The Future of Tonewood.

[Minstrel]

Feb.2008 issue of Acoustic Guitar. A look at the changing state of wood supplies.

Very interesting subject. After reading this article I'm not sure that I'm ready for 4-piece backs and alternate woods in the near future. However it seems that we're headed in that direction according to industry giants such as Martin and Taylor.

[ChiyoDad]

Luthiers, manufacturers and players just like the comfort-zone of familiar tonewoods.

 

I'm not too concerned. After sitting down with a few luthiers and seeing what they can do with alternate tonewoods (which are simply non-traditional tonewoods), I'm inclined to believe that we've not fully explored the potential of more-renewable and more-readily available woods. Some of these woods can produce excellent tone. In the lower-end, some laminates can even perform better, and more consistently, than solids.

 

And you can get creative with multi-piece backs, fronts, and sides too.

 

[guitarist21]

 

And you can get creative with multi-piece backs, fronts, and sides too.

 

 

If I had any skills in guitar building, I'd put that thing together myself just to see how it sounds.

 

Ellen

[EvilTwin]

I'm sure we may see four-piece spruce and cedar tops, paired with non-traditional back/side woods (wild cherry seems to be getting a bit more popular; Martin even has a model with it) in the not-too-distant future.

 

Builders managed to work their way around losing woods like red spruce and Brazilian rosewood. I think the next generation of builders will just have to keep on innovating.

[Samilyn]

 

... non-traditional tonewoods), I'm inclined to believe that we've not fully explored the potential of more-renewable and more-readily available woods. Some of these woods can produce excellent tone......

 

 

I think that says it all.

 

Given the ever-increasing scarcity of traditional tonewoods coupled with increasing use of lam and alternate materials, at some point in time gits of the "new" tonewoods will greatly outnumber those made of traditional woods.

 

People will become more accustomed to the somewhat different tones produced by alternate woods and eventually those will become the new standard. Tonal qualities we now perceive as unique might well be the norm in years to come.

 

I don't think it will be a bad thing. Different, to be sure, but not bad.

[0rbitz9]

I just read the same article over the weekend. One thing that was stated

was this, "a guitar's design, construction, and body shape have a greater

impact on tone than the wood it was made from". That's probably true.

20-25 years ago when I bought my first two acoustics, I knew absolutely

nothing about tonewoods, and just bought whatever sounded and played

the best in my lower end price range. I ended up getting a Fender Malibu

guitar with a sycamore body, and a little Yammie with a laminated birch

body. I still have these two guitars, because they're fun to play and sound

great.

 

I think Do3nut made a good point a few weeks ago, stating that we should

be auditiong guitars blindfolded, so that were not influenced by any

preconceptions about brands or tonewoods. On the other hand, I've been

recently thinking that I ought to buy a good Indian rosewood guitar,

before the price goes through the roof.

[rlindsey0]

 

Luthiers, manufacturers and players just like the comfort-zone of familiar tonewoods. I'm not too concerned. After sitting down with a few luthiers and seeing what they can do with alternate tonewoods (which are simply non-traditional tonewoods), I'm inclined to believe that we've not fully explored the potential of more-renewable and more-readily available woods. Some of these woods can produce excellent tone. In the lower-end, some laminates can even perform better, and more consistently, than solids.

 

 

+1

 

I think this is quite right. I've made my own small contribution to this by commissioning a classical in mostly if not completely nontraditional woods: redwood top (the most "standard" of my choices), myrtlewood (California bay laurel) back and sides, mesquite neck and bridge, desert ironwood fingerboard. The common thread is just a conceit of mine, namely that all the woods grow somewhere in California (where I was born and grew up). The luthier is quite confident that he can make a good guitar out of these, so I'm not worried either.

[guitarist21]

I just read the same article over the weekend. One thing that was stated was this, "a guitar's design, construction, and body shape have a greater impact on tone than the wood it was made from". That's probably true.

 

That's also the whole reason Bob Taylor made his famous "Pallet" guitar:

 

 

Ellen