Chug chug chug .
I completely agree people dont learn their amps enough. Im a long time fan of those old ADA's. I made a whole series of requests for harley hexxe to sell me his to no avail. I dont think i'll ever like channel switching though. One of my jcm800's has it, the 4211 model. I never use the highgain channel because the clean distorts so much at volume and responds to the guitar volume so well, just the same as my 2203. Simple channel with a volume treble and bass control the sound variation out of it though is a thing of wonder.

_________________
No no and no

I agree, when I play at volume with my drummer buddy, I use the clean channel or the vintage brown type voice which gets clean at low gain settings/and or moderate gain levels with the guitar volume backed off. The high gain channel seems overwhelming in these conditions.

However, the beauty of a really sweet high gain tube channel is at low volume for practing lead and heavy stuff. It also is great if you want to record direct at bedroom levels. Most good preamps have recording outs.

I like maple and rosewood. Rosewood for my metal guitars. Maple for my strat

_________________
Guitars:
1. mid 70's Ventura MIJ Gibson l6-s clone (Pre-lawsuit) in Black with Rosewood FB and EMG 81 BR/ 85 Neck
2. ESP KH2 Neck Thru
3. 2008 Am Std Strat in 3 tone sunburst

Ok whilst looking to mod some humbuckers earlier this evening i came across this vid. It seems that gibson subscribe to the wood affecting tone theory too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZxLiPF9bTo&feature=related

_________________
No no and no

Ron Kirn has interesting things to say about tone.

http://www.ronkirn.com/quest.htm

Which is why to me my LP Custom Plus sounds different because it has a Maple set neck and not the Mahogany that they went back to on the newer Custom Plus's also the reason it was hard to find . Much less common.

_________________
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Thomas Jefferson

+

Cool link thanks for sharing!

I fully agree with the voice being seperate from tone statement. That has been the foundation of my theory for quite awhile now. I even agree with his marketing hype theories (one of the reasons i dont buy guitar mags anymore). What i dont see is any relevance beyond that to the test performed here. Ok the rooms not blanketed. It is however rudimentary equiptment, guitars of the same spec, set up the same (yes i keep measurements and set all my guitars to them), of comparable value. I can honestly say that i prefer neither over the other and performed the test simply with a view to find out. I hear the difference.

_________________
No no and no

Don't forget the angle headstock affects how vibration is transferred to the body, from the neck. There are so many different aspects to guitar building, and each of them has some kind of impact on tone, and sutstain.

Wood, and in fact construction of the guitar, act in a subtractive way to your guitar's tone. that is resonance of the wood refers to the overtone frequencies of the vibrating string that the body doesn't dampen. different woods dampen different frequencies, so obviously different woods will sound different. how different depends on the types of wood. Woods like alder, and ash have pretty similar acoustic properties, so really you don't find as much difference as you would between either of them, and a wood like mahogany.
In fact, i would say with alder and ash, you can sometimes find nearly as much variance between 2 pieces of ash, as you do between one of those pieces and a piece of alder.

One aspect of a guitar's body is how quickly it absorbs the energy of a vibrating string. if the energy moves quickly to the body (a softer body --less dense--will absorb energy more quickly,) sustain will be short. Also the harmonic characteristics of the wood are also tied to density. it is accepted(somewhat,) that more dense hardwoods, like maple tend to have a brighter sound, that is, they absorb and dampen less of those high frequencies, while a softer hardwood, like mahogany will absorb more of the high overtones, and produce a different tone, some say mellower, and richer.(richer in this case doesn't necessarily mean better, just more to the mid-range or bass end of the sound spectrum.) The dampening of these frequencies changes the path of the vibrating string, the movement of the string through the magnetic field of the pickup is what determines the sound you hear.

Shape of the body probably doesn't have much influence on tone, beyond its actual mass and thickness. Too thin, and I would imagine the piece itself would start moving too much, and quickly absorb string vibration across all frequencies. This is really more apparent in an acoustic instrument. one of the main functions of the back and sides of an acoustic guitar is to brace the top, so that energy from the strings doesn't dissipate so fast, as to kill sustain.

if the finish of your guitar is going to affect tone, it will be by smothering the natural resonance of the wood. personally, i don't really think the actual material itself really has a lot of effect, so much as the thickness of its application. i think poly finishes get a bad rap, because they are usually really really thick, where as a lacquer finish shrinks, and is usually pretty thin, by comparison. i think i have heard that Fender has reduced the amount of sealer they use in their 'thinskin' finishes, so they may agree on this point. i think poly finishes were and are done as thick as they are, because builders probably feel they don't impact tone as much as a people believe, and the ease of application(at an industrial level anyway,) and their durability are worth the trade off, this of coarse is a hot topic of debate.

the electronics are of coarse another major factor in translating a guitar's tone. everything from field strength of the coils in your pickups, to which frequencies your potentiometers attenuate all change the sound of your guitar. How your pickups are attached to the body is, in my opinion, one of the big red herrings of these debates. You sometimes hear people talk about Strat pickups being mounted on the pickguard as being a bad thing, but i think it is wise design for them to not be directly mounted to the body. i think you want to have your pickup be as stable in its position relative to the strings as possible. the less the pick up itself moves or vibrates the more accurately it will capture the movement of the string. the pickguard theoretically acts as a damper between the vibrating body, and the pickup. even less pauls use a mounting bezel(pickup ring,) and pickups are not mounted directly to the body. (to e fair this is most likely done as much for ease of installation, and adjustment of pickup height, and angle, as much s anything.)

All of these factors, and more contribute to the tone of a guitar. The fact that so many, read all, parts of a guitar contribute to its sound is why even 2 stratocasters one after the other off the line will sound somewhat different. You can get predictable results building a guitar, within a certain tollerance for error, but there will be ,at least subtle, differences between every one.

_________________
I'm not an expert, but I play one on the internet.

Excellent and informative thread. Thank you all.

'Have noticed (metro Chicago) or fantasized noticing) how some guitars also tend to sound different at different times of the year.

Chicago summer 95% humidity /95 degrees F is not as kind to guitar sound as 62 degrees F, 55% humidity inside during the winter.

Hi Twelvebar,

Good Post! I am not so sure about your theory of the pickguard stabalzing the pu. The pickguard is not nearly as ridgid as the wood and there are what 9 or more screws holding it to the wood. I believe that the body will transfer vibration to the pickguard. In fact, with out all the screws I bet the guard would vibrate much worse on it own. My guess is with the guard screwed down so well, that it vibrates about the same as the wood. In other words, the body dapens the guard, not the other way around.

Van Halen has always prefered his pu's directly mounted to the wood. I have heard that this creates a fuller sound. He also prefers a basswood body which accentuates the lower and mid frequencies, but prefers a maple neck and fb, which acentuates the high and mid frequencies. Overall this creates some balance of frequencies, which seems to be the goal of many builders, its just the method of getting there differs. Gibson uses mahogany throughout the LP, but they cap it with maple to acentuate higher frequencies. It seems no matter who the builder, maple almost always comes into play in combination with a less dense wood somewhere for the lower frequencies. Seems that the goal is to get the best of both woods in one guitar so that it is well balances in its frequency response. The Gibson SG and L6S are exceptions. The SG is all mahogany and the L6S was all maple. Consequently, the SG is a very dark sounding guitar, and the L6s a bright sounding guitar. While these have the niche, it is obvious that they never had the universal appeal of the LP or Strat

_________________
Guitars:
1. mid 70's Ventura MIJ Gibson l6-s clone (Pre-lawsuit) in Black with Rosewood FB and EMG 81 BR/ 85 Neck
2. ESP KH2 Neck Thru
3. 2008 Am Std Strat in 3 tone sunburst

My thinking is that the pick guard's less rigid connection to the body dampens vibration, could be way off, and probably not very important anyway. I think from tinkering, that Eddie may like the pickups directly on the body, actually for the reason that they are as far from the strings as possible. CAFeathers among others(including myself,) like them set low into the body, and let our amplification (the other half of electric guitar tone!!,) do more of the heavy lifting.

Obviously whole libraries could be written on wood theory, I was trying to give a super basic example of what i was thinking. Your breakdown on LP's was spot on.

_________________
I'm not an expert, but I play one on the internet.