|
Post by dei305 on Aug 1, 2012 8:46:32 GMT -7
What do ya think? www.guitarsite.com/news/music_news_from_around_the_world/electric-guitar-wood-myth-busted/Electric Guitar Wood Myth Busted? Submitted by Alexander on Tue, 07/31/2012 - 02:37. After two months of testing, a La Trobe University researcher finds that electric guitar sound is unaffected by the body of the instrument. Electric Guitar Tone Myth Busted Matthew Angove, a La Trobe University Bachelor of Science honours student, conducted the research by trying out electrics of various shapes and builds. Being in the field of musical acoustics, Matthew found it unsatisfactory that very little research is done in the field of electric guitar. Compared to classical guitar musicians who tend to tinker with their instruments, it seems that most of the electric guitar research is done by manufacturers. Guitarists are familiar with the various tonewoods and shapes that are used on electric guitars. Manufacturers and guitar players suggest that using a particular shape, or a specific wood material - be it alder, poplar, ash, basswood etc - will produce significant and specific tone variations. Matthew was quoted saying: "I’m a player myself and I grew up believing the hype around different sounds and tones that can be created by using different woods such as mahogany or maple. I’m now testing that assumption." According to Matthew, the idea behind the research is that the "common" knowledge being spread by companies that market guitars go against the physics of how the electric guitar works. He wanted to find out why manufacturers and sellers are charging more for guitars made of "rare" woods. He wants to determine if material used and body shape affects the electric guitar's amplified tone and he wants to find out why and how it affects it. The test was straightforward, Angove placed identical strings and pickups in guitars of varying shapes and sizes and he then compared the resulting audio signals. A local music shop called J's Music City lent him several guitars and a number of pickups. He recorded every note individually on each guitar with the pickups carefully placed in exactly the same spot with the same distance beneath the strings. Matthew then listened to the recordings and looked at the harmonic content of each note, comparing each guitar shape and material against each other. Quoting Mr. Angove's verdict: "I've only been looking at the results for two weeks and it really looks like all of them are pretty much identical. I was surprised at just how identical they were because the guitars were very different in shape. As I was listening to them, I showed other guitar players and they were surprised as well, they were convinced they all came from the same guitar … I'm beginning to think we should be making guitars out of something more rigid than wood, such as carbon fibre." This research validates the opinion that the string setup, pickup type and pickup placement is what causes the various tonal differences that we hear between electric guitar models and brands. This reminds me of a video by Scott Grove that claims the same thing: the pickups, string vibrations and your guitar's bridge and saddles are the parts that really matter. Check out Scott Grove's video: "Does Wood Type, Finish, Mass Matter On Electric Guitar", right here: The research is still not complete, but the data, according to Mr. Angove, is pointing to the idea that there is simply no significant difference. The research is expected to be completed by the end of the year, and more data will be available by then.
|
|
|
Post by randalp3000 on Aug 1, 2012 8:54:40 GMT -7
Not buying it.................
|
|
|
Post by smolder on Aug 1, 2012 9:20:46 GMT -7
lot's of details missing, butit doesn't sound like great science. If al he is testing is the shape of the wood... I'd buy it, but then ask, "so what?" Thickness, type of wood, and density... that would be worth testing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 10:12:57 GMT -7
Weren't Steinbergers made of carbon fiber? I want one of them Dan Armstrong lucite deals--as a kid I thought they were the coolest things ever.
|
|
|
Post by zpilot on Aug 1, 2012 10:58:30 GMT -7
What a bunch of crap. Any real electric guitarist with EARS can tell that there is a difference in how swamp ash and mahogany sound and "feel". The difference is less between some woods, such as ash and alder, but a better player will still be able to tell it.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Bartee on Aug 1, 2012 11:14:30 GMT -7
Cool, now we can all get one block of wood to sound like every guitar, all we need to do is line up all the different pups in the right spot with a 47 position toggle switch. I'm ready, where do I get one. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Hohn on Aug 1, 2012 12:08:14 GMT -7
I'm sorry, I'm HIGHLY suspicious of research done by an undergrad.
How does he know the strings where the same? String vary from lot to lot and package to package. How did he reuse the same set each time to eliminate this variable?
No two pieces of wood are identical. Ever. Even within the same species.
The far more likely case (imo) is that he was unable to control enough variables sufficiently well to demonstrate the role of the wood and shape variables.
If he wanted to test the effects of shape, then he would have to use a material other than wood. You'd need to use a material far more uniform in composition.
