Billy Corgan thinks paint colour affects tone.

deano

thegummy said:

Bridgehouse said:

Ok, I see no point in this debate at all now.

I can hear differences. Lots of players can.

But apparently it’s simply just me perceiving that there is a difference. Great. In that case I’ll carry on selecting body wood on the notion it might make a difference to sound, as for me, and many others it does anyway. 

Lovely. Screw the science, apparently it’s psychology. Fine, that’s good enough for me to carry on as is. 

Enjoy your pointless debate chaps.

You've got that the wrong way round, it's not that your perception is definitely wrong, it's that it might be. So it's not "screw the science" - it's very much that we need science to determine facts because human perception isn't reliable.

No Bridgehouse, in my estimation, is right.

I'm not posting anymore in this thread after this. I have made my point, and have been slated for it by being accused of scrabbling through basic physics books, when one of the earliest posts said this issue could be understood by anyone with a basic understanding of physics. Perhaps we need to understand basic Portugese physics, which seems remarkably advanced for a basic knowledge. Clever folk these Portugese. Who would have guessed that Fast Fourier Transforms were part of the Portugese equivalent of GCSE's.

Tonewods exist, they are not going to be wished away. People can hear a difference between guitars built from different woods and have been able to for decades. That must be so frustrating for those Portugese folks who claim we are all wrong. Maybe the Portugese have particularly one-dimensional hearing. How very sad for them.

My theory of how strings dampen is exactly that; a theory. I offer no proof. It is a thought experiment. I have never claimed otherwise. But nobody - Portugese or otherwise - has offered a scientific proof of why people hear different tones from guitars built from different woods. At best we have been told there is no difference because of "no significant" or "negligable" differences. So there are differences but someone has taken the decision that they are unimportant. Of course difference are unimportant, especially if they don't support your argument.

I hope the scientific community will be able to tell us why many of us can hear differences when those poor Portugese can't.

Anyway, I have better things to do with my time, I am not convinced by the argument that there are no tonal differences between different woods. At best it is unproven, but as Bridgehouse states many players will continue to select instruments based on wood types (amongst other criteria) as that offers a good starting point for the desired tonality. How frustrating it must be for those who dispute the concept, that people wll continue buying alder instruments for a brighter sound and mahogany instruments for a warmer sound. 

thegummy

deano said:

thegummy said:

Bridgehouse said:

Ok, I see no point in this debate at all now.

I can hear differences. Lots of players can.

But apparently it’s simply just me perceiving that there is a difference. Great. In that case I’ll carry on selecting body wood on the notion it might make a difference to sound, as for me, and many others it does anyway. 

Lovely. Screw the science, apparently it’s psychology. Fine, that’s good enough for me to carry on as is. 

Enjoy your pointless debate chaps.

You've got that the wrong way round, it's not that your perception is definitely wrong, it's that it might be. So it's not "screw the science" - it's very much that we need science to determine facts because human perception isn't reliable.

No Bridgehouse, in my estimation, is right.

I'm not posting anymore in this thread after this. I have made my point, and have been slated for it by being accused of scrabbling through basic physics books, when one of the earliest posts said this issue could be understood by anyone with a basic understanding of physics. Perhaps we need to understand basic Portugese physics, which seems remarkably advanced for a basic knowledge. Clever folk these Portugese. Who would have guessed that Fast Fourier Transforms were part of the Portugese equivalent of GCSE's.

Tonewods exist, they are not going to be wished away. People can hear a difference between guitars built from different woods and have been able to for decades. That must be so frustrating for those Portugese folks who claim we are all wrong. Maybe the Portugese have particularly one-dimensional hearing. How very sad for them.

My theory of how strings dampen is exactly that; a theory. I offer no proof. It is a thought experiment. I have never claimed otherwise. But nobody - Portugese or otherwise - has offered a scientific proof of why people hear different tones from guitars built from different woods. At best we have been told there is no difference because of "no significant" or "negligable" differences. So there are differences but someone has taken the decision that they are unimportant. Of course difference are unimportant, especially if they don't support your argument.

I hope the scientific community will be able to tell us why many of us can hear differences when those poor Portugese can't.

Anyway, I have better things to do with my time, I am not convinced by the argument that there are no tonal differences between different woods. At best it is unproven, but as Bridgehouse states many players will continue to select instruments based on wood types (amongst other criteria) as that offers a good starting point for the desired tonality. How frustrating it must be for those who dispute the concept, that people wll continue buying alder instruments for a brighter sound and mahogany instruments for a warmer sound. 

It's a shame that frustration has caused you to make such a deliberately stupid post.

Kind of turns all the time you had spent in the thread trying to reasonably debate in to a complete waste.

