ShortScale.org

Mages wrote:ask anyone who works with wood for a living, basswood is an almost identical wood to poplar. the only practical difference is poplar has a greenish color.

I can't tell the difference between the two when they're painted over.

Phil O'Keefe wrote:No offense to anyone with a contrary POV, but I just don't like basswood for guitar bodies - and the vast majority of the MIJ for the Japanese market 'stangs seem to use that as the body wood, while the stuff that IS available in the USA uses poplar or alder...

They may look cool, but as with the '69 RI, I would pass due to the body wood. YMMV.

I'm sure if I let you play any of the four guitars that I have that are made of basswood, but lied to you and told you they were alder, you would love the tone. The idea that basswood is somehow an inferior guitar wood is just corcksniffing nonsense.

The Japanese Mustang Bass reissues all have alder bodies, unlike the originals which used poplar or ash.

Basswood bodies don't make the guitar sound any different than poplar or alder. From a durability standpoint though, I would say that basswood is inferior, it damages very easily! I once dented my old sonic blue mustang with my fingernail.

oh noes

Billy3000 wrote:From a durability standpoint though, I would say that basswood is inferior, it damages very easily! I once dented my old sonic blue mustang with my fingernail.

Very true. But for me that is made up for by the fact that basswood guitars tend to be much lighter than other woods. That's a good thing when your back is starting to show wear and tear, like mine!

Mages wrote:ask anyone who works with wood for a living, basswood is an almost identical wood to poplar. the only practical difference is poplar has a greenish color.

I respect your POV, but my perception differs.

Discounting the greenish / yellow heart sections of poplar, while they may look similar in some respects, there's definitely hardness and density differences between the two species of wood, and, at least based on the guitars I've owned, and the ones I've played, there tends to be a noticeable sonic difference between poplar and basswood bodies. Basswood seems to put more emphasis on the note's fundamental, with more of a bandpassed, midrange tone to it, with less subharmonics and upper frequency harmonics to the sound. Poplar seems a bit more similar to alder in tonality to me; a bit brighter, a little more open and resonant and lively sounding, with more complexity to the overtones and harmonics than basswood has. Depending on the type of sound you prefer, neither one is "better" or "worse", but I definitely prefer the sound of poplar. YMMV, and again, I respect that.

As far as asking someone who works with wood on a daily basis, I can ask the drummer in our band - he's a Fender CS Master Builder... but I suspect his tastes are going to lean towards the really primo grade woods and not the lower end stuff like poplar and basswood.

astro wrote:

Phil O'Keefe wrote:No offense to anyone with a contrary POV, but I just don't like basswood for guitar bodies - and the vast majority of the MIJ for the Japanese market 'stangs seem to use that as the body wood, while the stuff that IS available in the USA uses poplar or alder...

They may look cool, but as with the '69 RI, I would pass due to the body wood. YMMV.

I'm sure if I let you play any of the four guitars that I have that are made of basswood, but lied to you and told you they were alder, you would love the tone. The idea that basswood is somehow an inferior guitar wood is just corcksniffing nonsense.

I'm not so sure either one of us should be quick to jump at that bet. On one hand, my ears (and experience) might be significantly better than you may think... on the other hand, your guitars may sound significantly better than some of the other ones I've tried. And I'm not unwilling to admit that I can be wrong from time to time either.

Look, all modesty aside, I make my living in a large part based on my ears. People pay me to help them make good sounding stuff, or to give my opinion about how stuff sounds. I'm also a HUGE fan of bang of the bucks, and I'm not into high end stuff just for the sake of boutique snobbishness. If something isn't audible to me (and as an engineer, I'm a big fan of double blind listening tests), I have no problem admitting it, and I am certainly not going to pay extra for specially lacquered wooden knobs for my stereo, high tech IEC power cables and speaker cable trestles if I can't hear a difference when they're being used - no matter how flowery the hype and manufacturer's ad claims are. If I can buy something for 1/10th the price that gives me 90% of the performance of a top dollar, high performance item, I'll gladly do so, and will sing its praises on the forums I run and in the magazines I write for, and will use it on the records I produce and engineer... but while I don't automatically buy into the snake oil sales pitches, if I can hear something, and I like it better, I'm not going to ignore that either.

If you dig basswood and don't think there's any difference, or think there's a difference but prefer the sound of it, then I think that's great. It's just not for me. I wish it was. Why? Here's just one example - Years ago, I had a '73 Tele that I traded for a new mid-80s MIJ '62 Custom Tele. It was drop dead gorgeous, and had one of the best necks I've ever played on it. Just a beautiful guitar to look and and a blast to play from a comfort standpoint - but it sounded somewhat anemic. I figured a pickup swap would cure that. But even when I put the same pups and hardware the 73 had into the 62 Custom, it didn't change the basic issues I had with the sound of the guitar - and the sound was something I could hear even when playing it unamplified. There was a big difference in the sound of the wood, in the way it resonated. While that was a case of ash vs basswood, it still is generally typical of the sonic characteristics of other basswood guitars I've tried over the years; again, more fundamental, less overtones, a little more bandpassed. Maybe there are some other basswood guitars that don't have those same sonic characteristics - I'm certainly willing to admit that could indeed be the case... but so far, I have not really found any that did it for me.