The reality is that there is "collinearity" in his variables, and he isn't controlling for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 12:13:35 GMT -7
What a bunch of crap. Any real electric guitarist with EARS can tell that there is a difference in how swamp ash and mahogany sound and "feel". The difference is less between some woods, such as ash and alder, but a better player will still be able to tell it. I've never seen any evidence that this is true, and my own experience contradicts it. What I do know is that there's a lot of hype and magical thinking around "tone woods" in electric guitars, but most of it doesn't hold up under even minimal scrutiny. How does the alder or ash body of a Strat affect the flux the vibrating string creates in the pickups' magnetic field, given that the pickups themselves are floating in a 3/16" sheet of plastic? I haven't heard a good answer for that one yet.
|
|
|
Post by randalp3000 on Aug 1, 2012 12:27:03 GMT -7
Weren't Steinbergers made of carbon fiber? I want one of them Dan Armstrong lucite deals--as a kid I thought they were the coolest things ever. Got one of the reissues ( Dan Armstrong) MIJ, heavy but super cool.
|
|
|
Post by Hohn on Aug 1, 2012 12:32:04 GMT -7
What a bunch of crap. Any real electric guitarist with EARS can tell that there is a difference in how swamp ash and mahogany sound and "feel". The difference is less between some woods, such as ash and alder, but a better player will still be able to tell it. I've never seen any evidence that this is true, and my own experience contradicts it. What I do know is that there's a lot of hype and magical thinking around "tone woods" in electric guitars, but most of it doesn't hold up under even minimal scrutiny. How does the alder or ash body of a Strat affect the flux the vibrating string creates in the pickups' magnetic field, given that the pickups themselves are floating in a 3/16" sheet of plastic? I haven't heard a good answer for that one yet. The short answer is "comb filtering." Consider one extreme: a vibrating string suspends across two infinitely stiff, infinitely massive supports. The string resonates at its own natural frequency both side to side and axially. You could consider this a "carrier frequency." Now consider another extreme: a string under tension where one of the supports is a transducer like a speaker motor). In this case, the tension will vary according to the signal fed into the transducer. If I oscillate one of the string supports at 120hz, say, then it will induce a modulation into the vibrating string's natural frequency. This modulation matters a TON. It is the difference between a classic rock station at 89.3MHz and a NPR station at 89.3MHz. Thus, the argument that wood doesn't matter is (imo) to arguing that all the music on a given radio frequency is the same. If you tune a Les Paul to the same tension as a Telecaster and had the same pickups in it, it is NOT going to sound like a Telecaster. The wood has different filtering and the "modulation" applied to the bridge/saddles or fretted note is also therefore different. JMO EDIT: Looks like this was post 3999, so it's time to embark on the traditional pause...
|
|
|
Post by Dan F"i"fe on Aug 1, 2012 12:36:10 GMT -7
I'm guessing he received an "F" on his research paper.
Yep, there's no difference in sound from a maple neck vs a rosewood neck. I'm sure if I put Texas Specials in my SG it would sound just like a Strat.
I wonder if he was playing all these thru a Two Rock? ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 12:56:51 GMT -7
I've never seen any evidence that this is true, and my own experience contradicts it. What I do know is that there's a lot of hype and magical thinking around "tone woods" in electric guitars, but most of it doesn't hold up under even minimal scrutiny. How does the alder or ash body of a Strat affect the flux the vibrating string creates in the pickups' magnetic field, given that the pickups themselves are floating in a 3/16" sheet of plastic? I haven't heard a good answer for that one yet. The short answer is "comb filtering." Consider one extreme: a vibrating string suspends across two infinitely stiff, infinitely massive supports. The string resonates at its own natural frequency both side to side and axially. You could consider this a "carrier frequency." Now consider another extreme: a string under tension where one of the supports is a transducer like a speaker motor). In this case, the tension will vary according to the signal fed into the transducer. If I oscillate one of the string supports at 120hz, say, then it will induce a modulation into the vibrating string's natural frequency. This modulation matters a TON. It is the difference between a classic rock station at 89.3MHz and a NPR station at 89.3MHz. Thus, the argument that wood doesn't matter is (imo) to arguing that all the music on a given radio frequency is the same. If you tune a Les Paul to the same tension as a Telecaster and had the same pickups in it, it is NOT going to sound like a Telecaster. The wood has different filtering and the "modulation" applied to the bridge/saddles or fretted note is also therefore different. JMO EDIT: Looks like this was post 3999, so it's time to embark on the traditional pause... Okay, but you don't explain how the wood in the guitar body--which contacts neither the strings nor the pickups directly--introduces that modulation to the string's vibration. Also, you don't provide any evidence that even if there was such a modulating effect, it would be audible to the human ear. Also, I don't think that "modulation" in this context has the same meaning, exactly, that it has in broadcasting, although I'm not an engineer and I could certainly be wrong about that. Enjoy your pause!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 12:59:36 GMT -7
I'm guessing he received an "F" on his research paper. Yep, there's no difference in sound from a maple neck vs a rosewood neck. I'm sure if I put Texas Specials in my SG it would sound just like a Strat. I wonder if he was playing all these thru a Two Rock? ;D What if you put a Strat bridge on an SG, switched the neck so it had a Fender scale length, and floated the Texas specials in a plastic pickguard? Would it sound more like an SG or a Strat?
