quarter sawn neck - does it change the tone any

What difference in tone if any does
the quarter sawn neck make over
a standard neck?

Shouldn't make any difference in tone.

It does affect strength and stability of the neck as an assembly.

Ken...

Any opinions on ebony fingerboards, both structurally and sound-wise?
If they stiffen the structure, that would be very likely to keep notes lasting longer, and perhaps reduce dead-spots too? I have an acoustic with an ebony board that has a nicely rigid-feeling neck.

Any opinions on ebony fingerboards, both structurally and sound-wise?
If they stiffen the structure, that would be very likely to keep notes lasting longer, and perhaps reduce dead-spots too? I have an acoustic with an ebony board that has a nicely rigid-feeling neck.

Just in case you have not seen this post in the Knowledgebase: What are the fingerboard wood sound differences?

Hope this helps.

Thanks, Craig,
And yes, I remember that helpful post re woods / brightness.
Am still wondering about the structural aspects (which I do believe affect the character of the sound, a bit like what a synth programmer would call ADSR) as well as frequency content.

When I bought my legacy (from current stock) the dealer told me
that quarter sawn would make it brighter. I was planning on
ordering a legacy with quarter sawn neck and stainless steel
frets and DFS. They told me that the quarter sawn neck would
make it brighter and the frets brighter still and the DFS even more so.
When I heard that I bought off the rack. I"m very happy with my legacy
however - I'm only asking before I buy my second G&L (probably an ASAT
classic SH - not sure yet).

This comes from the bass side of life, so I'll just throw it out there and you guys can have at it.

Any opinions on ebony fingerboards, both structurally and sound-wise?
If they stiffen the structure, that would be very likely to keep notes lasting longer, and perhaps reduce dead-spots too? I have an acoustic with an ebony board that has a nicely rigid-feeling neck.

Soundwise, the combination of fingerboard wood and body wood can make a notable difference. Example: I was testing some otherwise matched basses, but in different wood combinations (ash/rosewood, alder/maple), and found that the ash/rosewood had a slightly less aggressive tone; more of a pure uncolored bass sound. The alder/maple, OTOH, had a great deal of character that I could easily modulate with right hand technique.

If you consider structural strength of the neck as an assembly there is likely to be only a little difference from one fingerboard wood to another, as the lion's share of the neck's strength comes from the rock maple. The fact that there is a glue joint holding the fingerboard on will increase the strength of the neck as an assembly. Ebony, rosewood, and hard maple (not so much birdseye) are all very strong woods, with the biggest difference being degree of brittleness. If I had to choose one fingerboard wood based solely on strength, it would be standard unfigured maple by a razor-thin margin.

Am still wondering about the structural aspects (which I do believe affect the character of the sound, a bit like what a synth programmer would call ADSR) as well as frequency content.

It is my opinion that quartersawn maple will have essentially little to no effect on the tone or frequency content of the instrument because all you're talking about is a piece of rock maple lumber that is cut from the log differently than flatsawn maple. The direction of its greatest bending strength is changed from "whatever you get" (flatsawn) to fore/aft (quartersawn). Quartersawn will generally resist bowing caused by string tension better than flatsawn, but the net tension would be the same because we use a little more trussrod in the flatsawn neck.

If you want to make a difference in the tone, frequency content, and sustain, there are some things that can be done.

Make sure than the neck fitment to the body is as perfect as can be made. The bearing surfaces need to be flat and clean, and the screws tightened (but not overtightened) evenly.
Make sure that the bridge is well-attached to the body. This is really more for hard tails, but that tremolo needs to be properly nailed down as well. This made a huge difference.
Make sure that string break over the nut & saddles is as it should be for your instrument.

There. That oughta get me into trouble.

Ken...

If you want to jump in the ship where wood makes a significant difference in the sound of a guitar, based on species, you are probably playing a dangerous game as is. A quartersawn neck will be stiffer in the out of plane direction of the neck, but no stiffer along the neck (it is benefit against bowing/bending in that direction and not much else). Stiffer would also mean a higher resonant frequencies, if it is this particular stiffness that is coming into play (and it is, to some extent as waves are working in all directions), so in a way you may move towards higher frequencies being a bit more prominent, which may not be desirable.

I am with Kens 3 points, that and if you want to make a difference in tone, get a different amp, get different pickups! Those are the heart of what you are hearing in an electric guitar. A lot of players mistake pickups for being microphones, and want 'transparent pickups to amplify the guitars natural sound'. This just doesn't happen. The pickups have their own resonant frequencies which in turn dictate how it responds, and only moving metal effects the pickups (so string vibration, which is losing energy to air first, and then MAY gain slight bits from reflected waves off the body, but I do not think this is significant by any means). These pickup resonances are largely what determines our quality of overtone series, which is very prominent in electric (the fundamental on an electric guitar being quite weak in consequence to this, at least on the lower strings falling well below these frequencies).

Players, amps, and pickups will name the game is my philsophy. Then you can toss in scale length, bridge type, string material (strings play a pretty big role after all). After you are done with all that, toss in your wood, pick material, pick stiffness, string guage (which affects overtones) and such. It is important to remember resonances in wood in electric guitars are low, this is done on purpose and is a big reason why they have the sustain they do. Acoustic instruments generate sound by sucking the energy from the string (effectively) so the materials in that case play a big role.

I'm intrigued by the matter of for-and-aft stiffness.
Is is possible that a slab-sawn neck ends up being MORE rigid in this plane, since more truss-involvement = more steel being structurally significant?
Of course, this might get stood on its head if the truss doesn't have much tension in it, perhaps with lighter strings on?
I am only wondering because of the stability issues when playing with a b-bender. I realise that pushing on the neck should not part of hipshot technique; it's just that sometimes it can hardly be avoided altogether, and then it's good if the other strings don't go flat at all... maybe I'm studio-fussy about this, but I don't think so. Recordings I like aren't out of tune much, even really old ones from before the modern perfection-mania school of record-making. Anyhow, 3 cents adrift bugs me, and anything that helps is something I want to know.

Let's say you string up your guitar with a .042/.009 set. That would apply about 84 LBS of draw and bow to the neck regardless of how the neck wood was milled from the log. If your guitar has a quartersawn neck, it'll take a bit less trussrod adjustment than if it were flatsawn. The point here is that the net tension of either neck is only what is necessary to counteract the strings.

It's also important to consider that the new-design trussrod does not apply any longitudinal pressure to the neck; it does not crush as part of what it does. So, any sonic differences that might arise from wood compression are avoided.

Side note: My 5 string bass uses these for about 215 LBS of draw. It has a quartersawn neck.

Ken...

Totally agree.
My point is that the amount of deflection required to increase tension in a steel rod by a certain amount, will perhaps be less than the deflection needed to get the same increase in resisting force in a piece of wood; that is, their coefficients of elasticity are not the same. Maybe the neck with more truss tension will behave more rigidly?

My point is that the amount of deflection required to increase tension in a steel rod by a certain amount, will perhaps be less than the deflection needed to get the same increase in resisting force in a piece of wood; that is, their coefficients of elasticity are not the same.

I had to read this several times to get my head wrapped around what you're saying. I think I've got it. I believe the operative phrase is "will perhaps", as deflection of either material will depend on the material's properties, shape, and dimensions. If you're talking about a 1/4" steel rod and a 1" X 2" piece of rock maple, then yes - the deflection would certainly be different to produce the same amount of resistive force in the materials. Looking at it another way; apply the same amount of force to the two materials and see which one deflects the most.

... Maybe the neck with more truss tension will behave more rigidly?

I don't believe this would be the case for a traditional guitar/bass neck, and certainly not for a current G&L neck. If the trussrod were supplying triangulation to the structure of the neck, then it would be possible that it could increase rigidity. But this isn't the case for a traditional neck. The trussrod supplies lateral force to the neck, through means specific to the trussrod design, for the purpose of counteracting the force applied by string tension. It isn't there to augment the structural rigidity; only to counteract string tension.

The old G&L style of curved trussrod that compresses the neck longitudinally may alter the rigidity of the neck a bit via the compression of the maple, but any increase would come from the squeezed wood of the neck rather than the steel of the trussrod.

Carbon fiber strips or rectangular stock of carbon fiber or steel, of appropriate dimension, that are strategically embedded in the neck will increase rigidity. Of course, then we get back into having a trussrod that works.

Ken...

Totally agree.
My point is that the amount of deflection required to increase tension in a steel rod by a certain amount, will perhaps be less than the deflection needed to get the same increase in resisting force in a piece of wood; that is, their coefficients of elasticity are not the same. Maybe the neck with more truss tension will behave more rigidly?

Deflection required doesn't change, you in a round about way specify that when you set up your guitar. A quartersawn neck should have less deflection under a given loading (hence more stiffness), so in theory smaller rod adjustments would be required when changes in the neck are due to load applied. I have never seen anything supporting quartersawn being any better for weather changes though, as that is a factor of the wood internally.