Again, YMMV.

Remember 2 different guitars made out of the same wood can sound different.

As far as wood goes the Japanese export guitars used to be basswood apart from the sunbursts that were alder. The Jap market ones were all alder unless specified. I'm not sure about the current stuff. Remember there are normally quite a few differencec between the J market vs export guitars. My Big Block Jaguar was a Jap market one, it was alder and it was routed/fitted with a mute. The neck was also way better than the "limited edition" ones I've played in the shop here. If you're after a Japanese market one ask about the body wood if it makes a big difference to you.

The market for these instruments is huge in Japan, that's why they've had the cream of the crop for so long.

astro wrote:

Billy3000 wrote:From a durability standpoint though, I would say that basswood is inferior, it damages very easily! I once dented my old sonic blue mustang with my fingernail.

Very true. But for me that is made up for by the fact that basswood guitars tend to be much lighter than other woods. That's a good thing when your back is starting to show wear and tear, like mine!

That is definitely true! That's why I love my compstang reissue, I just have to be gentle with it!

Yeah, I love how light my Aerodyne Jazz Bass and Telecaster are... but the Jazzy has dents in it from my strap buckle

Aside from how light they are, somewhat counter-intuitively, these bodies sustain like no one's business, and have great acoustic tonal character. Aside from it's softness, basswood is a great instrument material, imo. The mirror gloss finish on the Aerodynes is really NOT suited to such a soft wood, and I really doubt it's going to age well and take on a nice "worn in" look as it gets roughed up, unlike some other finish styles that take to relicing quite nicely. With a different finish, the readiness of basswood to take on nicks and dents could make for a very interesting, character filled instrument.

Phil O'Keefe wrote:

astro wrote:

Phil O'Keefe wrote:No offense to anyone with a contrary POV, but I just don't like basswood for guitar bodies - and the vast majority of the MIJ for the Japanese market 'stangs seem to use that as the body wood, while the stuff that IS available in the USA uses poplar or alder...

They may look cool, but as with the '69 RI, I would pass due to the body wood. YMMV.

I'm sure if I let you play any of the four guitars that I have that are made of basswood, but lied to you and told you they were alder, you would love the tone. The idea that basswood is somehow an inferior guitar wood is just corcksniffing nonsense.

I'm not so sure either one of us should be quick to jump at that bet. On one hand, my ears (and experience) might be significantly better than you may think... on the other hand, your guitars may sound significantly better than some of the other ones I've tried. And I'm not unwilling to admit that I can be wrong from time to time either.

Look, all modesty aside, I make my living in a large part based on my ears. People pay me to help them make good sounding stuff, or to give my opinion about how stuff sounds. I'm also a HUGE fan of bang of the bucks, and I'm not into high end stuff just for the sake of boutique snobbishness. If something isn't audible to me (and as an engineer, I'm a big fan of double blind listening tests), I have no problem admitting it, and I am certainly not going to pay extra for specially lacquered wooden knobs for my stereo, high tech IEC power cables and speaker cable trestles if I can't hear a difference when they're being used - no matter how flowery the hype and manufacturer's ad claims are. If I can buy something for 1/10th the price that gives me 90% of the performance of a top dollar, high performance item, I'll gladly do so, and will sing its praises on the forums I run and in the magazines I write for, and will use it on the records I produce and engineer... but while I don't automatically buy into the snake oil sales pitches, if I can hear something, and I like it better, I'm not going to ignore that either.

If you dig basswood and don't think there's any difference, or think there's a difference but prefer the sound of it, then I think that's great. It's just not for me. I wish it was. Why? Here's just one example - Years ago, I had a '73 Tele that I traded for a new mid-80s MIJ '62 Custom Tele. It was drop dead gorgeous, and had one of the best necks I've ever played on it. Just a beautiful guitar to look and and a blast to play from a comfort standpoint - but it sounded somewhat anemic. I figured a pickup swap would cure that. But even when I put the same pups and hardware the 73 had into the 62 Custom, it didn't change the basic issues I had with the sound of the guitar - and the sound was something I could hear even when playing it unamplified. There was a big difference in the sound of the wood, in the way it resonated. While that was a case of ash vs basswood, it still is generally typical of the sonic characteristics of other basswood guitars I've tried over the years; again, more fundamental, less overtones, a little more bandpassed. Maybe there are some other basswood guitars that don't have those same sonic characteristics - I'm certainly willing to admit that could indeed be the case... but so far, I have not really found any that did it for me.

Again, YMMV.

If you're able to hear a difference, then your ears are clearly more sensitive than mine! Sorry if I sounded dismissive before, I do respect your opinion. I've met a lot of people who say they hate the sound of basswood, but love the sound of my guitars when I tell them its alder ! None of them were audio pros, though. Just amateurs like me.

For me, I can't even say I like basswood as a matter of taste, because in all honesty I just can't hear a difference when it comes to wood. I can hear a difference when it comes to different pickups, hardware, strings and electronics, just not wood. Ultimately, I think we sometimes put too much emphasis on the subtleties of tone, especially in a live setting, because 98% of the people in the audience can't even tell the difference between a single coil and a humbucker based on what they're hearing. I can't say that about the recording studio, because I have no experience in professional recording.