Page 3 of 4
#81
Quote by OliOsbourne
fingerpicking sounds different from using a pick...


Alright, pick may have a difference, since the strings will vibrate in a different manner.
You won there.
#83
Quote by samuraigoomba
>_>

"Fag" in 2012 on a forum for guitar players (as in, NOT 4chan)? How old are you?

Also, my opinion is that black sabbath isn't overrated at all. I'm gonna call the cops and tell them to come make you listen to Planet Caravan and Faeries Wear Boots until you agree with me.


He called me a "Troll bitch", so you're obviously biased.

Oh, and I have all of Black Sabbath's albums, I'm not saying they're good, but much too overrated.
Last edited by Sullinger at Nov 15, 2012,
#84
Quote by Sullinger
I'M BRING UP MANY SOLID CLAIMS.
Alright:
1) Fingerboard isn't going to make a difference, this is proved every time you play a fret with an inlay
2) A pickup is a magnet. Magnets don't pickup wood.
3) Just because the wood vibrates with the strings, it doesn't mean the strings will create more of certain frequencies
4) If wood makes such a huge tone difference, then why do you mess with equalizers and effects, which will just overshadow your guitar's original tone?


"Just because the wood vibrates with the strings, it doesn't mean the strings will create more of certain frequencies"

Actually IT WILL. Some building are standing up today because when you have different materials connected their stiffness adds up in different ways and they react differently to vibrations. Works for buildings, bridges, seismology and guitars mate
#85
Quote by danvwman
At this point we all assume you are TONE deaf and not very smart or just good at being a troll


Well,
people laughed at everyone who said the Earth was round at first.
#86
Quote by marianoarnaiz
"Just because the wood vibrates with the strings, it doesn't mean the strings will create more of certain frequencies"

Actually IT WILL. Some building are standing up today because when you have different materials connected their stiffness adds up in different ways and they react differently to vibrations. Works for buildings, bridges, seismology and guitars mate


yeah, but you're stiffness doesn't apply since you have to change your string's stiffness constantly.
#87
I got into a discussion about why I dislike gibsons and the a person said "you can play 10 or more of the same model and they will all feel and sound different, you may play 20-30 before you find one that feels or sounds right" or something close to that.

They all have the same hardware,electronics, strings and wood.

What is different is the DENSITY of each piece of wood that makes each one sound different.
What the hell!!!
#88
Quote by marianoarnaiz
Hi, I am a REAL Scientist. I am a Geophysicist and I do REAL research and publish my findings. I will make the point that the arguments presented do not follow a true and honest methodology. The REAL way to test the HYPOTHESIS would be to make 2 identical guitars with only one difference (e.g. an ash body and a rosewood body) and test the frequency content (on a oscilloscope with fourier transform) and check if they are different.

Exactly. I've been trying to say this, but apparently the response is, "shut up, they're the same and you're an idiot to say otherwise because lololol it's plugged in."

Simply put, if it's not in a peer-reviewed scientific paper, if it's not put forward by a team of qualified researchers in relevant fields, if the methodology can be shown to be flawed or the researchers can be shown to have extreme, obvious bias...

It's not a reliable study and it doesn't mean anything!
#89
Quote by Sullinger
Evidence you're a real scientist/ these studies?


you can look for my papers online:

−Arnaiz-Rodríguez, M.S., Rodríguez-Millán, I., Audemard, F., 2011, Análisis gravimétrico y flexural del occidente de Venezuela: Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas, v. 28, núm. 3, p. 420-438.

−Arnaiz-Rodríguez M., Garzon, Y., 2012 Anomalías gravimétricas del Caribe. Interciancias 37(3) ,172-182

-“Magnetic anomalies in the Eastern Caribbean” Orihuela, N., García, A., Arnaiz, M. Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch) DOI 10.1007/s00531-012-0828-6
#90
Okay, I give up. Go back and read my posts until you understand them. My fault for assuming the world was as smart as me.

Good night!
#91
Quote by marianoarnaiz
you can look for my papers online:

−Arnaiz-Rodríguez, M.S., Rodríguez-Millán, I., Audemard, F., 2011, Análisis gravimétrico y flexural del occidente de Venezuela: Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas, v. 28, núm. 3, p. 420-438.

−Arnaiz-Rodríguez M., Garzon, Y., 2012 Anomalías gravimétricas del Caribe. Interciancias 37(3) ,172-182

-“Magnetic anomalies in the Eastern Caribbean” Orihuela, N., García, A., Arnaiz, M. Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch) DOI 10.1007/s00531-012-0828-6


I could post a Stephen Hawking paper and tell you I'm him.
and where's your guitar research?
#93
Quote by Sullinger
yeah, but you're stiffness doesn't apply since you have to change your string's stiffness constantly.


Not quite, stiffness is not time dependent, as the strings behave elastically and not plastic-elastically or viscoelastically the stiffness of the full guitar does not variate as you play
#94
Quote by Sullinger
I could post a Stephen Hawking paper and tell you I'm him.
and where's your guitar research?


ERM

First, I made the point I am a geophysicist i work with the Earth and as you can check my name is Mariano Arnaiz... real work here.

Second, I base what I said in my knowledge of elastic solids a finite elements methods applied to elastic materials and bulk structures (as the Earth crust, seismic resistant structures, etc).
#95
This is crap. Even though the tone pots, pickup types/amp type/ string type all have a huge impact on the tone, possibly even moreso than the type of wood used, the fact remains is wood has a big impact on the sound a guitar makes... this fact is undeniable.
#96
Hmmm... somebody seems really high on himself. You're the only over educated moron in this thread who is arguing your point. Not one other person has come in here and tried to back you up or believed what you're trying to prove. Other than some stupid youtube video you didn't even find! So maybe, if the general consensus is that pickups can pickup the tonal differences in TONE woods, and that everything in the guitar has an impact on the vibrating strings, that maybe you should shut the hell up and quit trolling.
#97
Quote by Sullinger
Okay, I give up. Go back and read my posts until you understand them. My fault for assuming the world was as smart as me.

Good night!


Bring us a real and scientific prove of your point, if you give me a mechanically valid reason of it i will support you, but until now i have the most physically validated point if view. Is not about smartness, is about fact and someone not-smart can hold a real and valid fact
#98
Quote by Sullinger
I agree with you, and that makes sense. If the guitar is played acoustically. I don't know how to explain it, since all my previous attempts seemed to fail: it doesn't matter once it hits the pickup. If all this tonal wood hype was true, then why do we have 3 band eqs on our amps? Even if wood did make a difference plugged in, it wouldn't matter since the amp and effects you use would overshadow it.


Yes it does... the pick-ups do not change the way the strings vibrate, merely read it. The wood the strings are attached to do. So say the wood dampens some upper midrange vibrations in the strings, the pickups will notice this.

The fretting on inlays thing has another point... the string vibrates after a metal fret, not on the board itself. That;s why inlays are negligible compared to the overall construction.

The study you linked is incomplete and so far it's incomplete, there's no paper or procedure to read and the results discussed were a quick look over 2 weeks, which is only a little bit of time and you wouldn't expect a massive difference. The differences are subtle as you're playing the same note at the end of the day. I'm also interested how the response will be to chords.

I found this study: http://www.stormriders.com/guitar/telecaster/guitar_wood.pdf

He for some reason concludes at it makes no difference through the pickups, but shows a noticeable difference in his results. If you play it through a highly gained and compressed amp these overtones may get lost, but judging by those graphs the difference in response is not insignificant IMO. The conclusion is not supported by the data presented. I've seen smaller differences in the frequency response of headphones and can still tell a difference between the pairs. Furthermore, he's managed to pick up a difference in Alder and Ash which are reasonable similar tonally. It should have been an Alder/Mahogany mix. The procedure in the experiment seems sound, but the study is a bit flawed; it wasn't comprehensive enough to come to the conclusion that tone woods make no difference. If he found such an even smaller difference between mahogany and alder you could make the conclusion that the tone woods make no difference but that wasn't the case.

