Is all of the good wood really gone?

Mark Vinbury · Post by **Mark Vinbury** » 20 Dec 2005 6:36 pm

Unfortunately I don't have an extra pickup,however,next batch of TrueTones I get I'm going to try screwing a second pickup to the back side of my lap steel,away from the strings, and see how much sound it produces.

Edited --I had a Strat single coil in the shop so I hooked it up to the amp and held it against the lap steel in different places(back,side,back of the neck,tip of the headstock). A substantial amount of sound is generated by the pickup in all positions.
I estimate it to be at least 10 percent of the sound produced when it is held 3/16" above the strings.
This was an interesting experiment.
The volume seemed the same no matter where the on the body the pickup was held.As expected, the amount of pressure made a significant difference in volume.
I pressed the pickup on my Tele,a 1 1/8" thick Maple lap steel and a 1 1/8" thick laminated Maple and Bloodwood lap steel,played the same note on all and the tone thru the amp was different for each.Not a lot different but noticably different.
It would be interesting to measure the voltage from a pickup screwed to the body away from the strings and compare it to one under the strings to see what the relationship is. [This message was edited by Mark Vinbury on 20 December 2005 at 07:37 PM.]

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 20 Dec 2005 7:18 pm

Well, I guess we are talking about a matter of degree. With my ear up against the back of my Strat Squire it was louder than I expected. So I guess saying there is "very, very little sound" passing through it is not accurate. But my ear up against the back of my Gibson J50 was way louder, and the top would have been louder still, but I couldn't figure a way to get my ear against it without getting my nose caught in the strings.

I noticed the sound behind the Squire was loudest over the tremolo spring cutout. Some of that came from the springs. I never thought about it before, but that cutout makes a Strat a sort of semi-solid body. I would expect that cutout and the springs would have a noticeable effect on string overtones and sustain, and could account for some of the difference in tone between a strat and a tele. A strat is not nearly as solid. So that kind of gross difference in solid-body configuration can have a differential affect on the sustain and overtones of the strings.

So I took an extreme view (always fun on the Forum), and I'm coming back from it a little. But still, I don't hear much difference between most solid bodies - nothing like the difference I hear between different hollow bodies and different acoustics. So I'm still skeptical about a lot of the solid-body tone mythology, but I guess there is something to some of it.

So I'm eating a little crow, are you happy, Eric? But I don't care, I'm still not voting Republican.

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 20 Dec 2005 7:42 pm

Dave D. I'm always happy when I read your posts.

EJL

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 20 Dec 2005 7:48 pm

Actually a point of interest, a Jr high school teacher of mine, Mr Herb Jenner designed and manufactured "Messenger" guitars that had a solid aluminum neck that went through the body. It was "tuned" but I forget what note. Maybe an E or an A. It also had stereo pickups. I thought of it the other day when I picked up an aluminum Kramer in the music store the other day. The headstock was split the same exact way. Wonder what ever happened to "Messengers".

EJL

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 21 Dec 2005 1:59 am

Guys, check these guitars out. http://www.ravenwestguitar.com/elguit.html

I have to say that I've close friends with the owner of the company, but the fact remains that these are really nice, and I like them a lot.

I am not playing these guitars because I know the man who owns the company. I know him because I like the guitars.

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 21 Dec 2005 3:24 am

A: The whammy springs in a Strat-type guitar absolutely take it more towards the tonal direction of a hollow or semi-hollow body, particularly if it's set up "floating", i.e. to both lower and raise. Serious Stratheads (like Eric J. for example) get all drooly-fanatic about having just the exact right springs, with the right number of windings, alloy, wire gauge etc. To my ear, Bigsbys don't seem to do this at all, and any guitar disfigured by a tone-sucking Floyd Rose is only suited for beating off the groupies. Steve Vai's "tone?" Gaak.

B: Back in the caveman days befor headphone jacks on amps, or any sort of decent sounding headphone amp, I used to practice an unplugged Fender bass with a stethoscope taped to the top. It worked great! Frank Zappa among others has experimented with mounting contact mikes on solidbodies, but it sure hasn't seemed to catch on. In a way, those electrics with piezo pickups in the bridge are an attempt to get after that tonal spectrum, but why? They sound awful. Whenever I hear somebody like Dave Matthews, or those plasticky, tin-canny sounding rhythm guitarists at the Opry using piezo-armed Takamines, I can't figure out why they are willing to put up with such a hideous sound. Why don't they just get a Strat and a Twin Reverb?[This message was edited by David Mason on 21 December 2005 at 09:15 AM.]

Mark Vinbury · Post by **Mark Vinbury** » 21 Dec 2005 6:15 am

The piezo/acoustic setup doesn't do it for me either.
The only place I think I'm hearing a piezo and it sounds good to me is in Victor Wooten's bass.I may be wrong but I'd swear he mixes in some kind of setup that captures whatever acoustic qualities his solidbody bass has.
Then again maybe he just has "microphonic" pickups.

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 21 Dec 2005 7:11 am

Being a "wood" thread, I'd have to say that my favorite pickups have been old single coil S~Bs that have gone microphonic just before they short out completely.

That said, were I younger and more adventurous, I'd put a peizo under the body and have a mixing knob that allowed it as part of my pickup setup, adding more body noise.

Myself, with my Strat, after seeing an Eric J shop model, I put all 5 springs on my tremolo as I don't use it anyhow and took off the cover. I think the "reverb" aspect of those springs is severely overblown, but I noticed that after whanging a chord, and damping it, that the springs were still vibrating. Also the EJ model being sans string clips on the headstock is interesting, but not so much that I'm gonna do it. I like my Tele more anyhow.

There's definitely no doubt in my mind that the lighter, "snappier" woods are the best for luthe.. luith.. well you know.

EJL

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 21 Dec 2005 12:03 pm

Peizos by themselves sound very thin and overly bright, but when combined with a magnetic pickup they add a really nice new dimention to the tone.

I have several guitars retrofitted with peizos, and I combine the signal with about an 85-90% to 10-15% ratio of magnetic to peizo. That tiny bit of the Peizo tone adds a little sparkle that really enhances the overall sound, in my opinion.

Terry Edwards · Post by **Terry Edwards** » 21 Dec 2005 1:51 pm

I've just finished reading this entire thread. Very interesting.

One question.

Would the tone of a $6K-$8K pedal steel guitar sound the same as the tone of a $2K-$4K guitar if they were both using the exact same pickup playing thru the same amp in the same room by the same musician?

Terry

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 21 Dec 2005 2:01 pm

No, if I'm reading the question right. There are always variables, and not necessarily toward the "more money/better tone" end.

Sometimes people aren't happy until they have a crappy tone.

EJL

Jim Peters · Post by **Jim Peters** » 21 Dec 2005 2:57 pm

I always liked lighter woods/less finish electrics,but...
I have an ash tele that I built,StewMac body, Warmoth Strat neck, mini humbucker at the neck, stacked hums middle and bridge, black nitrocellulose finish.
The guitar is VERY heavy, and the finish is as thick as a nickel!! It is easily one of the best sounding guitars I've ever owned. Go figure! JP

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 21 Dec 2005 9:48 pm

I agree with Eric, a $3K pedal steel and a $6K one might have a subtle difference a player would notice, but probably not the listener. But so would two $3K guitars or two $6K guitars. In a blindfold test, some would prefer one, some the other, and it wouldn't necessarily follow the cost. Beyond $3K or $4K you're paying for mechanics, features, finish, and prestige. I don't think anyone has discovered $3K worth of tone improvements. But I haven't played every brand made.

Darryl Hattenhauer · Post by **Darryl Hattenhauer** » 21 Dec 2005 10:01 pm

Mike,
Those are truly beautiful guitars. From the photos, they look like PRS level.

------------------
"Drinking up the future, and living down the past"--unknown singer in Phoenix

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 21 Dec 2005 11:36 pm

Darryl. I'll stick one or two of the guitars in the trunk of my car when I come to Mesa. Be sure to catch me so you can take take a look at them.

------------------
"Never underestimate the value of eccentrics and Lunatics" -Lional Luthor (Smallville) [This message was edited by Mike Perlowin on 21 December 2005 at 11:46 PM.]

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 22 Dec 2005 6:53 am

Here are some close ups. I have 2 guitars exactly like these (same colors)
http://us.st11.yimg.com/store1.yimg.com/I/ravguitar_1873_9351960

http://us.st11.yimg.com/store1.yimg.com/I/ravguitar_1873_3902637

If I drive to Mesa, I'll bring them both. I might fly though.

Webb Kline · Post by **Webb Kline** » 22 Dec 2005 7:35 am

Mark Vinbury, You are right about the fast growth of 2nd growth timber in some, but certainly not all, instances. First of all, very little hardwood is planted. Most deciduous (hardwood) species will replenish themselves at a rate of at least 2 to 1, without the need for reforestation as is common and ususally neccesary with coniferous species like spruce and pine.

There is a lot of talk on here about ash. A residual stand of ash, after a thinning of the stand, will produce trees that may have annual growth rings of as much as an inch and a half wide. Naturally, that wood will not have the tight-grained qualities rendered by slower growth patterns. The positive aspect of such rapid growth is that those trees typically escape the brown centers found in most ash, making it very favorable for veneering.

What I am getting at is that, given the similar growing situations of the older growth woods, 2nd growth will be the same. Therefore, if a manufacturer is going to have an edge in tone, it is going to have to ensure that the wood it selects is harvested from trees that have grown in an environment conducive to good tonal qualities. To simply purchase a slab of say, mahogany, online is not going to guarantee that it is going to make a quality instrument.

Martin, for example, used to have their own sawmill and the logs they purchased had to meet stringent requirements which included slow growth rates, minimum diameter requirements, mineral content, stain, coloration, etc.

They no longer have the mill, and I'm not certain what their process is, but I am sure that their wood procurement procedures are strict and under close scrutiny.

Bottom line is that there is plenty of good wood growing today, but you have to know where it is. Actually, some of the best instrument wood grows in places where it can be bought on the stump quite reasonably because location makes it cost-prohibitive for most high-production lumber companies to deal with. But, for instrument manufacturers, that wood could be a bargain. There is a lot of fine-quality wood growing in steep North-side hollows and even an acre or two can produce enough wood to make quite a passel of guitars.[This message was edited by Webb Kline on 22 December 2005 at 07:42 AM.]

Mark Vinbury · Post by **Mark Vinbury** » 22 Dec 2005 8:42 am

Webb-- You apparently know a lot more about this than I do,however ,I'm still sceptical. I don't see guitar manufacturers slowing down production to go poking around North Side hollows.
I see them trying to market the virtues of plywood necks, carbon fiber parts and untraditional, homogenized wood species that can still be cheaply harvested.

[This message was edited by Mark Vinbury on 22 December 2005 at 08:43 AM.]

Webb Kline · Post by **Webb Kline** » 22 Dec 2005 8:35 pm

You're absolutely right Mark. But, that's not to say that that fact just makes the available supply for the custom luthiers that much more plentiful. An acre of mature ash or maple will produce at least 3 to 5000 board feet of fine guitar stock. An acre of the right pine or spruce might yield twice that much or more. Just one acre will take a small to medium sized builder a long way.

I wasn't looking at this from the perspective of Fender, Gibson or Martin, but from the viewpoint of the cottage industrial craftsman who puts out say somwhere between a dozen and a hundred instruments a year. For someone like that, there is plenty of great wood available. I mean, how much premium wood was ever available? They didn't exactly manufacture Stradavariuses to be sold at a volume big enough to interest Guitar Center.

I was in the logging and sawmill business for many years and dabbled in the import and export of high grade veneer logs and lumber, so I know know my way around the woodpile fairly well. Like most production industries, there is so much deception, disinformation and outright lying that goes on in order to dupe buyers, as well as the general public regarding wood quality. I think alot of forest products firms have brought on a lot of this synthetic experimentation out of their own dishonesty and greed.

One thing is certain, as long as there is soemthing as beautiful to my tired, old eyes as a hunk of wood, I'm staying away from man-made composites no matter how practical they are.