radzikk said:
Are you talking fret boards, because thats about the only place the maple/rosewood question ever comes up. And while there is a slight difference, its one you will only hear in a perfect room recorded A/B. For the most part a good guitar will record well. If it sounds good to your ears to play than there is a way to replicate that in the studio. A lot of guitar players have a pretty enlighting experience the first time they hear an A/B of the same track recorded from the sound-hole vs. a mic placed over their shoulder. There is no such thing as what record's well, it is just a matter of how to record it well.
-k
He is talking acoustic guitars here, not electric. And though they are common on some electric guitars, there are very few acoustic guitars, and no good ones I can think of, which have maple fingerboards. There IS, however, a huge difference between an acoustic with maple back and sides, and rosewood back and sides. Rosewood is of course, by far, the most popular wood for the back and sides of an acoustic, but even there, there is controversy. These days, most acoustics have Indian rosewood back and sides. Back in the days of yore (when men were men, and acoustic guitars where also men), the most common wood was Brazilian rosewood. In 1969, Martin switched from Brazilian to Indian, and people have been complaining ever since. Personally, I don't think the difference is all that significant. It is there, and most people can hear it, but it does not matter much, because that is comparing equal quality pieces of wood. Today, it is nearly impossible to get a piece of Brazilian that I think is worth making a guitar out of. People still do it (hell, I'll still do it if you want to pay the $2000 extra I have to charge you for the wood), but the quality of the Brazilian being used sucks ass. It has gotten better in the last few years as they are cutting up the stumps of trees which have been dead since before the CITES treaty, and making them into guitar sets. It still does not come close to the quality of wood we can get in Brazilian.
So, to the question at hand. What wood is the best for recording? Well, that is an impossible question to answer. It is a factor of the sound you are looking for. I will say this, though: A lot of guys have said that rosewood is better for live, and mahogany is better in the studio. Personally, I just like the sound of mahogany better, as it is a bit brighter, and just a little more pleasant to my ear. And I mean for all situations. Live, studio, in my bedroom, hitting on a girl, wherever. I like the sound of mahogany. I am not at all fond of the sound of the traditional eastern hard rock maple which is, by far, the most common maple used for backs and sides. It is WAY too bright for my tastes, and just sounds brittle most of the time. That being said, I love the old Guild twelve-strings made with rock maple, so you can never say never. The maple we have been using for a lot of acoustics lately, though, is western big leaf maple, which is a lot less dense than rock maple, and is not nearly as bright. It is, I think, my favorite wood for certain body shapes right now. And we can not forget Koa, either. A blend of the articulation and brightness of mahogany, with some of the depth and richness of rosewood, and even more visual beauty than fancy maple. One of my absolute favorite woods.
But you should also remember that most of the sound of a guitar comes from the top, not the back and sides. The way it has been braced, the wood used, the thickness of the wood. These are all far more important issues than the back and side wood. Then you have body shape, and it's even more important relative, body volume. All of these things make a much bigger difference than the wood used for the back and sides. I have heard builders make comments that the top is anywhere from 75% to 90% of the sound of the guitar, and while I think they are, to some extent, talking out of there asses, they have a valid point. I mean, who knows what "percentage" of the sound comes from where, and how do you measure it? We are not doing something scientific here. But there is no question that the top is the primary producer of sound, and has the biggest effect on the sound of the instrument. If you are finding too much low end in your recordings, a mahogany or maple guitar may help; a guitar with a smaller body will help more.
So what do I like to record the most? All of them. I wouldn't think of asking a bluegrass rhythm player of using anything but a D-28 (rosewood), but then these are some of the guys who love the D-18 for recording (which is a mahogany body). For the backup players for old-time fiddle music, it is going to be mahogany bodied Gibson slope shouldered D's (J-45 or J-50). Most new age guys like there rosewood concert sized guitars, and rockers lean (just a little) towards maple jumbos. They all sound good, you just need to learn which one suits the sound you are after.
Light
"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
