Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Effect of Age On Solid Timbers


capmaster

Recommended Posts

Sometimes there's talk about how age affects tone of solid-body guitars. Discussions go around what parts possibly are responsible for the result. Here's what I observed on lots of instruments through many years.

 

It seem to be sapwood timbers that change considerably with time. This applies to flatsawn and quartersawn sapwoods as well.

 

In contrary, I never observed any significant effect of age on guitars made of heartwood timbers only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Experiences comprising lots of instruments I bought new and still own say that. The ageing process of my eldest instruments made all or mainly of sapwood, an Ibanez guitar and bass each, virtually came to an end in the 1990's.

 

At the moment, here are more quite young instruments than I want to admit undergoing changes - including L6Ses, an SG with maple body, LPs, EBs, Fender Strats, Teles, a '65 Mustang Reissue Bass, and then there are those SG guitars and basses that stay all the same...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing it's more with a fine acoustic instrument than a solid body electric.

Electric guitars may also change with time due to alterations in woods.

 

Lots of guitars undergo significant changes for several years. Within a few weeks a guitar's reaction to string attack may vary. Striking mannerisms may appear surprisingly, often at certain notes or specific overtones only, and disappear within a similarly short period.

 

You can't be sure what to expect when not playing a specific guitar for a while and picking her up again. Though using strings of same make and staying with the setup, everything seems to be subject to modification by itself. Remarkably the instrument is rather likely to be in tune than to feel and play the same.

 

In the long run the transients grow faster, the entire sound smoother and more consistent across frets and strings. Once spritely, springy and overly tending to string buzz when brand-new, the instrument seems to settle in a good way. Over the years it becomes handier and more conveniently playable.

 

That's at least what my experiences say about instruments made all or partly of maple, alder, ash, and basswood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The topic causes me to reflect on the future of my Telecaster Modern Player Plus;

It's crafted from pine.

 

My experience with southern pines leads me to believe that there must be some sap in there just dying to ooze out, no matter how much the guitar blanks were aged, cured, or baked.

 

modernplayerteleplushoney%20(4)567.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes there's talk about how age affects tone of solid-body guitars...

I don't buy into the idea that the tone of a solid-body guitar changes enough to be noticed.

Furthermore have you spotted how all the claims for such aging always say that the tone improves and never once worsens? Why is that, do you think?

 

Lastly, as has been mentioned ad nauseam, when the landmark 'tone' albums featuring all those original '58-'60 'bursts were recorded (Clapton, Green, Bloomfield etc.) not one of the guitars was more that 10 years old. My quartet of LPs are now 21, 23, 23 and 25 years old so should they all sound better now than the 5/6-year-old 'Beano' LP did in '65?

My #1 guitar for 24 years was a pre-CBS Strat and as far as I'm concerned it sounded just as good through the first year I had it as it did through the last.

 

As far as solid-body electrics go 'Vintage Wood' is a Myth. IMHO, of course.

 

Pip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The topic causes me to reflect on the future of my Telecaster Modern Player Plus;

It's crafted from pine.

 

My experience with southern pines leads me to believe that there must be some sap in there just dying to ooze out, no matter how much the guitar blanks were aged, cured, or baked.

 

modernplayerteleplushoney%20(4)567.jpg

 

I really can imagine that this tiber, used on an instrument can become a real pine in the a$$!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the change in tone be attribuated to the deterioration of some of the electronic componets?

At least in some cases?

I've read some sources state that the p'up magnets' readings change (weaken) as they age but this was rubbished by none other than the CEO of the leading magnet manufacturer in the USA.

 

Pip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read some sources state that the p'up magnets' readings change (weaken) as they age but this was rubbished by none other than the CEO of the leading magnet manufacturer in the USA.

 

Pip.

 

Yeah, I was thinking more about capacitors and maybe the pot's.

I remember some pics that Searcy posted showing readings of P-90´s that clearly proved wrong the weak-magnet theory.

Well at least I think it was Searcy and some P-90´s, but I could be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the change in tone be attribuated to the deterioration of some of the electronic componets?

At least in some cases?

 

 

Yeah, I was thinking more about capacitors and maybe the pot's.

I remember some pics that Searcy posted showing readings of P-90´s that clearly proved wrong the weak-magnet theory.

Well at least I think it was Searcy and some P-90´s, but I could be wrong.

Yea, Searcy did one like that.

 

As for electrical components, I used to be an "audiophile" with lots of stereo equipment, and did a lot of experimenting and tweaking and such, and definitely for sure, electrical components change and "break in", but it's for the better, not deterioration.

 

Basically, anything that passes electricity that we LISTEN to or may judge by the quality of the sound improves once a signal is passed through it for a break in period.

