well speaking of tone woods
I cant wait to try the "exotic" tone woods on baritone guitars (Wenge etc)
since i am a lefty these guys are one of my only option
http://www.etguitars.com/FAQRetrieve.aspx?ID=36907&Q=
Look at this baby.
http://www.etguitars.com/products/brands/et/katana-fx7-mkii
Ash
I only had time to listen to the first test.
The difference was obvious on my CrapMac™ speaker. The synthetic body had zero character; all you hear is the strings.
The final test I didn't bother with 'cause as soon as I heard the woods used I realised that the maple neck & fretboard would cancel out any improvement in warmth gained by the basswood body over the alder one, and that the alder one had the warmer neck, which in turn would've taken it towards the other guitar too.
IOW, it's a stacked deck, man. That's why I suggested the two compositions here:
Display MoreI only had time to listen to the first test.
The difference was obvious on my CrapMac™ speaker. The synthetic body had zero character; all you hear is the strings.
The final test I didn't bother with 'cause as soon as I heard the woods used I realised that the maple neck & fretboard would cancel out any implrovement in warmth gained by the basswood body over the alder one, and that the alder one had the warmer neck, which in turn would've taken it towards the other guitar too.
IOW, it's a stacked deck, man. That's why I suggested the two compositions here:
Sorry man but saying that means nothing;
You have to pick out the right answers in the blind test 
The creator of the test has stated that as well: anybody can say they hear a difference; but if they cannot pick ou the correct answers in the blind test, saying something like that, means nothing.
In another swedish guitar forum there are some people who's REALLY into tonewood, shims killing tone and they make a clear difference tc etc.
So I made this because one of the guys often says that shims kills the tone (both neck and saddle shims)
He didn't didn't score much right in the test, even tho he stated things like "shimming makes a GRAET difference" before the test.
And he even went as far as saying my test is idiotic, because "you cannot hear the difference on audio clips!"
YET... The same guy posted about how wood vs bushing floyd studs makes a differnce; USING AUDIO CLIPS...
However, I debunked his theory right away because the videos wasn't even made by the same guys, one was Nuno himself (wood screws) with his amp, and the other video was another guy (playing Nunos sig guitar with bushing studs) with a completely different amp and mic placement etc etc etc.
So yeah, before you say the difference is obvious, score the blind test or else it means nothing
I don't have to prove anything to anyone as far as I'm concerned, but I appreciate your comments, Ceddy, and agree with them in-principle - too many folks make assertions they can't back up. I'll provide an incontestable real-world example in a minute which, along with the wood-type decisions made by countless companies and luthiers the world over (and my own experiences playing and listening), render any judgement made by any of us of any A/B test designed to "prove" that material choices are inconsequential and posted to PooToob, irrelevant.
As for the shim saga, whilst I'd contend that there has to be a difference, scientifically-speaking, I doubt many could hear it. It'd be minuscule and theoretically-measurable by machines, but not by most of us. That dude's obsessing over very little IMHO, and I'm sure you'd agree.
Here's a real-world example for you of my basic assertion:
Suhr Modern Pro vs Suhr Modern Satin
The Modern Pro has a distinctive chimey sound overall, a mellowish-but-Strat-like twang from the bridge hum bucker, and a fat-but-not-very-woody neck PU sound. The middle pickup is classic chime. IMHO the guitar is well suited to the iconic '80s clean-chorussed sound. Overall the guitar sounds a little bright and even thin at times, but the front 'bucker does have balls and as I suggested, the rear isn't harsh by design, so the brightness of the guitar is tamed by Suhr's PU choices.
The Satin, OTOH, has an unmissable woody quality overall, less twang from the bridge PU, much-less chime from the middle and a way-more woody character from the neck PU. It shines in the cock-rock genre when driven; it's a bloody beast, and for jazz when played "clean", it's fantastic 'cause there's just enough woodiness and warmth in there to satisfy the genre.
Two very-different guitars, and yet both sport identical PUs, bridges, scale lengths, body shapes and even headstock shapes. The only real differences are that the Satin has a Mahogany body and neck with an Indian Rosewood fretboard, whereas the Modern has a Basswood body, Maple neck and Pau Ferro fretboard. If the Pro had an Alder body instead of Basswood, the differences would be even-more pronounced.
I'm stating facts here. I'm not going to undertake any tests 'cause I know what I know and am simply stating what I believe to be true, based upon personal experience with both these guitars as well as a bunch of custom jobs back in the '90s when I experimented with woods. It's clear-as-mud-fact to me, and frankly I'm stunned that anyone could suggest that all woods sound the same; it's frankly-ridiculous.
On that note, I'm respectfully bowing out of this thread, and please know that it has nothing to do with you. You know I've supported you since day 1 here, Ceddy, and I love the fact that you're willing to question things; I've prided myself on questioning established "science" and all manner of things all my life, so if anyone understands where you're coming from, it is I!
In this case 'though, I've already been down this path 25 years ago! Done the questioning. Done the comparisons. Wasted a bunch of moolah and time. Also, I'm bowing out respectfully (I'll watch out of curiosity 'though as I love your videos where you hack things up and whatnot, plus there'll no doubt be some heated debate riddled with popcorn moments) because I learned my lesson about a year ago when participating in listening tests using my CrapMac™ speaker. I vowed to no longer partake in such things - I even had the declaration in my signature so I wouldn't have to justify myself on the board (which I'm now doing, but that part of my signature had to go when a mod asked me to shorten it). Overall, said participation resulted in way-more stress than it was worth. Posts tended to be consistently long (like this one, and I'm a very-slow pokey-finger typist) and strained my brain as well (easily-done!).
So, Brother Ceddy, good luck with your experiment, try not to spend too much money, and know that I'm watching in full support of your efforts, man. Good on ya mate, and now... over to the man of the hour...
Ceddy! 
I'm absolutely not picking a fight with yuon a personal level, Monkey Man! 
We might have different opinions and experiences with guitars, and that's fine.
Did you record the A/B tests, or just listened by ear? Because, it's hard to remember exactly how something sounded when there has gone 10-30 minutes between changing parts.
Only good audio recordings can really show if there's any difference or not.
And I've seen recordings that shows no audiable difference, as well as tests that does show difference.
Nah mate, I owned the guitars, so the gaps between playing were a few seconds - unplug lead, replug lead. Every man, his dog and granny could hear the differences. Indisputable, which is why I know I have nothing to prove. Believe me, if there were any room for error I would've persisted until it was eliminated. Same as you in this regard, I reckon.
Hey man, I'm not here, remember? LOL
Seriously 'though, I stand strongly behind my wood suggestions for your tests:
Or you could try to copy the two Suhrs I mentioned:
http://www.suhr.com/Modern-Pro-series/
vs
http://www.suhr.com/Natural-Modern-Satin/
If you can show that the Suhr-wood combos or my suggested combos sound the same, I'll buy you a crapload of well-deserved beer.
I'm trying to be a spectator here 'though, so please try to ignore me bud. LOL
If you pick up a MATON guitar it will sound different because of QLD maple.
why dont all acoustics sound the same if tone wood is a unicorn.
Frequency through wood proves tone wood too, Maton show that (on their website)
If its different in acoustics its different in electrics, the difference IN SOME examples may be too subtle
But its there.You just need to pick the right examples IMO to show the CLEAR difference.
Ash
Display MoreMy vote is for:
Guitar A
Plain maple neck and fretboard (non-birdseye)
Alder body (or Swamp Ash? - I'm getting old LOL)
Guitar B
Mahogany neck & fretboard
Mahogany body
just playing devil's advocate here 
I'd just like to point out that there are perceivable differences between guitars that are made from the exact same materials.
My favourite anecdote, I posted many times already, is that while working for Framus I was once was tasked with selecting a guitar for an artist that played Framus. He had given us the specs: model, woods, pickups, hardware, paint job, even the hardware colour, so I ended up with five exactly identical guitars in the warehouse, all built within the last couple of weeks or months.
