What's the current consensus on body wood's effect on electric guitar tone?

yeky83 said:
@Andy Eagle what's your take on roasted maple necks & fingerboards? Generally lighter and more brittle, so makes a tonal difference? Noticeably more stable, or does it not matter all that much (especially if there's stiffening rods already)?
Click to expand...
I think it adds speed to the attack of a note and looses some mids, also put a piano like treble in the bass. Structurally I don't like it too dark as it gets pretty brittle. It helps against moisture in unfinished necks but I think carbon rods are a better solution if it's one or the other. On the whole a light roast is pretty good. I haven't seen a twisted one yet and Ibanez in particular are using some pretty undesirable grain pattern blanks to make AZ necks.
 
Andy Eagle said:
The buffer seems to negate its ability to be as influenced by subtle acoustic properties in the instrument.
Click to expand...
Well, they negate the interaction between the pickups and the cable, which is a big factor in how passive pickups sound. Changing cables can make a dramatic difference on passives, sometimes bigger than changing pickups.
 
I've bought (2) JP15's in the last 6 months - both brand new. They are identical in build specs with the only differences being total weight and "BFR" version. The BFR version is about 1 pound lighter (7.1# to 8.0#) than the standard production guitar. I was also told the BFR used hand selected pieces of wood by Willcutt

While these 2 guitars sound similar overall, there is a significant difference. The BFR is brighter, has quicker attack, and the 5th, 7th, 12th fret above note harmonics are much easier to strike cleanly. VH style playing is much easier on the BFR.

I've matched the setup on them as close as possible ie., action, neck relief, pup height, etc.

Doing the Vai test where he taps the body, then neck and listens to the note produces a near perfect pitch match on the BFR whereas the standard version is noticeably different.

The BFR model is my #1
 
Andy Eagle said:
The buffer seems to negate its ability to be as influenced by subtle acoustic properties in the instrument.
Click to expand...
It's not a buffer, it's a preamp. The magnets in EMGs are much weaker than in passives, which means that the string generates a much lower signal. The preamp is used to juice up the signal to a "regular" guitar level. I'm pretty sure there's also some dedicated circuitry in there for EQ curves and such. I'm not positive, but I believe the weaker magnet also reduces the effect of instrument resonance on the string, resulting in a more uniform tonal spectrum.

However, this is just me thinking about how all this works, not the result of any objective experimentation or expertise.
 
rossipedia said:
It's not a buffer, it's a preamp.
Click to expand...
They are not strictly dissimilar. It depends on what conditioning the circuit does to the input and output signals.

to quote Mark Hammer:

So, a full buffering function would be one in which the input is designed to optimize reception of the anticipated input signal, and the output is designed to optimize transfer of that signal. Some preamps do a nice job of buffering the input, but maybe not such a great job on the output. Ideally, you would want both for something to be properly labelled a "buffer".
Click to expand...

The circuit topology EMG uses does employ an opamp to help condition the output signal. It decouples the inductors in the pickups from the cable and input circuit topology downstream. From here:

In passive pickups, the pots in the guitar, cable capacitance, and amp input impedance are an interactive system that modifies the coil response. On active pickups and thanks to the buffering properties of the differential amplifier, the response will be less affected by these factors.
Click to expand...

It is not incorrect to consider the EMG preamp as a signal buffer.
 
It doesn’t need as strong a signal in terms of current though because buffer has high impedance, and doesn’t load the coil. It’s a better approach IMO. I just wish they made it easier to turn off the power when I’m not playing by adding the power switch to the volume knob.
 
I once was in a master class where Edward Van Halen visited as a guest teacher. Several students asked about improving their tone - mostly in terms of getting HIS tone. People were asking for recommendations about different pickups or other configurations on their specific guitars, saying the electronics / hardware / wood / frets were hampering their quest for a great rock tone. He played five or six different guitars that students brought up to him; LPs, strats, EVH-style clones, and even a 335. You already know how this worked out: different guitars + same amp + same hands = (very nearly) same tone. He said repeatedly that his Frankenstrats were made from unremarkable production-line components he had at hand, and that he assembled them purely experimentally. Once he had a combination that felt right, he just messed around with them to optimize what they could do. Watching him get oriented on another player's guitar was neat. He seemed to innately understand how hard (and WHERE) to pick on a guitar to get the sound he liked.

