jannusguy2 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I'm looking at a Collings OM and trying not to duplicate tone wood combinations that I already have in my little collection. Typically, Collings OM2Hs will be spruce/rosewood which I already have in a CS Martin (adi/madrose). I have found one that's spruce/walnut but have never played a guitar with Walnut back/sides. Would like to hear opinions from those who have as regards similarities to other tone woods. Thanks in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 Personal opinion from being around a while: A lot depends on how you play and overall construction, not to mention the guitar top and bracing construction regardless of using walnut. And too, what walnut? How aged, etc., by the maker? "We" can be, I think, overthinking a lot when it comes to "tone," and what we hear as a picker ain't really what somebody 20 feet away from us in front hears anyway. That's why, I guess, I'm kinda the "how does it play" sort of person. Heavy strumming with heavy strings will be handled differently by different guitars, and a very light fingerpicking touch ditto. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bayoubengal1954 Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I have a Halcyon (two man shop out of Vancouver, Canada) Nick Lucas inspired guitar with a Lutz top and walnut back and sides and really love the sound. Of course the Lutz top will have the most impact on the tone and it's always hard to put tone into descriptive words. Having said that, my ears hear that the walnut tone is not quite as lush or rich as rosewood and not quite as snappy as mahogany, but incorporates a mix of the two. For me, I have learned that if I were only allowed one guitar it would definitely have the mahogany b/s. I'm grateful that I am able to branch out and have one with the walnut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I have one Walnut and had another. I don't think I'm a good one to give an opinion. It seems to have to be drastic for me to distinguish the difference. My ears seem to put everything in three tonewoods. Mahogany, Maple and Rosewood. All the others seem to be close to these. For what it's worth, here's a chart from Taylor - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly campbell Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 The only one I have that is walnut B/S is the J15 and I really like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slimt Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I owned a J45 walnut.. I found it was not bad... I guess I could explain it as brighter in tone .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted January 2, 2017 Share Posted January 2, 2017 I've often done the same thing: trying to not duplicate tone woods. I've got a walnut J100 and J15. Both are real sweet instruments. Noticeably different from other tone woods? I guess, but it's not like "day and night." Maybe sometimes we hear more of a difference than what is actually there because we're expecting/taught by osmosis from hanging-around guitar forums...lol... to hear a real difference. The older and more grown-up I get, the more I simply like a guitar because it sounds good (no matter what the wood is) and it's easy to play. That's all that really matters to me anymore. I've got a rosewood SJ arriving tomorrow. A real good looker and if it's as playable as my other Gibsons, I'll keep it. If it's not, it'll be gone. I learned it was rosewood after I bought it. I thought it was mahogany (like my J45TV and Hummingbird). Figured if it was as sweet as I'm conditioned to think SJs are, then it will work for me, even though I've already got two hog Gibsons, along with an all mahogany Alvaraz. Didn't really care if it supposedly sounds like a mahogany guitar. Just want something that I'll want and feel I need. I've often bought guitars because "I don't have one like that," "That is really cool," and so on. Bottom line now is that if it's nice and playable and sounds like a good guitar, that's all I really need. I still like the idea of owning different tone woods, simply because they usually look different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorrisrownSal Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 I have played the J15 and liked it. Other than that, I played a Walnut high end custom Taylor at McCabes in LA a few years ago, and it sounded like a piano. It was fantastic. I imagine nearly any wood coming out of that Austin factory sounds great. Well maybe except cherry... Ps... I remember a few years back Martin made a D18 out of sycamore... I was so curious as to its sound. Never got to find out. Never see them anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuestionMark Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 I have a 1936 Epiphone Zenith acoustic archtop with walnut sides and a walnut back. Sounds great! Obviously, based on the age of my guitar, walnut had been around a long time as a guitar wood. QM aka Jazzman Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jannusguy2 Posted January 4, 2017 Author Share Posted January 4, 2017 I'm grateful for the input gentlemen. All the mentions about brightness have thinking this would sound like a Taylor which is not a plus for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bayoubengal1954 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 I'm grateful for the input gentlemen. All the mentions about brightness have thinking this would sound like a Taylor which is not a plus for me. Tone is subjective, but mine doesn't sound "bright like a Taylor" to me. Otherwise I wouldn't own it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Regardless the wood and even construction/shape, I'm utterly convinced that technical style combined with string types are the major governing factors of "tone." Much goes back to Segovia's comment that the guitar is an orchestra in miniature since one might coax so many tonalities from it. While he was talking about nylon strings, I think it's not dissimilar to steel strings. But again, that goes back to the classical guitar concept that one would be using the instrument's potential. Certainly one is talking something rather different strumming to back up fiddlers or a singing group - but even then, what strings, how hard strumming and with what if any "picks," where on the string compared to the bridge, etc., etc. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainpicker Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 A year ago I came upon a Larrivee LS-03WL at a great price and I got it mostly for the wood combination. It's Italian spruce over Peruvian walnut. The LS is the fifteen inch version of the signature Larrivee L, and the size was another plus for consideration. It's a light build too. I'm primarily a mahogany fan but after owning this I don't think I'd do another mahogany and I wish I had more walnut guitars. And, I wish I had European spruce on all of my guitars. Walnut definitely sits between rosewood and mahogany but closer to the 'hog end of the spectrum. So many variables determine tone but this Larrivee of mine is punchy and has a great bottom end with a lot of clarity. If it's built by Collings it probably is a monster guitar. I've played maybe ten Collings and every one was a wonderful instrument. They are powerful and have that more modern sound and awesome playability. I'm sure that the guys in Austin knew what to do with the materials they used. Put some medium Monels on it and I bet it blows you away. Keep us posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jannusguy2 Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 Wound up going with a pre-owned OM2HC in Sitka/EIR. I guess you could say I played it safe. The used one was $1K less than the new walnut one so that was a factor as well. It'll be here next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bayoubengal1954 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Wound up going with a pre-owned OM2HC in sitka/EIR. I guess you could say I played it safe. The used one was $1K less than the new walnut one so that was a factor as well. It'll be here next week. Cool! Let us know when it arrives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuestionMark Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Regardless the wood and even construction/shape, I'm utterly convinced that technical style combined with string types are the major governing factors of "tone." Much goes back to Segovia's comment that the guitar is an orchestra in miniature since one might coax so many tonalities from it. While he was talking about nylon strings, I think it's not dissimilar to steel strings. But again, that goes back to the classical guitar concept that one would be using the instrument's potential. Certainly one is talking something rather different strumming to back up fiddlers or a singing group - but even then, what strings, how hard strumming and with what if any "picks," where on the string compared to the bridge, etc., etc. m Agree with all you said. QM aka Jazzman Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuestionMark Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Double post removed. Oops! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 QM... Yeah... I guess I personally keep getting frustrated by an assumption from so many that there's a holy grail to woods, and this or that sort of construction on acoustics and construction and pups on electrics and AE. I've always seen guitars, even acoustic-only guitars, as a system that includes how one plays as a significant, if not ruling factor. On electrics, frankly if it were as comfortable, my old Guild S100c played in different ways could be great for country, country-rock, pop and even jazz. But I played it differently and used differing settings for the pups and amp. Heaven knows that for several years I was on stage with an old '50s Harmony single pup cutaway archtop with a 24-inch scale, and it worked quite well for what paid some bills. On AE, an inexpensive Epi plugged through an inexpensive board managed to impress some pro music videographers. I don't claim to be that much of a picker, and there's a lot of stuff I never did all that well since my emphasis always was on this or that variation of fingerpicking and being competent at a batch of styles rather than believing I could be marvelous at this or that. I just like too many kinds of music from Bach to '20s and '30s blues and swing and '50s pop and 60s rock and some country. But I'm not convinced that an audience really has a clue on stuff "we" tend to talk about here, and having a capability of presenting music to an audience that they will find pleasing and matching overall expectation of a performance. No matter what the music, I've had for decades a preference for ES-175 sort of physical instrument dimensions - but that's for my personal comfort playing, not because this box or that hit tonal magic. Then again, I'll admit I haven't bought a pure acoustic that wasn't AE since Ovation came out with what amounted to the first real AE option back in the '70s - and for what it's worth, both perform quite well today some 40 years later and with new batteries, I'd take either on a gig tomorrow if my @%#$@% left hand were working better after that stroke a year or so ago. Yeah, I'd prefer to take a coupla more traditional shapes that fit ES-175 sort of dimensions, but... that's for my comfort, not a deep belief in on-stage gigging tone. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.