Members gitmo Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 For anyone who's cared I just received a Silver Creek T-170 to compliment my T-160, the difference being mahogany vs rosewood back and sides. Naturally I've been A/B'ing them. Having two identical guitars, wood type being the only major difference, I'm starting to draw some conclusions. There are subtle variables such as strings and the saddle densities so I'd like to hear some opinions. I've read the descriptions of tones that these are supposed to produce on a few sites. What's your opinion? I did go walking around inside. I loosened the strings and pulled the saddle to lower the bass side. While the strings were loose I slipped a regular digital camera down inside to see what I would come up with. It's harder to position the bigger digital than the USB camera but takes better quality pictures when you get a good one. The USB's have a huge advantage if you need realtime feed back when working on the guitar with a need to see the affects on the inside. Take a quick look but don't forget to opine about the tonewoods if you're so inclined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members andy thompson Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 I wont bore you with what I ve read, but its topical for me. Cant you post soundclips? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted January 23, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 Cant you post soundclips? I could I suppose but I was really more curious about others experience and the conclusions they've drawn. I wanted to compare them to my observations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Misha Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 Mahogany vs rosewood back and sides... To me: Mahogany = Warmer sound, more mids, Rosewood = brighter, more refined, more highs, but "colder" sound... **** I could be wrong!**** My preference: I need one of each!!What do I have:Larrivee OM-03: All solid, spruce top, mahogany back and sides, mahogany neck, ebony fretboard Cort Earth Custom (dreadnought): All solid, spruce top, rosewood back and sides, mahogany neck, ebony fretboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members riffmeister Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 rosewood = more overtones & richnessmahogany = less overtones, more fundamental & "drier" These are my conclusions after A/B-ing several Collings dreads & OMs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 Many people describe mahogany as "woody" or "dry". Many people describe rosewood as "rich" or "heavy overtones". Others claim it makes very little difference because the top is responsible for 80% of the tone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 rosewood = more overtones & richness mahogany = less overtones, more fundamental & "drier" These are my conclusions after A/B-ing several Collings dreads & OMs. Hey! You beat me to it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Misha Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 Well guys, which one is warmer? Does dry = not warm to you??? To me, woody = warm... or even "feutr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitnoob Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 All I hear when I play are the strings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members andy thompson Posted January 23, 2010 Members Share Posted January 23, 2010 I dont understand this overtones thing....Its for strumming right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted January 24, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 Mahogany vs rosewood back and sides... To me: Mahogany = Warmer sound, more mids, Rosewood = brighter, more refined, more highs, ... Everybody seems pretty close. So far I'll say this is what I'm noticing. From Sweetwater's site this seemed to put into words what I'm hearing which is pretty much what most here seem to say: "When considered for back and sides, mahogany has relatively high velocity of sound, which contributes much overtone coloration. While rosewood guitars may be thought of has having a metallic sound, mahogany guitars sound more wood-like." The saddle on the T-160 is soft bone, it powdered easy on the file. The saddle on the T-170 was probably more like what it should be, it was much harder and felt like the TUSQ on the file. I wasn't sure if the tone difference was because of the harder saddle or the wood. The wood really seems to make a difference. Honestly, so far my preference is the mahogany, but it's a matter of taste not tone quality, they both have strong clear tone. P.S. Both of my Silver Creek guitars had snug fitting saddles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Misha Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 I dont understand this overtones thing....Its for strumming right? When I think of overtones, I think of harmonics created by the vibration of the wood of the guitar... A bit like an echo. ---------------------- Correct me if I'm wrong... in Physics: High frequencies: the wave(form) comes back more often in a period of time. It means that the echo we hear is repeated more often before fading. This is why we hear more overtones that refine the sound of the original signal (which is a waveform and is the dry signal). Mids: The wave(form) lasts a bit longer which means we hear the original (dry) signal more longer before the echo hits our ears. The echo is repeated less often because it has time to fade away before it echoes again. Bass: the