# Difference between a veneer and a top



## loqtrall (Apr 2, 2014)

I've just been mulling this over for a day or two. I plan on purchasing an Ibanez RG852LW soon, and the guitar has a Black Limba veneer. It's obviously a veneer, it's very, very thin and appears to only cover the front of the guitar. 







The only problem I'm having is, Ibanez (as well as several guitar-selling sites) advertises the guitar as having a Black Limba "top". Now, when I think of a top, the first thing I think of is an Ibanez RGA121, which has an obvious maple top:






Or guitars that have natural "top" binding that makes it obvious there's an actual maple top, like one of Misha's Jackson CS's: 






Is there just no difference between saying a guitar has a top and saying a guitar has a veneer nowadays? Or is it just commonplace to call veneers "tops" or "caps" now? Because PRS most definitely still calls the flamed or quilted maple on their SE series guitars a veneer. But big companies like Ibanez, Jackson, LTD, BC Rich, Dean, etc. advertise veneers as tops, and even charge a substantial amount more for a guitar with a "top" than one without a "top".

I guess I'm just ranting here, but it really bugged me when I saw (the front of) an RG852LW on the Ibanez website, and it was advertised as having a Limba top, and simply has a veneer. Isn't that something that should be clarified on a $1,500 guitar? It may seem like a minuscule problem, but it really bugs me knowing that kids who are just starting to get serious about guitars will have to learn the differences between a top and a veneer because manufacturers are advertising them as the same thing. I mean, one of my students, who has been playing for 4-5 years, told me he didn't even know what a veneer was, and said that the website he ordered his DKMG from said it had a flamed maple top on it.

Eh, I guess I'll just have to get over it.


----------



## VigilSerus (Apr 2, 2014)

Thinking about it more and more kind of makes me mad about it too, heh. It's probably a marketing ploy, for those people (like you said) who don't know the difference, it's better just to generalize for those people.


----------



## leonardo7 (Apr 2, 2014)

This is a great question! Is there a term for a top that is more than just a veneer? 

Ibanez is fully trying to capitalize on that term Black Limba. Its like someone important told them they should make Black Limba guitars, so they put a Black Limba veneer over basswood and are marketing it as a Black Limba guitar. Then they call it a top when its just a veneer. It just comes across as though they are playing games and trying to trick people into thinking they are playing an exotic guitar. And they are doing this on the Prestige stuff. I honestly didnt think they would stoop so low on the Prestige line.

It makes me angry and frustrated when I see a production guitar with specs that include a top but no info regarding that tops thickness, only to find out that its just a veneer.


----------



## loqtrall (Apr 2, 2014)

leonardo7 said:


> It makes me angry and frustrated when I see a production guitar with specs that include a top but no info regarding that tops thickness, only to find out that its just a veneer.



This, Exactly!
All I saw (at first) was the front of the guitar, and the word "Top", and I was sold on it. I was like, "An 8 string prestige RG with a real Black Limba top for $1499? Yes, please." I admit, I got overly excited, as I'm looking for my next guitar purchase, then it was like a punch to the gut when I started looking at the rest of the pictures. For people who know the difference between an actual top and a veneer, being lured in by the advertisement of a "top" only to find out it's a veneer is really disheartening.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Apr 2, 2014)

I can understand using the paper thin quilt veneers on the premium line to make them more appealing for the price but using them on prestige is just a cheap way of trying to make this new line look different.


----------



## UnderTheSign (Apr 2, 2014)

This might be a fun one to ask the Ibanez customer service!
I guess, in some way, a veneer _is_ a top. They 'top' the guitar with a veneer. Not saying I agree with that, but that might be their strategy.


----------



## sandalhat (Apr 2, 2014)

Just to add another possibility that I think has been used - I've heard that PRS SE instruments use a plain maple top with some "normal" or reasonable thickness, with a figured maple veneer over that. That way it's similar construction to a normal maple topped guitar with an added veneer. 

According to Wikipedia, a veneer is usually under 3mm thick, which is a heck of a lot thicker than I considered to be a veneer before looking it up! I don't know where the cutoff should be for guitar building, but I know I would be disappointed if I was looking at a guitar that called a veneer a "top".


