Light vs. Heavy Body
- Thread starter Arch
- Start date
Its a not very well kept secret that guitar bodies are priced by the same folks who price female "swim-ware", which is predicated on the "less is more (dollars)" rules of business. For a given volumetric constant, lighter wood is less dense - meaning less wood, more air, per the given size, hence the "less is more" rule applies.
rockskate4x
Hero Member
- Messages
- 1,601
in most cases heavier bodies have better tone, but I think swamp ash is a main exception. This is fitting because it is mostly lightweight swamp ash bodies that get the price bumped
normally i actively look for heavier guitars. which is a little backwards since i'm a huge fan of basswood :dontknow: go figure. anyway, i picked my tele body out of the showcase based on really weight alone (it has a solid color, didn't care about grain). i was really worried about my strat body being too light since it has an f-hole and the neck was purpleheart, which is known to be heavy. worked out just fine though.
Thanks for the replies. I have an Ibanez RG550 20th aniversary model that is heavier than a RG550 LTD model that I owned until recently. The 20th has a noticably better tone. Any more insight appreciated.I wonder why lighter bodies are so much more desireable then. I've never really been all that bothered by slightly heavier guitars really. Interesting...
Arch said:
I think you'll find there's a lot more than weight that separates an anniversary model and a regular model
And personally, I'm not convinced that more weight = more tone, objectively. A lot of it is in your head. Personally I kind of lose confidence in really light weight guitars and can't take them seriously, especially if they're an unergonomic shape like a str*t. Too flimsy. But there certainly is such a thing as too heavy.
[/quote]I think you'll find there's a lot more than weight that separates an anniversary model and a regular model
And personally, I'm not convinced that more weight = more tone, objectively. A lot of it is in your head. Personally I kind of lose confidence in really light weight guitars and can't take them seriously, especially if they're an unergonomic shape like a str*t. Too flimsy. But there certainly is such a thing as too heavy.
[/quote]
Oh yeah... My RG20th is really a quality piece... Nicest guitar I've ever owned.
Agreed, I think some things about tone are real and some of it is definately myth or just plain silly...
And personally, I'm not convinced that more weight = more tone, objectively. A lot of it is in your head. Personally I kind of lose confidence in really light weight guitars and can't take them seriously, especially if they're an unergonomic shape like a str*t. Too flimsy. But there certainly is such a thing as too heavy.
[/quote]
Oh yeah... My RG20th is really a quality piece... Nicest guitar I've ever owned.
Agreed, I think some things about tone are real and some of it is definately myth or just plain silly...
Superlizard
Hero Member
- Messages
- 2,514
No scientific facts to back it up... (disclaimer cough cough), but I'm of the strong opinion that light or heavy doesn't matter.
What matters is what you pair up that light/heavy body with (pickups, bridge, amp, speaker, etc).
"x" bridge might sound great on that light strat body, but sounds like poo on that heavy body, for ex... .
It's all about balancing the bass, mids and highs - and all components of the rig play a part in this.
What matters is what you pair up that light/heavy body with (pickups, bridge, amp, speaker, etc).
"x" bridge might sound great on that light strat body, but sounds like poo on that heavy body, for ex... .
It's all about balancing the bass, mids and highs - and all components of the rig play a part in this.
I think it's kind of analogous to a louder exhaust pipe on your motorcycle (I work in the aftermarket exhaust industry). A lot of people think louder means more power but we call that "psychological horsepower". High performance exhausts that work are usually louder but the guys who just chop them off or core them out usually lose horspower and think it feels more powerful because it's louder.
Still... I'm left wondering if heavier or lighter wood has much of an impact on resonance... Maybe it's just the cut of wood itself?
Still... I'm left wondering if heavier or lighter wood has much of an impact on resonance... Maybe it's just the cut of wood itself?