Now on your point on the EQ; yes, there is an argument that you can approximate the tonality of ash using an alder bodied guitar by manipulating the volume, tone and eq pots in the guitar and rig. However, a 3 band EQ is very crude; you can not seriously expect to make a les paul sound like a strat with 3 bands and the guitar tone knobs which trim bass and treble. Maybe with a 10 band parametric but it's still a huge over-simplification of the peaks and troughs in the actual signal. You will be surprised how small a noticeable difference looks.

edit: The pickup's magnetic field does have an effect on the vibrations of the string too, but this does not eliminate the overall effect on the wood. Their effects are combined, along with the other hardware on the guitar.
Last edited by baumaxx1 at Nov 15, 2012,
#99
Why can you not accept the fact that different wood densities create different frequency? For christ sake, forget guitars, go grab a piece of mahogany and a piece of maple. Knock on them with your hand, they sound different. When strings mount to the bridge, and the bridge to the body, frequencies resonate from the picked string and reflect through through the body. Yes the pickups recieve the vibration from the strings before all this happens, but that doesn't change the fact that they still resonate differently depending on the wood type.
#100
Quote by Sullinger
Evidence you're a real scientist/ these studies?


What do you want, a pdf copy of his degree you moron? And whether he is a professional scientist or a scientist at all, what he describes is correct. Google it, its physics.
#101
Quote by baumaxx1
Yes it does... the pick-ups do not change the way the strings vibrate, merely read it. The wood the strings are attached to do. So say the wood dampens some upper midrange vibrations in the strings, the pickups will notice this.

The fretting on inlays thing has another point... the string vibrates after a metal fret, not on the board itself. That;s why inlays are negligible compared to the overall construction.

The study you linked is incomplete and so far it's incomplete, there's no paper or procedure to read and the results discussed were a quick look over 2 weeks, which is only a little bit of time and you wouldn't expect a massive difference. The differences are subtle as you're playing the same note at the end of the day. I'm also interested how the response will be to chords.

I found this study: http://www.stormriders.com/guitar/telecaster/guitar_wood.pdf

He for some reason concludes at it makes no difference through the pickups, but shows a noticeable difference in his results. If you play it through a highly gained and compressed amp these overtones may get lost, but judging by those graphs the difference in response is not insignificant IMO. The conclusion is not supported by the data presented. I've seen smaller differences in the frequency response of headphones and can still tell a difference between the pairs. Furthermore, he's managed to pick up a difference in Alder and Ash which are reasonable similar tonally. It should have been an Alder/Mahogany mix. The procedure in the experiment seems sound, but the study is a bit flawed; it wasn't comprehensive enough to come to the conclusion that tone woods make no difference. If he found such an even smaller difference between mahogany and alder you could make the conclusion that the tone woods make no difference but that wasn't the case.

Now on your point on the EQ; yes, there is an argument that you can approximate the tonality of ash using an alder bodied guitar by manipulating the volume, tone and eq pots in the guitar and rig. However, a 3 band EQ is very crude; you can not seriously expect to make a les paul sound like a strat with 3 bands and the guitar tone knobs which trim bass and treble. Maybe with a 10 band parametric but it's still a huge over-simplification of the peaks and troughs in the actual signal. You will be surprised how small a noticeable difference looks.


Finally, someone who uses logic that I can have a legitimate debate with. Be back here tomorrow, so we can finish this. I gotta do some homework!
#102
Quote by Sullinger
It's pretty pathetic you've wasted a solid 2 hours arguing with someone you claim has no argument.


Contradicted yourself for the n^th time. It's that what you've been doing for the past two hours, arguing with people who you don't believe have solid arguments?

#fool
#103
Quote by baumaxx1
Yes it does... the pick-ups do not change the way the strings vibrate, merely read it. The wood the strings are attached to do. So say the wood dampens some upper midrange vibrations in the strings, the pickups will notice this.



I agree with everything you say mate!!! Except on the fact that a pick up with a really strong magnetic field will affect the way a string vibrates. That's why there are different types of magnets in the pick up industry: e.g. alnico 2 produces a weak magnetic field so the string can vibrate more in its presence than in the presence of an alnico 5 pickup
#104
Quote by KSEjunkie2468
Contradicted yourself for the n^th time. It's that what you've been doing for the past two hours, arguing with people who you don't believe have solid arguments?