----------



## loqtrall (Apr 2, 2014)

I mean, I wouldn't be so upset if it actually had a small, thin top on it, but the "top" (veneer) on that RG852lw looks thinner than some of the picks I use. Yet they still advertise it as a top. I'll be buying the guitar regardless, as I wanted an RG852 and the Limba veneer is more aestheticly pleasing. It'd make the purchase (and the guitar) a whole lot better if it were a real top, though.


----------



## tommychains (Apr 2, 2014)

Always been a gripe with me as well, but I knew the difference quite early. Once I started building, I could definitely we why they use these marketing and manufacturing tactics. REAL maple tops are VERY expensive and depending on the machinery available can be time consuming.

A good rule of thumb to determine if its a top or a veneer more often than not is just looking at the price. If you find yourself saying "a top for that price?"...It's not a real top.


----------



## downburst82 (Apr 2, 2014)

ya thats a big pet peeve for me right there, I have no problem with veneers but don't try to trick people.


----------



## loqtrall (Apr 2, 2014)

It's not even the price, it's just that companies advertise guitars as having tops when they obviously just use veneers. It's not so bad when it comes to super cheap axes, but advertising a veneer as a top on a $1500~ Prestige is just wrong.


----------



## Jake (Apr 2, 2014)

I mean on my S prestige it's obviously a bubinga veneer but the guitar is too thin for a full thickness top. 
It's a nice veneer though




My PRS on the other hand has a thick full flamed maple top, as did my old RGA321


----------



## loqtrall (Apr 2, 2014)

My complaints aren't about identifying a veneer compared to a top, it's that major companies are advertising paper-thin veneers as "tops" when they're not, they're veneers. Specifically on expensive guitars. Dropping $1k+ on a guitar that's advertised to have a top, only to find out later it only has a veneer is pretty messed up in my book. In my experience, this is more or less pointed specifically at the RG852LW and models like it. Not only is it advertised as having a Limba Top, but it's a $1,500 Prestige line RG that has a paper-thin veneer, and is $200 more than it's "no topped" brother, the normal 852. Now, I'm not an expert on exotic woods used for tops, but I highly doubt an almost paper thin piece of Black Limba costs even close to $200. I'm pretty sure a nice guitar-sized Black Limba veneer would probably cost like $20-30, if that.


----------



## Lillub85 (Apr 2, 2014)

loqtrall said:


> My complaints aren't about identifying a veneer compared to a top, it's that major companies are advertising paper-thin veneers as "tops" when they're not, they're veneers. Specifically on expensive guitars. Dropping $1k+ on a guitar that's advertised to have a top, only to find out later it only has a veneer is pretty messed up in my book. In my experience, this is more or less pointed specifically at the RG852LW and models like it. Not only is it advertised as having a Limba Top, but it's a $1,500 Prestige line RG that has a paper-thin veneer, and is $200 more than it's "no topped" brother, the normal 852. Now, I'm not an expert on exotic woods used for tops, but I highly doubt an almost paper thin piece of Black Limba costs even close to $200. I'm pretty sure a nice guitar-sized Black Limba veneer would probably cost like $20-30, if that.



That's business for ya


----------



## Hollowway (Apr 3, 2014)

Yeah, it may not be false advertising in the eyes of the law, but it definitely is deceptive in that they consciously chose the word to put in the ad. So may not illegal, but still wrong. It's the like box of muffin mix I saw as a kid that promised "real imitation blueberries." WTF? What does that even mean? Unfortunatley, you'd have zero luck doing anything about getting them to change the name. The only thing we can do is vote with our wallets and bring awareness to it, like you're doing. 

TL;DR I don think you're ranting at all. It is purposefully deceptive.


----------



## Le Jeff (Apr 3, 2014)

Getting upset over, what are basically, synonyms? I don't know how many blind guitar players are out there, but I'm willing to bet that anybody who can legally drive can see that the top on the Ibanez is wafer thin. Anyways, a veneer on a guitar is a top. Whatever is on top is the top. Veneer or top, they're both tops. Top that?

