It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
I think it is quite subjective I have to say. For myself, I am finding a big difference in the tone of the wood combinations. But of course, we are all different - our ears are different, our playing is different...so many factors! Which is no bad thing.
http://www.psych.lancs.ac.uk/hearing/the-guitar-experiment/
The claim that there are many other variables, each of which can sometimes be more important than all of the others, does stand up. Builder, shape, size, bracing style, scale length, and so on.
Note that comparing different-back instruments designed and built with a dead back isn't helpful. Where the back is not free to vibrate, the material it is made from is of little significance. Live-back instruments, however, get a great deal of their sound from the characteristics of the back material. Note also that some builders extract lots of tonal variation from different materials (Cole Clark is an excellent example, but there are many others) while others make instruments that sound very much the same regardless of their back timbers. (Someone here recently linked to one such builder - it was really hard to pick between his three guitars.)
Happy days.