Wood

[HiOctane]

Wood

Addressing Skorb's comments, all-maple bodies can have great tone and sustain, but there is a lot of variation in both weight and tone, so there's a risk involved.

Alder and poplar can sound VERY similar, but in my opinion the difference is that poplar tends to be heavier than alder and is less consistent in terms of tone. You will find more "dead" pieces of poplar than alder, but I still like it.

For me, what matters is that I have a bolt-on poplar telly as well and it smokes!

[Rupe]

Mahogany can run the gammut...you can't make blanket statements like "mahogany is heavier than alder" because its simply not true. Frequently it will be, but not always. I had a '59 double cut Jr. that was possibly the lightest guitar that I have ever played.

The best wood for a heavy, toneful body IMO is maple. All wood is variable though, so it really depends on the particular piece that you get.

[Bengal65]

Hey and don't forget the special Ultra Light Weight alder that is being grown for Charvel guitars. I heard it is light than air!

[j2379]

is that a master built option only......

[Sunbane]

A lot of people have also testified that the KBRR and the COW Dinky are both really lightweight. According to statements I've read from Jackson (can't remember where at the moment), they are of the opinion that lightweight mahogany generally is more resonant than the heavier pieces - so it would seem they try to use as lightweight mahogany as possible(?).

I'm also a fan of heavyweight guitars though, because I basically learnt to play on a really heavy V. My shoulder tends to cramp up when playing guitars that are too lightweight.

[Cygnus X1]

Weight doesn't always translate into tone. Ash and alder are both lighter than mahogany, but are brighter in tone. Maple is heavier than mahogany but is much brighter, same with rosewood or ebony. Walnut is heavier than mahogany IIRC and is generally considered to be darker in tone than mahogany. There is no real rule to weight vs. tone. All woods are different and have their own characteristics.

That is exactly why I posted the average densities of the woods from the reference. You have made the point well, and helps explain why even the same basic wood components can make two different sounding guitars.

But, WTH, they provide a reference of where to start knocking on pieces of board to figure out what fits where, according to what kind of "tone" fits the application.

[Grumpy]

Weight doesn't always translate into tone.

Completely agree. I just like a guitar that stays put on my shoulder. Some alder body guitars feel neck heavy, which makes me feel I'm constantly pulling up on the neck to keep it straight.

[straycat]

I like them all who cares what its made of as long as it sounds good.
I will have to admit my 87 USA Jackson super strat is over 10 lbs and is a maple body with an ebony fingerboard 2 J-50s/coil taps and an OFR and it sounds huge! Open and woody on the neck pickup and tight bright and nasty on the bridge.Can we say George Lynch type tone?
I would never had specd a guitar this way but this thing works and is one of those magical guitars to play.

[HiOctane]

Wood

I think that there are great-sounding guitar made out of all the woods that have been discussed. You can gather general principles and choose or spec. out a guitar based on what you like and have learned over the years, but there are always exceptions to the rule. There is simply a lot of variation in the tone of any given piece of wood- even within a given species.

That said, we have to stay open to instruments out of our comfort zone.
As Straycat so eloquently put it "I would never had specd a guitar this way but this thing works and is one of those magical guitars to play."

I agree 100%! Some of the coolest and best-sounding guitars I have encountered have been either been very average ones (poplar/alder) or really exotic ones (all-maple body/Kahler/maple neck) and have sounded killer!

[Soap]

.

[ihocky2]

The luthiery site always get heated when the discussion of wood vs tone comes up, simply because everyone has an opinion, but there has never been a full on study done. And to make maters worse is the two boards from the same tree can sound different. If I am looking to buy a guitar, I play it and decide if I like the tone.

If I am building one, I usually go by the rules of thumb for tones, but still go throw large stacks of lumber. Checking the weight between similar pieces, tapping on them to see how the resonate.

[DonP]

I don't think you can look at just one factor to determine if you will get a good tone. It's a combination of things. If you get a pickup that gels with the guitar, that's 1/2 the battle. I have great guitars made from all species of wood, except for my heavy maple body that is in the middle of a refin. I have an old zebra DDJ and this will be my Lynch guiar (actually my second, because I have an Alder guitar with a TB screamin demon that's the shit!).

I also have a 1963 SG Special that's light as a feather and has incredible tone. Dan Erlewine didn't want to give it back when I had him do some work on it.

[straycat]

Dan is a real nice guy and a hoot to talk to.To be honset the Charvel 88(mahogony) I just got is not what I would not call a great sustaining guitar but has such a huge bottom end and thick mids its a killer tone wise.I like lacewood,alder,poplar,maple and mahogony none better than the other just different.

[Cygnus X1]

Dan is a real nice guy and a hoot to talk to.To be honset the Charvel 88(mahogony) I just got is not what I would not call a great sustaining guitar but has such a huge bottom end and thick mids its a killer tone wise.I like lacewood,alder,poplar,maple and mahogony none better than the other just different.

Ditto on the Model 88. I would have thought the mahogany/maple would
be the sustain machine (not bad, certainly not plinky by any means), but
others have outdone it easily on this point. It is toneful, absolutely. It doesn't look like a rock/blues axe, but that's about where I like to use it.

Asthetics aside, look at the original les pauls. He was designing it to avoid that tinny sound, and also not too much on the bass side. Sustain was the game, even if it may not have been the absolute intent. I'm screwing around with this oak Bich guitar I built, it had good sustain from the start, but it wasn't very good looking. But I want it to sing. Let the accessories set the tone. I could end up hating it.

What about the various other materials? Kramer's aluminum necks, some graphite experiments and plastics?

Bottom line, it is about the sound, the look, and the feel of wood that we
love about it. It's an old V8 that has that rumble we're looking for, not a newer V6 that winds up twice the rpms and has more efficient horsepower.

Pick the guitar that's right for you. Wood is just a starting point.