software

What would be the sonic difference between having an alder body with a veneered ash top as opposed to a swamp ash body in a tele?

Is the venner just for aesthetics? Because I don't think it will have much affect on tone. It will still sound like a alder bodied guitar, I think.

I don't really know if veneered would be the right term because i just saw in harmonycentral.com that some of the reviewers are describing that way. btw, the guitar in question is a yamaha pacifica 311MS. It's like a budget-version of the mike stern sig model that i think is made of ash.

Consensus is that HC's revies are not to be trusted entirely. Without more knowledge on the guitar I'd wait for someone a bit more experienced to inform you.

I do know that it takes a bit of wood to make an impact on tone. Some would even say too thin a venner is actually bad as the glue is having more of an effect than the venner. Of course these people usually quote Ed Roman so you hav to take that opinion with a grain of salt.

ok, thanks. I've been searching the web and it just says ash top with alder back and sides. So i don't know what kind of ash is it.


Originally Posted by edgieWhat would be the sonic difference between having an alder body with a veneered ash top as opposed to a swamp ash body in a tele?

I have three Teles: two with very light swamp ash bodies and one with very light alder. The alder one is brighter. I know that's contrary to what most would expect...but it's true. Lew

in that guitar, the ash top is for looks only ... it'll sound like alder ... in the expensive 'mike stern' model, i seem to recall that they use japanese ash (called sen) which is more dense than swamp ash ... i have a sen tele-clone and like it just fine, but it is not quite as happenin' tone-wise as swamp ash ... doesnt have as cool a grain property either (looks only)

t4d