[Jahn]

And by the way, very headphone friendly sounding comparo to boot!

 

[3x331m]

Never mind.

 

[3x331m]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn /img/forum/go_quote.gif And by the way, very headphone friendly sounding comparo to boot!

I'd take mahogany.

My ranking:

Mahogany
Madagasca rw
Indian rw
Brazilian rw.

 

[amphead]

The warmest sounding IMHO, is mahogany. But that was on a custom built stratocaster. Sorry wrong thread.

 

[F107plus5]

I used Brasilian Rosewood on my guitar I built back in 87' cause it was recommended by a Luthier friend of mine. Honduras mahogany on the neck, and redwood for the soundboard sanded to just above B-sharp before installing and finish sanding.

The rosewood on the back and sides has a beautiful grain and pattern. I prefer to look at the back rather than the front in this case.

 

[mbriant]

There's definitely differences between all four, but they all sound good to me. Usually the preferred top wood on an acoustic is spruce so I'm wondering if this test is just done with different side/back woods.

IMO, the wood has a lesser effect on solid body guitars but still does have an effect. I have a 100% walnut telecaster ( body, neck, fretboard, and head ) which looks fantastic, but doesn't sound so great.

Here's an interesting site for guitar wood comparison.

http://www.jemsite.com/jem/wood.htm

 

[adanac061]

I can hear the difference, but I don't think he used a very good mic. They sound kind of muffled. having said that, I liked Indian rosewood best.

 

[Davesrose]

I liked the Indian Rosewood....warm, but still very clear. Of course all of this seems a bit moot, since the top soundboard has the most impact on a guitar's resonance (love my ceder double top).

 

[chadbang]

All I know is the madagascar rosewood sounded like shiite. Brazillian and Mahogany sounded the closest. Indian rosewood sounded nice. But brazillan seem to sustain best.

But, of course, I have to mention, no one can create four "identical" guitars. As we all know, the tiniest things, like the cut of a nut, can make a big difference in tone.

 

[chadbang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here's an interesting site for guitar wood comparison. http://www.jemsite.com/jem/wood.htm

Interesting, but I just went on Santa Ynez Valley winery testing here in Southern California and those wood descriptions started sounding like the bullshiite wine "notes" that they try to bamboozle you with before they get you drunk and convince you to spend $40 on a label no one's ever heard of and probably is the same quality as a $5 bottle on some liquor store shelf -- "you're going to be tasting overtones of mint, hazel, pencil shavings and juniper with and undercurrent of tar and cinnamon". Bullshiite. They all tasted pretty much like wines - strong and weak.

 

[mrarroyo]

I usually prefer mahogany for back and sides because of its darker sound, specially on archtops or flat tops. Spruce for the top of course.

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrarroyo /img/forum/go_quote.gif I usually prefer mahogany for back and sides because of its darker sound, specially on archtops or flat tops. Spruce for the top of course.

X 2 I like the darker sound since the strings are bright to begin with. Kind of a balance

 

[flashnolan]

Mahagony sounded the closest to a "reference" sound with accrate tones and pitches. The Brazilian one sounded the warmest and most well rounded sound to me.

 

[Davesrose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif X 2 I like the darker sound since the strings are bright to begin with. Kind of a balance

Even a low E string is too bright??

You should stop listening to Grado so much Rob

Of course all of this seems kinda too vague. Lets consider strings as well....would you like the same woods if they had used nylon strings instead of steel? Maybe....I looked up my guitar, and sure enough it has Indian Rosewood back and sides, along with a prototype double ceder top soundboard. Maybe I'm just drawn to Indian Rosewood