#fool


>Is too busy trying to insult me then to prove the original point
#106
Quote by Sullinger
Mega-butthurt fag detected. Well, the musical tastes thing was kinda off topic, but that kind of thing just bugs me "Ohhh, M3tallica420 would be such a cool name"... but it looks like you're starting to lose since you have to refer to my invalid argument to continue yours.


But you've been referring to our invalid arguments to continue yours for two hours! XD This is laughable. Not to mention that I've stopped developing an argument with you because you made your list of points, we rebutted them, and then you say that we haven't rebutted them. I don't want to keep repeating myself, so I'm just going to point out over and over again how many times you blatantly contradict yourself in knowledge and logic. And I'm a butthurt-fag? are you going to develop a feasible argument, or just insult me like an upset child?
#107
This should end this stupid discussion that always starts by some guy who doesn't know anything about building guitars. John Suhr, Tom Anderson, Don Grosh, Frudua, etc will tell you that wood does make a difference in tone.

I'll give you my example of tone.
I had a strat with alder body and a "2 piece maple neck" in nitrocellouse finish.
I replaced that 2 piece maple neck with a 2 piece "roasted" maple neck, same hardware, electronics and specs (pickup height, intonation, string gauge).

When I first plugged in (same amp with same setting) my girlfriend and father said right away
"it sounds like that guitar went through puberty!"
They and I noticed that the guitar sounded bigger, more throathy, more top end and high end.

Both necks were maple, just different types of maple!

Like Guthrie Govan said once
"some woods never wanted to be guitars, they wanted to be a cabinet or a chair"

It explains why some Strats of the same model sound shitty and some sound great.
#108
Quote by Sullinger
>Is too busy trying to insult me then to prove the original point


The original point has been proven over the last 5 pages, and you've ignored it. What else do you want?
#109
Quote by KSEjunkie2468
The original point has been proven over the last 5 pages, and you've ignored it. What else do you want?


Bro, calm down your butthurt, especially when it's over the internet. I've basically proved myself, but it's you guys who ignore it. When someone made a valid point that stumped me, I mentioned it. You're too busy sucking Warpig's dick to notice.
#110
Quote by cisco444
This should end this stupid discussion that always starts by some guy who doesn't know anything about building guitars. John Suhr, Tom Anderson, Don Grosh, Frudua, etc will tell you that wood does make a difference in tone.

I'll give you my example of tone.
I had a strat with alder body and a "2 piece maple neck" in nitrocellouse finish.
I replaced that 2 piece maple neck with a 2 piece "roasted" maple neck, same hardware, electronics and specs (pickup height, intonation, string gauge).

When I first plugged in (same amp with same setting) my girlfriend and father said right away
"it sounds like that guitar went through puberty!"
They and I noticed that the guitar sounded bigger, more throathy, more top end and high end.

Both necks were maple, just different types of maple!

Like Guthrie Govan said once
"some woods never wanted to be guitars, they wanted to be a cabinet or a chair"

It explains why some Strats of the same model sound shitty and some sound great.


Cool story bro, because you said it over the internet automatically makes it true.
#111
Quote by Sullinger
Mega-butthurt fag detected. Well, the musical tastes thing was kinda off topic, but that kind of thing just bugs me "Ohhh, M3tallica420 would be such a cool name"... but it looks like you're starting to lose since you have to refer to my invalid argument to continue yours.


Quote by Sullinger
He called me a "Troll bitch", so you're obviously biased.

Oh, and I have all of Black Sabbath's albums, I'm not saying they're good, but much too overrated.


I didn't call you a troll bitch at all, you simply called me a "Fag" like a child for no reason.
#113
Quote by KSEjunkie2468
I didn't call you a troll bitch at all, you simply called me a "Fag" like a child for no reason.


"Lawl, I'll go back and edit it, and he'll look stupid!" I quoted you calling me a troll bitch, page 4. When it says "Originally Posted by" it means I didn't edit the quote
>Failed.
#114
Like someone mentioned before. You can shape a guitar sound in many ways such as pick material, strings, action, intonation, WOOD, pickups, frets, pick attack, pick angle, etc.....
but wood is defitinely part of the equation. A guitar with made from mahogany would sound very different from an Ash guitar.

EVEN FINISHES AFFECT TONE!

Sullinger, your best way to find out is to build a guitars yourself.
#115
Quote by cisco444
Like someone mentioned before. You can shape a guitar sound in many ways such as pick material, strings, action, intonation, WOOD, pickups, frets, pick attack, pick angle, etc.....
but wood is defitinely part of the equation. A guitar with made from mahogany would sound very different from an Ash guitar.

EVEN FINISHES AFFECT TONE!

Sullinger, your best way to find out is to build a guitars yourself.


Okay, my argument was mostly about fingerboards, not body woods (even though I'm 100% the body doesn't matter either)... I'll see if I can buy a couple cheapos and make a video on youtube sometime...
#116
Quote by Sullinger
Bro, calm down your butthurt, especially when it's over the internet. I've basically proved myself, but it's you guys who ignore it. When someone made a valid point that stumped me, I mentioned it. You're too busy sucking Warpig's dick to notice.


I'm the one who should calm when you're the one accusing me of having but hurt? You're the one fighting with names here, not me, so therefore you is you that is getting upset over the internet. And you're only arguing instead of insulting.

Heres an assertion, the resonating of wood changes the tone of the guitar because when the string begins to vibrate, the wood resonates back affecting the frequencies the string give off (because fact: the density of the wood affects frequencies which are given of), when the strings are vibrating, the pickup, amplifies this.

You mentioned that pickups only pickup the vibration. But that isn't true. I've identified a flaw on in your argument, now slowly, please don't ignore it, address it.

Sound easy enough?

And you only mentioned one point that stumped you, picks affecting tone. You refused to acknowledge my argument of why picks affect the tone.
#117
Quote by KSEjunkie2468
I'm the one who should calm when you're the one accusing me of having but hurt? You're the one fighting with names here, not me, so therefore you is you that is getting upset over the internet. And you're only arguing instead of insulting.

Heres an assertion, the resonating of wood changes the tone of the guitar because when the string begins to vibrate, the wood resonates back affecting the frequencies the string give off (because fact: the density of the wood affects frequencies which are given of), when the strings are vibrating, the pickup, amplifies this.

You mentioned that pickups only pickup the vibration. But that isn't true. I've identified a flaw on in your argument, now slowly, please don't ignore it, address it.

Sound easy enough?

And you only mentioned one point that stumped you, picks affecting tone. You refused to acknowledge my argument of why picks affect the tone.


*sigh* alright, the pickups ONLY pickup the strings, since they're magnets. The body DOES vibrate, but this isn't going to affect how much bass the pickup picks up. Picks, though, aren't really changing tone as much as they're changing volume.
#118
Quote by Sullinger
"Lawl, I'll go back and edit it, and he'll look stupid!" I quoted you calling me a troll bitch, page 4. When it says "Originally Posted by" it means I didn't edit the quote
>Failed.


A bitch can be defined as someone who says or does mean things. And you've been pretty rude to all of us since the beginning of this thread, do according to the webster dictionary, you are a bitch. At least I can back up my insults haha
#119
You cited a study that supposedly supported your claim. I pointed out why the study is incomplete and deeply flawed. Please give a response for why you believe the study is still valid. For example, you could find me the original abstract and tell me which peer-review journal reviewed it. I have not been able to find anything of this nature. If the study is not valid, or not sufficient to draw any conclusions from, then we're just back to your opinion versus the opinions of individuals like Suhr.

And wait, picks don't change tones? But... What about equal size picks made of different materials? Stone and glass picks? Or thick versus thin picks? The only thing that changes is the volume? >_<

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFjoEgYOgRo

We're richard dawkins and you're wendy wright.
#120
Quote by Sullinger
*sigh* alright, the pickups ONLY pickup the strings, since they're magnets. The body DOES vibrate, but this isn't going to affect how much bass the pickup picks up. Picks, though, aren't really changing tone as much as they're changing volume.


Yes the pickups pick up the strings, the tone of the strings, not just the vibration. If they only picked up vibration, then the pickup wouldn't be able to voice the difference of a string vibrating very lightly from being gently plucked, and a string vibrating very lightly because a natural harmonic was played (these two vibrations looking exactly the same to the human eye). Here there are different frequencies causing a different sound, but the string is vibrating the same amount.