wave(form) lasts even more than for the mids... etc, etc... It would be easier to me to explain this in French... Feel free to correct me if what I tried to say is incorrect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Grant Harding Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 My guess would be the hog has more deep bass and shimmering treble, but the rosewood has a more biting and present midrange and a more articulate voice. But it could be completely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members andy thompson Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 When I think of overtones, I think of harmonics created by the vibration of the wood of the guitar... A bit like an echo. ---------------------- Correct me if I'm wrong... in Physics: High frequencies: the wave(form) comes back more often in a period of time. It means that the echo we hear is repeated more often before fading. This is why we hear more overtones that refine the sound of the original signal (which is a waveform and is the dry signal). Mids: The wave(form) lasts a bit longer which means we hear the original (dry) signal more longer before the echo hits our ears. The echo is repeated less often because it has time to fade away before it echoes again. Bass: the wave(form) lasts even more than for the mids... etc, etc... It would be easier to me to explain this in French... Feel free to correct me if what I tried to say is incorrect! :eek: Max Plank and Stephen Hawkins are on voice mail at the moment.... Is it frequency (Hz) and more specifically Khz that are in context here? To my mind..bass, or taken to extremes ULF (ultra low frequency) has a larger amplitude, ie the waveform is longer, which is how whales can communicate over vast distances. These waves inside a guitar will reflect and attenuate (decay). For strumming and a twelve string, I, in my ignorance, can see the benefit, but for fingerpicking..? I dont have the theoretical background to expand, is it the 1,4,5 thing where these frequencies are in harmonic unison? Hmm, I think I spend too much time obsessing over the minute aspects of sound when I should be learning the neck, still I guess it all adds up in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members knockwood Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 rosewood = more overtones & richnessmahogany = less overtones, more fundamental & "drier"These are my conclusions after A/B-ing several Collings dreads & OMs. Thisness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mister natural Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 when I was seriously shopping : my eyes wanted to like the RW tone better I couldn't get past the warmth/earthiness of the mahogany. Agree with most that RW sounds brighter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Joseph Hanna Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 I pulled this quote from guitar builder Rick Turner from a similar discussion on another forum. It is of course a discussion primarily aimed at tone wood myths. "Once again, don't ascribe particular qualities only to certain wood species. As Al has noted, there is tremendous overlap from one species of spruce to another in terms of the measureable qualities...stiffness along or across the grain, density, damping characteristics, etc. Yes, the average for one type may be a bit this way or that way from the others, and hence we wind up with all this Adirondack vs. Sitka vs. Englemann, etc. debate, but it's about each individual piece of wood. But all this happens with side and back wood, too. I've seen a lot of pretty spongy Indian rosewood...stuff that had higher damping that a lot of mahogany or maple, yet it was "rosewood"...ooooooh! Non-luthiers (and more than a few luthiers...) want definitive definitions for these various woods; they want to buy into a belief system that is rigidly compartmentalized with regard to names and wood species. Sorry...it's all very fuzzy borders with lots of overlap. The rest is marketing..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members andy thompson Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 when I was seriously shopping : my eyes wanted to like the RW tone betterI couldn't get past the warmth/earthiness of the mahogany. Agree with most that RW sounds brighter You dont know how relevant to me that is at the moment...big thanks:thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted January 24, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 when I was seriously shopping : my eyes wanted to like the RW tone better I couldn't get past the warmth/earthiness of the mahogany. Agree with most that RW sounds brighter Ditto! I think the rosewood is very good looking. I do prefer the tone of the mahogany at this time. I'm conflicted over my Strat and Les Paul though so like those, it could change. I can be fickle. There is a distinct difference in the sound of the two guitars. There is also a distinct difference in the density/hardness of the saddles. I'm wondering how much is attributable to the wood. The tone difference does follow the basic description of mellow for mahogany and bright for rosewood. Having two identical guitars made of different woods is a good opportunity to check out these claims. I do agree with the "overlapping boundries" of wood types, it's probably as dependent of the specific piece of wood to a great degree. I'll eventually change the soft bone saddle on the mahogany guitar to Tusq and see if it brightens the tone bringing it closer to the rosewood