Some people think a lighter body is more likely to be resonant and airy, acoustic-like a little bit, but a heavy body is more likely to sustain better and have a beefier sound. I dunno, I think there may be some truth to that but some bodies regardless of weight are just "dead" and others are "lively" - my 6 lb warmoth LP body is very lively and the guitar sounds wonderful @ 10 lb total. But I usually play my new tele with a 3.5 lb body and 7 lb total weight, it is just as "lively" and a lot more comfy. The couple of bodies I've come across that were a bit "dead" were a strat and a tele in the high 4-lb range, but I doubt that means very much at all.
fdesalvo
Hero Member
- Messages
- 3,609
I had a 6.XXlb walnut-bodied strat that was extremely bright, harsh, and very dead sounding; it had terrible sustain regardless of pickups. It left me with a bad taste in my mouth for sure. Conversely, my friends 7lb lp sounds great. Tone is about more than just the body wood- the neck is equally important in the equation. I think the walnut guitar didn't work becasue the neck was maple/ebony. Had I gone with a lighter wood, I think the guitar would have been elevated to the mediocre level.
Arch said:
that's like the upside down aircleaner lid back in the days of carburated cars. oh yeah and those silly parts-store chrome air tubes and cone filters for imports. the result is a nice howling sound under the hood that silly kids (and some adults too) swear is the sound of power. someone once told me they drove a there s-10 truck down a road as fast as he could and then flipped the lid and tried again and the truck got to a higher speed. no special timing equipment just looked down at the speedometer and determined that he had more power. anyone who has ever been down a dragstrip knows increments of even 10 or more horsepower don't show in the mph by amounts you can easily spot on an analouge speedo at speed while driving 2-3 times the speed limit and trying not to crash. i told him to put head phones in his ears listening to the same song and repeat the test!
but as far as guitars go weight has an effect, weight, density and rigidity will always affect resonance but more weight might not be what you want. i know weight and density are related but i listed both for a reason. density influences the rate sound moves through a material, weight(mass would be more correct) influences resonant frequency like the weight of a pendulum or thickness of a guitar string. other things like the hardness of the wood and the structure of the grains would also have an affect so i think the species is more important.
light bodies are sometimes more resonant but i'm not sure i'd build a basswood SG. too resonant and there may be losses, ie. no sustain. or just a really annoying boomy kinda sound. i could be wrong but that is what i imagine. i think there would need to be a balance between the body thickness and the density and resonant properties of the material.
O
OzziePete
Guest
I will set aside the tone & sustain argument in my comment & just simply state I prefer a heavier body to a lighter one of the same wood.
If you are building a parts guitar, the weight of the neck is an unknown factor til you get it, and for balance sake, I want the body to weigh a lot more than the neck.
Also with bolt on necks I feel better having a fair bit of dense wood on the body than a lighter air-ier body. To me a light body doesn't feel like it can hold the bridge and the neck on it.
Mostly about personal taste and feel than logic for me, but that's my 2c worth. I just like a nice chunk of wood that weighs a bit. :dontknow:
If you are building a parts guitar, the weight of the neck is an unknown factor til you get it, and for balance sake, I want the body to weigh a lot more than the neck.
Also with bolt on necks I feel better having a fair bit of dense wood on the body than a lighter air-ier body. To me a light body doesn't feel like it can hold the bridge and the neck on it.
Mostly about personal taste and feel than logic for me, but that's my 2c worth. I just like a nice chunk of wood that weighs a bit. :dontknow:
Dan025 said:
There are heavy woods, that are not resonant, and light woods that are not resonant as well. Then again, there are light resonant woods, and heavy resonant woods.
For instance - cypress is heavy, but very soft and not very resonant, while balsa is light and soft, not very resonant. OTOH, spruce is light and lively, while maple can be lively too, but its heavy.
Weight alone, density alone do not tell the whole picture. The structure of the wood, its pores, its fibre, and whats BETWEEN the fibre make a huge difference in how its going to react. For instance, I've milled teak that was so full of minerals or clay, it actually threw sparks from the knives, and dulled them to nothingness in very short order. We had to resort to special grinds and special knife treatment to plane that stuff.
Its much in the woods hardness to weight ratio, that is why i prefer Light weight Alder,Swamp ash Paulownia wood as body wood, it's has the best hardness to weight ratio!
Paulownia usually has all the best tonal qualities of good lightweight Alder and Swamp ash but is even more resonant= acoustically louder!
Paulownia usually has all the best tonal qualities of good lightweight Alder and Swamp ash but is even more resonant= acoustically louder!
Similar threads
