Old G&Ls sound better?

[bloodied_fingers]

you would think if tone wood didn't make any difference aluminum guitars would be a lot more popular

Why? There is a lot of momentum with wooden guitars. And it would be nigh impossible for hobbyists to machine their own axes from aluminum. Whereas even I can assemble a partscaster with relatively simple hand tools.

Is it a safe assumption that the woods are different between every imported line and its U.S. counterpart? G&L lists "swamp ash" in its specifications for many Tribute instruments. Swamp ash (more properly called "green ash") grows in the eastern half of North America. I hope G&L is shipping that lumber to Indonesia for the Tributes, and not misrepresenting some local wood with a similar grain pattern. Many species of ash and alder are native to Asia, so there could be somewhat locally sourced woods with similar properties. Even if some manufacturers source local lumber for their imports, that wouldn't make it inherently inferior to lumber sourced in North America (or Europe, or where ever). It depends on the species, the conditions it grew under, and how it was handled after harvesting. I'll go out on a limb and guess that it costs no more (and very likely less) to ship African mahogany to Indonesia than to California.

That said, there is definitely low-grade lumber used in some import lines. My local Guitar Center has a Chinese Fender that arrived with a huge area of missing finish, and it's obvious that the "tone wood" is some sort of soft pine. On the other hand, if we cast a wide net to include all import lines we are including things like MIM Fenders (built a couple of hours' drive from the U.S. factory, and using many of the same woods as their U.S. counterparts), and instruments built in Japanese factories that are very highly regarded. I doubt there would be any way to make that damaged Fender at the Guitar Center sound remotely close to decent, but I wouldn't rule out getting good results by swapping out a couple of cheap components on an MIM Fender. Well, at least you could make it sound as good as a U.S. Fender...

LOL "as good as a US Fender.. "

I don't think G&L is shipping wood to SE Asia. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think any of the big boys ships wood into their overseas shops. At least, not for the price points we see tribute models at. I understood my Legacy Tribute to be made of locally sourced bass wood. If G&L was shipping swamp ash I'd think those models would have a significant upcharge.

I would also concede that most MIJ models shouldn't be considered in the import lineup, because as you say, that would include things like Epiphones Elitist models. Which are going to exceed the $1k in price and then we're not comparing cheap guitars anymore.

What you're describing here is the same concept that's at the heart of an old-school, subtractive analog synthesizer. You hit a key (or flip a switch, or push a button) and an oscillator turns on. When you release the trigger, the oscillator stops. It's instantaneous, and without further processing it all sounds pretty bad. The solution is running the signal through an ADSR (attack/decay/sustain/release) module, which lets you "swell" into the note and gradually fade it out. Dialing in an extreme value for the attack can make it sound like a "reverse tape" effect on guitar, but at very subtle levels it makes a huge difference in how pleasing the note sounds.

I don't think I could make a graphic representation here, so I'll try to describe what I'm thinking of. It's not that one particular wood could increase the "bloom" of a note or chord. Assume there is some theoretically "wide open" material that gives immediate attack - the instant the string begins to vibrate, the signal out of the guitar or bass is at maximum amplitude. Real woods aren't going to reach that maximum instantaneously. I picture it on a graph as the "wide open" material having a vertical line for the attack, while the real wood has a sloped (increasing) line. The question to me is whether all woods would have the same slope on that graph, and whether the slopes would be identical if they were plotted for different overtones in the note or chord.

I guess another way of putting it would be to say that I think the same thing happens between a guitar or bass and a subtractive synth - just that the synth's attack is shaped by circuitry while the guitar's or bass's is shaped by dampening from the materials.

I don't get what you're saying. Sorry. My point was I don't think the subtractive affect should be significant soon after energy is put into the system (the plucking energy should dominate)

I might understand how when the string energy gets very low, as at the end of its ringing out period, the dampening of supporting materials takes some affect. That is why I wonder about any effect on sustain. But I think sustain is still, by a wide margin, a function of magnetic pull and bridge material and mass.

good discussion, btw.

[bloodied_fingers]

Bloodied Fingers,

You have been doing an eloquent job of speaking my mind.

Thanks

very interesting stuff to think about. Maybe my next career will be in musical instruments.

[y2kc]

cporro,

This hippie voodoo leo mojo that some refer to regarding older G&L guitars is bogus. I have played many older G&L's and let me tell you they are highly over rated. Avoid the older stuff and just say no.

If you see a Leo era Asat or S-500 or any of that other stuff, just walk the other way and then contact me and warn me about it. Tell me where I can avoid seeing it.

Be careful out there,

y2kc

[Sprinter 92]

cporro,

This hippie voodoo leo mojo that some refer to regarding older G&L guitars is bogus. I have played many older G&L's and let me tell you they are highly over rated. Avoid the older stuff and just say no.