And they all had their own voice, meaning, overall attack & decay, decay of certain parts of the frequency spectrum, weight, amount of bass etc.
The point being, if there are perceivable differences between guitars made from the very same materials, one should maybe be wary to view characteristics a certain guitar has as general tonal properties of let's say the type of body wood this guitar is made of.
Agreed, Don; one has to generalise at some point 'though, as one does when one contrasts, say, a Maple tone with a Mahogany one and so on.
If natural wood was like Kraftwood or whatever they call it these days, where particulate size and glue densities are controlled, there'd theoretically be much less in the way of differences, but as we all know, natural woods all have their unique grains, sizes and quantities of knots, both hidden and seen, densities, moisture-retention characteristics and so on.
No two pieces are the same, but are more-likely to share many characteristics if they're from the same tree or tree type.
Reminds me of the Stradivarius "debate" where the theory is the woods /climate were different back then.
A more modern theory attributes tree growth during a time of global cold temperatures during the Little Ice Age associated with unusually low solar activity of the Maunder Minimum, circa 1645 to 1750, during which cooler temperatures throughout Europe are believed to have caused stunted and slowed tree growth, resulting in unusually dense wood.
In 2008, Dutch researchers announced further evidence that wood density caused the claimed high quality of these instruments. After examining the violins with X-rays, the researchers found that these violins all have extremely consistent density, with relatively low variation in the apparent growth patterns of the trees that produced this wood
The tone wood debate is the Internets favorite, cant understand why.
I would still not pay 15 million for a Stradivarius lol
BTW the guy that makes fenders will back up Nicky and Don.
He states he will look for special qualities of the SAME wood and by INSTINCT (his words)
only selects the best one, its on youtube some where
Ash
No, but you'd shell out 20 mil for Profiles.
A number of things are entering this discussion that I wasn't going to mention but since they have been touched upon, here is some of my experience over many decades (and much $$$) testing guitar build theories that have been mentioned in this thread so far:
- Some wood types can make a very clear difference, no question. Mahogany, basswood, alder, etc.
- Identical guitars can sound considerably different, but this difference is typically not the same as different wood types.
- Dense wood of the same type tends to have a different behavior than less dense.
- Single piece bodies can behave different than multi-piece, as can bolt-on neck vs. neck-through
- Stainless frets are wonderful for playability and longevity but can sometimes reduce a bit of the "warmth", especially on attack
- Direct-screw Floyd's seem to sound different than sleeve type (although testing this was limited and difficult)
I'm not debating the above, these are simply my experiences. Long before there were internet forums. LoL
Sonic
100% agree on all points except the FL one, Sonic, and only 'cause I haven't been able to compare the two either.
Density is arguably the most-critical factor IMHO, especially when it comes to sustain. Most bass players know this from experience.
Moral of the story....If you want better WOOD for BETTER GUITAR TONE....
You have to take care of the environment and planet..RESPECT the Tree's and environment....
Rosewood.... gone already. Enough said.
Ash
Insanely talented as usual @Cederick. On the whole materials thing, personally I think pickups make a bigger difference than body material, but certainly some guitars seem to sustain and resonate better than others, some suffer wolf notes where others don't, I've only played one perspex guitar and just breifly at that so I can't speak for variability, but what I remember was that it was very heavy, not very acoustically resonant, sounded fine plugged in but surprisingly to me it didn't sustain for days, looked cool as heck though.
I have had 3 different bridges on my Les Paul. Each one of them changed the tone and the sustain, nothing to do with wood as its the same guitar.
So its not just tone wood its the bridge and pick ups too!!
Ceddy has a point, BUT so do the other side of the EXAMPLES! 
There are many examples.
What about style of music too, tone woods come out more in this.
Ah blah 
Lets just drink beer and listen to more of Ceddys solos LOL
Ash
"Cute" slinky fingers, haha
