Ash vs. Alder Jazzmaster

[SashaB]

Thank you for the references. That is an interesting study, however this sentence from the paper you refer the most makes me laugh: "A handmade replica of the reference model Les Paul Junior by Gibson"

Looks like the specimen on which they performed their studies was not too representative.
When I was talking about feeling a solid body guitar to resonate this never concerned cheap instruments somehow. So probably, that is the key why they do not see the energy flow to the body?

Otherwise, ok: I agree, that what I feel with my belly depends on my receptors there which is not a precise apparatus, apparently. But the same would be relevant to my ears as well - some frequencies are amplified differently by the middle ear than the others. Maybe my ears are sensitive to those related to the guitar body only and not to the neck

In a nutshell, any objective measurements of a guitar will have to deal with the subjective hearing of a particular person at the end of the day...

[timtam]

Thank you for the references. That is an interesting study, however this sentence from the paper you refer the most makes me laugh: "A handmade replica of the reference model Les Paul Junior by Gibson"

Looks like the specimen on which they performed their studies was not too representative.
When I was talking about feeling a solid body guitar to resonate this never concerned cheap instruments somehow. So probably, that is the key why they do not see the energy flow to the body?

Otherwise, ok: I agree, that what I feel with my belly depends on my receptors there which is not a precise apparatus, apparently. But the same would be relevant to my ears as well - some frequencies are amplified differently by the middle ear than the others. Maybe my ears are sensitive to those related to the guitar body only and not to the neck

In a nutshell, any objective measurements of a guitar will have to deal with the subjective hearing of a particular person at the end of the day...

All the multiple guitars used in Pate's studies (with the exception of the 'Modal parameter variability in industrial electric guitar making' paper*) were made by master French luthiers associated with the acoustic group at the Sorbonne in Paris where the studies were done; in order to have strict control over the materials and consistency of the processes involved. I guess they didn't trust Gibson to make a consistent product (not an unrealistic position is it ?). Similar results were found for all the guitars. Read on.

* that used multiple guitars from a un-named major US manufacturer that gave them access to guitars from the warehouse

[sal paradise]

The lovely paradox is that all objective data is also subjective the moment it’s measured or interpreted by human conciseness.


Donald Hoffman comes to mind here. His work has led him to believe our consciousness is mostly like playing grand theft auto… you can interact with the world, but you’re seeking a false interpretation of it. Makes sense why he called his latest book The Case Against Reality

[timtam]

The lovely paradox is that all objective data is also subjective the moment it’s measured or interpreted by human conciseness.

Donald Hoffman comes to mind here. His work has led him to believe our consciousness is mostly like playing grand theft auto… you can interact with the world, but you’re seeking a false interpretation of it. Makes sense why he called his latest book The Case Against Reality

Indeed the classic musical example of that now is the several studies from Claudia Fritz's French/American research group from the same institute in Paris - which showed that violin experts who had always said that Stradivari violins were superior to modern masterbuilt instruments and that they could easily pick them, did the opposite when blinded to which they were playing or listening to. Not only could they not reliably pick the Strads, but they generally preferred the modern instruments.
Fritz, C., & Dubois, D. (2015). Perceptual evaluation of musical instruments: State of the art and methodology. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 101(2), 369–381. https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ethodology

There is similar work showing that people can't generally pick ash strats from alder strats in blinded tests.
Zwicker, T., Zollner, M., Härtl, K., Hönlein, W., & Gebhardt, J. (2016). Listening Experiment: Tone-woods in solid-body electric guitars. Gitec Forum. https://www.gitec-forum-eng.de/listenin ... c-guitars/

Such work is important, because some people assert that they can hear things that can't be measured. There is little objective evidence for that. Indeed violin experts were not impressed by scientific studies' earlier apparent failure to show the Strad's superiority when measured, which they said they could "easily hear". Except when their ability was actually tested ... and they couldn't.

