Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Okay, so this isn't a Rick or a finish question per se, but I think you'd know the answer nonetheless.

I was on a Fender bass forum and I noticed a post by someone saying that they passed on a P-bass with a maple fretboard in favor of a very similar one, with a rosewood fretboard. The reason, he said, was the "warmer" tone of the rosewood fretboard - even though he much preferred the looks of the maple.

I don't think that the fretboard wood would make any discernable difference in the tone, but I leave it up to you, Paul.

Statements like this always leave me wishing that I, too, had hearing like my old border collie, Radar O'Reilly.

I'd welcome comments from anyone who has done a legit A>B test on fretboard woods on identical instruments, and actually heard differences in the results.

In the beginning Fenders were solid Maple necks, later came the Rosewood F.B. in late 1957. Most players say that the Rosewood does gives a warmer tone. I know for certain that Ebony is the densest wood for F.B.s' and it does give a brighter tone. As for Rosewood vs. Maple, IMO it's the strings that make the biggest difference. Now in the late 60's and early 70's when Fender was using a very thick Resin finish on their Ash bodies with Maple necks it does make a difference, more highs while the Rosewood F.B. on an Alder body produced softer sweet tones. Resonance of the wood is the variation here. This what my ear has heard over the years...John you'll have mail soon....

I have never felt the need to conduct a scientific A - B test, but I can attest to the fact my ears can discern a difference.
I have several Fender guitars. Most have Rosewood slab board necks. I have three Fender Stratocasters that have solid maple necks.

I have played Strats since 1965 and I am confident enough to tell you that in my experience that a Strat with a maple neck is more often than not, quite a bit "brighter" in sound than one that has a Rosewood neck installed.

I don't notice any appreciable difference.

I may be splitting hairs here, but I have always found a difference. A finished maple neck has some harmonic content that is eaten by an unfinished rosewood fretboard. My Ricks (both maple and rosewood, finished) have that high end sparkle, or even some percussive "spankiness" that I prefer. To me, the rosewood FB Ricks, unlike just about every other make, don't need more sparkle, chime and spank than their fretboards produce. This is why over time a maple fretboard nut has converted to Ricks (I still am nutso over the 650C fretboard.)

So, some of it may just come down to finish. But in my mind (and ears), maple is a denser wood than rosewood, so it does possess some different tonal qualities- as my acoustic guitars would suggest about the response- probably a flatter response, more treble and a stiffer bass. I actually believe this, but the rest of the guitar can have an enormous impact on tone as well.

I always go for the ability to have a brighter sound: I can always EQ later to tame the treble, but I can't organically add frequency content that was absent from the signal later in the process.

Yeah, Mark, Dale, and Brian. I have heard about the difference, but have never really heard it in a way that really convinced me.

I am absolutely certain that the difference can be seen on a scope. But whether an individual listener can hear it is highly subjective both psychologically and physically, IMO.

I will acknowledge that some of it may be psychological. Some of it stems from their huge difference as box tone woods in acoustic guitars for me, and probably my general visual preference (though Rickenbacker rosewood is highly shagadelic.) My teles were way too different to compare empirically, but almost anybody could have been able to tell which was which even when using their most similar (bridge) pickups.

I think this difference is fairly apparent when playing unamplified. It probably works best through the air, but I have also even noticed a difference when putting an ear on the body of guitars (while playing) I have tried out in shops. The staff thinks I'm kinda weird for it and that's okay with me.

There was a time when I went to Sam Ash to buy a Strat, a few years back. They had two identical brand new sunbust American Standard Strats, one with a maple fretboard, one with a rosewood fretboard. I a/b'd them over and over for a half hour or so and could swear I heard the rosewood one being darker in tone.

Looking back however, I think the tonal difference I noticed was due to me being told that rosewood was darker in tone. I'd also add a set of unrefined ears into the equation.

I'm quite sure that if I had the opportunity to do the same today, I predict that i'd find several different factors (dead strings, pickup height, etc.) that would contribute to tonal difference - but I don't think that fretboard wood would be one of them.

Mark, if there's ever been a truer way of really hearing differences in either acoustics or electrics (right up to plank-bodied Strats or Teles or 660s), it's the ear-to-the body trick. But all variables should be factored in.

If the staff thinks you're kinds weird for doing this, they must be awful young...it's how we useta tune up between songs when the room was too loud, before electronic tuners.

BTW, those shagadelic Rick fretboards are actually bubinga. My '60 Capri has padauk. There are some ebonies out there.

Another BTW: rosewood looks great under a nice coating of conversion varnish, too.

I have a/b'd identical Godin Exit22 guitars, one maple and one rosewood (both unfinished fretboards). I tried with identical amp settings and guitar settings (even the same cable), and attempted to get the the same tone from my fingers as well. I tried but could not notice any discernible difference in tone.

I DID notice quite a difference in playing comfort and feel (not the set ups, both were so close that you could say identical). I found the rosewood to be more comfortable than the maple. The maple board felt stiffer to me. The result was a more consistence tone from my fingers with the rosewood.

Not sure this would be noticeable on finished fretboards though.

...Dean

Some thoughts:

Even with a Maple fretboard, I would think it possible that the sound would vary somewhat comparing a capped vs. un-capped maple board...it may have more to do with construction, YMMV.

I think a maple fretboard looks cool, especially with black markers...pearloid markers would look just fine too IMHO, and it's something I'd like to see on a Rickenbacker someday, with edge-to-edge triangle markers.

Gibson turned out some Les Paul Customs back in the 70's that had Maple boards...I thought they looked cool enough, but it was more than likely a cost-cutting measure on Gibson's part...

Just a thought. If we accept that no two guitars are identical in construction, density of wood, string tension, string tolerance, bridge mass etc. That probably renders performing an A - B test to being virtually meaningless.

All I know for sure is that in order to get my "sound" I have to roll back the tone pots on my Strats that have maple necks, just to cut back on some of the higher frequencies that they somehow produce.

Subjective? Perhaps. But I believe that I notice a difference. I have never subscribed to any industry hype or theories in this regard either.

Is the noticeable difference a result of the subject guitars having maple necks? Who knows for certain?

This is all good, but the original question was about the Bass Guitar which has different tonal qualities verses a Strat or L.P.

I've never owned two of the very same model at the same time to compare, but I've found that pickup placement makes way more difference in tone than the fretboard wood.
The body wood density makes more difference as well, as do strings & pickup distance from the strings.