If you see a Leo era Asat or S-500 or any of that other stuff, just walk the other way and then contact me and warn me about it. Tell me where I can avoid seeing it.

Be careful out there,

y2kc

[KenC]

I don't think G&L is shipping wood to SE Asia. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think any of the big boys ships wood into their overseas shops. At least, not for the price points we see tribute models at. I understood my Legacy Tribute to be made of locally sourced bass wood. If G&L was shipping swamp ash I'd think those models would have a significant upcharge.

According to G&L's website, several Tribute models (including Legacies) use basswood under solid colors and swamp ash under clears and 'bursts. That would be interesting if they were calling an Asian species "swamp ash". As I mentioned before, my guess is that it is at least as cheap (if not cheaper) to get mahogany to the Tribby plants as to Fullerton.

Which are going to exceed the $1k in price and then we're not comparing cheap guitars anymore.

True, but are the woods different from the same manufacturers' lower-priced models? I don't know what the answer to that would be...I haven't done any shopping in that market. I would guess that a lot of the positive comments about upgrading pickups and hardware on imports would relate to the ones with good woods and build qualities.

My point was I don't think the subtractive affect should be significant soon after energy is put into the system (the plucking energy should dominate)

I might understand how when the string energy gets very low, as at the end of its ringing out period, the dampening of supporting materials takes some affect. That is why I wonder about any effect on sustain. But I think sustain is still, by a wide margin, a function of magnetic pull and bridge material and mass.

I would agree that if wood does have a noticeable effect on tone on some guitars and basses, it is way down on the list of contributing factors. Based on my personal experience with a lot of G&Ls, I can't discount body wood as a factor. OTOH, my beloved mahogany L-1K and L-2KE would not sound remotely close to the way they do if it weren't for the bridge, MFD pickups and circuitry. The difference between an ash L-1K and a 'hog L-1K is much less than the difference you would get by swapping any of those components out, IMO.

Personally, I hear the difference in my own pairs of G&Ls (ash vs. mahogany F-100s and L-1Ks, and ash ASAT Bass vs. 'hog L-2KE...where all the other factors have negligible differences) as being a distinct reduction in the higher overtones (or much more fundamental) with the 'hog bodies. Having been a researcher in the past myself, I realize how tiny of a sample that is. I agree that it would be interesting to test this objectively - I'd probably start with a data-logging sound level meter, with a 1/3 octave band analyzer and an obscene sampling rate - but that will have to be another project for another time.

good discussion, btw.

I agree!

Ken

[bloodied_fingers]

I don't think G&L is shipping wood to SE Asia. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think any of the big boys ships wood into their overseas shops. At least, not for the price points we see tribute models at. I understood my Legacy Tribute to be made of locally sourced bass wood. If G&L was shipping swamp ash I'd think those models would have a significant upcharge.

According to G&L's website, several Tribute models (including Legacies) use basswood under solid colors and swamp ash under clears and 'bursts. That would be interesting if they were calling an Asian species "swamp ash". As I mentioned before, my guess is that it is at least as cheap (if not cheaper) to get mahogany to the Tribby plants as to Fullerton.

Maybe someone could confirm the source of this swamp ash? My guess is they aren't shipping high-grade swamp ash to Indonesia for manufacturing. I think the wood and shipping for a slab of it the size needed to cut into guitar bodies would cost 1/2 as much as Tributes retail for. Then you have the USA made pickups too? They would be taking a loss.

As for mahogany, that is still not the same. The bulk mahogany used in cheap guitar mfg is not 'tone wood' as described by any luthier I have ever met. The 'Real Mahogany; is any one of the 'Swietenia' variants, most highly coveted is the Brazilian variant Swietenia macrophylla. But any of the Caribbean, South and Central American varieties could be considered 'real' by most. That stuff has been harvested nearly to extinction now and since 2003 I think is illegal to trade in, or at least highly restricted.

Currently US production guitars tend to rely on African Khaya, which is the product of raping the African congo. There is some movement toward Sapele, another African variety. What ends up in most Asian made guitars is any of about 1/2 dozen Asian species between Nato and Luana (sp?). Which are, incidentally, also being overharvested in places like Indonesia where certain companies move their labor to avoid nasty regulations... But hey, we got cheap guitars right!? But that is OT and not popular thinking around here so I digress...

Which are going to exceed the $1k in price and then we're not comparing cheap guitars anymore.

True, but are the woods different from the same manufacturers' lower-priced models? I don't know what the answer to that would be...I haven't done any shopping in that market. I would guess that a lot of the positive comments about upgrading pickups and hardware on imports would relate to the ones with good woods and build qualities.

Yes the woods are different. One of the best examples of this gouging, and the reason I keep bringing them up, is Gibson and its Les Paul Standard versus Epiphone's Les Paul. The Epi is MiC and woods are 'some form of mahogany' locally sourced to reduce costs and maybe a maple cap, or maybe not. I think the maple cap depends on the year, factory and model. The Epi versions can be made so they sell as low as 350USD. The equivalent Gibson will start at over $2k and be made from 'choice' mahogany with a carved maple cap. Given the material differences, if body wood is so important then you could never, ever have a Epi that approached the sound of a Gibson. But there are tons of single-blind comparisons where people couldn't tell the difference.

Personally, I hear the difference in my own pairs of G&Ls (ash vs. mahogany F-100s and L-1Ks, and ash ASAT Bass vs. 'hog L-2KE...where all the other factors have negligible differences) as being a distinct reduction in the higher overtones (or much more fundamental) with the 'hog bodies. Having been a researcher in the past myself, I realize how tiny of a sample that is. I agree that it would be interesting to test this objectively - I'd probably start with a data-logging sound level meter, with a 1/3 octave band analyzer and an obscene sampling rate - but that will have to be another project for another time.

Two issues here:
1. Define negligible differences: have you measured the electrical characteristics? setup? strings? played them blindfolded?

2. you can't objectively analyze the difference.

you have a lot of preconceived notions and personal investment in those guitars sounding different. You probably play them different in part because of those notions. If you really want to know you'd have to discount your own guitars in your own hands.

Will inadvertently emphasized this point -

...
Haven't you ever picked up a used guitar and immediately started playing differently on it? Same thing.
...

If you know the guitar is 'different' then you can't really be objective. Corollary is if I assume the guitars are the same, then objectivity goes out the window. That is why only a blind comparison should count.

I don't think you have enough guitars but if you did have enough guitars that are 'identical' except for the body wood, you might try being blindfolded and have somebody else was playing your guitars.

How many do you think you could correctly identify based on hearing only? If they were all be setup the same and run through an amp beforehand to get their tone and volumes consistent with each other? I doubt it would be much better than random chance, but you need enough guitars to make it statistically significant.

You should test this not only with clean amp settings but with effects throughout the range of what is typically used by guitarists - including effects heavy sounds. If there is a difference it should be apparent in all cases.

[suave eddie]

Ron Kirn, renowned guitar builder has some interesting things to say about blind tests.
http://www.ronkirn.com/quest.htm

[bloodied_fingers]

Ron Kirn, renowned guitar builder has some interesting things to say about blind tests.
http://www.ronkirn.com/quest.htm

Ron has forgotten more than I know about guitar construction, and for me this is really it:
"That is why ALL honest audio comparisons are double blind tests."

It is true of practically any scientific evaluation.

Also this:

"Just listen to the dribble coming from a salesman the next time you’re in a Mega Guitar store as he hypes the high commission made in whatever hack he wants you to buy. Then listen to him dis the classic piece you really want."

Except it doesn't even have to be the mega guitar store. The myths are perpetuated even by the 'small' shops where people are supposed to give a rip about the customers.

These are just random winners:

"and number one on most lists is you have gotta be in love with your instrument to perform at your best."
"Musicians will spend thousands on a new amp, their 4th or 5th, but wont pay the 25 dollar co-pay to have their hearing checked. Kinda makes you say hummmm."
"Don’t buy junk, never buy junk, ‘cause, well, it’s junk, but don’t buy hype either, ‘cause hype is just BS, and if you have ever been on a farm, you know, BS stinks"

His guitars are also effing gorgeous!

[NickHorne]

Ron is definitely on the right road. And it's great to hear such honest open sense from a guitar builder.
My experience has been that rigorous objectivity about sounds we make as musicians is really hard to achieve. We are caught in a psychological fuzzy zone, where our memory of what we heard a few seconds ago is not exact (probably because it's not very survival-significant, and so not much of a priority), and also it is a major learning process to truly detach at will from performing and switch to judging / editing; I think that out of my 90,000 plus hours now spent in studios, I've only been able to really judge my own output, as though it was someone else's, for maybe the last third of all that time. And the true settling-in time with a new instrument (guitar), to fine-tune all the adjustable, inter-relating factors of string gauge and alloy and pickup adjustments, until it's really doing the very best it's capable of, is still over a year for me. Say around 250 hours for any one instrument.
I think this is the reality of the psychology of guitarists' music-making. It's tedious, and really there's everything to be said for just picking up an instrument that works for us and getting on with it. And that, of course, is what we mostly do.
But the itch to explore or perfect always remains, of course, and it's beset with these foggy problems of our fallible humanity. Right where marketing people love to have us.
Right on, Ron!
And "gotta be in love with your instrument to perform at your best" - Wow!! a fantasy pleasure - image and an insecurity - hit, all in one soothing - sounding bit of BS if ever there was one.