![]() In a good maple flat-top, the effect of maple can be like having an individual volume slider for the treble, middle, and bass register of the guitar. This explains why it is the go-to wood for archtops: with so much going on harmonically in jazz, the wild overtones of a rosewood guitar would produce the effect of holding the damper pedal down on a grand piano – mud. Plus, the dampening effect of maple enhances note separation and clarity. Now, why in the world would you want a guitar back that does that? Well, put another way, a maple back stays out of the way of the guitar’s vibrations, allowing you to hear more of what the top itself is up to. Where rosewood will tend to propagate and amplify vibration, emphasizing overtones and sustain, maple tends to shut that down fairly quickly. All maple is characterized by relatively low-velocity transmission of vibration, with high internal dampening. So, what’s the difference? Let’s talk about the similarities first. He was using maple for his 5-course Renaissance guitars in the 1600s, and if that doesn’t qualify maple as a traditional tonewood, then I can’t imagine what would.Ĭollings SJ German Spruce/Maple Sunburst Acoustic Yes, the same Stradivari known the world over as the violin maker’s violin maker. Too modern? How about an 1834 Martin with maple back and sides? More than one are known to exist, but even those early American maple guitars seem positively au courant when compared to the maple guitars of Antonio Stradivari. ![]() Gibson’s J-200 springs to mind, but decades before that they were using maple for Nick Lucas Specials and L-C “Century of Progress” models, among others. Often thought of more in the context of archtop backs (or Les Paul tops), maple has been used to great effect on some of the greatest flat-tops in history. How about a wood that’s nearly as common as grass, but with a history of use in guitar building stretching right back to the beginning? I am speaking of maple, a frequently overlooked choice for the tonewood of the backs and sides of fine acoustic guitars. Never fear, conservation-minded traditionalist. This is a good hedge against the day when mahogany and rosewood become truly scarce, but whither tradition? Must I play a Venezuelan beaverwood OM to save the rainforest? Many of these woods are being marketed as close substitutes for one of the “big two,” with similar tonal characteristics and (hopefully) less negative ecological impact. Expanding horizons of taste, combined with a tightening of supply for traditional guitar materials, have led to a virtual explosion in back-and-sides wood choices in the acoustic guitar market. ![]() Acoustic guitar buyers have, for years, been similarly constrained – mahogany or rosewood? Today, the situation is quite different. Sometimes life hands us a binary choice I recall how my heart would sink when the middle school lunch-lady would issue her daily demand, “peas or fruit?” (I suppose a tossed salad would be out of the question, then?).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |