Whenever this kind of topics come up, I can't help but remember a couple of scientific works:
https://www.pnas.org/content/109/3/760
https://www.pnas.org/content/114/21/5395
If there is any group of people capable of beating us, guitarists, in the finicky, snobbery and pettifoggery race, they have to be classical violinists. The conclusion of those studies is that they are not even capable of telling apart a 300-yo legendary Stradivarious from a freshly made instrument in a blind test,
even playing them with their own hands. As with everything scientific, there is much more to it if you dive into the discussion, but you get the idea...
When the topic of wood and body shape comes up, I wonder how many of the opinions are based on unbiased, blind experiences, under controlled listening conditions. IMHO, the -literally- thousands of variables in play makes it utterly difficult to get a clear idea of how a particular kind of wood influences the sound. There is an amplifier there (capable of hundreds of thousands of different knob configs), a cab, cones, a pick, a set of hands, pickups, rooms, environmental conditions... hell, even if you take a step to your side the sound of the room varies.
...And... PSYCHOACOUSTICS
I'm not saying there is no difference. Anyone with a basic understanding of physics knows there IS an influence. My point here is:
1) That I would like to see a much more scientific approach to the issue
2) That appreciable influence in the sound is almost negligible under most circunstances (probably anywhere except playing solo in a very controlled environment).