Look up Jim Lill's video "Tested: Where Does The Tone Come From In An Electric Guitar?" All the guitar builders are full of BS. Now sustain is another topic.
I played in a counry rock band and I played a tele . The other guitarist played a Gibson 335. We switched guitars one gig for one set. A few songs into the set we all couldn't believe he had that tele sounding like his 335 just by adjusting the tone ,volume knobs . I'll never forget that.
@@smokenfire teles are magical, if you've never owned one, buy one. I have yet to know someone with a decent tele who didn't love it or doesn't miss having it.
@@death32815 never played one, actually. Teles are everywhere, but somehow neither me nor any of my friends ever owned one. I suddenly find it really weird.
Bro, that had to be so much work, but it made an very high quality, accurate comparison! Thank you for taking the time to make this, first vid of yours I've seen. Subbed for your dedication to quality content!
I was happy that your editing made the swaps quite seemless... it's the first time I've seen this in comparison videos. Because of this I was able to hear those subtle differences, just like you heard. Thanks
@@guyfromnj Yes, and I can always hear a difference on my own comparisons too. I just preach that it isn't something worth fretting over :) The "wrong" type of wood will not ruin your tone, and likewise, the "right" type of wood will not make you sound magically amazing - only practise does that! Comfort, balance, neck profile, and overall playability are much more important in an Instrument. With a good amp, and knowledge of EQ, any tone is available to a player regardless of what type of wood is on the guitar!
I agree also, it's not huge but the differences are there. I watch all your vids Darrell. I wasn't being accusatory or anything like that. I was just curious of your thoughts because I've heard you laugh about tonewood before and the heated debates are laughable. It's not that big a deal people. I stick with the tonewoods are subtractive idea. Alder eats up low frequencies making it sound bright. Mahogany can do the opposite. The real test is taking different density wood of the same species and showing the difference that can make. A really light piece of alder is going to sound different than a heavy dense piece also. But again, it's not huge differences but as you play and train your ear it becomes very apparent.
I'm going to have to echo the same sentiments others have shared. This is probably the best tone comparison video out there. This is a good starting point for deciding what you want your sound to be like.
great video. this this the kind of comparisons worth watching. 3 of the most popular wood types for guitar and exact conditions to test sound. most people just don't/can't do that type of testing. great stuff. for me, on the swamp and alder i didn't hear much difference on the clean but once distortion was added, the swamp was more warm and creamy. the alder had more mid with distortion. the mahogany was brighter and brittle clean and had more crunch when distorted. anyway, that's how it sounded to me. this video was very useful and anyone considering these wood options for their next build should watch this.
Done as it should be, a controlled experiment with minimal variables - great job!! I'd love to see this done again to include all of the core wood choices you offer: Basswood, Maple, Walnut, Roasted Swamp Ash, Roasted Alder, Poplar, Black Korina, and again Mahogany, Ash and Alder - it'd be the go video for choosing a tone wood :-)
I came across this channel looking for info on UA-cam about roasted maple necks. Liked and subscribed. And this vid was a fair test with valuable info. What a great age we live in to have such access. Thanks
This is the first time I have seen and heard a legitimate test of woods compared side by side. I think it definitely revealed noticeable differences between the different woods used. The most distinctive difference that I noticed was with the mahogany body. For my playing style, I prefer the mahogany, than the alder and swamp ash. The differences between the latter woods was not as pronounced, but much more subtle than it was with the mahogany. It would be interesting to see and hear a similar test with additional woods and some exotic woods as well. Thank you very much for the demonstration! Please have an excellent and awesome day! 🙂
Wow, that's what I was waiting for! Very interesting, thanx a lot, Aaron. Actually no big surprises, except that the difference in sound of the three bodies was smaller than I had expected. Mahogany is my favorite tone wood for guitar bodies. That unique 'bite' in higain sounds simply makes the difference for a great rock'n'roll tone for me.
Fantastic comparison! I like how you did your best to isolate just the wood. Wood sounds different from piece to piece, but to get a general idea how each is going to perform is really great. Thanks!
Absolutely. I agree. It was like performing a 1dB frequency sweep across the spectrum while mixing to find the frequencies you want to accentuate or diminish. The funny thing is that I thought each sounded better than the others while in its element. Depending on what you were playing, I tended to prefect a different wood. Now I’m going to have to buy even more guitars. Lol Thanks for doing the comparison.
Thanks Aaron, you did it again, when I was watching the guys who have shooted a video like that, first thing I would say, they didn't say anything about the weight. At those times, I always thought that, Warmoth should shoot a video like this, the fact that they have all kinds of different woods on same weights and stuff. Finally I could send this to my friends whom I argued before, it makes the world different place, when I have different woods on the body, they told me otherwise. I am really happy to see this video :D that being said, I could really hear the difference even in the clean samples. I love all three woods, especially alder and mahogany, but I definately hear a full sound on mahogany with its girth. I never tried a swamp ash tele, so that was new for me to hear it with the other two woods, I have a swamp ash strat, but its definately different on tele. Now, I know why Richie Kotzen told Fender to build his tele with Ash. Tele is known for its bouncy notes, and swamp ash just compliments to this feature so well. Alder didn't surprised me, because I have alder Tele and I'm used to its sound. But, I think the mahogany sounds the best in this video, so I should start building a tele soon with a mahogany body.
Thanks for this video. I have a trebly tone naturally from my hands. I became a believer in body tone wood differences years ago. I had a very thick Alder bodied guitar with a rosewood fretboard that has always had fat thick tone even under my hands. I bought a new very thin super strat guitar that had the same pickups as my thick alder guitar but a swamp ash body. That night I brought along my new baby to my gig and noticed my solos in particular sounded very very bright compared to my other alder guitar and convinced myself it was in my head until my bass player came over and said that my new guitar was like a buzz saw. I eventually set up different profiles for the different tones. Years later, I switched the swamp ash body out for mahogany body I got in trade and "bam" the tone changed to a more mid bass heavy thick tone with all of the same electronics. Several years after that, I learned about the "tonewood" debate and went "Oh yeah!".. Having said that most of the differences can be compensated for with the amp or pickup selections., For teles and country, I lean towards swamp ash, for hard rock and humbuckers I am a mahogany, limba or alder guy.
A very scientific comparison. Great idea and a lot of work involved in swapping everything over to each body. I did hear subtle differences with each body. However, how noticeable would that be in a mix (either in the studio or live)…so it really is, whatever floats your boat. Thanks for posting this.
I love how you test each guitar. Stay on the same pick up and change guitars. Some play all 3 pick ups then change guitars. Don't get it! You nailed the sounds. I heard the same thing (for the most part). You have better hearing than me. Thanks for the comparison. Awesome! The solid vs chamber body was awesome too.
I built a Strat with a mahogany body back in '89. As a performing musician using mostly a Gibson SG, I really loved mahogany. Having said that I will say that it is really tough to hear the difference in tone between the same guitar of different woods when the guitar is highly overdriven ... and if there is a chance to hear a difference ... it will most likely be heard with the guitar being played clean. On the clean clip with the neck pickup, I heard the most difference between the mahogany tele and the other two. Nice video ... thank you.
The mahogany body sounded just slightly warmer and the alder body had a balanced sound but I could barely hear the differences. I'm saving up money for a Stratocaster build, picking Swamp Ash just for the grain really. Thanks for the video!
thanks for the careful, balanced comparison with clear, repeated musical phrases for each setting on each wood type! this answered a lot of questions I had about how these woods contribute to tone. mahogany definitely sounded warmer, something resonant about that in the low/mid frequencies. the alder had an interesting almost flangey sound when distorter, and swamp ash (which I thought would be muddled) seemed just a bit brighter and snappier in tone, especially with the clean sounds.
@@franknstein4340 Absolutely not. If you use a pair of decent studio monitors, you can easily ear the difference (and note that I don't use the verb "feel") in a blind-eyed test. Also, if you analyze the spectrums, mahogany has clearly a more compact spectrum which translates, indeed, in a warmer sound.
Great video! I've listened carefully with good monitors and for me, the differences are clearly audibles. I's even obvious if you pay attention to the palm muted transients in the overdriven sound clips. Mahogany have a kind of very pronounced low release/ringing wish can be great for heavy parm-muting things, but not as ideal for others things. This wood also affect the mid range more dramatically than others, and tend to narrow the mid band in a particular "ring-y" way... A very typical rock sound. Add a "growl". Ash are somewhere in between the two others concerning the muted note resonance, but tend to have a better precision in the low end, with a great and consistent low end quality in the single notes playing in the 3 lower wounded core strings. Hight mid notes have a great presence without being over-represented (frequency wise). Ash as the best attack and overall precision of the 3 to my ears. Alder is the most discrete signature tone, It suffer for a bit distant and "messy" low-mids, and an underpowered feeling. But Alder is a great and versatile wood but maybe he is not at his advantage in this test, I dont know exactly why. Alder can be interesting when a flat response is needed, for instance to tame off some edgy sounding pickups. Alder based guitars generally takes electronic very well due to their "raw" and "hype-less" kind of sound. It's a pretty universal and "hi-fi" wood that let you adjust your tone more easily in your chain. Not impressive at all, but very balanced. The blank page of tone. My personal preference in this particular configuration goes to Ash.
Another really cool comparison. I agree with trevordeke. So many noodle crazy players. That was really straight ahead and clear. I loved that Alder body tone. It did seem to have a brighter sound to me. As you mentioned in the video you did comparing the F hole, vs chambered vs solid Tele's - it's so true that it's really difficult to discern what you're feeling and hearing, especially when you're playing a guitar unplugged, just to see how it feels, snaps, etc. And no 2 teles play/feel the same way. I recently tried a Tele parts-caster at a local guitar shop in my city, and it had a 51' thick U shaped MIM neck. The guitar played so well. It was snappy, bright, immediate, focused and acoustically loud. Very easy under the fingers. I don't know if the tone could be attributed to the thicker neck, or just that particular piece of maple that it was made from - on that body. But it felt really good to play, and I think that's really important to most of us.
2 videos later and it explains why "I've always wanted an Alder Tele with a Rosewood board (instead of or in addition to my longtime '52 RI Butterscotch Tele) , and explains why I just built one - from parts including a very very old Warmoth body - and I knew from the moment I strung it up that it was going to be the best Tele I've ever had, and it is.
Difference to me was negligible, especially when you consider how many other factors contribute to the end sound in a real-world scenario. But I give you MASSIVE respect for having gone through so much trouble to give us as honest a side-by-side comparison as could ever be possible. Seriously, setting this up must have been so much work, and I really appreciate it 🙂
Every discussion & demonstration I've ever seen on the subject convinces me that "tonewood" is a ridiculous concept. It _is_ the perfect youtube content though - guaranteed to be controversial, with no real stakes or problematic opinions. Guitar players are a superstitious bunch, and tone is a strange sorcery arising from arcane incantations and mystical spell components.
Most of them are subtle differences indeed. The crowd wont notice and even the best ear wont notice on a blind test. Still there are part of the character, response and overall DNA of every instrument. You might notice how certain tracks on a daw might sound "better" to you with one instrument over the other. Another thing to notice is that this type of videos get compressed and eq by youtube. This is something that you really have to test by yourself with your own setup.
@@mallninja9805 This actually is one of the things I greatly appreciate about UA-cam. It removes the sorcery aspect for those of us that are willing to be objective. That has been useful for me on numerous occasions, and I laugh at some of the stuff I used to believe just because some musician I respect said it. On the other hand, this niche comparison is helpful for those of us that are building a tele and need to first choose the body wood. Sorcery.or no sorcery, I still have to make that decision, along with a number of other decisions. I'm sure Warmoth gets asked for advice on body wood choices every day they are open!
@@juankyman8404 Well said. Ultimately it is only the Player that need be inspired by the instrument they are playing. Be it color, age, scale length or whatever, whatever works to inspire the player is what is important.
Great comparison video. Thank you for doing all this work and for sharing it too! I have a few Strats but the only one with a Mahogany body has what you found, an emphasis on the lower mids. My swamp ash 72 Strat has a definite snappiness to the high notes but no real low notes emphasis - I just ordered a replacement maple neck from Warmoth for my 72 as the frets on the original neck are down to about 15-20% life left and I want to save the neck as is after 50 years of playing it on and off
I'm wearing good headphones and wow, I was really surprised at how much I could tell the difference! I liked the mahogany with the distortion, The alder had a more mellow, almost muted tone that sounded great with clean arpeggios. While the swamp was more sharp. Great job!
The differences were very subtle but they are there. Mahogany seemed a tad more focused or midrangey and the ash seemed a tad brighter and louder. At least to me. yep, just watched your conclusions and I agree. Even tho they are slight, it's there and so.... thx!
INDEED spot on to be honest, also depends alot on your current sound system/headphones but im using a cheap ass flat EQed headphone. still I hear the same as you. the mahogany seems punchy and a bit more midrange. swamp ashp certainly plays well with the single coils.
@@adzbox Different pieces of wood WILL sound different. You'd have to be scientifically illiterate to deny it. People say "tonewood is a myth" and then dumb people blindly repeat it. The original "Tonewood is a myth" was in reference to the ads in guitar magazines. I don't recall which company coined the term "tonewood", but the spiel was about them using species of tree that sound better...for some reason. Which IS utter bollocks. The tone is affected by the stiffness, density, etc of the wood. NOT the species of the tree. If a guitar string is attached at each end to an infinite, immoveable mass, then you will be hearing just the sound of a string vibrating in air. Putting anything else between those points, will attenuate energy from the vibrating strings, and it will do so differently at different frequencies, depending on the properties of whatever is holding the ends of the string in place. So yes, "tonewood" is a myth. But yes, the wood does affect the tone. Even the amplified tone. There just isn't a rule that beautiful wood from a 5000 year old tree in a tribal graveyard in Bongo-bongo land, has to sound better or worse than a slab of ash or a couple of sheets of plywood glued together
Thank you. Your test was a lot work and analysis. I’m also sorry to say that my loss of hearing over my 74 years couldn’t hear an appreciable difference in the woods.
This is a really great comparison thank you so much for creating it for us all. I noticed the differences very clearly between all 3 guitars. The Mahogany body was the most phat and solid sounding to me, and the Alder seemed more thin and less character. Overall I would go with the Swamp ash as I think it was the most unique and interesting sounding with its own distinct character to the tones.
Well, I just ordered an Alder body, quilt maple top. I prefer mahogany bodies or so I thought. After hearing this test I feel much better about my choice. Now I'm really looking forward to getting my new axe. Very informative video. Opened my eyes.. ears to sound. Thanks for sharing this. Perfect timing for me. ✌
Thank you. As with the companion video which compared chambered and solid bodies, the difference between these woods is negligible and appears to be more noticeable with overdrive because the overtones are amplified somewhat and there’s some sort of compounding going around. I think the good news is you can make guitars with just about any good quality of a certain type of wood.
Wait...there IS a video comparing chambered and solid bodies? YES!!!! I (and others in here) were commenting that he should do that video hahaha! Going to find it now.
That’s the best and most accurate comparison I’ve ever seen or heard. Excellent job. I preferred the ash. I was pleasantly surprised on the mahogany. The Alder was thinner and third place, even though I liked it. For my taste, the ash took the sonic qualities of the other two and gives you the best of both worlds.
Agreed! The snob in me wanted the Alder to win. The Ash surprised me. What also surprised me was the bodies of original sort-after Fender Teles. They are made from ‘humble’ Pine. Now then!
This is an excellent test. My half-brother got a CV-50 and I was impressed with how good it sounded for a Squier so I got one. Mine didn't sound good at all, but his did. Little did we know this would start us off on a journey that would include putting partscasters, cabs together, doing fret work, rewiring, changing necks, body's, etc. What we found were our CV50's, which were proclaimed to be made out of Alder, were really made out of wood chips glued together. I cannot say if they are Alder or not, but they are not solid pieces of wood. His happen to sound good and mine didn't. By then I had changed the pups out for Tex-mex, copper block and added 2 more springs to this base, did a fret job, and it still sounded thin and terrible. Meanwhile he got a Warmoth body and his sounded richer and more resonate. He never painted it or protected the wood in anyway and it just sounds amazing. He did end up changing the neck, although, I really like Squier CV50 and CV60 necks. His new guitar was wonderful. So we both started putting partscasters together and ended up with a lot of really excellent players that were well set up and sounded wonderful. We noticed that basswood and Alder weren't that different. Ash was a little brighter. Cedar bodies had a warm sound. The neck made a big different and Rosewood was warmer than Maple, which was sparkly and bright. When I had way too many guitars I started selling them off. It was a great learning experience.
Very useful experiment, thanks for doing this and sharing! I agree with your thoughts. The mahogany really had a different mid range compared to the others. Especially on the bridge pickup.
Absolutely agree with all of the sound differences you pointed out, great comparison! I definitely hear the lower mid "mud" in one of my guitars which is made from mahogany!
Putting on headphones makes a world of difference. Also confirms that I love swamp ash. It sounded the most open and full to my ears, similar to what you said. EQ could get them all sounding very similar, but it's still cool to hear a good example of what the differences are. The tone wood opinion wars will rage on, but I'm sure many will find this helpful when thinking about their next instrument.
@Leon thecat "Immune"? Nope. A DiMarzio Tone Zone, for example, will retain most of its qualities going from body wood to body wood but will sound tighter in Swamp Ash vs Mahogany, muddier in Mahogany vs Swamp Ash, more compressed in Maple versus Alder etc when all other variables gave been taken out of the equation (shape, construction, neck material, pickup height, string guage/action, room acoustics etc). I can attest to "immunity" not even being the case with ACTIVE pickups (an 85 sounds clearer in Ash vs Mahogany etc). There's a fair bit of bullshit in the instrument world and it's good to call it out, but you can clearly hear differences in this video.
@Leon thecat Preconceived TERMS, yes. It's how the English language works. How else would I be able to describe subjective experiences of sound to somebody else without a (largely) uniformly-understood glossary of terms to base it off of? It's far easier to say "muddy" than "too much in the 200-350hz range". I've done plenty of blind A/B/X testing my life (guitars, amps, mp3 vs WAV...), presicely to get rid of the confirmation bias aspect. I've had friends test me while I wasn't looking etc. When watching THIS EXACT VIDEO, I didn't look at the screen. I'd be deeply concerned if you failed to hear any differences in this video and that the differences weren't consistent across examples. Maybe Aaron had the door closed every time he played the mahogany guitar?
@Leon thecat You seem to be avoiding all of the pertinent questions. Did you hear a difference in this video? If so, how do you explain them- in particular the consistency of tone change from wood to wood? (I actually know, but I'll assume you've studied both sides of the argument). As I said earlier, I conducted this test blind. You can choose to disbelieve me, of course, but it's the truth. If you do the same and still can't hear differences then I'll be surprised.
@Leon thecat Negligible, yet you heard a difference nevertheless. Good. Did you do the test blind, write down notes as to the qualities of each example (riff example, not wood example obviously) and what was your listening setup? (Smart phone; PC w/desktop speakers; run through a hifi setup etc).
This well done video shows me again: The differences between tone woods are so subtle that they can be definitely neglected. Amps, speakers, effect pedals, mics and even the pick you use effects the tone much more. What really matters is the relationship between you and your guitar and your ability to play and to create tones. Then swaplemahagoalder doesn't matter at all.
R G seriouly? To me , the difference is there and not to be neglected. Then, even when you have choosen a kind of wood, there will also be a difference between an old wood, old grown, light or heavy, roasted or not.... at the end , you can always upgrade your pickups, bridge...whatever on your guitar ...., but the wood you choose will always remain. Just my opinion....
@@perudolux I had a guitar that was swamp ash- then I switched it to alder. I definitely MISSED the sound of the old body--- especially on certain songs. It was subtle, but enough to kinda drive me crazy a bit. OTOH, the alder body sounds ever so slightly better on other songs. So I just left it as it was. I have been able to tell on recordings I've done which was which- almost 100% of the time. FYI, I went back and re-recorded parts with the update- then did blindfold. But yeah, the subtle difference shouldn't bug me. It's a personal issue. But. That's my damn programming. And why I own too many objects.
great video and great test! I think the 2nd position had the most notable differences between the body woods. The other positions the differences were really hard to notice -- at least to my ears!
Agreed. And I think ash is good at distinguishing the note of each string. The more gain is used, the more it will become noticeable. To my understanding, that's because ash is solid and dense, so less transient attacks are "absorbed".
@@PJSOFTagreed, the swamp ash really has clarity in the highs and minds mid cuts through and also mains great bottom end... I have a sungkai body solar guitar and from what i have read online (which unfortunately is hard to find info on) - but Sungkai is some form of Indonesian swamp ash I believe. Anyway, whatever it is, it's the best guitar for metal that I have, especially for getting those highs and mids to seemlessly cut through the lows and the bass, giving great distinction between notes and chords. Does anyone have any info on Sungkai for electric guitars as I prefer it's metal tone and clarity even when heavily, heavily distorted, even compared to my esp which is solid mahogany. Anyway thanks for reading.
After reading an article in Guitar player magazine years ago,about an artist who only played Strats in the neck position.I tried it,along with laying down the pick,and going knofler/buckingham mode. My playing improved DRASTICALLY!Finger picking/plucking(also claw hammer)changes everything!
With this test, I would also be more interested in which body type had the better sustain. I liked the sound of the Mahogany and it sounded like it had better sustain than the Ash and Alder. But a sustain test should have also been done.
Honestly, they were very subtle, 1 thing I really noticed, Telecaster and Stratacaster - Body doesn't mean much unless you are a pro master level player with higher level equipment to make the nuances more pronounced to make a difference, Now partial hollow body or LP style guitars the wood actually seems to make a pronounced difference from the get go. From what I gather its due to the shape and amount of wood used, obviously ANY hollow instrument wood will matter 100% more for the reverberations through the chamber.
Yeah, I hear a very subtle difference. Emphasize the word subtle. I’m listening using AKG k712’s. I’m sure playing in person the difference would be more noticeable. But the takeaway is that the differences aren’t as pronounced as most would believe…
That swamp ash looks amazing unpainted. With just a little clear coat to seal it it’d be gorgeous. Also. Thanks for making this video! Difference is very subtle but definitely the mahogany has a little something in the mids.
New to this channel, but I have got to say that headstock shape is killer! I am a very traditional guy, but there is something about that headstock that i just love!
Great Work!The tone fully response the expectations! I`ll also notice that the mahogany has some pleasant nasal harmonics, that reminds LP sound. Especially at Gain
I built my PC case out of mahogany but I felt that it had too much low-end in my video games so I put a Flame Maple top on it and now my games have a very nice creamy sound,not to mention Spotify never sounded as good.
Another thing that improves guitar tone is 2 B sure the knobs U R using on it R as light as possible, as the heavier they R the more it deadens the complexity of the textures in the sound. This is obvious if U have a GR8 sounding guitar & try removing the knobs & trying different types on it, like solid metal ones through to light little plastic ones or none @ all, etc. It's similar 2 how 'semi-hollow' guitars have a different sound than solid body ones. Adding weight down the center line of the strings tends to help chime things up in a nice way & add sustain, if the parts R metal, like beefier bridge & metal pickup rings, etc. Doing the same on the 'wings' of the guitar makes it sound WORSE though. Try it out! =) Also, having more of a 'break angle' on things sounds better, like at the head. It's pretty E Z 2 hear the difference in tone in ALL the notes played when U change from tall posted tuners 2 short stubby ones = the shorter sounding better. Guess it's driving more of the sound into the wood instead of 'dissipated' off the sides. Like if U have a rope on something & swing it = if it's being pulled down hard over something @ the other end less 'swing' will occur 2 the side & instead drive that energy downward into the item it's crested over (the wood). Same phenomena @ the bridge end.
U R the pathetic joke. Maple ruins tone. It's mahogany that sounds 'rich & creamy'. Maple sounds nasal & piercing (annoying) by comparison. Tone is IMPROVED when maple is removed from the equation.
Spread the mahogany gospel far & wide! =D Except below about 80Hz, where it just farts. Swamp ash has way better lows. Mahogany has even worse deep bass than alder, but not as mush as 'basswood' = the WORST! (very nasal 2!)
Ok fine I subscribed to your channel! lol When you started on the mahogany I thought "Les Paul" , it seemed to have that same low powerfulness of a LP to me. In certain tests the Alder seemed to be a touch brighter than the Swamp ash while in others it was the Swamp ash that was brighter. But I agree with you that the Alder seemed to be the most even toned of these 3. I really wish you would have done such a test with a maple bodied guitar. I think Gibson decided to use the maple cap because the mahogany was so deep sounding the maple would help offset that. I own about 10 Les Paul's and two have maple necks and those two are my favorites I have noticed. I see a lot of people are saying they did not hear a difference? Well they are either listening on earphones, bad speakers or are to a point tone deaf? I have bad hearing, just ask my family who are sick of having to repeat everything they say lol. Even with my bad hearing I definitely heard differences. This test and one performed by Johan Segborn really prove that the body wood does make a difference in the tone so why people keep refusing to agree with this is beyond me, but I have a theory lol. The ones who say there is no difference probably mainly play a heavy distorted guitar and they use a lot of effects (pedals). When you cranked up the distortion I noticed the differences in the 3 guitars were not so obvious which is why I think the tone deniers must play the majority of the time on those settings. Good test and good presentation, why did it creep you out to play the guitars, because they were unfinished?
This was without a doubt the best video on this subject, and I commend you for the professional way in which it was conducted. No gimmicks like trying to simulate a neckless guitar. Just real world stuff. Case closed, as far as I am concerned!
Slight differences, but differences nonetheless. Mahogany is chunkier in the low mids, alder has the most articulate high end and clarity, whereas the swamp ash was direct and immediate. Thanks for making the video as thoughtfully as you guys did
@@Hornet135 Everything else was identical. Even the neck with the frets, tuners, nut and the pickups, pots and bridge. So what besides the body changed between the guitars?
@@user-lv7ph7hs7l Even using the same neck, there’s no guarantee the neck pockets are cut the same. Differences there affect neck angle and thus string height over the pickups.
@@Hornet135 Not by much unless the guitars were very badly made. But what is your argument, wood makes no difference but microscopic differences in shape do? That's in the margin of error once you play the neck bends and the pickup height is not fixed perfectly anymore, plus the strings vibrate so really it's a range of pickup heights the size of the amplitude of the note being played. So even if there is a tiny neck angle difference it's way less than normal flexing during playing, which constantly changes so there wouldn't be a consistent difference between the guitars just each take sounding slightly different. Which is the case anyway because a human can't play the same thing twice exactly perfectly the same.
To me, Mahogany separates itself the most. Also, it seems to improve all aspects of the tone. Warmth, separation, almost eliminates harshness. But does not diminish the highs. It just seems to add low miss and bass. I’d love to hear it with older fender staggered pole piece pickups and electronics.
@Memu And You’re not listening at all. Each time it went from brighter to darker . Mahogany sounded best with distorted bridge . Idk if you’re listening on your phone, laptop or have undeveloped ears for frequencies as many guitarists do. But the Differences are obvious t
well there *is* a tiny difference, but anyone who thinks it's significant enough, or completely insignificant enough to start arguments are just no bueno. end of the day just go with what makes you happiest, any tone difference can be dialed in or out with EQ, it ain't magic.
Awesome video guys ! This is hands down the perfect way to compare tone woods. Now it would be truly epic if you can make another video comparing every tone woods species Warmoth do offers ! But that's probably too much work I know.. I'm particularly interested in a limba/korina vs mahogany tone battle ! Thank you for this great comparison !
'the perfect way to compare tone woods' - no it isn't. All guitar woods vary depending on eg where in the tree trunk the guitar body was cut from, when it was cut, how long and in what way the wood was cured and many many other variables etc. There weren't any 'control guitars' - for instance if you'd had say, 3 different swamp ash bodies, one of them could have sounded 'darker' than the one used (depending on the variables I mentioned) or one of the mahogany bodies could have actually sounded 'brighter' than the one demonstrated because of these things too. So, no, it wasn't the perfect demonstration - also it should have been a blind test - guitarists have a tendancy to hear what we see. Show me on an audio frequency analyser, the 'brightness' or 'darkness' of wood and I'll believe it.
@@miguelnewmexico8641 I assume that your 'fresh air' reference puts you on the side of the 'proof' in the video. It's not 'dying on a hill' - it's just calling out bullshit claims. You prove it to me in a controlled scientific way - I'll absolutely be convinced. But if you are happier believing in the science free fantasy world of tonewood 'mojo' nonsense, I'm sure guitar manufacturers will very much enjoy continuing to take your money.
Great video ! Darrell Braun Guitar led me to this site & I have now subscribed. One "Tuber" said the only reason most "old" electric guitars were made of mahogany & maple is due to the fact that in USA in those days mahogany & maple were plentiful & cheap. I remember seeing & hearing an electric guitar with the function of changeable pickups that has an aluminum body & it sounds great ! (Darrell, surely you remember that one ?) I own a 1972 Strat copy made in Taiwan, when I installed Dimarzio pickups, Fender wiring, pots & good hardware I found the body is actually a matrix of plywood compressed & glued together at different angles & then was cut into a guitar shape, routed etc. Oh yeah, the sound ? Just as good as a "real" Strat ! I think sound is mostly good pickups, then hardware, pots & wiring. With respect to all, because everyone has their own opinion & taste, we're all different, as for the sound comparison in this video ? I liked the mahogany a little more than the alder & ash, but that's only my opinion, & therein lies my point, it's all subjective . All the best to everyone in these hard times.
This is the best tone wood comparison video I've seen .
Thanks bro it was my 💡
Oak has a nice resonance to it too. It reverberates well.
ua-cam.com/video/n02tImce3AE/v-deo.html Check this one out if you haven't already.
Look up Jim Lill's video "Tested: Where Does The Tone Come From In An Electric Guitar?"
All the guitar builders are full of BS.
Now sustain is another topic.
True, and l am a guitar builder.
Body wood has no influence on electric guitar.
I really appreciate how you play simply, rather than burn through a load of cheesy licks. Makes it much easier to hear the guitar. Awesome!
Every demo ever needs very rarely are they done though. Thanks
I played in a counry rock band and I played a tele . The other guitarist played a Gibson 335. We switched guitars one gig for one set. A few songs into the set we all couldn't believe he had that tele sounding like his 335 just by adjusting the tone ,volume knobs .
I'll never forget that.
Tele magic.
@@death32815pretty-much-any-guitar "magic" 😂
@@smokenfire teles are magical, if you've never owned one, buy one. I have yet to know someone with a decent tele who didn't love it or doesn't miss having it.
@@death32815 never played one, actually. Teles are everywhere, but somehow neither me nor any of my friends ever owned one. I suddenly find it really weird.
John 5 is a testament to what the Tele can and will do. 😂
Really appreciate the lengths you went to create this video! Definitely found my findings between the woods to be similar to yours
what I learnt is that its better I spend more time on my playing abilities than worrying about the frequencies of wood.
You're right. Get practicing. :)
I wood agree.
absolutely right ...
"stop obsessing and just play"
Well good for you. For us looking to make an educated purchase this video is gold.
Bro, that had to be so much work, but it made an very high quality, accurate comparison! Thank you for taking the time to make this, first vid of yours I've seen. Subbed for your dedication to quality content!
Straight forward and well done! Best tonal wood comparison I've seen! Thanks so much in taking the time to do this! Well done! Liked and Subbed!
As always a real useful and interesting vid, not only does Warmoth do parts properly, they do tests properly, thank Aaron!
I was happy that your editing made the swaps quite seemless... it's the first time I've seen this in comparison videos. Because of this I was able to hear those subtle differences, just like you heard. Thanks
Superb job Aaron!
Just like your nickel vs stainless test, you knocked it out of the park!
Hey Darrell, did you hear a difference?
Thanks Darrell. It feels good to finally have this debate settled. ;)
@@guyfromnj Yes, and I can always hear a difference on my own comparisons too. I just preach that it isn't something worth fretting over :)
The "wrong" type of wood will not ruin your tone, and likewise, the "right" type of wood will not make you sound magically amazing - only practise does that!
Comfort, balance, neck profile, and overall playability are much more important in an Instrument.
With a good amp, and knowledge of EQ, any tone is available to a player regardless of what type of wood is on the guitar!
I agree also, it's not huge but the differences are there. I watch all your vids Darrell. I wasn't being accusatory or anything like that. I was just curious of your thoughts because I've heard you laugh about tonewood before and the heated debates are laughable. It's not that big a deal people. I stick with the tonewoods are subtractive idea. Alder eats up low frequencies making it sound bright. Mahogany can do the opposite. The real test is taking different density wood of the same species and showing the difference that can make. A really light piece of alder is going to sound different than a heavy dense piece also. But again, it's not huge differences but as you play and train your ear it becomes very apparent.
I personally prefered mahogany and alder tones. But yes you can notice a huge difference between them all.
I'm going to have to echo the same sentiments others have shared. This is probably the best tone comparison video out there. This is a good starting point for deciding what you want your sound to be like.
What an amazing job you've done here mate!
Aaron, that was STELLAR work. Best video on UA-cam covering this touchy subject.
Literally one of the best videos on youtube. Thank you!
This is one of the best tonal wood comparison videos.. Loved it
great video. this this the kind of comparisons worth watching. 3 of the most popular wood types for guitar and exact conditions to test sound. most people just don't/can't do that type of testing. great stuff. for me, on the swamp and alder i didn't hear much difference on the clean but once distortion was added, the swamp was more warm and creamy. the alder had more mid with distortion. the mahogany was brighter and brittle clean and had more crunch when distorted.
anyway, that's how it sounded to me. this video was very useful and anyone considering these wood options for their next build should watch this.
Awesome job! Removed all variables except the tone woods. I don't think I've seen anyone be that precise. Excellent!
Done as it should be, a controlled experiment with minimal variables - great job!!
I'd love to see this done again to include all of the core wood choices you offer: Basswood, Maple, Walnut, Roasted Swamp Ash, Roasted Alder, Poplar, Black Korina, and again Mahogany, Ash and Alder - it'd be the go video for choosing a tone wood :-)
I came across this channel looking for info on UA-cam about roasted maple necks. Liked and subscribed. And this vid was a fair test with valuable info. What a great age we live in to have such access. Thanks
Very well-done, actually usable video. You even kept the same right hand position in the comparisons.
This is the first time I have seen and heard a legitimate test of woods compared side by side. I think it definitely revealed noticeable differences between the different woods used. The most distinctive difference that I noticed was with the mahogany body. For my playing style, I prefer the mahogany, than the alder and swamp ash. The differences between the latter woods was not as pronounced, but much more subtle than it was with the mahogany. It would be interesting to see and hear a similar test with additional woods and some exotic woods as well. Thank you very much for the demonstration! Please have an excellent and awesome day! 🙂
Yeah it showed differences that weren't because of the wood.
Wow, that's what I was waiting for! Very interesting, thanx a lot, Aaron.
Actually no big surprises, except that the difference in sound of the three bodies was smaller than I had expected. Mahogany is my favorite tone wood for guitar bodies. That unique 'bite' in higain sounds simply makes the difference for a great rock'n'roll tone for me.
Great work on this comparison! I appreciate your thoroughness!
Fantastic comparison! I like how you did your best to isolate just the wood. Wood sounds different from piece to piece, but to get a general idea how each is going to perform is really great. Thanks!
That was a good demonstration. There certainly were slight differences with each body materials, but they all sounded great. Keep on picking!
Absolutely. I agree. It was like performing a 1dB frequency sweep across the spectrum while mixing to find the frequencies you want to accentuate or diminish. The funny thing is that I thought each sounded better than the others while in its element. Depending on what you were playing, I tended to prefect a different wood. Now I’m going to have to buy even more guitars. Lol Thanks for doing the comparison.
Great video. Definitely appreciate all the work to do this.
Very helpful video on the exact question I was hoping to answer. Nice work. Can't wait to build a Tele!
having my first guitar customized soon. this was very helpful!
Thanks Aaron, you did it again, when I was watching the guys who have shooted a video like that, first thing I would say, they didn't say anything about the weight. At those times, I always thought that, Warmoth should shoot a video like this, the fact that they have all kinds of different woods on same weights and stuff. Finally I could send this to my friends whom I argued before, it makes the world different place, when I have different woods on the body, they told me otherwise. I am really happy to see this video :D that being said, I could really hear the difference even in the clean samples. I love all three woods, especially alder and mahogany, but I definately hear a full sound on mahogany with its girth. I never tried a swamp ash tele, so that was new for me to hear it with the other two woods, I have a swamp ash strat, but its definately different on tele. Now, I know why Richie Kotzen told Fender to build his tele with Ash. Tele is known for its bouncy notes, and swamp ash just compliments to this feature so well. Alder didn't surprised me, because I have alder Tele and I'm used to its sound. But, I think the mahogany sounds the best in this video, so I should start building a tele soon with a mahogany body.
Thanks for this video. I have a trebly tone naturally from my hands. I became a believer in body tone wood differences years ago. I had a very thick Alder bodied guitar with a rosewood fretboard that has always had fat thick tone even under my hands. I bought a new very thin super strat guitar that had the same pickups as my thick alder guitar but a swamp ash body. That night I brought along my new baby to my gig and noticed my solos in particular sounded very very bright compared to my other alder guitar and convinced myself it was in my head until my bass player came over and said that my new guitar was like a buzz saw. I eventually set up different profiles for the different tones. Years later, I switched the swamp ash body out for mahogany body I got in trade and "bam" the tone changed to a more mid bass heavy thick tone with all of the same electronics. Several years after that, I learned about the "tonewood" debate and went "Oh yeah!".. Having said that most of the differences can be compensated for with the amp or pickup selections., For teles and country, I lean towards swamp ash, for hard rock and humbuckers I am a mahogany, limba or alder guy.
A very scientific comparison. Great idea and a lot of work involved in swapping everything over to each body. I did hear subtle differences with each body. However, how noticeable would that be in a mix (either in the studio or live)…so it really is, whatever floats your boat. Thanks for posting this.
I love how you test each guitar. Stay on the same pick up and change guitars. Some play all 3 pick ups then change guitars. Don't get it! You nailed the sounds. I heard the same thing (for the most part). You have better hearing than me. Thanks for the comparison. Awesome! The solid vs chamber body was awesome too.
I built a Strat with a mahogany body back in '89. As a performing musician using mostly a Gibson SG, I really loved mahogany. Having said that I will say that it is really tough to hear the difference in tone between the same guitar of different woods when the guitar is highly overdriven ... and if there is a chance to hear a difference ... it will most likely be heard with the guitar being played clean. On the clean clip with the neck pickup, I heard the most difference between the mahogany tele and the other two. Nice video ... thank you.
Awesome video ! I wish I had such material available 15 years ago when I bought most of my guitars. Fantastic job !
Great video this tone test was greatly needed in UA-cam. Thanks guy's.👍🏾👏🏽
The mahogany body sounded just slightly warmer and the alder body had a balanced sound but I could barely hear the differences. I'm saving up money for a Stratocaster build, picking Swamp Ash just for the grain really. Thanks for the video!
thanks for the careful, balanced comparison with clear, repeated musical phrases for each setting on each wood type! this answered a lot of questions I had about how these woods contribute to tone. mahogany definitely sounded warmer, something resonant about that in the low/mid frequencies. the alder had an interesting almost flangey sound when distorter, and swamp ash (which I thought would be muddled) seemed just a bit brighter and snappier in tone, especially with the clean sounds.
It only sounded "warmer" because you imagined it did.
@@franknstein4340 or you're not listening enough
@@franknstein4340 Absolutely not. If you use a pair of decent studio monitors, you can easily ear the difference (and note that I don't use the verb "feel") in a blind-eyed test. Also, if you analyze the spectrums, mahogany has clearly a more compact spectrum which translates, indeed, in a warmer sound.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH for this precise and true comparison of wood tone!!!
thanks for making the sacrifice for science! This is the best comparison video I've seen on UA-cam!
Great video! I've listened carefully with good monitors and for me, the differences are clearly audibles. I's even obvious if you pay attention to the palm muted transients in the overdriven sound clips.
Mahogany have a kind of very pronounced low release/ringing wish can be great for heavy parm-muting things, but not as ideal for others things. This wood also affect the mid range more dramatically than others, and tend to narrow the mid band in a particular "ring-y" way... A very typical rock sound. Add a "growl".
Ash are somewhere in between the two others concerning the muted note resonance, but tend to have a better precision in the low end, with a great and consistent low end quality in the single notes playing in the 3 lower wounded core strings. Hight mid notes have a great presence without being over-represented (frequency wise). Ash as the best attack and overall precision of the 3 to my ears.
Alder is the most discrete signature tone, It suffer for a bit distant and "messy" low-mids, and an underpowered feeling. But Alder is a great and versatile wood but maybe he is not at his advantage in this test, I dont know exactly why. Alder can be interesting when a flat response is needed, for instance to tame off some edgy sounding pickups. Alder based guitars generally takes electronic very well due to their "raw" and "hype-less" kind of sound. It's a pretty universal and "hi-fi" wood that let you adjust your tone more easily in your chain. Not impressive at all, but very balanced. The blank page of tone.
My personal preference in this particular configuration goes to Ash.
I have a pretty decent ear, and after watching this, I will be choosing ash over alder for all future teles. To each their own though! Thanks again!
Best comparison I’ve heard. Excellent!
Another really cool comparison. I agree with trevordeke. So many noodle crazy players. That was really straight ahead and clear. I loved that Alder body tone. It did seem to have a brighter sound to me. As you mentioned in the video you did comparing the F hole, vs chambered vs solid Tele's - it's so true that it's really difficult to discern what you're feeling and hearing, especially when you're playing a guitar unplugged, just to see how it feels, snaps, etc.
And no 2 teles play/feel the same way. I recently tried a Tele parts-caster at a local guitar shop in my city, and it had a 51' thick U shaped MIM neck. The guitar played so well. It was snappy, bright, immediate, focused and acoustically loud. Very easy under the fingers. I don't know if the tone could be attributed to the thicker neck, or just that particular piece of maple that it was made from - on that body. But it felt really good to play, and I think that's really important to most of us.
2 videos later and it explains why "I've always wanted an Alder Tele with a Rosewood board (instead of or in addition to my longtime '52 RI Butterscotch Tele) , and explains why I just built one - from parts including a very very old Warmoth body - and I knew from the moment I strung it up that it was going to be the best Tele I've ever had, and it is.
Difference to me was negligible, especially when you consider how many other factors contribute to the end sound in a real-world scenario. But I give you MASSIVE respect for having gone through so much trouble to give us as honest a side-by-side comparison as could ever be possible. Seriously, setting this up must have been so much work, and I really appreciate it 🙂
Every discussion & demonstration I've ever seen on the subject convinces me that "tonewood" is a ridiculous concept. It _is_ the perfect youtube content though - guaranteed to be controversial, with no real stakes or problematic opinions. Guitar players are a superstitious bunch, and tone is a strange sorcery arising from arcane incantations and mystical spell components.
Most of them are subtle differences indeed. The crowd wont notice and even the best ear wont notice on a blind test. Still there are part of the character, response and overall DNA of every instrument. You might notice how certain tracks on a daw might sound "better" to you with one instrument over the other. Another thing to notice is that this type of videos get compressed and eq by youtube. This is something that you really have to test by yourself with your own setup.
@@erikwellerweller8623 I could definitely hear the differences also.
@@mallninja9805 This actually is one of the things I greatly appreciate about UA-cam. It removes the sorcery aspect for those of us that are willing to be objective. That has been useful for me on numerous occasions, and I laugh at some of the stuff I used to believe just because some musician I respect said it. On the other hand, this niche comparison is helpful for those of us that are building a tele and need to first choose the body wood. Sorcery.or no sorcery, I still have to make that decision, along with a number of other decisions. I'm sure Warmoth gets asked for advice on body wood choices every day they are open!
@@juankyman8404 Well said. Ultimately it is only the Player that need be inspired by the instrument they are playing. Be it color, age, scale length or whatever, whatever works to inspire the player is what is important.
Great comparison video. Thank you for doing all this work and for sharing it too!
I have a few Strats but the only one with a Mahogany body has what you found, an emphasis on the lower mids.
My swamp ash 72 Strat has a definite snappiness to the high notes but no real low notes emphasis - I just ordered a replacement maple neck from Warmoth for my 72 as the frets on the original neck are down to about 15-20% life left and I want to save the neck as is after 50 years of playing it on and off
Absolutely amazing comparison! Thanks a lot.
I'm wearing good headphones and wow, I was really surprised at how much I could tell the difference! I liked the mahogany with the distortion, The alder had a more mellow, almost muted tone that sounded great with clean arpeggios. While the swamp was more sharp. Great job!
The differences were very subtle but they are there. Mahogany seemed a tad more focused or midrangey and the ash seemed a tad brighter and louder. At least to me. yep, just watched your conclusions and I agree. Even tho they are slight, it's there and so.... thx!
Yet people deny that there is any difference. He used the same neck and only swapped the body.
Subtle enough to be explained by the subtle differences when playing the same part may be?
INDEED spot on to be honest, also depends alot on your current sound system/headphones but im using a cheap ass flat EQed headphone. still I hear the same as you. the mahogany seems punchy and a bit more midrange. swamp ashp certainly plays well with the single coils.
@@adzbox Different pieces of wood WILL sound different. You'd have to be scientifically illiterate to deny it. People say "tonewood is a myth" and then dumb people blindly repeat it. The original "Tonewood is a myth" was in reference to the ads in guitar magazines. I don't recall which company coined the term "tonewood", but the spiel was about them using species of tree that sound better...for some reason. Which IS utter bollocks. The tone is affected by the stiffness, density, etc of the wood. NOT the species of the tree. If a guitar string is attached at each end to an infinite, immoveable mass, then you will be hearing just the sound of a string vibrating in air. Putting anything else between those points, will attenuate energy from the vibrating strings, and it will do so differently at different frequencies, depending on the properties of whatever is holding the ends of the string in place. So yes, "tonewood" is a myth. But yes, the wood does affect the tone. Even the amplified tone. There just isn't a rule that beautiful wood from a 5000 year old tree in a tribal graveyard in Bongo-bongo land, has to sound better or worse than a slab of ash or a couple of sheets of plywood glued together
@@ashscott6068 yet it's been scientifically proven that it doesn't make a difference. 🤦♂️
Thank you. Your test was a lot work and analysis. I’m also sorry to say that my loss of hearing over my 74 years couldn’t hear an appreciable difference in the woods.
Best comparison vid, nice job dude!
This is a really great comparison thank you so much for creating it for us all. I noticed the differences very clearly between all 3 guitars. The Mahogany body was the most phat and solid sounding to me, and the Alder seemed more thin and less character. Overall I would go with the Swamp ash as I think it was the most unique and interesting sounding with its own distinct character to the tones.
test setting PU time wood
1 clean bridge 1:24 swamp ash
1 clean bridge 1:33 alder
1 clean bridge 1:42 mahogany
2 clean middle 1:52 swamp ash
2 clean middle 2:05 alder
2 clean middle 2:18 mahogany
3 clean neck 2:34 swamp ash
3 clean neck 2:44 alder
3 clean neck 2:55 mahogany
4 gain bridge 3:07 swamp ash
4 gain bridge 3:24 alder
4 gain bridge 3:40 mahogany
5 gain neck 4:00 swamp ash
5 gain neck 4:12 alder
5 gain neck 4:23 mahogany
Well, I just ordered an Alder body, quilt maple top. I prefer mahogany bodies or so I thought. After hearing this test I feel much better about my choice. Now I'm really looking forward to getting my new axe. Very informative video. Opened my eyes.. ears to sound. Thanks for sharing this. Perfect timing for me. ✌
Exactly what I needed to know, presented very well!
Thank you. As with the companion video which compared chambered and solid bodies, the difference between these woods is negligible and appears to be more noticeable with overdrive because the overtones are amplified somewhat and there’s some sort of compounding going around. I think the good news is you can make guitars with just about any good quality of a certain type of wood.
Wait...there IS a video comparing chambered and solid bodies? YES!!!! I (and others in here) were commenting that he should do that video hahaha! Going to find it now.
That’s the best and most accurate comparison I’ve ever seen or heard. Excellent job. I preferred the ash. I was pleasantly surprised on the mahogany. The Alder was thinner and third place, even though I liked it. For my taste, the ash took the sonic qualities of the other two and gives you the best of both worlds.
Agreed!
The snob in me wanted the Alder to win. The Ash surprised me.
What also surprised me was the bodies of original sort-after Fender Teles. They are made from ‘humble’ Pine. Now then!