|
|
|
Post by DSauls89 on Aug 1, 2012 13:27:21 GMT -7
Cool, now we can all get one block of wood to sound like every guitar, all we need to do is line up all the different pups in the right spot with a 47 position toggle switch. I'm ready, where do I get one. ;D PRS did it with 5 positions lol.
|
|
|
Post by helmi on Aug 1, 2012 15:59:43 GMT -7
I smell horse$hit somewhere, and it's not on the bottom of my shoes. the man's an idiot!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 16:35:43 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by GuitarZ on Aug 1, 2012 17:13:15 GMT -7
I'm an eee-lectrical engineer with a masters to boot. I love data.
I've tried to emulate speaker response inside my computer with great digital EQs and most recently tried to emulate the freq response of my Martin HD-28V versus my mag pickup.
It looks good, but when you apply your ears and/or feel, I can get in the ballpark, but it ain't the same. Some folks can get real close and maybe Flea Biscuit's friend has some good finger to pull out the sound, but it's not the same.
You have to give the young guy credit for diving in. He's going to get a lot of negative response and hopefully he learns from it and keeps on researching and coming up with ideas. Leo Fender and Les Paul probably had some pretty strong critics in their early days.
|
|
|
Post by nicholas on Aug 1, 2012 17:29:35 GMT -7
Bullshirt.
|
|
|
Post by sparrowhawk (Bob) on Aug 1, 2012 17:41:03 GMT -7
Marginal work.
Music is more than a Bode plot.
|
|
|
Post by Pete aka shouldb on Aug 2, 2012 0:19:51 GMT -7
In the lad's defence (he's either very brave or very stupid), if you take the "feel factor" out, and the acoustic tone out, and focus 100% on BLIND hearing test (is that an oxymoron??), then things like saddles, block, nut, strings and most of all pickups, will alter the amplified sound WAY WAY WAY more than the wood used to make the darn thing.
Now add back IN the "feel factor" and acoustic tone, and that's a whole different ball game IMHO.
Ruari, my 16 year old son, said it really well last night when we were discussing this, "if you play a really well made guitar which FEELS right, then you instinctively play better, therefore you sound better. So the material it's made with DOES matter where it counts - to the player!". The wisdom of youth, eh? ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 3:44:43 GMT -7
I'm not an engineer, but if his study is true why does a PRS McCarty Korina lack the high end snap of a PRS McCarty with a mahogany/maple body? Same pickups, same scale length, etc?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 8:39:20 GMT -7
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 9:53:40 GMT -7
^^^ Certainly reiterates the standard belief system around electric guitar "tone woods." Doesn't offer any evidence to support it, though. My vote is still with the pickups, since Strat, Tele and LP pickups are fundamentally different in design. How the pickups are mounted might make a difference, too--are they floating in a square foot of plastic, mounted in a plastic ring, or screwed into a metal bridge? Bridge design/materials, scale length, nut material, setup (string height, pickup height, etc) all make sense along with pickup design/materials as determinants of tone. Anything that makes direct contact with the strings seems a likely candidate--anything that doesn't, doesn't. The pickups are magnetic, after all--they don't "hear" the acoustic sound of the guitar. All they hear is the flux in their magnetic fields created by the strings' vibration. The type of wood in the guitar body would come in close to last as a determinant of tone, just before paint color, IMO--and we're still not talking about the BIG factors in the signal chain besides pickups, like amps, effects, speakers, cables, tube choice and maybe the most important element--the player's ears. Do any two listeners hear exactly the same thing? The aesthetics of the guitar also matter in our perception of its tone: if we like what the guitar is, and how it looks, we might be more inclined to believe that it sounds good. Weight/mass/rigidity would logically affect sustain, but how do we differentiate tone and sustain? Do some frequencies sustain longer than others? No idea.