On the guitar side, some of Pate's other studies have looked at the relationship between measured guitar physics and the perceptions of experienced players. In some cases - like differences in fretboard wood - they found measured spectral differences that the players on the whole failed to notice, when not told about the wood differences. Admittedly even guitars made by the same luthiers (as these were) might still differ sonically in other ways too. But it does at least show that the ability of appropriate measurements to detect spectral differences is not obviously worse than the human hearing system.
Paté, A., Le Carrou, J.-L., & Fabre, B. (2013). Ebony vs. Rosewood: Experimental investigation about the influence of the fingerboard on the sound of a solid body electric guitar. Proceedings of the Stockholm Musical Acoustics Conference (SMAC2013), 182–187. https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ric_guitar
Paté, A., Le Carrou, J.-L., Navarret, B., Dubois, D., & Fabre, B. (2015). Influence of the electric guitar’s fingerboard wood on guitarists’ perception. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 101, 347–359. https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... Perception

[armensguitars]

The lovely paradox is that all objective data is also subjective the moment it’s measured or interpreted by human conciseness.

Donald Hoffman comes to mind here. His work has led him to believe our consciousness is mostly like playing grand theft auto… you can interact with the world, but you’re seeking a false interpretation of it. Makes sense why he called his latest book The Case Against Reality

Indeed the classic musical example of that now is the several studies from Claudia Fritz's French/American research group from the same institute in Paris - which showed that violin experts who had always said that Stradivari violins were superior to modern masterbuilt instruments and that they could easily pick them, did the opposite when blinded to which they were playing or listening to. Not only could they not reliably pick the Strads, but they generally preferred the modern instruments.
Fritz, C., & Dubois, D. (2015). Perceptual evaluation of musical instruments: State of the art and methodology. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 101(2), 369–381. https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ethodology

There is similar work showing that people can't generally pick ash strats from alder strats in blinded tests.
Zwicker, T., Zollner, M., Härtl, K., Hönlein, W., & Gebhardt, J. (2016). Listening Experiment: Tone-woods in solid-body electric guitars. Gitec Forum. https://www.gitec-forum-eng.de/listenin ... c-guitars/

Such work is important, because some people assert that they can hear things that can't be measured. There is little objective evidence for that. Indeed violin experts were not impressed by scientific studies' earlier apparent failure to show the Strad's superiority when measured, which they said they could "easily hear". Except when their ability was actually tested ... and they couldn't.

On the guitar side, some of Pate's other studies have looked at the relationship between measured guitar physics and the perceptions of experienced players. In some cases - like differences in fretboard wood - they found measured spectral differences that the players on the whole failed to notice, when not told about the wood differences. Admittedly even guitars made by the same luthiers (as these were) might still differ sonically in other ways too. But it does at least show that the ability of appropriate measurements to detect spectral differences is not obviously worse than the human hearing system.
Paté, A., Le Carrou, J.-L., & Fabre, B. (2013). Ebony vs. Rosewood: Experimental investigation about the influence of the fingerboard on the sound of a solid body electric guitar. Proceedings of the Stockholm Musical Acoustics Conference (SMAC2013), 182–187. https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ric_guitar
Paté, A., Le Carrou, J.-L., Navarret, B., Dubois, D., & Fabre, B. (2015). Influence of the electric guitar’s fingerboard wood on guitarists’ perception. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 101, 347–359. https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... Perception

Conclusion from this would be to pick for comfort and looks over anything else, which is what I suppose I do anyway. That being said, placebo effect is still real, so by believing something sounds amazing due to lore, like a Strad, it does sound better until its tested. Testing it doesn't really matter in this case as I prefer to live my life less objectively. If someone plays a Strad in front of me, of course I will be inspired. Who cares if a modern one technically sounds the same or better? Ignorance is bliss in a way. Good to know though, I will likely prioritize weight of a guitar (for comfort) more than before.

[ainm]

Coming up in Fender’s marketing materials;

Un-quantum-fiable*
* Just don’t try measuring it

[armensguitars]

Coming up in Fender’s marketing materials;

Un-quantum-fiable*
* Just don’t try measuring it

Fender's Uncertainty Principle

[Guitarman555]

My '61 Jazzmaster originally came to me with a stripped/70s-refin Ash body, that I later on swapped to a '61 Alder body as I wanted a colour other than Blonde on my Jazzmaster.

This was a loooong time ago, but I essentially did what most people don't get to do: experience the exact same guitar, same pickups and neck and pots with the only thing changing being the body.

The weights were very similar, and of course they vary anyway from guitar to guitar. The sound of the Ash body was a bit "airier" for a lack of a better word...maybe it ha d bit more chime to it...the alder was more focused and I liked that, especially at the time.

My view is that a lot of the sound in a Fender is in the neck. It may be a touch controversial, but swapping the bodies really wasn't that much of a night and day difference in that instance.

This, of course is out of a sample of only two bodies, and others may have had different experiences...I just thought I'd chime in with mine.

Interesting experience, didn't know that, thanks!

[OffYourFace]

IMO, everything makes a difference but the neck is where the magic is.

I've been using the same 1972 Telecaster neck since 1993. It's been on about 4 different bodies. I've also been using the same mid to late 80s Seymour Duncan Broadcaster lead pickup that came with the guitar. The fundamental sound I'm used to has always been there no matter what body I've used. Some bodies have been better than others but it's minor. Certain bridges matched certain bodies better than others but like I said, the fundamental sound that I love is always present.

That being said, the current body is a Guitar Mill light-weight 2pc Ash body just cuz Ash is the 'tele thing'.

I've used heavy ash (what originally came with the guitar), medium weight ash, Alder and now the light ash (3 lbs 12oz).

[GilmourD]

My view is that a lot of the sound in a Fender is in the neck. It may be a touch controversial, but swapping the bodies really wasn't that much of a night and day difference in that instance.

That's not really controversial any more. The published physics measured from real guitars over the last several decades consistently show multiple examples of sonic effects due to the long, thin, flexible, composite neck. Mostly mediated via its resonant modal frequencies, which determine which frequencies are lost to the neck, flowing from the strings via the nut/frets to vibrate the neck at those frequencies. There is also objective measurement evidence of some sonic effects due to the fretboard wood. And also due to string-fret micro-damping (hard to equate when swapping necks or body across two guitars). The bridge is also a common source of string vibration losses at particular frequencies.

In contrast, there is little evidence of sonic effects due to the big chunk of solid-body wood. Bridge admittance is much lower than neck admittance, so minimal string vibration energy flows from the strings to the body compared to the neck. The measurements of real guitars have shown that previous notions about body "tonewood" - often associated with the simplistic dichotomy "if it's not the pickups it must be the wood" - reflected a failure to appreciate the many places that sonic differences can come from. And which are significant and which are not. See especially the work of Fleischer, Zollner, and Pate for examples of all of those. Fortunately or unfortunately , you don't need to fully understand guitar physics to build great guitars. Hence we still get the same science-challenged marketing drivel from Fender and others - ash sound like 'this', alder sounds like 'that'. The big guitar companies do not employ guitar scientists, and show no evidence of even having read the last two decades of published scientific work measuring the guitars their companies made, by independent scientists (mostly in Europe, and some only available in English in recent years).

That kinda goes with everything I've always said. Everything plays a part, some playing more of a part, some playing less of a part, but if it's attached to the guitar it's playing a part.

Also sometimes the biggest differences are something nobody can hear except the person actually playing the guitar while playing the guitar because of that physical feedback. I think that is the most important component of it all. If it's something the player can hear and feel and they LIKE it, it'll make for better music.

[JamesSGBrown]

Very interesting discussion. Though recently as I've started being more conscientious about my own hearing... I do have to wonder how accurate a lot of comparisons done by people who regularly make (assumingly) pretty loud noise and listen to music often etc are gonna be... my own ears are so screwed after an ear infection and ruptured ear drum that sometimes my setup sounds completely 'different' from day to day, purely on the basis of how nicely my ears are playing. In fact, I can engage my very own treble burst by popping my right ear...