Tonewoods and construction...

[laidback]

I was looking pretty seriously at a couple of Breedlove Atlas instruments. I noticed a huge difference between the model with rosewood back and sides vs. mahogany. I'd heard there was a lot of varibility in these guitars so I player several of the mahogany; they only had a couple of rosewood. The rosewood was much more "lively"; the mahogany models all seemed almost "muted." But then I played a Takamine with mahogany back and sides and it was much closer to the Breedlove rosewood. It was a low end Tak so I'm pretty sure the back and sides were laminated. Is there so much difference in the bracing/construction of different manufacturers that the effect on sound is greater than the tonewood used?

[garthman]

Is there so much difference in the bracing/construction of different manufacturers that the effect on sound is greater than the tonewood used?

 

 

The bracing and construction will certainly make a difference to the sound of a guitar, I suspect more so than the contribution from the back and sides.

 

It is believed that the top of a guitar generates 85% of the sound of the instrument, both volume and 'quality' (timbre, etc), so the more effectively the top vibrates the better the sound, hence the use of good, solid tonewoods for the top. Similary, bracing and construction techniques need to be a compromise between allowing the top to vibrate and keeping the instrument from warping under the tension of the strings (so, for example, steel strung guitars need stronger bracing than nylon strung guitars).

[LaurentB]

Didin't someone post some sound clips with recordings of similar guitars with different tonewoods some time ago?

[Freeman Keller]

Here are several locations with clips of different guitars

http://www.kentotushek.com/

http://www.thepodium.com/t-soundsamples.aspx

http://www.maurysmusic.com/martin_guitar_video_clips

If you select similar body sizes from one manufacture you can get a pretty good idea of what different woods contribute. Obviously if you compare an rose OM from one company to a hog dread from another all bets are off.

In the case of the Breedloves, remember too that their construction is a little different from most guitars - they use the JLD "Bridge Doctor" and from the pictures I've seen, tend to be very heavily scalloped - go to the last page of this and compare with some of the other manufacturers.

http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Musician/Guitar/XGallery/xgallery1.html

I assume the Atlas series are built the same way but I'm not 100%.

[Queequeg]

While there are generally accepted differences in tonewoods such as rosewood and mahogany, 'lively' vs 'muted' are not typically among them. Please don't misunderstand: I am not suggesting that the rosewood wasn't in fact more "lively" than the mahogany which sounded "muted".

I suspect that there may be some other reason for what you were hearing than the tonewoods, themselves.

My first assumption when one guitar sounds more muted than another similar guitar by the same maker is the condition of the strings. If you are serious about purchasing one of these two guitars from this particular retailer, ask him/her to restring them for you before you decide which one you want. If, in the end you opt out, and you decide not to purchase either one of them, you might offer to pay for those strings, but they will probably not accept your offer.

[StonedTrout]

Hey this my first post!!

I have owned a lot of guitars, most under $400. I have had all sorts of woods they were made with. the best sounding guitar and best playing guitar i have ever owned, has been a Sigma DM-35 with rosewood back and sides. it sounds awesome even with dead strings on it. I bought it used at a guitar show, it is my guitar in every way. every one who has played has said good things about. I think if i were shopping for a guitar again i would go after another one with rosewood back and sides, only because I had such a a good experience with the Sigma.

I think when you buy a guitar; you want to make sure your going to be happy with it. if you think the rosewood one sounds better than the mahogany ones then buy it. I think you will be happier getting the one you really like than settling for one.

[Dave W.]

Hey this my first post!! I have owned a lot of guitars, most under $400. I have had all sorts of woods they were made with. the best sounding guitar and best playing guitar i have ever owned, has been a Sigma DM-35 with rosewood back and sides. it sounds awesome even with dead strings on it. I bought it used at a guitar show, it is my guitar in every way. every one who has played has said good things about. I think if i were shopping for a guitar again i would go after another one with rosewood back and sides, only because I had such a a good experience with the Sigma. I think when you buy a guitar; you want to make sure your going to be happy with it. if you think the rosewood one sounds better than the mahogany ones then buy it. I think you will be happier getting the one you really like than settling for one.

 

 

Welcome to HGAC!

 

Your Sigma is almost definitely laminated (ply) back and sides. The wood they use for the veneer makes little difference in the sound.

[LaurentB]

I liked that Martin site, where you can hear all the different guitars!

There's also this site, where some differences in tone woods are being explained:

http://www.esomogyi.com/tonewoods.html

[Freeman Keller]

There's also this site, where some differences in tone woods are being explained: http://www.esomogyi.com/tonewoods.html

 

 

Thanks for the link. That is some wonderful insite from one of the truely great masters

[Dave W.]

However, there is some pretty strong feeling among a few folks on this old forum that a plywood cheapie, er, laminated back and sides and even top, like my old Yamie, can sound remarkably good

 

 

I have an all lam Yamaha classical I bought new in the early 80's for maybe $150. Wouldn't let go of it for the world, it is a great little guitar. It has been through hell, and still plays and sounds great.

All I was saying is that the type of wood chosen for the top veneer lam will not color the guitars sound as it would if it were solid. RW ply and hog ply are going to sound pretty much the same, all else equal.

[Freeman Keller]

All I was saying is that the type of wood chosen for the top veneer lam will not color the guitars sound as it would if it were solid. RW ply and hog ply are going to sound pretty much the same, all else equal.

 

 

We agree on that, Dave.

[Etienne Rambert]

Laurent B. http://www.esomogyi.com/tonewoods.html

----

Good link. Informative essay. It's brevity necessitates the generality.

I don't know about lumping Mahogany & Koa together. Mahogany comes

from different places. But Koa only comes from the Hawaiian Islands. Am I right?

 

If woods that grow in different parts of the world, such as Rosewood, Spruce or Cedar have different tonal qualities, wouldn't the same be true of Mahogany?

[Freeman Keller]

I don't know about lumping Mahogany & Koa together. Mahogany comes from different places. But Koa only comes from the Hawaiian Islands. Am I right? If woods that grow in different parts of the world, such as Rosewood, Spruce or Cedar have different tonal qualities, wouldn't the same be true of Mahogany?

 

 

Marcellis, I don't have much experience with Koa, but everything I've heard places it somewhere between mahogany and rosewood in sound. Like 'hog, you do see a lot of all koa guitars - again, I don't know what having it on top does for the sound but it sure looks purty. OTOH you never see a rosewood topped guitar.

 

I also read a little piece on ukes that said that the early Martin spruce topped ukes weren't very good, when they started using mahogany they got better and the koa ones are considered the best.

[JasmineTea]

I don't know about lumping Mahogany & Koa together. Mahogany comes from different places. But Koa only comes from the Hawaiian Islands. Am I right? If woods that grow in different parts of the world, such as Rosewood, Spruce or Cedar have different tonal qualities, wouldn't the same be true of Mahogany?

If the differences in those woods are atributed to the location they were grown, then I'd say yes. But from what I've read, some very different woods from very different places can have a lot of similar characteristics.

 

I'm no wood expert, nor can I back this up, but when I had regular internet access I remember reading some stuff about woods...

[bjorn-fjord]

I can attest to the differences in koa. My current batch includes a koa 00-ish guitar and a koa reso. The differences between the two sets of koa is huge. It's almost as if they are entirely different woods. The wood on the 00 is light in color and density, and more fibrous - quite close to Honduras mahogany. The wood on the reso is dark in color and very dense, even denser than the Indian rosewood on the 3rd guitar in the batch - it begins to shine after sanding with 220.
There must be a lot of climatic variation in Hawaii.

[garthman]

Traditionally (and it's a tradition that has evolved over centuries of guitar making) a softwood like spruce or cedar is used for the top and a hardwood like rosewood, mahogany etc. is used for the bottom and sides. Spruce and cedar are both strong woods that can be cut quite thinly but retain their shape and they resonate well . Hardwoods are used for the back and sides because (it is thought) they resonate less than the sofwood top which reduces potential 'intereference' to the sound of the resonating top.

Laminates can be used throughout a guitar (and are inherently stronger than solid wood, epecially at the thicknesses used in guitars) but a solid top is more highly thought of because it is believed a solid wood resonates better. Whether or not solid or laminate is used for the back and sides is less important since the top is responsible for approx 85% of the sound (and the back another 10%). A good compromise - which is commonly adopted - is to use a solid hardwood back and laminate sides.

