sure a Fir guitar could be built that makes my juices flow...Just not this particular plank guitar ahhahah I'm 100% convinced that wood makes a difference, but I'm also 100% convinced that any wood can make a great guitar. Diversity in sound is why we don't all just own one guitar and leave it at that.
Timestamps for comparing! *Tapping Wood:*
1:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir
2:02 - Maple
2:08 - Mahogany
*Guitar:*
Acoustically:
2:15 - Mahogany
2:20 - Maple
2:25 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Electrically:
Riff 1:
2:32 - Mahogany
2:38 - Maple
2:51 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 2 (Strumming:)
2:57 - Mahogany
3:05 - Maple
3:14 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 3 (just played with 2 bottom strings, and High E:)
3:23 - Mahogany
3:35 - Maple
3:47 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 4 * :
4:17 - Mahogany
4:31 - Maple
3:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir (yes, they're out of order in the video.)
Pressure-Treated Fir sounds more harsh to me at times, especially here.
Riff 5:
4:51 - Mahogany
4:56 - Maple
4:46 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 6:
5:12 - Mahogany
5:23 - Maple
5:04 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 7 * :
5:38 - Mahogany
5:49 - Maple
x:xx - Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Riff 8 * :
6:16 - Mahogany
6:02 - Maple
x:xx - Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Individual Strings * :
6:55 - Mahogany
7:21 - Maple
6:31 - Pressure-Treated Fir
* = This is a section where the clips weren't put in the same order as they were originally. I changed the locations of the timestamps in the list, to keep consistent.
*Personal Thoughts:*
For the Acoustic Parts of this video (both wood tapping and acoustic playing,) I'm not convinced that the camera angle was consistent enough.
For the Electric Parts, it did convince me that that the body wood does matter for electric tone. It's present, but it's a bit more subtle than obvious differences between Strat Pups and Gibson Humbucker Pups. Another video, from new Perspectives Music, also convinced me of this:
czcams.com/video/EM7wDZENKEM/video.html
Anyone else feel like they could totally rock any of these guitars on stage?? The mahogany one sounds especially great to my ears! I love everything about the shape of just a neck plus board!!
Thanks , it’s great to hear that! :-)
The old tale of bad guitar good amp. Sounds really good for an epi neck.
Love your guitar design. How much for a custom build? I'd like a Mahoganycaster 24x8x2
do you want the price in linear footage?
Ngl, I would love to have one of these with an EMG and a standby switch. I would use it for shows.
@@shift307 it's not like you can distinguish anything with an active pickup, so it I'll probably to turn out well
I’d actually prefer the Maplecaster, with the Mahoganycaster pickup and neck.
O sheeet didn't expect it to actually change the tone but it really did, to me the mahogany sounded much fuller than all the other woods here
That Mahogany plank sounds really good!
+Pingshan Luan Thanks! :-)
Others simply call a mahogany plank a Gibson SG!
@@JohanSegeborn Guitar bodies aren't made out of Maple Einstein, & run a loop, like someone actually serious about tone comparisons would do, so your inconsistent playing doesn't effect the data. Fail.
@@JeighNeither you can't run a loop if you're changing the guitar...
@@freebird61885 lol 😂
At the end of the day, the difference between different wood types is minimal. I found that the overall tone was just about the same, but things like sustain and “snappiness” varied.
Once you add gain, a lot of the those differences vanish. Pick your wood types based on weight and aesthetics instead.
dude i bet the guy who mixes your guitar would disagree. Each of those has a pretty significant EQ change imo
@@djangomaxfield
1. The guitars were not held the same each time.
2.The location where you picked is not identical
3. There is no mention of the pickup height being identical.
czcams.com/video/n02tImce3AE/video.html
@@djangomaxfield thats not true. I've heard plenty of recording engineers say that tonewood on electric guitars is bullshit
@@TrannyFluids I knew MANY of the recording engineer that worked in the 1980's. You are correct. What makes a bigger difference in sound than 'tone wood' was the type of microphone, mic placement and the recording console.
Yep, what actually matters on an electric guitar is in this order.. Pickups > Pedals (If you're using them) > Amp > Pedals Again (If you're Using an FX Loop) > Cabinet
When it comes to a solid guitar body, it is very much about subtleties, the body weight determines more than tree type in my opinion.
My philosophy and experience is that the neck has significantly greater influence than the body "especially in attack and sustain and to some extent resonance.
The most important however, in my opinion, is the actual construction and the sum of the parts!
Another extremely important aspect, of course, is the hearing of the individual, which is totally subjective and determines everything in the end.
"Of course you must have pickups amplifiers and speakers that can pick up those subtleties and deliver that information to the ears"
THIS
👍YESSS!
100%
Wrong czcams.com/video/n02tImce3AE/video.html
Hey mate, I pulled around the hose for you and called the fire dept. You'll need them when the flames erupt;-) (loved the vid)
+Woodeso's Guitar Mods Thanks man ;-)
I love it. Sounds fucking great! I'm about to make a guitar like this for a main instrument! That mahogany sounds amazing. How much did the wood cost you? And where you get it?
He lives in Sweden, but if you live in the US any decent hardware or Lumberyard should have it in stock
rbagel55 like home Depot has a piece of mahogany wood like that?
Well it depends on how thick you want you body to be. I don't know how thick the board Johan is using,
it appears to be around 3/4 or 5/8 inch. If you want thicker, then you can laminate 2 boards together, that would be cheaper than trying to find a 1 piece the thickness of a Les Paul. If Home Depot doesn't have it
then a good Lumberyard should have it. I can't quote you a price, all I know is the bigger and thicker the piece is, the more $$$ you are going to pay it.
With my eyes open the mahogany sounded deeper and richer, with my eyes closed towards the end I could hear no difference. I wonder if seeing the wood allows the brain to follow it´s preconceptions. I have to say I liked all three sounds! Who needs an expensive guitar? The knocking test obviously showed different tones from the 3 samples. Love your fast hammer technique Johan, I could have used you in my Blacksmithing business before I retired. Fascinating stuff, well done.
+Christopher Jeneson Thanks my friend ;-)
I agree. I was listening while reading the comments, and I couldn't hear a difference that would have made me select one wood over the other. I'd love to hear 2 different Planks of the same wood.
Exactly Christopher! There was no difference and the people who commented that they could hear a difference with their eyes shut are self delusional!
Well, there it is gentlemen, I said honestly what I heard and it seems that you agree. Thanks. CJ
"I wonder if seeing the wood allows the brain to follow it´s preconceptions." Absolutely. Google " McGurk effect". This is the kind of shit that let's "audiophiles" spend $1000 on a cable. Just knowing they have an expensive cable makes it sound better to them. To truly know what's happening requires blind studies.
Timestamps (some may go slightly earlier than they most ideally should, but this might be as good as I can do:)
*Tapping Wood:*
1:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir
2:02 - Maple
2:08 - Mahogany
*Guitar:*
Acoustically:
2:15 - Mahogany
2:20 - Maple
2:25 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Electrically:
Riff 1:
2:32 - Mahogany
2:38 - Maple
2:51 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 2 (Strumming:)
2:57 - Mahogany
3:05 - Maple
3:14 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 3 (just played with 2 bottom strings, and High E:)
3:23 - Mahogany
3:35 - Maple
3:47 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 4 * :
4:17 - Mahogany
4:31 - Maple
3:57 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Pressure-Treated Fir sounds more harsh to me at times, especially here.
Riff 5:
4:51 - Mahogany
4:56 - Maple
4:46 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 6:
5:12 - Mahogany
5:23 - Maple
5:04 - Pressure-Treated Fir
Riff 7 * :
5:38 - Mahogany
5:49 - Maple
Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Riff 8 * :
6:16 - Mahogany
6:02 - Maple
Pressure Treated Fir's not played.
Individual Strings * :
6:55 - Mahogany
7:21 - Maple
6:31 - Pressure-Treated Fir
* = This is a section where the clips weren't put in the same order as they were originally. I changed the locations of the timestamps in the list, to keep consistent.
*Personal Thoughts:*
For the Acoustic Parts of this video (both wood tapping and acoustic playing,) I'm not convinced that the camera angle was consistent enough.
For the Electric Parts, it did convince me that that the body wood does matter for electric tone. It's present, but it's a bit more subtle than obvious differences between Strat Pups and Gibson Humbucker Pups. Another video, from new Perspectives Music, also convinced me of this:
czcams.com/video/EM7wDZENKEM/video.html
The sound may be different or may be not, but this shows you can take any wood for a solid body electric guitar, if the pick ups are good, the guitar will sound good.
A palm mute or a tone knob has WAY more effect than this nonsense.
Nope. My old 62 "Les Paul" sounded worlds better than modern SGs and putting a good set of PAF copies made it sound a bit better. The same PAF copies in a modern SG sounded nowhere near as good as the 62 with garbage pickups.
@@FPChris Judging by your videos I can definitely understand how you'd think this. For your purposes, the difference would clearly be negligible; for more dynamic players, these types of differences are massive.
Another FANTASTIC experiment!!! You really could hear a sleight difference starting already with the tap test. The fir has a great sound but the throaty fullness of the mahogany is my favorite!
+Blues Bengan Thanks Bengan! Glad to hear it. I preferred the Mahogany too.
I agree, the mahogany has the fullest tone. As heard in the Commanding tone of most Les Paul's
I am blown away by this guy! Johan has tested every folklore about famous amps and guitars. I think I've watched most of them because the history of rock guitar has been preserved here in these videos. I have learned so much from your videos! Johan, I love your videos, man.
I mean it's the same thing it's always been, everything effects the sound it's just a question of how much. In an accoustic instrument the flexing and vibrating of the wood in the body is what actually produces the sound waves that we hear, so wood is very important. In an electric the sound is produced by the pickups based on the vibration of the strings. As such, so many different things have more effect than the wood. Taking out the obvious things, like your amp, pedals, knobs and dials on the guitar, etc... the pickups have the most effect, followed by your strings, the nut and bridge, the stiffness and frequency response of the neck, then the body material. This is not even taking into account that a lot of tone comes from how you play, seeing as your hands are the things directly interacting with the strings.
Wood is basically not worth considering unless you've figured out the rest of your build (your favorite strings, pickups, bridge, bone or synthetic nut, etc...). Check all of Fender's non-artist models. From the cheapest to the most expensive they're all alder bodies and maple necks. Squire is mostly poplar bodies and maple neck. If the master luthiers at Fender don't give a shit about tone wood then it probably won't matter to you until you hit a very high level of skill.
Of course, if you want to get a specific wood then go for it, it's your guitar make it the way that you want, but don't try to play it off as if it's some huge deal.
Yeah, all the differences in wood for electric guitars can be removed by very very slightly changing the EQ a bit. It'd be pointless wasting money on an expensive wood for a guitar when you're playing it through an amp. For acoustic guitars though, as you say, the wood can make a huge difference, because the wood itself is acting as a loudspeaker. The wood moves in the same way speakers do, they wobble up and down. And so of course wood affects the tone greatly on an acoustic. Unless you're plugging the acoustic in too because it has a piezo on it. Record it with a microphone instead of a piezo.
Maybe the best tone on an acoustic guitar I've ever heard was one made with bog oak. Yes, oak, as a tone wood. Search for it on CZcams, the bog oak acoustic guitar. Bog oak just means the oak was found in a bog/swamp and recovered and dried, and built into a guitar. It just the most juicy and glassy and smooth tone I've ever heard. Too many acoustic are very very bright and tinny and nails-on-a-chalkboard these days, especially with young guitarists insisting on putting on brand new strings right before a gig/recording. Acoustic guitars sound best with weeks old strings. But some things help achieve that sound even with new strings. Apparently bog oak is one of them. Now I have a new thing I can't afford that I want to buy. Because bog oak is extremely rare and expensive, it's not like you can just make it up yourself by leaving it in a man-made pond or something. Bog wood is usually ancient, hundreds or thousands of years old, preserved in the bog. So yeah. What I want instead is an all mahogany or all rosewood acoustic, which are expensive but realistically expensive, not re-mortage your home level expensive.
Another thing I do is use flatwound strings. They sound less trebly and tinny when brand new too, although they're much much closer to normal roundwound strings as I thought it'd be. They are still bright, really. But definitely better than normal roundwound strings, not THAT trebly.
And flatwound strings last much much longer too. I assume it's because they have no grooves in which for sweat to fall down into, collect in those grooves, and make the string begin to rust or break down so that it becomes a weak point where it'll snap. But yeah I use flatwound strings on everything now, even my electrics, and I don't play jazz. They're definitely still bright enough for when you want them to be bright, say for a genre like funk for example. But the mere fact they just last a lot longer is great.
Flatwound strings even last a lot longer than Elixir strings. I've tried Elixir strings so many times, and yet they've never really lasted any longer than normal strings do.
Air sounds as good as wood. czcams.com/video/n02tImce3AE/video.html
Umm, well I can hear a difference between the different woods, but I could not say one was better then the other. They were just different. I am sure slightly different tones could be used for different styles, but frankly a few times I thought the treated fir sounded best, so I guess what wood you should go with is determined by what you want the guitar to be best at.
Thumbs up well said
It is exactly the point of the video .
And partially why guitars are now made of different and exotic woods. Other than esthetics
And well the biggest reason we buy more than one
IMHO
Cheers
Some people won’t hear it, some will. Peeling back harmonics is a real litmus test for ear detection
@@BobBob-dv2qh i bet you change your tune when you watch this.
czcams.com/video/n02tImce3AE/video.html
It's a trade-off it's just like the necks on bass guitars older body matches up great with a maple neck for Rock but not for blues and Ebony neck with older body sounds better same way with pickups summer brighter summer lower pitch the pressure treated with it everybody seems to be commenting on you perceive it as sounding better because it has more high end but does that sound better to a 20 year old that has a lot better hearing and has not lost his high end like myself it sounds very brittle even though I'm in my fifties but my ears are good I usually go with older bodies and maple on Maple necks for Rock Lindy Frailand pickups
Thanks Johan for all your work here.
It’s been a pleasure not only watching your playing but the well thought out concepts for videos, well executed and documented.
I’ve often wondered what the difference would be with electric guitars and if it would roughly follow what I’ve experienced in acoustic guitars.
I heard a distinct difference between all three woods. I was actually surprised how good the cheap for board sounded in some of the clips.
Here are the tone prints as I perceived them:
Mahogany:
Bass - 8
Low Mid - 7
High mid - 5
Treble - 5
Maple:
Bass - 5
Low Mid - 6
High mid - 7
Treble - 7
Fir:
Bass - 7
Low Mid - 4
High mid - 7
Treble - 8
+Kelvin Jenkins Thanks man, that’s great feedback!
The Mythbuster of music. Great!
+Vinicius Antunes de Proença Thanks man :-)
The difference is bigger in the way of playing.
Exactly lol. I was like. But he keeps picking differently. I can hear it like....
@@crashdummy40 I know. It boggles the mind that people are sat watching this on the internet - a source for all humanity's knowledge and understanding - and yet they are still ignorant to basic science. 'Tonewood' belongs in the flat earth pile of woo-woo.
Im completely shocked people can't hear any difference. Bad speakers? Too much loud music? Lol hey I can't blame anyone for the latter.
Thanks for the vid. Fun and valuable
I can hear the difference. The mahogany sounds best to me.
+Scott Locaputo Thanks, that was my favorite too
The mahogany sounds open and musical. The maple sounds bright and compressed.
You can really hear the difference on riffs 3 and 4. The maple and fir planks sound like crap! The mahogany sounds like Angus Young's SG! I have really great speakers hooked up to my computer, and well trained ears. Some people may not have that luxury. The mahogany sounds warmer and more harmonic.
Scott Locaputo I agree.
maybe this is telling us thickness and volume of wood are less important than the wood
One thing people forget about 'Tone', is that 'Human Error' will also effect how things sound. The same person can play the same things 10 times over, and it will sound a little different each time tone wise. Also, Sustain effects the tone far more than people realize. Acoustically, there is definitely a major difference due to wood species, but those differences become far more subtle when a pickup (that listens to only the strings) comes into play. Most of those differences disappear when Effects are added, or when the instrument is tossed into a mix of other instruments.
I've found the thing that effects my tone the most is how I have my bridge setup. At least with trems that have individual saddles like a Wilkinson or Music Man where you can adjust both the height of the whole bridge and the height of each string individually.
If I put the bridge high and the saddles low, the angle from behind the saddle where the string goes into the body is more gradual. The tone becomes more thin, snappy, and poppy kind of like a Tele. But if I lower the bridge and raise the saddles it becomes thicker and warmer sounding because there's a higher tension and a more extreme angle on the strings at the bridge.
I figured this out when I bought a blemished guitar from AMS which had obviously been used and returned. I almost returned it myself because it sounded like shit but I noticed the previous buyer adjusted the bridge all the way up and the saddles all the way down. I adjusted it more to my liking and it immediately changed the entire tone of the guitar. I didn't change anything but the angle of the saddles and the height of the bridge plate. same string height. same pickup height. same distance from string to pole piece, etc but that angle on the strings made a huge difference.
My original point is that I agree with everthing you said lol. When just adjusting bridge settings, or your pick attack can dramatically change the tone of your guitar it's hard to even do any accurate experiments. Or even the way the pots and input jack were soldered. if one guitar has a better solder job or more or less solder than the other, I assume it'll effect the way a signal travels through that solder
Pickups vary slightly in their output. To exclude this possibility you should have used only one pickup for both guitars. Or did you do exactly that and I missed it? Would be nice if you repeated the test like that and showed the results.
End of a stupid debate. Thanks Johan.
+Sum 1 Thanks ;-)
I don't think it will end the debate. It will shift it to: "Yes, there is a slight difference. But is it predictable and significant?"
It's not the end of any debate. All anyone would have to do is blind the test and suddenly, every single moron in this comment section who thinks the 'debate is settled' would be reduced to excuses.
I'm the one who understands what happens here. You're not, ergo, you're the idiot, not me.
Ape you mean that in a blind test the sound from both guitars will suddently change and be the same? If yes, you are an idiot.
The mahogany [guitar] could be played as is. I have heard guitars that cost a lot of money sound worse lmao. Great job man.
+Wile e. Coyote Thanks, yeah the Mahogany was my favorite
Haha true!
with a good headphone, it makes a huge differents .the mahogany is warmer. the maple is clearer with separated strings note,
and the pressure treated fir ,the sound is dull and unlived. i really appreciate your videos . i hear two often ,people saying that
wood does'nt affect the sound on electric guitar(of course ,if we use high gain set up it's not gonna work!).keep making your excellent videos!
Thanks Yohann!
The fir sounds like a cheap manufactured guitar and you can clearly hear differences in the open chords positons
Please run the same test with 3 planks of the same wood. 3 maples 3 mahog 3 fir etc. The resonance in the same species should close the gap a bit more. IMHO!
+WoahBoomshakalaka Yeah, we do indeed need to do that, to get some idea about variation within one wood
That is what I wanted to know. anyway, thanks johan you are the man!
I'm looking forward to that! (In this test, I could hear something very distinct in most, if not all, of the mahogany sound-bites. Anyway, many thanks for the video.
It would be nice if you could do a frequency analysis as well, just to stop people using meaningless terms such as "fat" or "warm".
All of my this.
The best fair comparision video, well done!
Thanks, I’m really glad to hear that
@@JohanSegeborn It would be better not to have the room mic and the guitar many feet away from the cab mic. You are bringing in the acoustic properties into the recording. Those properties should be taken out of the equation as no one can hear the acoustic properties in a band setting. I'd also do a blind test wood 1, wood 2 and wood 3. ask the user to take notes and choose which wood is which before the reveal at the end.
@Tod Dot lol! I’d like a double blind test so biases can be excluded. That’s how testing works!
Johan: you have the world's best job, playing all these different bases and guitars. This was a great idea! Everybody talks about the differences between tonewoods but you've actually cooked up a good comparison test. Even my old ears could clearly hear the difference, with the Mahogany being warmer and more evenly balanced and the Maple having more high harmonic content. It does confirm what many of us have suspected all along. I think that much of the difference we are hearing is in the decay characteristics of the different woods. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks Jim, I’m glad to hear that!
It's a great idea for an video - love it. Now you should start a Segeborn brand and sell those "stump" models. Simplest design ever! ;)
Thanks! ;-)
Johan Segeborn i agree. A travel guitar line hahaha. And Segeborn sounds like a badass guitar brand. Like Segeborn Lester would be a good name for an LP type guitar hahaha
They both sound pretty incredible the maple has a lot more pop and snap to it the mahogany has that deep richness that we so dearly love obviously Gibson had a great idea by capping mahogany with Maple to get the best of both worlds
+Sam Fosdick Thanks Sam! Cheers :-)
I think you are right and Johan's efforts here could confirm the usual consensus about Maple (bright and snappy) and Mahogany (warm und punchy). But the difference is smaller than I thought it would be. Seems like the construction and the PUs are more important than the type of wood?
I have seen the light! I used to be a tonewood naysayer, but I hear a difference. A minor difference, but it's there.
Mahogany is my preference, but it's like the difference between a Super Bass and a Super Lead - horses for courses.
I am pretty sure this is how Les Paul started figuring out which wood combinations would give him the tone he was looking for, you don't really need to build a complete guitar to sense the main differences in tone coming from the wood acoustically, but alas then you get a pickup involved and an amp and things get really complicated!
Loved the video I have an unused guitar neck that I will put to good use as a travel guitar copying our friend here, thanks for the video!
simply, the best video, the video that destroys myths, the video that goes into all theories of building music instruments, a video that is very fun
Thanks, I’m really glad you liked it!
The age old debate that ends with two different types of people.
Those who understand how electric guitar pickups works.
Those who overpaid for their guitar and refuse to accept reality.
Mike Hunt so I’m assuming you’re ignoring the clearly audible differences displayed in this video...
@@Dagger_323 Were you paying attention to the position of his hand in relation to the pickup? That changed around a bit.
@@keyboardwarrior6296 his hand placement was not nearly varied enough to cause the level of tonal changes that were discernable here.
@@Dagger_323 Yeah it was. Up until the greenish slab, that was the only discernible difference in tone, at which point, there was more gain.
@@Dagger_323 Also dynamics, hand placement isn't the only thing happening.
I think it would make a bigger difference if you had a full body construction, more wood means more tone. The difference was obvious to me, maple had a punch to it and the mahogany had a warmer tone. And thanks for the video!
The "LOG" lives..les paul would be so proud..lol..keep up the great videos..all the best from Australia.
It would be nice to be able to remove the imprecision of the human element from these sorts of tests in order to make them more fully subjective, but even bearing that inherent imprecision in mind, the difference remains obvious. And, why wouldn't it be? Materials matter. The overall system is more than a string with two anchor points and an electromagnetic transducer in the middle. The substrate is going to affect both the dynamic response of the signal (attack, sustain, &c) and the frequency response due to resonances within the system. And, your demo here demonstrates all of that very clearly. (Ironically, one uT00b guy did a similar test, "proving" that the wood made no difference, yet even with eyes closed, the difference in dynamic and frequency response between the different "bodies" was obvious.)
I think the real issue isn't whether or not there's a difference, but whether the difference matters to most players, or even if it's discernible. If a body could be fabricated from rubber, and another from titanium, I'm sure the difference would be obvious to 100% of listeners. As body materials converge to the much more subtle differences between different woods, fewer and fewer would notice the differences. However, observational bias shift certainly doesn't "prove" there is no difference. I have a friend whose colour vision is much better than mine, and he can discern shades that I cannot. Anyone would be a fool to say that those variations don't exist (they can be measured, and we've tested it), but this is precisely what the "tone wood deniers" do at every turn. (Returning to our buddy in the first paragraph, he was convinced his four "guitars" sounded identical, and I have no reason to doubt that to HIM they did, as I cannot hear through his ears. To me, and to a couple of friends and family members who have no reason to believe one way or the other, the differences were easily discerned.)
The REAL physics of this falls solidly in the "tone-wood matters" camp, just as REAL physics does not allow for the belief in a flat earth. But, science seems to be a greased water balloon that those lacking the background knowledge cannot seem to grasp, so they resort to reductionistic pseudo-science. Sometimes, I wish I could turn off my engineer brain and join them in their folly. It seems it might make life so much easier to be unaware of the actual complexity of almost everything.
For me, the type of wood doesn't matter as long as the SYSTEM comes together in such a way as to produce a tone that makes me happy, but it's ridiculous to assert that the wood isn't part of that system. I built a Tele with a poplar body and rosewood capped maple neck; it's dynamic and frequency response is noticeably different from an otherwise identical guitar built from ash with a maple neck. Not better nor worse; I love them both.
Thanks man great comment.
I’ve been noticing more and more lately how much different the mahogany body on my Les Paul sounds and resonates compared to the alder body of my Strats. Unplugged, the acoustic properties of the mahogany really have a woody fee to them, a warm, jazzy tone compared to the alder Strat, which is much more guided by the strings themselves.
Even though the two guitars have some differences in design, I.e. bolt on, my Strat is a tune-o-magic bridge with a Gibson scale length Warmoth conversion neck, so it’s designed to be very Gibson-like, there is a fundamental woodiness to the tone that the Strat doesn’t have, for better or worse.
It’s because the electronics and pickups are different
czcams.com/video/n02tImce3AE/video.html
I really think your channel is one of the very best guitar related channels here at youtube. Love your shootouts and your sometimes unconventional approach ;-)
+Steven van Demsky Thanks Steven, it's really good to hear that!
My brother and I both play guitar. I played the audio starting at the actual playing of the riffs. Afterward I asked him what the difference was with each riff. Without a moments hesitation he said, "Different guitars."
How come he did not said 'different WoOd'.
dude... it´s the microphone place not the wood hahahah do the same with direct line recording...