This is an excellent test. My half-brother got a CV-50 and I was impressed with how good it sounded for a Squier so I got one. Mine didn't sound good at all, but his did. Little did we know this would start us off on a journey that would include putting partscasters, cabs together, doing fret work, rewiring, changing necks, body's, etc. What we found were our CV50's, which were proclaimed to be made out of Alder, were really made out of wood chips glued together. I cannot say if they are Alder or not, but they are not solid pieces of wood. His happen to sound good and mine didn't. By then I had changed the pups out for Tex-mex, copper block and added 2 more springs to this base, did a fret job, and it still sounded thin and terrible. Meanwhile he got a Warmoth body and his sounded richer and more resonate. He never painted it or protected the wood in anyway and it just sounds amazing. He did end up changing the neck, although, I really like Squier CV50 and CV60 necks. His new guitar was wonderful. So we both started putting partscasters together and ended up with a lot of really excellent players that were well set up and sounded wonderful. We noticed that basswood and Alder weren't that different. Ash was a little brighter. Cedar bodies had a warm sound. The neck made a big different and Rosewood was warmer than Maple, which was sparkly and bright. When I had way too many guitars I started selling them off. It was a great learning experience.
what a great test Aaron! thank you
Fascinating, I liked the Ash body for the cleaner sounds and the Alder body for the distorted sounds!
Same here
Same, actually also liked ash distorted
Thanks for going to the trouble of setting this up. Swamp ash was my favourite with mahogany a close second! A very useful test though.
Very useful experiment, thanks for doing this and sharing! I agree with your thoughts. The mahogany really had a different mid range compared to the others. Especially on the bridge pickup.
Awesome content Aaron. Just from your sound test I will be ordering a swamp ash tele body for my build.
Absolutely agree with all of the sound differences you pointed out, great comparison! I definitely hear the lower mid "mud" in one of my guitars which is made from mahogany!
Yeah, but it doesn't come from the wood.
Putting on headphones makes a world of difference. Also confirms that I love swamp ash. It sounded the most open and full to my ears, similar to what you said. EQ could get them all sounding very similar, but it's still cool to hear a good example of what the differences are. The tone wood opinion wars will rage on, but I'm sure many will find this helpful when thinking about their next instrument.
I heard the same thing and agree with your analysis of the sound. Such an excellent video.
Wow. Thank you for this. Had I not seen it I would never have known how much I prefer alder over the other two.
definitely heard differences but nothing that couldnt be shifted away with a slight adjustment in eq
I buy ash bodies because I like the way they look. That's it.
@Leon thecat "Immune"? Nope. A DiMarzio Tone Zone, for example, will retain most of its qualities going from body wood to body wood but will sound tighter in Swamp Ash vs Mahogany, muddier in Mahogany vs Swamp Ash, more compressed in Maple versus Alder etc when all other variables gave been taken out of the equation (shape, construction, neck material, pickup height, string guage/action, room acoustics etc). I can attest to "immunity" not even being the case with ACTIVE pickups (an 85 sounds clearer in Ash vs Mahogany etc). There's a fair bit of bullshit in the instrument world and it's good to call it out, but you can clearly hear differences in this video.
@Leon thecat Preconceived TERMS, yes. It's how the English language works. How else would I be able to describe subjective experiences of sound to somebody else without a (largely) uniformly-understood glossary of terms to base it off of? It's far easier to say "muddy" than "too much in the 200-350hz range". I've done plenty of blind A/B/X testing my life (guitars, amps, mp3 vs WAV...), presicely to get rid of the confirmation bias aspect. I've had friends test me while I wasn't looking etc. When watching THIS EXACT VIDEO, I didn't look at the screen. I'd be deeply concerned if you failed to hear any differences in this video and that the differences weren't consistent across examples. Maybe Aaron had the door closed every time he played the mahogany guitar?
@Leon thecat You seem to be avoiding all of the pertinent questions. Did you hear a difference in this video? If so, how do you explain them- in particular the consistency of tone change from wood to wood? (I actually know, but I'll assume you've studied both sides of the argument). As I said earlier, I conducted this test blind. You can choose to disbelieve me, of course, but it's the truth. If you do the same and still can't hear differences then I'll be surprised.
@Leon thecat Negligible, yet you heard a difference nevertheless. Good. Did you do the test blind, write down notes as to the qualities of each example (riff example, not wood example obviously) and what was your listening setup? (Smart phone; PC w/desktop speakers; run through a hifi setup etc).
This well done video shows me again: The differences between tone woods are so subtle that they can be definitely neglected. Amps, speakers, effect pedals, mics and even the pick you use effects the tone much more. What really matters is the relationship between you and your guitar and your ability to play and to create tones. Then swaplemahagoalder doesn't matter at all.
R G pretty much
R G seriouly? To me , the difference is there and not to be neglected. Then, even when you have choosen a kind of wood, there will also be a difference between an old wood, old grown, light or heavy, roasted or not.... at the end , you can always upgrade your pickups, bridge...whatever on your guitar ...., but the wood you choose will always remain. Just my opinion....
@@perudolux I had a guitar that was swamp ash- then I switched it to alder. I definitely MISSED the sound of the old body--- especially on certain songs. It was subtle, but enough to kinda drive me crazy a bit. OTOH, the alder body sounds ever so slightly better on other songs. So I just left it as it was. I have been able to tell on recordings I've done which was which- almost 100% of the time. FYI, I went back and re-recorded parts with the update- then did blindfold. But yeah, the subtle difference shouldn't bug me. It's a personal issue. But. That's my damn programming. And why I own too many objects.
great video and great test! I think the 2nd position had the most notable differences between the body woods. The other positions the differences were really hard to notice -- at least to my ears!
Thank you for this video ! My favourite is the Mahagony, it sounds so full and it seemed to me that it's has the best Sustain.
saying "swamp ash " sounds more rock n roll. therefore the winner!
Ash has more of a transient attack on the high end and punches while alder softens those attacks. Mahogany brings out the low mids more.
Agreed. And I think ash is good at distinguishing the note of each string. The more gain is used, the more it will become noticeable. To my understanding, that's because ash is solid and dense, so less transient attacks are "absorbed".
Spot on
This is the best sumarisation I've found. Each would be best for specific use cases.
@@PJSOFTagreed, the swamp ash really has clarity in the highs and minds mid cuts through and also mains great bottom end... I have a sungkai body solar guitar and from what i have read online (which unfortunately is hard to find info on) - but Sungkai is some form of Indonesian swamp ash I believe. Anyway, whatever it is, it's the best guitar for metal that I have, especially for getting those highs and mids to seemlessly cut through the lows and the bass, giving great distinction between notes and chords.
Does anyone have any info on Sungkai for electric guitars as I prefer it's metal tone and clarity even when heavily, heavily distorted, even compared to my esp which is solid mahogany.
Anyway thanks for reading.
Exactly what I hear.
After reading an article in Guitar player magazine years ago,about an artist who only played Strats in the neck position.I tried it,along with laying down the pick,and going knofler/buckingham mode. My playing improved DRASTICALLY!Finger picking/plucking(also claw hammer)changes everything!
What a gem this channel is!!
I really didn't think there would be much discernable difference but there was. I'm pleasantly surprised Thanks for the vid.
With this test, I would also be more interested in which body type had the better sustain. I liked the sound of the Mahogany and it sounded like it had better sustain than the Ash and Alder. But a sustain test should have also been done.
I watched this video maybe 10 times already 😂. Keep coming back
Great comparison test, added to my education. Much appreciated.
Honestly, they were very subtle, 1 thing I really noticed, Telecaster and Stratacaster - Body doesn't mean much unless you are a pro master level player with higher level equipment to make the nuances more pronounced to make a difference, Now partial hollow body or LP style guitars the wood actually seems to make a pronounced difference from the get go. From what I gather its due to the shape and amount of wood used, obviously ANY hollow instrument wood will matter 100% more for the reverberations through the chamber.
Yeah, I hear a very subtle difference. Emphasize the word subtle. I’m listening using AKG k712’s. I’m sure playing in person the difference would be more noticeable. But the takeaway is that the differences aren’t as pronounced as most would believe…
That swamp ash looks amazing unpainted. With just a little clear coat to seal it it’d be gorgeous. Also. Thanks for making this video! Difference is very subtle but definitely the mahogany has a little something in the mids.
New to this channel, but I have got to say that headstock shape is killer! I am a very traditional guy, but there is something about that headstock that i just love!
Great Work!The tone fully response the expectations! I`ll also notice that the mahogany has some pleasant nasal harmonics, that reminds LP sound. Especially at Gain
I built my PC case out of mahogany but I felt that it had too much low-end in my video games so I put a Flame Maple top on it and now my games have a very nice creamy sound,not to mention Spotify never sounded as good.
Another thing that improves guitar tone is 2 B sure the knobs U R using on it R as light as possible, as the heavier they R the more it deadens the complexity of the textures in the sound. This is obvious if U have a GR8 sounding guitar & try removing the knobs & trying different types on it, like solid metal ones through to light little plastic ones or none @ all, etc. It's similar 2 how 'semi-hollow' guitars have a different sound than solid body ones. Adding weight down the center line of the strings tends to help chime things up in a nice way & add sustain, if the parts R metal, like beefier bridge & metal pickup rings, etc. Doing the same on the 'wings' of the guitar makes it sound WORSE though. Try it out! =)
Also, having more of a 'break angle' on things sounds better, like at the head. It's pretty E Z 2 hear the difference in tone in ALL the notes played when U change from tall posted tuners 2 short stubby ones = the shorter sounding better. Guess it's driving more of the sound into the wood instead of 'dissipated' off the sides. Like if U have a rope on something & swing it = if it's being pulled down hard over something @ the other end less 'swing' will occur 2 the side & instead drive that energy downward into the item it's crested over (the wood). Same phenomena @ the bridge end.
@The Nio It's a f****** joke .
U R the pathetic joke. Maple ruins tone. It's mahogany that sounds 'rich & creamy'. Maple sounds nasal & piercing (annoying) by comparison. Tone is IMPROVED when maple is removed from the equation.
@@Deathrape2001 Thank you for clearing that up for me,now I could sleep better at night.
Spread the mahogany gospel far & wide! =D Except below about 80Hz, where it just farts. Swamp ash has way better lows. Mahogany has even worse deep bass than alder, but not as mush as 'basswood' = the WORST! (very nasal 2!)
Ok fine I subscribed to your channel! lol
When you started on the mahogany I thought "Les Paul" , it seemed to have that same low powerfulness of a LP to me. In certain tests the Alder seemed to be a touch brighter than the Swamp ash while in others it was the Swamp ash that was brighter. But I agree with you that the Alder seemed to be the most even toned of these 3. I really wish you would have done such a test with a maple bodied guitar. I think Gibson decided to use the maple cap because the mahogany was so deep sounding the maple would help offset that. I own about 10 Les Paul's and two have maple necks and those two are my favorites I have noticed.
I see a lot of people are saying they did not hear a difference? Well they are either listening on earphones, bad speakers or are to a point tone deaf? I have bad hearing, just ask my family who are sick of having to repeat everything they say lol. Even with my bad hearing I definitely heard differences. This test and one performed by Johan Segborn really prove that the body wood does make a difference in the tone so why people keep refusing to agree with this is beyond me, but I have a theory lol. The ones who say there is no difference probably mainly play a heavy distorted guitar and they use a lot of effects (pedals). When you cranked up the distortion I noticed the differences in the 3 guitars were not so obvious which is why I think the tone deniers must play the majority of the time on those settings.
Good test and good presentation, why did it creep you out to play the guitars, because they were unfinished?
Many thanks for this video. The result surprised me. And therefore your "scientific" videos are very appreciated and very valuable.
Outstanding job! I will definitely consider your shop for my custom Bass! Also, you just got a subscriber!
Listening in studio monitors I could clearly hear a difference. Not insane amounts, but small differences.
The ash was really musical to me. It really vibed with the Tele voice to me.
This was without a doubt the best video on this subject, and I commend you for the professional way in which it was conducted. No gimmicks like trying to simulate a neckless guitar. Just real world stuff. Case closed, as far as I am concerned!
Great test. Honestly I can't tell enough of a difference to explain the obsession that people have about it.
Slight differences, but differences nonetheless. Mahogany is chunkier in the low mids, alder has the most articulate high end and clarity, whereas the swamp ash was direct and immediate. Thanks for making the video as thoughtfully as you guys did
Differences not from wood.
@@Hornet135 Everything else was identical. Even the neck with the frets, tuners, nut and the pickups, pots and bridge. So what besides the body changed between the guitars?
@@user-lv7ph7hs7l Even using the same neck, there’s no guarantee the neck pockets are cut the same. Differences there affect neck angle and thus string height over the pickups.
@@Hornet135 Not by much unless the guitars were very badly made. But what is your argument, wood makes no difference but microscopic differences in shape do? That's in the margin of error once you play the neck bends and the pickup height is not fixed perfectly anymore, plus the strings vibrate so really it's a range of pickup heights the size of the amplitude of the note being played. So even if there is a tiny neck angle difference it's way less than normal flexing during playing, which constantly changes so there wouldn't be a consistent difference between the guitars just each take sounding slightly different. Which is the case anyway because a human can't play the same thing twice exactly perfectly the same.
@@Hornet135 Besides there's a few videos like this and this trend is consistent. It's a small difference but it's there.
To me, Mahogany separates itself the most. Also, it seems to improve all aspects of the tone. Warmth, separation, almost eliminates harshness. But does not diminish the highs. It just seems to add low miss and bass. I’d love to hear it with older fender staggered pole piece pickups and electronics.
You're definitely listening with your eyes. There is just straight up no difference.
@Memu
And You’re not listening at all.
Each time it went from brighter to darker .
Mahogany sounded best with distorted bridge .
Idk if you’re listening on your phone, laptop or have undeveloped ears for frequencies as many guitarists do. But the Differences are obvious t
@@heythere6983 I am a musician and used good quality headphones. You are just listening with your eyes.
@@Memu_my guess he already owns a mahogany guitar. And he says what he believes to back that up
well there *is* a tiny difference, but anyone who thinks it's significant enough, or completely insignificant enough to start arguments are just no bueno.
end of the day just go with what makes you happiest, any tone difference can be dialed in or out with EQ, it ain't magic.
Fantastic video! Thanks for sharing really important information
Love your positivity! New sub here. Liked the vid and thanks for doing this video! Very informative! 🍻☮
I would like to see a comparison between the roasted bodies and the regular bodies. And would like to see a roasted mahogany body.
The dryer the wood the more open the mids & highs, & the more attack 2.
I have never seen a roasted body I will have to look that up I have seen roasted necks.
Roasted beef is good to what some carrots and potatoes 😋
Awesome video guys ! This is hands down the perfect way to compare tone woods. Now it would be truly epic if you can make another video comparing every tone woods species Warmoth do offers ! But that's probably too much work I know.. I'm particularly interested in a limba/korina vs mahogany tone battle ! Thank you for this great comparison !
'the perfect way to compare tone woods' - no it isn't. All guitar woods vary depending on eg where in the tree trunk the guitar body was cut from, when it was cut, how long and in what way the wood was cured and many many other variables etc.
There weren't any 'control guitars' - for instance if you'd had say, 3 different swamp ash bodies, one of them could have sounded 'darker' than the one used (depending on the variables I mentioned) or one of the mahogany bodies could have actually sounded 'brighter' than the one demonstrated because of these things too. So, no, it wasn't the perfect demonstration - also it should have been a blind test - guitarists have a tendancy to hear what we see.
Show me on an audio frequency analyser, the 'brightness' or 'darkness' of wood and I'll believe it.
@@redstrat1234 hopefully you've gotten some fresh air in these 4 years. this is not the hill to die on.
@@miguelnewmexico8641 I assume that your 'fresh air' reference puts you on the side of the 'proof' in the video.
It's not 'dying on a hill' - it's just calling out bullshit claims. You prove it to me in a controlled scientific way - I'll absolutely be convinced. But if you are happier believing in the science free fantasy world of tonewood 'mojo' nonsense, I'm sure guitar manufacturers will very much enjoy continuing to take your money.
Very cool video. Very informative and the fact that you played a bit Scorpions made it even better ! My next build will be Mahogany !
Great video ! Darrell Braun Guitar led me to this site & I have now subscribed.
One "Tuber" said the only reason most "old" electric guitars were made of mahogany & maple is due to the fact that in USA
in those days mahogany & maple were plentiful & cheap.
I remember seeing & hearing an electric guitar with the function of changeable pickups that has an aluminum body & it sounds great !
(Darrell, surely you remember that one ?)
I own a 1972 Strat copy made in Taiwan, when I installed Dimarzio pickups, Fender wiring, pots & good hardware I found the body is actually a matrix of plywood compressed & glued together at different angles & then was cut into a guitar shape, routed etc.
Oh yeah, the sound ? Just as good as a "real" Strat ! I think sound is mostly good pickups, then hardware, pots & wiring.
With respect to all, because everyone has their own opinion & taste, we're all different, as for the sound comparison in this video ?
I liked the mahogany a little more than the alder & ash, but that's only my opinion, & therein lies my point, it's all subjective .
All the best to everyone in these hard times.