Just a note--I'm not invested in this in any way, but it's interesting to apply a bit of critical thinking to the "conventional wisdom" on this stuff. I'd give the kid an A just for challenging the standard thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Jefferson on Aug 2, 2012 10:32:19 GMT -7
Very interesting discussion! i am an engineer by education, although i havent worked in the engineering field for nearly 20 years.
i think one need look no further than an acoustic instrument such as a nice guitar or violin to realize that woods do indeed make a difference on the tones our ears percieve. A nice maple-bodied guitar is generally going to be pretty bright, even with a rosewood or ebony neck. a koa wood guitar is going to sound different than an exact model made with rosewood back and sides and a spruce top. I think each of us would agree that as a principle this is generally true.
the question then is not whether woods offer certain detectable contributions to the tone of a particular guitar - they do. the question is whether the electronics on board are so overpowering that they completely negate the effects of the wood. I have no evidence other than my own anecdotal observations, but i believe that i have been able to hear a recognizable difference in a strat with a maple neck and a strat with a rosewood neck, just as an example.
again, this is my subjective opinion and nothing more.
Fleabiscuit, with the utmost of respect, i would humbly disagree with the idea of giving the kid an "A" for simply challenging standard thinking. i agree that this is a very important part of the scientific process and should be encouraged. However, i feel very strongly that the point of science isnt just to challenge, but is also very much about the process that one uses to find a conclusion. my sense is that too many scientist/researchers (on either side of the issue du jour) feel too free to work to support their particular hypothesis rather than working down a path to simply find out where the evidence leads.
If i were this kids professor, i would most certainly give the best grades to the kids who were most able to demonstrate that they understood that the integrity of adhering to the scientific method of discovery is far more important than simply challenging a standard.
Again, i offer this differing opinion with complete respect for your opinions as well!
JR
|
|
|
Post by Michael Bartee on Aug 2, 2012 10:33:35 GMT -7
Yell into your pickup and you will hear yourself. Do it with no strings on the guitar and you will hear yourself. The pickup does hear more than just the distrubance in the magnetic field. Have fun, time to go play.
|
|
|
Post by helmi on Aug 2, 2012 11:12:51 GMT -7
I'm not an engineer, but if his study is true why does a PRS McCarty Korina lack the high end snap of a PRS McCarty with a mahogany/maple body? Same pickups, same scale length, etc? hey now, I LOVE my mcarty korina! (lol)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 13:59:44 GMT -7
Yell into your pickup and you will hear yourself. Do it with no strings on the guitar and you will hear yourself. The pickup does hear more than just the distrubance in the magnetic field. Have fun, time to go play. I did this just now with a Strat, and in fact I did hear myself--because I was yelling! I didn't hear anything coming out of the amp, though. I have heard old P90s that were pretty microphonic--made 'em feed back like a mofo. Not a desirable trait in a pickup, as it turns out. Even if your pickups were microphonic (i.e., defective), the acoustic resonance of the guitar body would be nowhere near as loud as someone yelling directly into the pickups, and nowhere near as loud to the pickup as the vibration of the string, or the sound coming out of your amp that was causing the pickups to feed back.
|
|
|
Post by greenblues58 on Aug 2, 2012 14:58:40 GMT -7
Fleabiscuit wrote I think there would be a lot of pickup manufacturers particularly boutique winders that may disagree with the above statement. Just sayin IMHO
|
|
|
Post by Michael Bartee on Aug 2, 2012 15:04:26 GMT -7
Original PAF's are not wax potted and quite microphonic but I wouldn't consider them defective. You can speak into them and hear it through your amp. I concede that some can't hear any differences and they will have to accept that they can't dictate what I can hear no matter how many times they say it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2012 16:15:37 GMT -7
I think there would be a lot of pickup manufacturers particularly boutique winders that may disagree with the above statement. Just sayin IMHO I personally agree with you. I recently had a conversation with a boutique pup maker that had a similar opinion to fleabiscuit's. Here is what he had to say: Hi Doug, regarding the base plates, originally they used the raw steel (unplated) base plate, however this was subject to corrosion hence the move to plating. First they used zinc and subsequent to that a copper coating over the steel base plate. The base plate, whether raw, zinc or copper plated is primarily for historical accuracy and look with negligible impact on the tone, the scatterwinding and AlNiCo is far more significant in influencing tone. In my experience good guitar tone is really all about 3 things, 1/ you, 2/ the pickups and 3/ the strings, Everything else is way down the tone food chain, it's like a digital picture, if it’s a poor quality, low res image then you can zoom in all you like the picture will still be bad or even get worse, best to start with a really great picture... LOL Choose the woods, weight and finish to your personal liking, it is more a playability and comfort issue, the pickup will take care of the tone, trust me!
|
|