Wood doesn't add anything to the tone. It takes something away. If both ends of the string were connected by a material that was infinitely rigid and infinitely dense, you'd just hear a vibrating string through the pickup. But the very fact that the wood can move, means some of the energy of the string is lost to the guitar, rather than just the air and the guitarist. But the wood doesn't just evenly reduce volume across all frequencies. It depends on it's mass and stiffness. The wood resonates better at certain frequencies, and the better the wood resonates at a frequency, the more that frequency is bled from the sound of the strings. I'd guess the construction of the neck has a bigger impact than the body, though.
I guess the initial attack sounds more similar across different materials, before certain frequencies are attenuated by the guitar. So, for one thing: playing a riff with no held notes, is not going to show the difference as much.
Also, there's the reverse to consider in the case of an amplified instrument. That big body provides a lot of space for sound from the amp to get the whole guitar vibrating and feed energy back into the strings. Maybe a better test would be to gently tap a note at high volume, and see the difference in how quickly the note starts to die and feedback starts to creep in, and how that feedback sounds.
But anyone who says the wood makes no difference, is just blindly repeating garbage that's just false as the statement that expensive "tonewood" sounds "better" or "worse" than a cheap slab of ash or alder.
There's just so much else going on and affecting the sound, that it's pointless worrying about it.
Besides, most recordings that people hear and admire, were made on cheap, mass produced guitars and sound nothing like that guitar through that amp, did in that recording room at that time, since the signal has been through a mic, a desk, a bunch of effects, EQ, compression...etc.
So I just wouldn't worry about it. Great songs make great tone, not the other way around. If the song is great, the tone BECOMES great. That's just how it works
This is actually the first time I hear a noticeable effect, which speaks volumes to the way you went about this experiment. Well done! I have always been on the side of wood affects tone, but mostly for reasons I have not often heard discussed. This reason is how waves work, you know, the ones that travel from the strings to the body. While those waves might not be picked up by the pickups so much, they definitely have a cancellation effect back to the strings. Any waves that are offset from each other will have a cancelling effect on each other, which is why types of wood will each have a distinctive effect on the way the final guitar will ultimately sound. This is very much how phase works in music recording, where if microphones aren't placed correctly, the input of one will take out the energy of the other, which is why you would flip the phase of a bottom snare mic for instance.
+The Ape Machine Thanks! Maybe we can visualize that in some way in an upcoming clip.
There is actually an online tool to do this, but I can't find it at the moment, I might have to get back to you on this, but you can start here: www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/superposition/superposition.html
thank you for explaining it so simple.
The Maple and Mahogany sounded more warm and round tonally, but sounded pretty much the same to me through my speakers/headphones. The Fir sounded a bit more brittle and thin, but it could probably be EQ'd out in a mix. And the tonewood debate rages on! ;-) Happy Monday Johan!
+jcoulter43 Thanks man ;-)
We get to see "behind the scenes" of the "hand made" Segeborn factory in it's early stages. When do you outsource and make "The Plank" in S. Korea or China to save production costs? Ha ha ha!
what debate? it sounds different, hence tone wood is real.. it doesn't mean you agree that spending $1000 on a piece of mahogany is going to sound $1000 better than a $60 piece.
I tried with my eyes closed to hear the difference. There's a distinct audible difference when it's not going into the amp. The sound is the same when it's going into the amp.
I was listening to you tap the woods, and I noted something interesting. When you tapped on the fir, it had basically one frequency to it. The other two, however, had two particularly loud frequencies to them. While the intervals aren't perfect, I heard an octave plus a major third on the maple, and an octave plus a fifth on the mahogany. I'd be interested in knowing if this quality of the sound of the woods as you tapped them could be used to help indicate the potential quality (not the final quality, of course) of the guitar that could be built from a particular piece of wood?
I ask this cuz in your demos, I found the mahogany to be the most pleasant; and the interval I perceived for it was close to a fifth. A perfect fifth is often considered the most pleasant non-unison interval in music. The mahogany guitar didn't "tap" a perfect fifth, to my ears, but it was pretty close. The maple guitar had a particularly harsh quality to it, both acoustically and electrically. This was surprising to me, since I normally like maple bodies. The fir didn't sound too bad, but it did seem to lack something that the mahogany and maple had, and I'm guessing that the two "peak" tones I mentioned above might have something to do with that.
Assuming that my observations are correct, that would imply that a piece of wood could be "tuned" for tone through density and dimension. This has always made sense to me, but this is the first time I've seen it demonstrated in such a compelling way.
You can probably guess that I'm a bit of a novice when it comes to this subject. I'd love to hear your thoughts on what I've said. In any case, thanks for the demo!
Indeed, the mahogany sounded the most pleasant!
When will they be available to order?
+1965fatbob haha! Soon, but they'll be extremely expensive ;-)
I'm ready to order my lumbercaster and plankcaster.
Joke aside, I'm sure there are people who'd pay for that body design if there's that golden Bender logo on somewhere and of course some quality pickups. Then they'll complain about ergonomics-ONLY.
fortj3 LOL!
It'd likely be a Gimpson logo as a reissue of the infamous Les Paul LOG. And they'd just glue some ES wings onto it when people complained about ergo, just like last time.
Yup. It’s true. The bridge is attached to the wood whose density and character in turn affect the “shape” of the wave.
The sound of a guitar is determined by the following things, in no particular order. The forest that the wood for the guitar grew in. The species of wood. The rainfall during the time the tree was growing. Whether the wood came from the inner or outer rings of the tree trunk. The fingers of the guitarist. The song being played. The amp being used. The tone settings on the guitar, and amp. Any pedals in between the guitar and the amp, and the settings of those pedals. The brand, gauge, and materials of the strings. The pick being used. The pickups on the guitar. The tuners. The material of the nut and bridge. The cables connecting everything together. The acoustics in the venue. The sobriety of the listener. The interaction of the guitar's sound with the sounds of the other instruments of the band, including the vocalist's larynx. The sympathetic vibrations of the strings based on what's played on the other strings, as well as what vibrations occur in the guitar's body picked up from the sound of the other instruments. This is separate from how the ear of the listener is affected by the other instruments. The phase of the moon. Relative humidity of the environment. The air temperature. Whether the guitar has decorative stickers on it or not. The material of the pickguard, and how it is attached to the guitar. The forest that the wood for the guitar grew in. The species of wood. The rainfall during the time the tree was growing. Whether the wood came from the inner or outer rings of the tree trunk. And others, too numerous to mention. Even though this exercise attempted to isolate Just the effect of the wood species, in the real world, all those other differences would have factored in.