Re: the last statement, I wouldn't care if someone buys an alder guitar or puts the money towards advancing a level in Scientology; it's my own guitar purchases I'm interested in.

Bridgehouse

thegummy said:

Bridgehouse said:

Ok, I see no point in this debate at all now.

I can hear differences. Lots of players can.

But apparently it’s simply just me perceiving that there is a difference. Great. In that case I’ll carry on selecting body wood on the notion it might make a difference to sound, as for me, and many others it does anyway. 

Lovely. Screw the science, apparently it’s psychology. Fine, that’s good enough for me to carry on as is. 

Enjoy your pointless debate chaps.

You've got that the wrong way round, it's not that your perception is definitely wrong, it's that it might be. So it's not "screw the science" - it's very much that we need science to determine facts because human perception isn't reliable.

No. No no no no no no no.

THAT is my opinion. Don’t tell me my opinion is wrong. It’s my opinion. Only I can determine if my opinion is right or wrong. You can disagree, but don’t tell me what my opinion is or whether it’s right or wrong.

There are simply too many people on the internet telling other people that they don’t think what they think. 

I’m absolutely out of this debate now if people are actually going to tell me that I’m not thinking what m thinking. To be honest, it’s pretty indicative of this very forum. Too many people who think they know best and are more than happy to tell other people what they think or whether what their opinion is is valid or not.

Frankly I’m getting tired of it, tired of this forum and tired of too many people who think they are right all the time and won’t even entertain anyone else’s point of view or thoughts or opinions. 

Hattigol

Everybody duck! Flying toys!!

Bridgehouse

Hattigol said:

Everybody duck! Flying toys!!

Very droll.

Philly_Q

Hattigol said:

Everybody duck! Flying toys!!

Flying common sense, it seems to me.

Bigsby

Bridgehouse said:

Ok, I see no point in this debate at all now.

I can hear differences. Lots of players can.

But apparently it’s simply just me perceiving that there is a difference. Great. In that case I’ll carry on selecting body wood on the notion it might make a difference to sound, as for me, and many others it does anyway. 

Lovely. Screw the science, apparently it’s psychology. Fine, that’s good enough for me to carry on as is. 

Enjoy your pointless debate chaps.

There's no point in getting upset about it - yes you can hear differences, in just the way people can tell the huge difference between Pepsi and Coke, until they take a blind test and perhaps discover their perception was more about the logo on the bottle than anything their tastebuds could savour. 

Your perception is no different to anyone else's: When you see, your brain is processing signals from the eyes in multiple regions of the brain, and combining them with memories, emotions, and all other sensory inputs, before bringing it all together and creating what you experience as simply vision. The only way to eliminate some of these things is to remove them, as in blind tasting, but you can never quite achieve 'pure' perception - our brains have simply not evolved to do this - in fact, doing it would be a huge evolutionary disadvantage. 

Bear in mind, if Billy Corgan can hear a difference in sound from a white guitar, that difference is just as real (to his perception) as any difference you can hear. The big question is whether there is a difference that can be discovered outside either of your brains*. I can't begin to fathom why people find this so upsetting, other than on the basic level that their judgement/skill/personal qualities are somehow being questioned. They are not - we all have the same fundamental and unavoidable limitations built into our otherwise quite awesome ability to perceive the world outside our bodies within our conscious awareness.

There really is no need to take any of this personally.

*EDIT: Please note, I'm NOT saying there isn't a difference, and that you're 'wrong', simply that we all need to be more rigorous in the way we explore this issue. And it sounds as though you made a very serious attempt to do so, but it's still limited by 'researcher bias' and other issues. I didn't mean to compare your efforts to discover sound differences to Billy Corgan - I've no idea how seriously he has attempted to establish the difference in sound from white guitars

Bridgehouse

Bigsby said:

Bridgehouse said:

Ok, I see no point in this debate at all now.

I can hear differences. Lots of players can.

But apparently it’s simply just me perceiving that there is a difference. Great. In that case I’ll carry on selecting body wood on the notion it might make a difference to sound, as for me, and many others it does anyway. 

Lovely. Screw the science, apparently it’s psychology. Fine, that’s good enough for me to carry on as is. 

Enjoy your pointless debate chaps.

There's no point in getting upset about it - yes you can hear differences, in just the way people can tell the huge difference between Pepsi and Coke, until they take a blind test and perhaps discover their perception was more about the logo on the bottle than anything their tastebuds could savour. 

Your perception is no different to anyone else's: When you see, your brain is processing signals from the eyes in multiple regions of the brain, and combining them with memories, emotions, and all other sensory inputs, before bringing it all together and creating what you experience as simply vision. The only way to eliminate some of these things is to remove them, as in blind tasting, but you can never quite achieve 'pure' perception - our brains have simply not evolved to do this - in fact, doing it would be a huge evolutionary disadvantage. 

