Suhr

Originally posted by ptah Christ on a pogostick, I can't believe people actually think this chart is anything more than a figment of someone's imagination, straight out of Eric Johnson's playbook. I would like to see the scientific method used for such data, where did that chart come from? I dont hear Mahogany as have more mids AT ALL, some people write these descriptions by listening to a Les Paul vs a strat or something, you cant do that, Les Paul is a different scale length body thickness and a million other differences. I find Mahogany airy and resonant, brilliant top end but only clicks for me when using a Mahogany neck.

Originally posted by Megadeth7684 Like what??? All lower end guitars are basswood, agathis, etc. Actually most the cheaper guitars are not a 2 piece body but 5 piece and more, also the cheapys at Fender were Poplar A medium density wood , Excellent strength and stability. Actually sounds pretty good but has a bad name. Agathis is cheap Mahogany. Many of the cheaper Basswood guitars were not true basswood but other species that were called basswood during that craze in the 80's Some Canadian companies just use the local woods found in their forests , Aspen, Cottonwood are also used in the cheaper guitars. Half the time the actual specs have nothing to do with what is really on the guitar. Most companies going for cheap product dont use true basswood since it is to costly, Aspen and Poplar are cheaper so that is what you will usually find regardless of what they say. One company I used to work at used 5 and 6 piece bodies out of scrap alder with an ash cap and back, I think those bodies were 10% glue:D they were called Alder but looked like Ash, how confusing is that? You can tell because the sunburst black area went all the way into the tummy cut to hide the top glue line. True Basswood sounds pretty good sweet midrange, very fluid. Not many companies are using the real deal though, especially those in Japan