guitar. I do recall a saddle discussion where others reported a huge difference in tone as a result of a saddle change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kwakatak Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 Rosewood = muddy & metallic making bass notes "gongish", mids "bellish" and trebles "chimish" where the original note (through overtones) change into something else. Mahogany = warm and articulate. I don't sense a difference in tonal balance (that's determined by bracing IMO) but generally there's still a lushness to the entire spectrum. The original note doesn't change with overtones though. Personally I love rosewood for strumming on dreads with spruce tops and light bracing. The HD-35 is a prime example. That model has incredible lushness with overtones and sustain that make the guitar respond like a grand piano. OTOH, take a mahogany deep-bodied OM and you've got a nice fingerstyle instrument. The following are just my opinion but if you give it a cedar top and IMO it's great for jazz and classical, give it a spruce top and it's great for folk, give it a hog top and it's great for blues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rjoxyz Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 Rosewood = muddy & metallic making bass notes "gongish", mids "bellish" and trebles "chimish" where the original note (through overtones) change into something else. Mahogany = warm and articulate. I don't sense a difference in tonal balance (that's determined by bracing IMO) but generally there's still a lushness to the entire spectrum. The original note doesn't change with overtones though. Personally I love rosewood for strumming on dreads with spruce tops and light bracing. The HD-35 is a prime example. That model has incredible lushness with overtones and sustain that make the guitar respond like a grand piano. OTOH, take a mahogany deep-bodied OM and you've got a nice fingerstyle instrument. I agree with every word. I also agree with the generalization that rosewood has a "metallic" flavor and mahogany is "woody". Complex v. Fundamental tones? Check. These are very broad characterizations, aimed at the peak of the bell curve. As Mr. Hanna points out in the quote above, there is much wood variance and overlap among species. Add design and manufacturing processes and the picture blurs even further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guildfire Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 These are generalizations that are nice to talk about but until you get down to specific A/B comparisons don't really mean much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gitmo Posted January 24, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 These are generalizations that are nice to talk about but until you get down to specific A/B comparisons don't really mean much. Agree! I have a rare opportunity so I thought I would put it out there. Even though they are identical models there are the variables that have been discussed such as the differences among the same woods, the bone density and how that may change tone as much as different pieces of the same TYPE of wood or slight variations in design amongst different manufacturers. I do think some generalizations are valid or manufacturers wouldn't use spruce overwhelmingly for sound boards to give one example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Misha Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 :eek: Max Plank and Stephen Hawkins are on voice mail at the moment.... Is it frequency (Hz) and more specifically Khz that are in context here? To my mind..bass, or taken to extremes ULF (ultra low frequency) has a larger amplitude, ie the waveform is longer, which is how whales can communicate over vast distances. These waves inside a guitar will reflect and attenuate (decay). For strumming and a twelve string, I, in my ignorance, can see the benefit, but for fingerpicking..? I dont have the theoretical background to expand, is it the 1,4,5 thing where these frequencies are in harmonic unison? Hmm, I think I spend too much time obsessing over the minute aspects of sound when I should be learning the neck, still I guess it all adds up in the end. Yes I was thinking about frequency, period, wavelenght, etc... One thing though, the amplitude has to do with the loudness, not the wavelenght. About the 1,4,5 thing, the only thing I know is that there is an A at 440Hz, (Well, the teacher told us that the real frequency was 444 Hz.) so, if we take the A major scale: A B C# D E F# G# a where A = 1, D = 4, E = 5 knowing that there are 12 semi-tones between A and a. A = 220 Hz (One octave lower than A) . . . . A = 440 Hz D = 440 Hz + (5/12 X 440 Hz) = 623.33333 Hz) E = 440 Hz + (7/12 X 440 Hz) = 696.66666 Hz) . . . a = 880 Hz (one octave higher than A) I don't know a lot about this, the only thing I know is that some frequencies we hear sound good along with other frequencies, however, some others really don't... (false notes...) The 1-3-5 thing sounds good to the human ear, as well as the 1-4-5. All the chords formulas sound good to the human ear, octaves sound good too! My opinion is that we are, as human beings, captors of different electromegnetic waves. Ours ears capt certain wavelenghts, our eyes others, etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mister natural Posted January 24, 2010 Members Share Posted January 24, 2010 You dont know how relevant to me that is at the moment...big thanks:thu: peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.