I have a couple of really great-sounding guitars that shouldn't be great. One is an 80 Fender Strat Ultra with a pretty thick polyurethane finish and an ebony board. I believe the body is either poplar or ash. It has ridiculous resonance and warmth. But you'd never spec a guitar to be built this way. It defies everything that a good guitar shouldn't be! But somehow all those things just work together. I also have a couple of boutique guitars including a Suhr strat and Strandberg Boden. Those guitars were built from hand-selected blanks and meticulously crafted at every step. Yes, they are incredible, and it's a function of everything being just right. That is one of the reasons those instruments are worth their price; an expert understood how to make the best of what was there.

I have every confidence that the body wood has a big contribution effect to the guitar's tone. But as M@ said, it's the entirety of the build that makes the magic. If you put me in front of a hundred bodies and necks, and told me to pick one of each to build my guitar, I'd be making a guess, and that's before we even get into the question of finish and electronics. I know there are luthiers who knock on the body blanks or perform other arcane rituals to identify the magic ones; that's awesome, and it's why boutique builders can consistently deliver such unique but perfect instruments.
 
rossipedia said:
It's not a buffer, it's a preamp. The magnets in EMGs are much weaker than in passives, which means that the string generates a much lower signal. The preamp is used to juice up the signal to a "regular" guitar level. I'm pretty sure there's also some dedicated circuitry in there for EQ curves and such. I'm not positive, but I believe the weaker magnet also reduces the effect of instrument resonance on the string, resulting in a more uniform tonal spectrum.

However, this is just me thinking about how all this works, not the result of any objective experimentation or expertise.
Click to expand...
The output is low impedance = the signal is buffered (regardless of whatever tone shaping might be going on).

Fun fact, the magnetic gauss of a EMG pickup is typically around 350, which is right in the middle of the range of humbuckers in general. A PAF might be in the 200-300 range, a Super Distortion is around 450. A Duncan JB is around 365, so the string pull of an EMG is pretty much the same as a JB.

The single coil EMGs are also around 350, so they do in fact have less string pull than a traditional single coil (which are around 1000 for A5 magnets).
 
To me the acoustic tone needs to be good to let the string vibrate properly, the wood smooths and rounds the balance of the strings in to a nice harmonic mix. The pickups then add their flavour to the existing signal. Active pickups seem to offset the tonal balance to mostly pickup and the only thing that gets past is when the acoustic properties are so bad the notes just die or the volume balance is terrible( dead spots and loud notes .) The best sounding electric guitars are acoustically always great. not loud or quiet but an interaction of ALL the parts.
 
rossipedia said:
It's not a buffer, it's a preamp. The magnets in EMGs are much weaker than in passives, which means that the string generates a much lower signal. The preamp is used to juice up the signal to a "regular" guitar level. I'm pretty sure there's also some dedicated circuitry in there for EQ curves and such. I'm not positive, but I believe the weaker magnet also reduces the effect of instrument resonance on the string, resulting in a more uniform tonal spectrum.

However, this is just me thinking about how all this works, not the result of any objective experimentation or expertise.
Click to expand...
It is a buffer and a preamp. Reducing the magnet pull increases the interaction with the wood but the subtle effect is lost in the pickup designs strident signal. The effect of the magnetic pull is why Allan Holdsworth played one pickup guitars.
 
Andy Eagle said:
It is a buffer and a preamp. Reducing the magnet pull increases the interaction with the wood but the subtle effect is lost in the pickup designs strident signal. The effect of the magnetic pull is why Allan Holdsworth played one pickup guitars.
Click to expand...
I don't think active pickups have less of a magnetic pull...? They use less wire, but magnets should still pull all the same. It should depends on the magnets used, and I don't think EMG and Fishman use less strong magnets AFAICT.
 
yeky83 said:
I don't think active pickups have less of a magnetic pull...? They use less wire, but magnets should still pull all the same. It should depends on the magnets used, and I don't think EMG and Fishman use less strong magnets AFAICT.
Click to expand...
See my post above. I got the info from antigua over at the guitarnuts2 board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom