Jazz tones - solid Vs. hollow body question

[K Road]

Question for those in the know...

I've always been of the belief that the tone and sustain qualities of a struck (plucked) string were influenced primarily by the type of pup and the density of the platform (or body of the guitar) in which the pup is installed or imbedded.

A hollow bodied Jazz guitar will not have the sustain properties of a solid body because the lack of solidity in the body will absorb the vibrations of the struck string and cause the note to decay faster than a solid body (think Les Paul) - correct?

If this is indeed the case, what exactly does the quality of the wood used in the construction of the instrument and/or whether or not the sound board is laminated (Eg. Gibson 175) or solid (Eg. Höfner New President) have to do with the tonal quality of the guitar when it is used outside a purely acoustic situation - which is most of the time? In other words, does the quality of the wood play a role in the warmth/quality of the tones possible - or are these purely variables of the amp and pick-ups? I say its all down to the pups and amp - but then I don't know shit about this kind of stuff.

K.

 

[Gear_Junky]

makes sense (what you're saying). i haven't seen (generally) any snobbery about electric archtops being laminated. expensive gretsches are lams, they invented the process (for archtops) or so I read.

on the other hand, maybe the type of wood affects the sustain in just such a way as to make a difference.

there's a reason why les pauls are made of mahogany and teles/strats are usually made of alder or ash. it matters even on solid bodies.

maybe some people can hear the diff. i guarantee that not everybody can, though.

 

[ashley_B_Soton]

The quality of the wood is very important in solid body guitars, some are really good like mahogany or Walnut some are not so good acoustically like alder or basswood but all provide a great material for electric guitars.

Wood is the most important quailty for building sustain in an electric guitar barring a sustainer pickup.

Hollow body guitars the wood is important as is the quality of the open space inside, the freeer the air moves about inside the better. Lamination makes the sound inside refract around even more thus being better.

In short two guitars created exactly equal except that one is solid and the other is hollow would have very little difference in sustain with a slight advantage to the single medium solid body.

But no two guitars are created equal.

It all comes down to preference as usual, if you prefer the sound of a hollow body get one, in-fact as a jazz player you should have one.

I am not a jazz player so i am not going to buy one.

 

[K Road]

The quality of the wood is very important in solid body guitars, some are really good like mahogany or Walnut some are not so good acoustically like alder or basswood but all provide a great material for electric guitars.

Wood is the most important quailty for building sustain in an electric guitar barring a sustainer pickup.

Hollow body guitars the wood is important as is the quality of the open space inside, the freeer the air moves about inside the better. Lamination makes the sound inside refract around even more thus being better.

In short two guitars created exactly equal except that one is solid and the other is hollow would have very little difference in sustain with a slight advantage to the single medium solid body.

But no two guitars are created equal.

It all comes down to preference as usual, if you prefer the sound of a hollow body get one, in-fact as a jazz player you should have one.

I am not a jazz player so i am not going to buy one.

Agreed.

But the air bouncing around unimpeded in the body of a hollow body cannot
influence the signal generated by a magnetic pup sending a signal into the amp - or can it?

K.

 

[ggunn]

Agreed.

But the air bouncing around unimpeded in the body of a hollow body cannot
influence the signal generated by a magnetic pup sending a signal into the amp - or can it?

K.

This kind of question, as well as the treatise on tonewoods above, are sources of endless and sometimes acrimonious debate, since there are no hard data to support anyone's position. I would, however, shy away from using terms like "cannot". ;^)

 

[K Road]

This kind of question, as well as the treatise on tonewoods above, are sources of endless and sometimes acrimonious debate, since there are no hard data to support anyone's position. I would, however, shy away from using terms like "cannot". ;^)

I ended my last post with the rejoiner: "can it?" hopefully to imply that I was indeed in a genuine quandary as to the role played by different tonewoods in generating/colouring the sound of hollow-bodied jazz guitars.

My contention is that the pups and amp used are 100% responsible for the qualities of the amplified sound produced by this type of guitar. If no "hard data" exists, then surely, given the subjective nature of guitar tone appreciation, opinions based purely on the aural aesthetics of the jazz guitar (and any other kind of guitar) player, here merit mention.

I mean, if it is the case that the tones produced by hollow-body are not radically different from those produced by a solid-body, then why do jazzers (generally, but not always) go for a hollow-body? For looks? I suspect most players of jazz are beyond that. And while we are at it, why should such a question be perceived as generating acrimony???

K.

 

[ggunn]

I ended my last post with the rejoiner: "can it?" hopefully to imply that I was indeed in a genuine quandary as to the role played by different tonewoods in generating/colouring the sound of hollow-bodied jazz guitars.

My contention is that the pups and amp used are 100% responsible for the qualities of the amplified sound produced by this type of guitar. If no "hard data" exists, then surely, given the subjective nature of guitar tone appreciation, opinions based purely on the aural aesthetics of the jazz guitar (and any other kind of guitar) player, here merit mention.

I mean, if it is the case that the tones produced by hollow-body are not radically different from those produced by a solid-body, then why do jazzers (generally, but not always) go for a hollow-body? For looks? I suspect most players of jazz are beyond that. And while we are at it, why should such a question be perceived as generating acrimony???

K.

Oh, sorry; I wasn't accusing you of anything. I thought that the smiley after what I wrote would be sufficient to indicate levity, bemusement, whimsy, whatever. The acrimony to which I refer is what I have observed in threads concerning tonewoods and their effect (or lack of it) on the tone, sustain, attack, etc. evident in the amplified signal from an electric guitar or bass. In some fora, simply asking a question about such things is sufficient to release the hounds.

Anyway, my apologies if I gave the impression that I was hanging any of that on you; such was not my intention.

FWIW, hollow bodied electric guitars, especially the large bodied ones without the solid center rails, sound different (mellower and more woody) to me than solid bodied guitars, but of course that is my subjective opinion and I make no claims as to why they should.

Peace,
Gordon in Austin

 

[danw]

I agree about releasing the hounds. Nobody wants to enter into a debate on how wood influences sound because there are a billion different opinions on the subject. The reason there's not a lot of hard data is because every piece of wood is different from every other piece of wood. But here's my speculation on the subject.

Even if it doesn't directly influence the action of the pickups, I would think the vibration of the wood would have an impact on the vibration of the strings. I can't see why the vibration would just go one way, from the strings to the wood; there has to be some feedback loop between the two. When you pluck a string, there are all kinds of frequencies going on, not just the principal one, and the way I understand it, different woods are going to reinforce some of those frequencies and mute some of the others. Mostly what you hear when the instrument is played acoustically comes from the wood, sure, but I bet some of that information also gets fed back into the strings. If you put the same pickups on a two guitars, identical except one having a solid maple body and the other having a solid poplar body, I suspect you'd hear a difference. I can't say for sure, though.

One big difference, though -- on a hollow body, that top is going to be vibrating a _lot_ more than on a solid-body, so I would suspect the influence of the wood would be much greater in that case.

 

[Thurgood]

I offer my .02; I have two gtr's (teles) one with an alder body, the other solid maple. Both have the same Pu's. They sound totally different to my ears. I frequently use the same amp and settings to record and you can hear the diff. As to the science behind it I am not qualified to say but it seems to me that the body material makes a difference. Just a thought. TO GGunn: hope to get to Austin soon. Be well all.

 

[muttley600]

I've sat out of this one so far for a few reasons. One, I'm on holiday and these type of open threads always end in a bunch of crap flying at you. Two, I've explained the physics and the practical side of acoustics regarding how tonewood effects the sound of a guitar, both solid body, archtop and acoustic on numerous occasions here. Do a search and you'll find the info. Three, despite having thirty years of experience building archtops, flat tops and solid bodies, and teaching acoustics to graduate level I still get told I don't know shit by people who insist that their "opinion" is correct despite proof to the contrary when they have barely a handful of years learning to play the things. Four, The question is always stated in such a manner as to include vast overstatements and promote misinformation. Five, sometimes I just can't be arsed.

Gunn, the reason these threads often end in acrimony is because as you once put it. The people who think they know everything piss off the people here that do!!

I'll start by debunking a few of the comments made here. You can take em or leave them I am not about to argue about it. What I often do here is not let rubbish pass as fact. The internet is full of that.

Question for those in the know...

I've always been of the belief that the tone and sustain qualities of a struck (plucked) string were influenced primarily by the type of pup and the density of the platform (or body of the guitar) in which the pup is installed or imbedded.

It's far more complex than that but specifically the density of the wood is not the controlling factor it is the stiffness to weight ratio or elasticity that is the most important material property.

A hollow bodied Jazz guitar will not have the sustain properties of a solid body because the lack of solidity in the body will absorb the vibrations of the struck string and cause the note to decay faster than a solid body (think Les Paul) - correct?

K.

Simply not true at all. You need to understand the manner in which the energy in the string is converted into sound waves or lost to understand the relationship between amplitude (volume), decay (sustain) and timbre (tone). I have written quite a bit about it here in the past. The relationship between these three things is crucial and understanding how the sound is produced is the key to your question. Do an advanced search on terms like tonewood, string vibration, string energy and type in my username you'll find quite a bit on the subject.

If this is indeed the case, what exactly does the quality of the wood used in the construction of the instrument and/or whether or not the sound board is laminated (Eg. Gibson 175) or solid (Eg. Höfner New President) have to do with the tonal quality of the guitar when it is used outside a purely acoustic situation - which is most of the time? In other words, does the quality of the wood play a role in the warmth/quality of the tones possible - or are these purely variables of the amp and pick-ups? I say its all down to the pups and amp - but then I don't know shit about this kind of stuff.

No offense but your right about one thing. Yes the quality and type of wood have a huge effect on the tone or timbre, everything you have on the guitar has some effect to a greater or lesser degree. Tonewood is a biggie.

makes sense (what you're saying). i haven't seen (generally) any snobbery about electric archtops being laminated. expensive gretsches are lams, they invented the process (for archtops) or so I read.

on the other hand, maybe the type of wood affects the sustain in just such a way as to make a difference.

there's a reason why les pauls are made of mahogany and teles/strats are usually made of alder or ash. it matters even on solid bodies.

maybe some people can hear the diff. i guarantee that not everybody can, though.

Gretsch didn't invent laminated archtops they have been around for many many years. Acoustically they are less responsive less versatile and these days less regarded on archtops than a solid spruce top. The type of wood does effect the sustain and the tone of any instrument. It's the material properties f the timber and also the fittings that describe the wave form in the string and the harmonic overtones that it contains. I would suggest that nearly everyone who plays the guitar to a reasonable standard could tell an archtop from a LP. Can you explain this for me please. I don't quite know what you mean by this?

there's a reason why les pauls are made of mahogany and teles/strats are usually made of alder or ash. it matters even on solid bodies.

Not having a go just after clarification.

The quality of the wood is very important in solid body guitars, some are really good like mahogany or Walnut some are not so good acoustically like alder or basswood but all provide a great material for electric guitars.

Wood is the most important quailty for building sustain in an electric guitar barring a sustainer pickup.

Hollow body guitars the wood is important as is the quality of the open space inside, the freeer the air moves about inside the better. Lamination makes the sound inside refract around even more thus being better.

In short two guitars created exactly equal except that one is solid and the other is hollow would have very little difference in sustain with a slight advantage to the single medium solid body.

Sorry guy's this is just rubbish. Ignore it. Especially the bit I've highlighted.

Agreed.

But the air bouncing around unimpeded in the body of a hollow body cannot
influence the signal generated by a magnetic pup sending a signal into the amp - or can it?

K.

Yes it can and it does. The enclosure on any hollow body guitar has a definite and proven effect on the tone both acoustically and as the string vibration is amplified. Everything that effects the strings vibration effects the resulting tone. Again the size of the enclosure and the size type and position of the openings also has a big influence.. A lot of musical acoustics has focused on just that in the past.

There is hard data on this stuff by the way. The main problem is that the subject is a very complex one and to get a full understanding of what goes on you have to analyse the physics and mechanics of the guitar and then take it in small steps.

I'm more than happy to deal with specific questions but so far this thread has dealt only in sweeping and often incorrect assumptions and opinions.

Thats all for now.

 

[danw]

There is hard data on this stuff by the way. The main problem is that the subject is a very complex one and to get a full understanding of what goes on you have to analyse the physics and mechanics of the guitar and then take it in small steps.

Fair enough. I'd be interested in reading up on the subject; could you recommend a good starting reference?

 

[K Road]

I agree about releasing the hounds. Nobody wants to enter into a debate on how wood influences sound because there are a billion different opinions on the subject. The reason there's not a lot of hard data is because every piece of wood is different from every other piece of wood. But here's my speculation on the subject.

Even if it doesn't directly influence the action of the pickups, I would think the vibration of the wood would have an impact on the vibration of the strings. I can't see why the vibration would just go one way, from the strings to the wood; there has to be some feedback loop between the two. When you pluck a string, there are all kinds of frequencies going on, not just the principal one, and the way I understand it, different woods are going to reinforce some of those frequencies and mute some of the others. Mostly what you hear when the instrument is played acoustically comes from the wood, sure, but I bet some of that information also gets fed back into the strings. If you put the same pickups on a two guitars, identical except one having a solid maple body and the other having a solid poplar body, I suspect you'd hear a difference. I can't say for sure, though.

One big difference, though -- on a hollow body, that top is going to be vibrating a _lot_ more than on a solid-body, so I would suspect the influence of the wood would be much greater in that case.

Thank you.

If I read you correctly, this would then mean that guitar tone, to the extent that it is influenced by the body of the guitar, is variable upon the thickness of the soundboard (laminated or solid, and/or type of wood) only in so far as it impacts on the strength of the electro-magentic signal generated by the pup, which in turn is fed into the amp?

In which case we are back to my original contention.

The reason I ask, is to cut through a lot of superferlous bullshit fed to us by major league guitar manufacturers who harp on to us about "triple AAA spruce" tops in jazz guitars, with triple $$$ price tags to match. Once you plug it in, it seems to me the size of the hollow-body and the cut/quality of the wood doesn't add up to a piece of shit tone-wise once you start dailing the damn sucker in on your amp. I have gotten GREAT jazz tones from the humble old Paul; a VERY cheap and cheerful guitar compared to big league jazz boxes.

Maybe I'm missing the point. But what the fuck. I'd appreciate your feed back.

K.

 

[ashley_B_Soton]

Agreed.

But the air bouncing around unimpeded in the body of a hollow body cannot
influence the signal generated by a magnetic pup sending a signal into the amp - or can it?

K.

Yes, otherwise an electric-acoustic guitar would sound like a hollow body when it was played through an amp.

 

[K Road]

Thank you Muttley600. Very informative.

K.

 

[ashley_B_Soton]

Thank you.

If I read you correctly, this would then mean that guitar tone, to the extent that it is influenced by the body of the guitar, is variable upon the thickness of the soundboard (laminated or solid, and/or type of wood) only in so far as it impacts on the strength of the electro-magentic signal generated by the pup, which in turn is fed into the amp?

In which case we are back to my original contention.

The reason I ask, is to cut through a lot of superferlous bullshit fed to us by major league guitar manufacturers who harp on to us about "triple AAA spruce" tops in jazz guitars, with triple $$$ price tags to match. Once you plug it in, it seems to me the size of the hollow-body and the cut/quality of the wood doesn't add up to a piece of shit tone-wise once you start dailing the damn sucker in on your amp. I have gotten GREAT jazz tones from the humble old Paul; a VERY cheap and cheerful guitar compared to big league jazz boxes.

Maybe I'm missing the point. But what the fuck. I'd appreciate your feed back.

K.

Yeah, it does, but different quaility of the same wood makes too little difference to bother about. Think Violins, if a violin was made of plywood it'd sound like a peice of shit next to a stradivarius (or other Mahogany violin).

But as i always said it is what you want you music to sound like, if you like jazz music on a solid body, go for it, i hate the tone from most hollow-bodies anyway. And i do listen to jazz.

 

[danw]

If I read you correctly, this would then mean that guitar tone, to the extent that it is influenced by the body of the guitar, is variable upon the thickness of the soundboard (laminated or solid, and/or type of wood) only in so far as it impacts on the strength of the electro-magentic signal generated by the pup, which in turn is fed into the amp?

...

The reason I ask, is to cut through a lot of superferlous bullshit fed to us by major league guitar manufacturers who harp on to us about "triple AAA spruce" tops in jazz guitars, with triple $$$ price tags to match. Once you plug it in, it seems to me the size of the hollow-body and the cut/quality of the wood doesn't add up to a piece of shit tone-wise once you start dailing the damn sucker in on your amp. I have gotten GREAT jazz tones from the humble old Paul; a VERY cheap and cheerful guitar compared to big league jazz boxes.

Not so much just the strength of the signal, but the other qualities that are harder to quantify. Timbre and tone and so forth. It's not like you're just getting a straight sine wave out of the pickup. Even at the same thickness, different woods are going to sound different. Try two acoustics, one with a cedar soundboard and one with spruce. I bet you hear the difference. If you put pickups in the soundholes, the difference in the amped sound would probably be smaller, but I bet there'd be a difference. Sure, the amp and the pickups will definitely affect the tone in a huge way. My point is that everything that affects the acoustic sound will probably also affect the amped sound, even if the effect is less pronounced through the amp.

Unfortunately, a AAA top may very well be a better top. I hate it too, because I don't have the money to throw at them. Some of it is for looks -- I've read on the Stew-mac site that the lower-grade tops can be made into great-sounding guitars -- but I mean the lowest grade among luthier-grade, solid tops. If you want bear-claw figure, or something of that nature, you're going to pay more because that's a rarer thing to find.

The difference between laminate and solid is structural, though, so I can't help thinking that would have a huge effect on the sound. In a laminate top, you've got 2 or 3 thin layers with grains going in different directions, which are likely pressed into a shape for something like an archtop, so the grain follows the curve in the wood. For a solid spruce archtop, as I understand it, the top is carved from a solid chunk of wood, so the grain's all going in the same direction, so it doesn't follow the curve of the top. In spruce in particular, I've heard that vibrations travel differently along the grain vs perpendicular to it, so grain orientation seems like it would be a major factor in the manner of top vibration, which should affect both sounds, amped and acoustic.

The other thing to remember is just because you can't hear a difference doesn't mean there's not a difference. I doubt I could hear the difference between a bottom-line carved spruce top and a AAA carved spruced top. But I also couldn't hear the difference between a tape player and a cd player until I had actually owned a cd player for awhile, after which it was glaring. These are things you grow into slowly, I think. For now, if you're happy with a cheap guitar, you should play a cheap guitar. I am, and I do.

 

[ggunn]

The other thing to remember is just because you can't hear a difference doesn't mean there's not a difference.

True enough, but of course the flip side of this is just because you hear a difference doesn't mean there is a difference. Subjectivity of hearing and all.

 

[muttley600]

Fair enough. I'd be interested in reading up on the subject; could you recommend a good starting reference?

There is heaps of research done on musical acoustics of all sorts. I've been involved in quite a bit of it myself over the years. Not so much now as I'm drifting away from academia and spending nearly all my time making.

The start point for much of the research began with Carleen Hutchins and the Catgut acoustical society (CAS). She analysed the way in which sound propogates around the violin and how certain properties of the materials we use are influential on the resulting sound. Cas have subsequently sponsored or been central to mountains of research on the subject. You can find their website here.

While most of the research CAS has done is concerned with the violin family the principles of the vibrating string, the properties of the soundboard and enclosure and the physics behind it all apply to all stringed instruments with some specific exceptions between plucked, bowed and hammered stringed instruments.

For a broader look at musical acoustics involving guitars and more there are many sources. A good place to start is the website of the University of New South Wales. Although the information there is often incomplete as it is designed for student support.

Have a browse around and if you have any specific topics you would like to read up on I'd be happy to try and recommend some sources. As I said the subject is huge and no single source can cover it all.

Happy reading and please ask if need explanation of any of the content. I don't dance around pretending or being coy, I'm too long in the tooth for that. When it comes to musical acoustics I know my stuff, and I'm happy to help.

 

[danw]

Fantastic, thanks. More than enough to keep me busy for a long while.

 

[muttley600]

Thank you.

If I read you correctly, this would then mean that guitar tone, to the extent that it is influenced by the body of the guitar, is variable upon the thickness of the soundboard (laminated or solid, and/or type of wood) only in so far as it impacts on the strength of the electro-magentic signal generated by the pup, which in turn is fed into the amp?

In which case we are back to my original contention.

The reason I ask, is to cut through a lot of superferlous bullshit fed to us by major league guitar manufacturers who harp on to us about "triple AAA spruce" tops in jazz guitars, with triple $$$ price tags to match. Once you plug it in, it seems to me the size of the hollow-body and the cut/quality of the wood doesn't add up to a piece of shit tone-wise once you start dailing the damn sucker in on your amp. I have gotten GREAT jazz tones from the humble old Paul; a VERY cheap and cheerful guitar compared to big league jazz boxes.

Maybe I'm missing the point. But what the fuck. I'd appreciate your feed back.

K.

No, in shorthand without getting too technical about it. Generally speaking a decent solid wood spruce top will out perform a laminated or lesser quality top for some simple reasons. I'll deal with it for now from a purely plugged in perspective. It matters less plugged in simply because you are introducing more things into the chain so to speak.

First understand that what a pickup does is detect complex vibrations in a moving string and convert them into complex electrical signals. That bit is well understood. If the string was vibrating perfectly without any influence from it's own material properties or without influence from the body or points at which the string is fixed you would have a perfect sine wave and a very boring tone. In reality what happens is that the vibration of the string has all sorts of "interference" going on.

The energy in the string behaves as follows. You pluck a string and a finite amount of energy is put into the string. Now if the energy stayed in the string then the wave would last for ever. It doesn't, energy is lost from the string in a variety of ways. The important ones to us are, via the bridge as energy passes into the body, via sound to the air and via internal friction or impedance.

As the string vibrates and energy is sent into the body of the instrument some of it is reflected back along the string to continue the cycle until all the energy is lost. The reflected energy differs from the energy that left the string in that it has been "coloured" by the properties of the body material, bridge material, whatever. What is reflected back has all sorts of harmonic properties that are unique in every case. They can be analysed as they are strongest at the higher partials or harmonic series. In this way the tone of a given strings vibration is dependant on the manner in which it loses energy and the colouring of the materials to which it is fixed. If it wasn't the case all guitars would sound the same and they would all produce a perfect sine wave. They don't.

The pickup now detects the movement of that string that has been influenced in the way described above and translates that information to an electrical signal that is unique. If this didn't happen all instruments and pickups would sound the same. They don't..

The issue of why spruce is better than plywood is both objective and subjective. Spruce is the perfect timber for acoustic instruments because of it's light weight and high stiffness. Hundreds of years have proved this and the science bears it out. It is also better, and this is the subjective bit, for archtops because of the way the energy in the string is influenced as described above. Spruce is just acoustically superior to ply. It behaves better in terms of dynamic range and at a wider range of frequencies and amplitudes. Put simply it allows the player to "pull" more "sound from the instrument. Thats why it is sought after by makers and professionals players.

Plywood is popular with bigger makers because it is easier to mass produce and cheaper. Nothing wrong with ply archtops at all but they are what they are.