A summary of several different tonewoods

monty

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Hey guys,
I came across this picture while doing some research, and I thought i'd share it with all of you. It was based on guitar's - but I dont see how the tonal properties of the wood would be different for guitar or uke purposes :)

Tone-Graph.jpg
 
Thanks...that's a good start...
Yes - but it's a lot more complicated than that. Rosewood, for example, is a dense wood. It requires more energy to move it than, say mahogany or spruce. So it has a nice frequency range as the graph shows, but is a poor top wood. It would be better as bridge material and as back and side material because it will reflect the sound wave inside better than the softer spruce, which absorbs more.
 
Yes - but it's a lot more complicated than that. Rosewood, for example, is a dense wood. It requires more energy to move it than, say mahogany or spruce. So it has a nice frequency range as the graph shows, but is a poor top wood. It would be better as bridge material and as back and side material because it will reflect the sound wave inside better than the softer spruce, which absorbs more.


A "good start" as in just beginning to get your feet wet. Other factors like construction, thickness, string choice and tuning ( a neglected factor IMO with C tuning sometimes stubbornly misapplied in most sopranos and not a few tenors)...as if body size were somehow irrelevant to the optimization of a particular instrument...to rely on tonewoods? Possible to miss out on the best a particular uke has to offer...by not considering everything.
 
Of course its not everything you'd consider when looking at sound, just thought it was a neat graphical representation :)
Cheers for your thoughts!
 
That chart is from Taylor guitars. The dotted lines indicate the wood's potential once it has opened up.
 
Top Bottom