Now, anyone who claims those different woods didn't sound different is either deaf or was listening on 89¢ earphones. But, anyone who can claim any one wood was "better" overall is full of sheep dip. Johan played some interesting riffs that demonstrated the difference in tones. Props to him for that. But what counts the most in a guitar in the real world is how it sounds FOR THE SONG BEING PLAYED. For some songs, a "warm" sound is great. For other songs, it sucks. And the same is true for all other sounds.
Wood is just a material to hold the magnets and wires. It really isn't that complicated.
@@FPChris So why not make every single electric guitar out of cheap crappy wood? Why go for a maple neck vs mahogany when cheap plywood will work just as well?
Harder woods can handle the string tension with the help of a truss rod. For bodies hard woods are more durable than softer woods like pine. There ARE plenty of plywood body guitars out there that sound just as good as "tonewood" bodies. Maple veneer tops are VERY common. It just looks pretty. I printed a body on a 3D printer. Sounds just as good as any other guitar I own.
@@FPChris So a custom shop Fender strat will sound just as good as a squier bullet with the same pickups and hardware. Got it.
Yo.....did you listen to the video?
So glad I found your channel Johan. Great content brother. Thank you
+Randy Spear Thanks my friend, Cheers!
Personally I liked the Mahogany best.
Then the Fir.
Lastly the Maple.
me to and i have new mahogany body guitar
Mahogany sounds warm, pretty nice tone
I wish all these folks doing tonewood tests on solid body electric guitars would not only compare different bodies by replacing them and keeping everything else the same, and then TRY to play exactly the same, but ALSO record several takes using the exact same guitar and body and reveal sound differences between THESE takes that occur just by having a human playing. And be fair, have lunch or go for a walk between the takes, because setting up a different body takes time inbetween aswell, and will lead to you playing with a different feel. Then I want to see if sound differences between THESE takes are minor to the ones that occur when using different bodies or not!
So, if you are a luthier coming up with the next "electric tonewood" experiment, please: compare
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TAKES PLAYED ON SAME BODY
vs. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TAKES PLAYED ON DIFFERENT BODIES.
do not just compare take vs take. When I record 3 takes on the same guitar and setup, there is alway going to be one with more bottom, one sharper sounding, one open and big, because the sound is in my fingers. The question is: is there an additional influence of tonewood to the sound when using electromagnetic pickups?
By the way, the unplugged comparison that Johan made in this video is basically using an electric guitar as an acoustic, recorded directly with a microphone, no amp. It is an acoustic instrument now. But Pickups are not microphones, what they "hear" is not resonance. So the unplugged test is a completely different story... tonewood IS relevant for acoustic instruments, we know that. But in this debate, we are talking solid body electric guitars. It's about what the pickups hear, not what microphones hear.
Totally get what you're saying, however over 8 riffs it's quite clear to hear richer tonal property of the mahogony compare to the maple and pressure wood. Even though I understand it can sound different through playing as you said.. There's a consistency for all 8 that the maple and pressure is lighter and snappier than the mahogony. This isn't a coincidence
@@iamacharliest What are you talking about? listen to the video without watching and try to guess which one is which. You might be surprised... so bad that you already know the order, but try it.
@@pordiosero80 I don't think I could tell between the maple and pressure but definitely the difference in the mahogony over the other two. Sound is literally vibrations and when a certain wood soaks up some different frequencies of course it will make a difference to the tone, if only slightly.
PGspeed88 If luthier made 6 guitars exactly the same and 30 guitarists could not detect a difference (reliably)? Duh....of course not, all 6 guitars are the same!?
The Mahogany sounds darker and fuller.
+kj053910 it did indeed :-)
Besides the wood, there are other factors that govern the subtle differences between electric instruments as well. The bridge (tailpiece, individual saddle mass) and its mass, how it is installed into the body, the strings (composition, age and linear density), the wood of the neck, the windings of the pickup (number of windings, scatterwound or precisely wound, narrow or wide profile of windings), the configuration of the pickups (single coil, humbucker, piezo), the location of the pickups along the strings, the number of pickups (more pickups = more magnetic pull on the strings to reduce sustain), the bevel profile of the polepieces (this will affect the shape of the magnetic field that the string cuts through), the pickup magnets (alnico type, neodymium), the geometry of the pickups (big pole pieces vs. small ones, laminate core in pickup to "squeeze" the tone as in the case of Hagstron BiSonic bass pickups), the tone knob setup (potentiometer value, linear or nonlinear taper, low-pass or Stellartone circuit), active or passive circuitry (active has additional EQ parameters), type of pick (thickness, material, texture profile, etc.), and wood sealant of finish (nitrocellulose, varnish, polyurethane...).
Any change to any of these parameters will alter the sound. It's all physics, but the choices we make in a guitar of all of these factors to decide its final sound is art. And on top of all that, there is the player's nuances and idiosyncracies as well as the guitar instrument cable (longer ones will tend to have impedance issues where bass frequencies and treble frequencies will go out of phase, bass leading the treble--making the sound muddy), guitar amp, proximity of guitar to amp (feedback), room geometry, signal processors (stomp boxes), and neck profile (affects HOW the guitarist plays the guitar--fat neck vs thin neck makes a huge difference).
And non-guitarists wonder WHY guitarists can't be happy with just one guitar. It's an ongoing quest for the "right one" and keeping the good ones along the way (the ones that help us explore different ways to approach playing and making sounds). Some are happy with just one guitar, but the restless and pioneers among us are constantly seeking out one with a different voice that appeals to our tastes. Same goes for any other instrument. I'm a drummer--always seeking out new textures for my kit. But I also play bass and guitar. And I'm a physics professor, so this stuff fascinates me to no end. Thanks for the test!
Only just discovering this and it's fascinating! The differences are really subtle but there's definitely something there. The mahogany and maple sound pretty similar, except that the maple definitely has a little less bottom end in the sound that's especially apparent on the lowest notes, and a bit more top end, whereas the mahogany has more lows and a bit more punch in the low mid-range, but with a little less top end than the maple. Definitely shows to me why the mahogany/maple combination in a Les Paul works so well, as to me the two tones definitely compliment each other. The fir just had a different resonance in the mid range to me that makes it sound a little scooped and just a bit odd in comparison. They're all such minor differences though, and they're only really noticeable like this when all other variables are removed, but they're still there.
I honestly never understood the idea that the wood of a solidbody makes no difference. Anyone who's played a fully hollow Gibson ES and a solidbody Gibson like a Les Paul or SG knows that, even if the pickups are identical (I know they're not on current production ones but they were on the originals), they sound different. If putting air in the body of the guitar makes a difference, why wouldn't the actual type of wood used make a difference too, if only a small one?
You gave a very professional answer. The combination of the mahogany and maple in a less paul explain why they compliment each other so well
Putting the air in the body is an actual structural difference. You would get a different acoustic response. But solid to solid it’s so close only the extensively trained ear can tell the difference.
If you really want to bend your mind contemplate that different shapes would also have different sound quality. Structure means more than material in something is nearly supporting the microphone.
@@Rotwang72 but then it wouldnt be a les paul it would be less paul. i disagree that they sound close because there a tonal differences from a les paul and a gretch white falcon for comparisson although they are a bit the same tonally i quite see what you mean with eyes blindfolded it is hard to tell the differnce
@@Rotwang72 also and sg and a flying v are both mahogonay and in a comparisson of them they are unique in every aspect but they have exactly the same wood but the sg is solid and the flying v is 2 piece mahogany as showed here
czcams.com/video/bJXTTOlV4wU/video.html
here is the white flacon
czcams.com/video/O-v27jjM18s/video.html
I definitely here a difference, the mahogany is way warmer........ Fantastic video as always. 💪😁👍
Thanks, glad to hear it! :-)
No
I’m sold, my next guitar I creat will be mahogany, body and neck. Love the deep dark woody sound. Thanks you sir. For this very insightful video.
Its amazing how much electronics can change your tone
alternate title: man plays identical riff on identical guitars through identical amplifier while people pretend they hear a difference
Hi Johan !
Thank you for the honest and plain effort to tackle myths and legends,and, at the same time showing what really affects what in a guitar. Keep on !
+Pedro Leal Thanks man! Cheers Johan
The mahogany to me seemed like the high end was rolled off slightly compared to the other two. But I think they all sounded pretty good. Probably because they were in the right hands going into the right amp.
Thanks for your efforts Johan. I want to say your videos confirmed what I had in mind for a long time. That the different between the tonewood is not huge but subtle. That I prefer humbucker PAF type on Mahogany and single coils on Maples. And more importantly, not to fuss too much about 'tone' and get better at playing instead. Cheers!
+danyjr Thanks, yeah I couldn't agree more. Cheers Johan
Amen
I prefer the. Maple. I would also point out that the tone, attack, and acoustic volume will change over time from vibration. I have recordings of my Alder body Music Man Silhouette from 2002 when it was brand new. It is has a much more rounded tone now that it has been played for a couple hours almost every day for the last 16 years. String vibration definitely changes the stiffness of wood. My favorite combination for a solid body guitar is Swamp Ash with a highly figured rock maple top. I built one using a Carvin maple neck/curly maple fingerboard. I am building another with a Primavera/curly maple top same neck. I choose wood by tapping the way that you demonstrated. I am building an acoustic with a quarter sawn Douglas Fir top. I expect it to be very loud due to the stiffness of the fir.
Hey Johan! Just wondering, have you ever thought about glueing a "maple cap" to a piece of mahagony like you had in this video and than compare the mahagony only with the capped one? Would be interesting for sure!
Maybe watch this then decide. czcams.com/video/n02tImce3AE/video.html
To my untrained ear the maple had a slightly brighter sound than the mahogany. The treated pine was somewhere in between the two. I’m not musically inclined but I am a furniture maker and use common and exotic woods all the time. Doesn’t make me an expert though, just my opinion. Good and interesting experiment.👍🏻
Thanks, I’m glad to hear that!
Watching your picking hand, this biggest differences in tone seem to correlate with the biggest shifts in hand position (in some cases being right over the pickup with one guitar, and halfway between the pickup and neck on another). The ones where your hand is in the closest position between guitars are the ones that sound nearly identical.
One thing I wish tests like this also showed is a clip of every test with a single guitar back to back, so the viewer can hear how much variation there is from clip to clip with a single instrument. There may seem to be consistency when watching the tests run in order, but the palette of the ear is being cleansed by the other guitars. Listening to the fir and muting the other two, the difference was more noticeable than the other two were from each other.
Love that video, thanks Johan Segeborn. Surprisingly all sounds good, and may be that mahagony sounds the best.
Thanks Dan, glad to hear it!
The mahogany deffinatly has a warmer tone. Always picked mahogany for my basses.
I think there is a good argument to be made as to how people pick a guitar differently when holding a guitar that weighs differently. A light guitar you might hold up more with your non-picking hand, even if you're trying very hard to be consistent. If someone built a strumming machine to pair with a wood test and did repeated experiments, it would solve the issue a lot more conclusively.
How closely did you control pickup height/string height across the three test guitars? Small differences can have significant impacts to tone & balance.
The biggest factor when it comes to the sound of a guitar are the hands playing it.
I have been making guitars as a hobby some 10 years ago, and this was what I expected. Mahogany slightly darker, maple a bit harsh, Fir in the middle, more difference in response then in tone color. Difference is more pronounced with different neck material then body. Would be nice to see same test with different necks then bodies. If You add gain differences start to disappear. For higher gain stuff (hard rock and punk to heavy metal) wood doesn`t matter, for jazzy blues I like to play, it does.
I feel that this would be much more representative if the riffs had been played the same way on each. But the fact is that each version has variations in tempo and embellishment.
Mohagany sounded the best and most balanced. Tonewood might not be a HUGE factor but I think its clear that it makes an impact on the soul of the sound.
Maple IMHO for this one.
Brighter and more broad spectrum, while the mahogany is darker - that is, closer to the first harmonic.
"soul of the sound"
Wow how scientifical is that
@@Sortsylic I can use other words than "soul". Is "general characteristic" better? Science is about measurable study. This is just an experiment measured with each person's audible perceptions (highly subjective mind you). So I'll say "soul" if like. Feel free to do a randomized control study and come back to me when u want me to use more scientific terms. I'm just going off of what I hear.
😂😂😂
It depends most on your own starting point and what you have expected. I personally am surprised that you could hear a difference, so good, not least in this medium. Thank you for this effort!
Thanks Micke!
Two things.
1)There are differences, but they're subtle, probably not enough to matter live, but maybe enough to make a difference in a hi-fi recording setup.
2) There's something to be said that guitars built with "nicer" wood tend to have higher build quality. That's a perfectly good reason to buy an instrument. If the body isn't put together well or feels crappy, that will effect how you play.