Bear in mind, if Billy Corgan can hear a difference in sound from a white guitar, that difference is just as real (to his perception) as any difference you can hear. The big question is whether there is a difference that can be discovered outside either of your brains. I can't begin to fathom why people find this so upsetting, other than on the basic level that their judgement/skill/personal qualities are somehow being questioned. They are not - we all have the same fundamental and unavoidable limitations built into our otherwise quite awesome ability to perceive the world outside our bodies within our conscious awareness.

There really is no need to take any of this personally.

Would you also like to pat me on the head and tell me not to worry my pretty little head about it whilst you’re at it?

prowla

OK - here's some things to freak him out...

Bigsby

Bridgehouse said:

Would you also like to pat me on the head and tell me not to worry my pretty little head about it whilst you’re at it?

If it'll help...

Sassafras

Bridgehouse said:

Would you also like to pat me on the head and tell me not to worry my pretty little head about it whilst you’re at it?

We wouldn't tell such blatant lies. We all know you haven't got a pretty little head.

thegummy

prowla said:

OK - here's some things to freak him out...

Nice! Some of them are very cool, especially the fretboard one.

I hope the first one goes back to normal when it's dry!

NelsonP

The topic of this thread and the previous one is very interesting.

However the sciencey bit very quickly turns into a 'here's something i found on the internet which proves my point, so what do you say to that' competition. I have been as guilty of that as anyone else on this very thread. Its actually a fairly crap way to argue when you think about it. 

I don't believe many, if any of us have the required knowledge and understanding to investigate this properly. This debate has been had all over social media with no resolution. And it will until someone suitably qualified and motivated resolves it.

Thinking about it I'm not even sure what wood my guitars are made from. I know that one of them is basswood but that's it. So it seems that in the real world i don't actually give a shit.

The white one does sound best though. But only just.

pintspiller

prowla said:

So, if you are colour blind, does that make the guitar sound different?

I am deuteranomaly colourblind and red and green guitars sound the same

Bigsby

NelsonP said:

However the sciencey bit very quickly turns into a 'here's something i found on the internet which proves my point, so what do you say to that' competition. I have been as guilty of that as anyone else on this very thread. Its actually a fairly crap way to argue when you think about it. 

I don't believe many, if any of us have the required knowledge and understanding to investigate this properly. This debate has been had all over social media with no resolution. And it will until someone suitably qualified and motivated resolves it.

IIRC, the WWW was initially designed as a way of sharing scientific information, that's why the original implementation of HTML had endless ways of presenting lists and tables of data, but was incapable of streaming porn. So searching the internet for scientific data, and sharing it with others is about as legitimate a use as you can get. 

You're right, few of us here have the knowledge or resources to properly investigate this ourselves, and that's why there's a need to reference the work of people who do have the knowledge and resources, (and by that I don't necessarily mean some bloke who is trying to make money by producing attention grabbing Youtube videos). What's the alternative? Simply accepting any claim that's put out there? If that's the case, we should all be thanking Billy for sharing his profound knowledge with us! My next Reverend has to be a white one.

It's funny how one half of this thread has been laughing at a belief a guitarist has about his guitars sounding different, and the other half has been about people defending their own beliefs about their guitars sounding different.

thegummy

Bigsby said:

NelsonP said:

However the sciencey bit very quickly turns into a 'here's something i found on the internet which proves my point, so what do you say to that' competition. I have been as guilty of that as anyone else on this very thread. Its actually a fairly crap way to argue when you think about it. 

I don't believe many, if any of us have the required knowledge and understanding to investigate this properly. This debate has been had all over social media with no resolution. And it will until someone suitably qualified and motivated resolves it.

IIRC, the WWW was initially designed as a way of sharing scientific information, that's why the original implementation of HTML had endless ways of presenting lists and tables of data, but was incapable of streaming porn. So searching the internet for scientific data, and sharing it with others is about as legitimate a use as you can get. 

You're right, few of us here have the knowledge or resources to properly investigate this ourselves, and that's why there's a need to reference the work of people who do have the knowledge and resources, (and by that I don't necessarily mean some bloke who is trying to make money by producing attention grabbing Youtube videos). What's the alternative? Simply accepting any claim that's put out there? If that's the case, we should all be thanking Billy for sharing his profound knowledge with us! My next Reverend has to be a white one.

It's funny how one half of this thread has been laughing at a belief a guitarist has about his guitars sounding different, and the other half has been about people defending their own beliefs about their guitars sounding different.

Kind of like how some people would laugh at Scientology but not the mainstream religions - the more common a belief is, the more accepted it is but when only a small number of people believe something, it's seen as wacky.