[Queequeg]

A good compromise - which is commonly adopted - is to use a solid hardwood back and laminate sides.

.

I don't get out much, so forgive me.

But who builds such an instrument?

I have never heard of such a guitar with a solid back and laminated sides.

[rjoxyz]

. I don't get out much, so forgive me. But who builds such an instrument? I have never heard of such a guitar with a solid back and laminated sides.

 

 

 

I think there are some Breedloves like that and Martin recently made one (D1, DR, DM--can't recall which). I think there are others that don't come to mind at the moment.

[JasmineTea]

. I don't get out much, so forgive me. But who builds such an instrument? I have never heard of such a guitar with a solid back and laminated sides.

I have one, a Martin 000-1. http://www.martinguitar.com/guitars/choosing/guitars.php?m=000-1&p=i

 

Mine's an earlier version with a mahogany neck, not "select...". A larger neck profile too. They changed the profile sometime after I bought it.

 

Great little guitar.

[bjorn-fjord]

. I don't get out much, so forgive me. But who builds such an instrument? I have never heard of such a guitar with a solid back and laminated sides.

 

 

Many independent luthiers are doing this. But they're not using plywood, they're actually laminating two pieces of solid wood together to make super strong, heavy sides. The thought is that stiffer sides have less of a dampening effect on the vibrations.

[LaurentB]

. I don't get out much, so forgive me. But who builds such an instrument? I have never heard of such a guitar with a solid back and laminated sides.

 

 

My and many other Crafters have that, for example. I suspect that the back of my Crafter could be solid, becauze I can see the same tiger maple patterns on the inside of the back. I don't see it at the inside of the sides though, so they're definitely laminated.

[AK47]

Many independent luthiers are doing this. But they're not using plywood, they're actually laminating two pieces of solid wood together to make super strong, heavy sides. The thought is that stiffer sides have less of a dampening effect on the vibrations.

Yes I've heard this too. Gets the back better into the sound mix. In addition to less dampening between the top and back it is supposed to make the sides stronger and less prone to crack. Sounds good in theory but I've no personal experience.

[AK47]

I was looking pretty seriously at a couple of Breedlove Atlas instruments. I noticed a huge difference between the model with rosewood back and sides vs. mahogany. I'd heard there was a lot of varibility in these guitars so I player several of the mahogany; they only had a couple of rosewood. The rosewood was much more "lively"; the mahogany models all seemed almost "muted." But then I played a Takamine with mahogany back and sides and it was much closer to the Breedlove rosewood. It was a low end Tak so I'm pretty sure the back and sides were laminated. Is there so much difference in the bracing/construction of different manufacturers that the effect on sound is greater than the tonewood used?

IMHO tonewoods and construction make an equal contribution to the sound. Taylor made a pallet guitar that's supposed to sound good. Take a Blueridge and Collings of identical size and wood and you'll see the difference construction contributes to sound. Some companies take greater time for detailed construction with luthiers that are more capable. Of course you will pay for for that time and experience. Off the rack guitars will have less consistency and must be judged on an individual basis. I've found guitars on the rack made of different woods that sound virtually identical. I've also tried 2 identical guitars from the same manufacurer that sounded different. When buying a guitar off the rack the safest bet is to test drive it first.

[bjorn-fjord]

I've also tried 2 identical guitars from the same manufacurer that sounded different. When buying a guitar off the rack the safest bet is to test drive it first.

Which is exactly why I would never buy an acoustic guitar sight unseen (or sound unheard?).

A local independent instrument store owner recently told be he's afraid he may have to close up shop because he's lost so much business to internet sales. I just don't get it. Is a price discount really worth that kind of gamble? I mean, it's a guitar, not a food processor. Oh, the humanity!

[JasmineTea]

Which is exactly why I would never buy an acoustic guitar sight unseen (or sound unheard?). A local independent instrument store owner recently told be he's afraid he may have to close up shop because he's lost so much business to internet sales. I just don't get it. Is a price discount really worth that kind of gamble? I mean, it's a guitar, not a food processor. Oh, the humanity!

It's the return policy. Some places have a 45 day no questions asked return policy. You don't like the way your new guitar sounds? Send it back and we'll exchange it for another.