I totally agree with you in the 2nd point. but regarding number 1.... bro/sis the difference is huge! maple is brighter and "crispier", the pressure treated fir had an amazing tone, bold and sharp, and the Mahogany had a huge warm tone over all... to my listening, using studio headphones and the quality of the video, the difference was nothing but subtle, I'm not saying one sounded "better" than the other, I just say that there is, in fact, a noticeable difference between the woods
The mahogany sounds “richer” for lack of a better term, the maple is snappier, the pressure treated is the least dynamic and seems to be treble heavy. The mahogany has some more mid range harmonics too. Just my thoughts.
That is some serious analysis from a compressed youtube video :D But I agree they sound just a bit different. For me, the pressure treated one sounded the best. Could be the variations in his playing technique as well.
The Maple one sounded brighter to me, the mahogany one was more "midrangy". The pressure treated one was interesting, not as even in tone across the frequency range, seemed to have less sustain.
@@DiegoSilvadosSantos1 this seemsto validate the construction of Les Pauls to me, a maple top for sustain and higher frequencies laminated on a mahogany body which comprises the bulk of the body. I still say the neck construction and whether it is bolted, glued or a through body construction has a lot to do with tone on a solid body but here he used the same neck on order to eliminate the any of differences due to that.
@@knawl well that's fine, but remember no one in the history of the guitar has done a real scientific test on tone wood.
I don't think anyone really wants to know.
@@valueofnothing2487 yeah, but a lot of things aren't investigated by "science" then discounted as superstition or mythology, some later proven right , though not originally expressed in "scientific terms. I also say what people call science is largely faith based because it never more than a working knowledge based on ever evolving data that is often later proven to be pretty flawed or tainted, collected using pretty biased methods and attitudes. Anyway, I still say the neck has a lot more influence than the body especially concerning things like sustain, staying in tune etc, both with the wood used and construction method. The body obviously has some effect but not near as much, though obviously using pine or some thing soft has more, in a bad way of course. As others pointed out things like electronics blurr any effect the body wood has to the point that, as long as a good hardwood is used, the body wood becomes a mute point in solid body electrics. That doesn't mean it has none but little enough that it might be practically ignored up to a point. Of course acoustics are an entirely different matter. Its still interesting.
This is a classic. I've probably watched it four times now. The fluency of your English has really improved.
Brilliant job on this! It has reinforced what my ear has always told me. Mahogany with a maple top…. it’s perfect. Also, this demonstrated why Dano’s and similar have such a great rock thing going on. I love mahogany and you have demonstrated why. Just brilliant!!!
I think the fir has the most "in tune" sound. Probably due to the special treatment the wood received.
Mahogany sounds a bit warmer and deeper comparable to les paul type of sound, while the others sound a little clangy and tighter in the lows more like fender guitars, that's the simplest way I can explain this. Awesome video, I have always wondered what was the difference, learned that there is, but... If I was blind and someone swapped wood in my guitar over the night, I'm almost sure I wouldn't notice anything.
I laugh when you do tapping test of those wood. It looks like you do some ritual to call the tone wood spirit to bring his best sound to you.
To the test itself. I listen to your riff with close eye. So, I don't know which riff played with what wood. Some riff sounds brighter (more treble) while others sound warmer. But, some riff sound the same. Basically, I'm 50:50 about tone wood theory.
+Rendy Andrian ;-) that was exactly what I did. Don't tell anyone ;-)
Rendy Andrian the violin makers do this to chose the plank they will use, some sound like bell some doesnt.
Beside I am not sure it is really fair to use same thickness for both woods as they may react differently because of density or anything. I wanted to believe there is nothing very mysterious in electric guitar design but I find more and more subtilities in soundmaking.
I don't criticize the will to experiment by oneself and I would watch and listen many videos like this one, it remains very interesting but it does not close the debate about what wood gives what.
For instance this experiment here could not define seriously which wood gives the best sustain, even if it tells it.
the question is not if different woods sound different acoustically,we all know they do 100% without question.go play 3-5 acoustic guitars,they all sound slightly different.the "tonewood argument"is mainly about people questioning the tone difference only through the guitars electronics and not acoustically or unamplified.
You laugh but a knock is a lot like an impulse which is an abrubt energy transfer that can be used to determine the response characteristics of a system. Impulse response is the de facto way of measuring time domain characteristics for pretty much all of engineering, so laugh away LOLOLOL.
To really hear the diference first of all you have to have good ear(you can distinguish close notes-high/low only with you hearing,if you cant,you crealy cant hear the diference between these tipes of woods because you are partly or totally tone deaf),good headphones or pair of hifi speakers and eyes closed.
I can clearly hear diference and its not that subtle as you think,but the rest of the of the deaf world cant hear it and doesnt give a shit about your tone,they just listen music as it played and doesnt judge your tone or whatever,that musician do..because we just love to criticese somebody else's performance or work..
My conclusion is that wood can change the tone of the guitar but there is much more involved in mine and yours guitar tone(pick-ups,pedals amp,mice etc.)
Biggest impact wood can make on your guitar is sustain, without good wood there wouldnt be good sustain,without sustain you can't really sing on guitar..
Cheers ☺️
Sorry for my English, obviously english isnt my native language xD
Thanks Aleksandar! I hear a clear difference between them too.
The debate is over. Thank you for shutting up all the people who think they know better than professional guitar manufacturers
"confirmation bias" , "correlation not imply causation" and "non representative sample" - (among the others) those are main methodological errors you make.
To do it right you need (at least) 5 pieces of each type of wood and then a blind test. First you need to check if different pieces of the same type of wood sound the same.
Finally a smart comment, this "experiment" would be like trying to figure out which bacteria is more deadly to human beings by simply seeing how many times the person coughed with just 1 person, its so stupidly simple to the point where it doesn't even prove anything and wouldn't be taken seriously if it were to be sent to a physics department.
agree
Don't you mean "Sheck it"
They all sound the same through my headphones.
Yes. Small differences can be heard immediately between wood species.
What I think is more important is that over an extended time of playing those notes /series of notes that have different attack/decay because of body resonances will become satisfying/irritating. The attack and decay are quite strongly affected by body / neck structure. Having an instrument that responds evenly to subtle playing or digging in across the entire fingerboard is very important. My observation - long time luthier.
Could be. But it could also be the case that he didn't use the exact same pickup. I mean the identical. Not the same manufacturer but swap the pickup into the other guitar. Pickups vary slightly in their output. To exclude this possibility he should have used only one pickup for both guitars.
@@EbonyPopeit’s the same exact pickup, neck, and hardware just swapped over, though!
Mahogany didn't have some of the upper register overtones the fir had. Maple was right in the middle by my ear. Clearly a difference.
+Mark Artyniuk Thanks Mark
Haha, this is such BS. "Upper register overtones", you are such a superstitious believer.