 

I'll give an example: for simple RCA cables, if they are new, it takes 8-24 hours (usually 8) until it sounds it's best. Once it reaches that point, it doesn't improve, BUT if it sits for weeks or months or years, takes about an hour or so to do the same. Components such as CD players or pre-amps and such, it usually takes about the same, but most lean toward taking 24 hours than 8.

 

The effect is both definite and drastic. It's pretty easy to judge something that sounds "better" when it's something just being listened to and compared, rather than an instrument being played. The effect is so drastic that even a 900 dollar set of pure silver and copper fairy dust infused cables will not sound all that much better than a 10 dollar set when first plugged in and new, but will change that drastically and quickly after being used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I understand it...

 

The 'sapwood' is the layer of wood up through which passes all the water and nutrients from the ground to 'feed' the tree as opposed to the 'heartwood' which has since finished that service.

The heartwood is the central core of the tree and the sapwood is the newer growth which forms yearly around the heartwood - hence the annular rings.

As the tree grows the sapwood changes to become heartwood itself.

 

Pip.

 

EDIT :

 

lboaklog_zpswt5f2ixv.jpg[]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine a solid timber guitar will alter much once the finish is applied. Different for an acoustic because the inside of the guitar isn't finished. I know the inside of the semi acoustics aren't finished, but there basically plywood with the exception of the centre block.

 

 

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I understand it...

 

The 'sapwood' is the layer of wood up through which passes all the water and nutrients from the ground to 'feed' the tree as opposed to the 'heartwood' which has since finished that service.

The heartwood is the central core of the tree and the sapwood is the newer growth which forms yearly around the heartwood - hence the annular rings.

As the tree grows the sapwood changes to become heartwood itself.

 

Pip.

 

EDIT :

 

lboaklog_zpswt5f2ixv.jpg[]

 

 

How would one know if their guitar is made from sapwood or heartwood?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy into the idea that the tone of a solid-body guitar changes enough to be noticed.

Furthermore have you spotted how all the claims for such aging always say that the tone improves and never once worsens? Why is that, do you think?

 

Lastly, as has been mentioned ad nauseam, when the landmark 'tone' albums featuring all those original '58-'60 'bursts were recorded (Clapton, Green, Bloomfield etc.) not one of the guitars was more that 10 years old. My quartet of LPs are now 21, 23, 23 and 25 years old so should they all sound better now than the 5/6-year-old 'Beano' LP did in '65?

My #1 guitar for 24 years was a pre-CBS Strat and as far as I'm concerned it sounded just as good through the first year I had it as it did through the last.

 

As far as solid-body electrics go 'Vintage Wood' is a Myth. IMHO, of course.

 

Pip.

Two Ibanez instruments I bought new in 1982 respectively 1987 changed so significantly with age I just couldn't ignore that. They were nice from the start and went better with time.

 

As you pointed out some moons ago in a topic about the revered '59 Les Paul tone, there were better and less nice LPs built in 1959, too, and those sounding great today probably also sounded better when new. Perhaps the guitars and basses I'm talking went respectively go better because they were nice ones from the start, too.

 

Changes due to age for sure can be a matter of taste. As for me, I prefer instruments with a consistent behaviour across frets and strings, and all of them went or seem to go more consistent in the long run. Interestingly I loved my quilt-top LP in particular for her conservative odd-order harmonics, but they grew louder with time. She develops towards "typical" LP response so to say.

 

The LP Traditional 2013 of mine goes smoother, too, but she really shocked me last year while on her way. Perhaps you remember this the topic I created about three months ago about my most surprising experience with a guitar ever happened to me: http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/129432-dramatic-temporary-change-of-a-guitars-resonance/

 

 

Could the change in tone be attributed to the deterioration of some of the electronic components?

At least in some cases?

With all the controls cranked up this is extremely unlikely. Furthermore, even the stock "cheap" Asian (Japan-made!) controls of my 1980's Ibanezes read and work still fine.

 

 

Yeah, I was thinking more about capacitors and maybe the pot's.

I remember some pics that Searcy posted showing readings of P-90´s that clearly proved wrong the weak-magnet theory.

Well at least I think it was Searcy and some P-90´s, but I could be wrong.

I think Searcy is right on the magnet topic. Oxygen contained in the wire would be more of a problem basically but I guuess can be ruled out in most cases, too. Dynamic measurements of oxidized pickup coils would reveal distortions through copper(I) oxide and increase of DC resistance through copper(II) oxide, but I didn't find anything published on these points in wound coils.

 

 

But back to solid-bodies, what is a "sapwood" I feel silly asking, but I actually don't know the difference.

 

Then I am going to add another factor I think matters: that's the finish.

Sapwood is the living wood in every tree and the only sort of wood in younger ones. Some tree species form heartwood with time by progressively encasing the cores of trunk and large branches in phenolic resin. Heartwood isn't alive anymore and gives the wood static strength and durability without further consuming nutrition.

 

There are trees where only heartwood is used for instrument building, mostly tropical ones like mahogany, rosewood, ebony, pau ferro, and many others. Maple, alder, ash, or spruce usually don't form heartwood, and in case very old trees do, it is not apt for using as timber for buildong guitars.

 

Most heartwoods have a considerable resistance against biodegradation and can be used untreated, mostly done with fretboards. Sapwoods need protection against decomposition. For instance, raw maple fingerboards would rot with time.

 

 

I can't imagine a solid timber guitar will alter much once the finish is applied. Different for an acoustic because the inside of the guitar isn't finished. I know the inside of the semi acoustics aren't finished, but there basically plywood with the exception of the centre block.

 

 

Ian

My guess is that all the sapwoods of my guitars were kiln-dried. Changes obviously happen under the finish, too, or my guitars wouldn't do or have done it. Perhaps air-dried wood, settled some decades under a roof but otherwise environmental conditions wouldn't change anymore.

 

The guitars of mine consisting of mahogany and rosewood, either heartwoods only, didn't change at all in tone or response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my two cents . . . I'm not quite sure of everyone's definition of "tone", but as far as aged wood goes, I can't help but think that aging does affect the resonance quality of the wood and that this may have some affect on string vibration, harmonic overtone development and sustain, etc. Having owned a Martin 12-string since 1971, I can say that the overall sound of the this guitar has changed and become "richer" over time. Is it possible that this could be evident in solid body electric guitars? Why not? The pickups translate the vibrations of the strings. If string vibrations are affected by the resonant quality of the body wood, maybe it's possible that the origin and quality of the body wood does affect the final sound produced by the strings and pickups.

 

And, yes, if this hypothesis is reasonable, it should be just as reasonable to assume that the finish on the body wood (be it tung oil, shellac, lacquer, polyurethane, no finish, etc.) could contribute to the end sound product. Whether or not the difference in "tone" is discernable to most ears is, I'm sure, open to debate.

 

Just my two cents (adjusted for inflation).

 

[rolleyes]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The happening with my Les Paul Traditional 2013 I already linked in my post #17 (http://forum.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/129432-dramatic-temporary-change-of-a-guitars-resonance/) has not been the only astounding experience of mine with instruments partly or entirely made of sapwood.

 

Here's another basically bewildering event. It's about a MIM Fender Floyd Rose Stratocaster, about two years old then, with alder body, flamed maple top, one-piece maple neck, and, just to mention it, modded from HSS to Noiseless Fender SCN SSS, Graph Tech LB 63 CR Ghost piezo bridge and active Acousti-Phonic circuit, though this doesn't really matter I think.

 

One evening in mid-2015 I noticed to my surprise that the A5th buzzed like hell at the 4th fret meaning C# 3 (C sharp 3, not C number 3). I play this note regularly in an original song of mine written in 1996 and never encountered this trouble before with this or any other guitar.

 

Though often played, the strings were still fine after 22 months, but now I decided to restring the guitar. Anyway, the note buzzed with the new strings, too. It still did the next day, and so I tried a different A5th but kept the previous one (I used it later on another FR Strat, and there was no buzz at all). I had 28 string sets of that brand and gauge in stock. I had taken the eldest one the day before and now chose the A5th of the newest set. I had bought that circa ten months later, and thus it was very likely from a different batch. However, the third A5th again buzzed like crazy, also just at the 4th fret.

 

I checked the frets, but they were perfect. I verified the neck relief, but it was as fine as can be. Not a hair's breadth off. Then I tried the C# at several positions and octaves and found that especially the C# 4 on G3rd at 6th fret buzzed quite heavily, too.

 

About three weeks later the problem was gone as it had come and never appeared again up to now.

 

In my opinion something in the timbers causes such occurrences. Within sapwoods of younger ages lots of more or less volatile substances are in motion, mainly fatty acids, fatty alcohols, glycerol, lecithines and essential oils. In case they react creating typically waxes, fats or resins, water will also be produced. It may either vaporize or promote the reverse reaction of the related chemical equilibrium. Finishes will delay the humidity's volatilisation significantly and thus keep the chemical reactions running back and forth. This may allow for a quite even distribution of the aforementioned less volatile organic components within the wood until finally the water may permeate the finish. No reason to worry, the amount of water resulting from these reactions is just a few percent of the mass compared to all the other components forming much heavier molecules. It wouldn't cause any damage and could easily be absorbed by any poperly treated wood.

 

Finally I think the effects of wood torrefaction and applying gear like Tonerite probably accelerate processes within sapwoods that my guitars undergo with time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...