/bed time


----------



## loqtrall (Apr 3, 2014)

Le Jeff said:


> Getting upset over, what are basically, synonyms? I don't know how many blind guitar players are out there, but I'm willing to bet that anybody who can legally drive can see that the top on the Ibanez is wafer thin. Anyways, a veneer on a guitar is a top. Whatever is on top is the top. Veneer or top, they're both tops. Top that?



There are several different types of tops. They shouldn't call a veneer a "top" just because it's on top of the guitar. They should call it a veneer because that's literally what it is. I'm not saying anyone's blind, and for the third time: This *ISN'T* about whether or not *I, PERSONALLY OR ANYONE ELSE* can determine the difference between a veneer and an actual top. This is all about big guitar manufacturers advertising veneers as tops, like there is no difference between the two. All experienced guitar players I know refer to "Tops" as the same thing, thick pieces of (mostly) figured or exotic wood glued to the front of a guitar body, and refer to "veneers" as close-to paper thin pieces of wood glued to the front of a guitar body.


----------



## Dcm81 (Apr 3, 2014)

I'm currently modding my old Iceman and putting an 8mm piece of Walnut on top......is it a veneer or a top?


----------



## RV350ALSCYTHE (Apr 3, 2014)

In my experience it's always been this way:

Top = a way to describe the physical face of the guitar body, has no bearing on type or thickness of the top

Veneer = thin layer applied for appearance, very floppy/flimsy by itself

Cap = thicker than veneer to the point that it is a solid piece of wood, which has an effect on final tone

I used to get confused when I first started out looking for maple capped LPs because I kept seeing "top" but no description of whether it was a veneer or cap. It seems guitars with a veneer will be described as having a "maple top" for example because describing veneer as a veneer does sound much less appealing.
Very rarely do I see the description "maple cap" but when I do it usually means the guitar has a real piece of wood for a top, and the price always reflects that.


On the topic of the $200 price difference, it also includes the trouble of gluing that veneer to the body and cleaning the routes and edges, then it has to be stained with a greater attention to detail to make the figuring pop. I personally don't think the $200 extra is out of place considering the bit more work it would need for the veneer top. A real 1/4 or thicker cap would cost even more, I'd guess $500 and up.


----------



## loqtrall (Apr 3, 2014)

I'd hate to have to reiterate for a 4th time, but: Again, It's not that I'm confused about whether something has a veneer or an actual top. My whole problem, and reason for creating this thread, is that several big guitar manufacturers advertise quite expensive production model guitars without clarifying that the guitar has a veneer, and instead just says "top". So, when I go shopping for a new guitar, and see an Ibanez RG852LW, just the front of it, and the specs say it has a Black Limba Top: It really sucks when I get excited about a future purchase, and then find out the $1,500 I'm literally about to buy has a paper thin veneer.

What I'm saying is, big manufacturers like that, specifically with their expensive models, should clarify whether the guitar has an actual wood top, or a piece of paper on top of the guitar. It'd really help, especially when it's a newer guitar model (like the 852LW) and the only pictures one can really find on guitar buying sites is the front of the instrument. I mean, I'm still buying the guitar, and regardless of veneer or not, I'm sure it's going to be quite a good instrument. But, this was basically an impulse buy, and I scoured many sites that sold the 852LW and thought, "Man, this is a great guitar for the money". I'm glad I found those pictures on Sweetwater before I just impulsively bought it from another site, because I would have been sorely disappointed seeing it advertised as a "limba top" and then it arrived with a paper thin veneer.

That's the problem.


----------



## rikomaru (Apr 3, 2014)

I typically used the side shot to determine if it's a "top". You see natty binding, likely a top. I guess 1/8" is thick enough for me and if i'm not mistaken, that's what they use on the JCRGs right? Oddly enough, I feel as though 1/4" is the true starting point for tops. lol

I'm not sure why, but i've always thought of caps as veneers placed on convex bodies so the whole thing follows the curves of the instrument instead of a flat bottom you carve, i.e. "tops".

I can't say they're technically wrong, but this whole thing has been going on for a bit, and it's honestly discouraged me from getting many instruments. I mean, if you've thrown such a nice top on there, why cover the edges with synthetic bindings? Instantly suspito me. Haha


----------



## Le Jeff (Apr 3, 2014)

loqtrall said:


> There are several different types of tops. They shouldn't call a veneer a "top" just because it's on top of the guitar. They should call it a veneer because that's literally what it is. I'm not saying anyone's blind, and for the third time: This *ISN'T* about whether or not *I, PERSONALLY OR ANYONE ELSE* can determine the difference between a veneer and an actual top. This is all about big guitar manufacturers advertising veneers as tops, like there is no difference between the two. All experienced guitar players I know refer to "Tops" as the same thing, thick pieces of (mostly) figured or exotic wood glued to the front of a guitar body, and refer to "veneers" as close-to paper thin pieces of wood glued to the front of a guitar body.


 If you care enough to find out why some guitars have different woods glued together in a sort of sandwich arrangement, aren't you going to probably learn about veneers?

I get it, generalizing is annoying and contributes to the detriment of the English language to small degrees. However, this kind of thing happens all the time and making a big deal about any one instance of it, rather than piping up about the phenomenon in general, makes it look like you're just really mad about veneers.

For instance, when I was shopping for a Les Paul Axcess I eventually came to the point of giving up because I was unwilling to buy one sight-unseen and they're kinda expensive for what they are. I ended up buying a Schecter because I could get a C-1 FR Custom for $500 off the bay with some minor issue and basically end up with what I was looking for in the Axcess (sculpted heel; 24.75" scale; Original Floyd). Imagine my surprise to find out a few days after pulling the trigger, and reading some enlightening reviews, that my guitar would actually be arriving with an FR1000 bridge. Made in China. I did some reading and found out what was up with the bridge and decided to not blow a fuse over the deception (which isn't what I'm saying anybody needs to do - just what I happened to do in that circumstance) because everybody with FR1000s at the time seemed happy with them and an OFR would be a direct swap if I wanted one. The point there is, it was advertised on Schecter's website as having an OFR when one of the things that we like about OFRs is that they're made in a Western country - Germany. A veneer is a top in the same way an FR1000 is an OFR.

... generalizing. When I check the "specifications" part of a product page I expect those "specifications" to be _specific_.


----------



## JaeSwift (Apr 3, 2014)

Using woodworkers terms, veneers are up to 2mm, where I would consider ''tops'' to be above that, though I don't think in the official woodworkers book of jargon (lol) the term ''tops'' is listed as specifically referring it to as such; hence why I don't think using the term top is wrong considering that veneer is still wood and it is indeed topping off or on top another piece of wood. 

If they were to use the term tops it'd be nice and fair to disclose the thickness but as long as they don't -have to-, why would you.


----------



## RV350ALSCYTHE (Apr 3, 2014)

loqtrall said:


> I'd hate to have to reiterate for a 4th time, but: Again, It's not that I'm confused about whether something has a veneer or an actual top. My whole problem, and reason for creating this thread, is that several big guitar manufacturers advertise quite expensive production model guitars without clarifying that the guitar has a veneer, and instead just says "top". So, when I go shopping for a new guitar, and see an Ibanez RG852LW, just the front of it, and the specs say it has a Black Limba Top: It really sucks when I get excited about a future purchase, and then find out the $1,500 I'm literally about to buy has a paper thin veneer.
> 
> What I'm saying is, big manufacturers like that, specifically with their expensive models, should clarify whether the guitar has an actual wood top, or a piece of paper on top of the guitar. It'd really help, especially when it's a newer guitar model (like the 852LW) and the only pictures one can really find on guitar buying sites is the front of the instrument. I mean, I'm still buying the guitar, and regardless of veneer or not, I'm sure it's going to be quite a good instrument. But, this was basically an impulse buy, and I scoured many sites that sold the 852LW and thought, "Man, this is a great guitar for the money". I'm glad I found those pictures on Sweetwater before I just impulsively bought it from another site, because I would have been sorely disappointed seeing it advertised as a "limba top" and then it arrived with a paper thin veneer.
> 
> That's the problem.



If you're not confused then what is the point of this thread?
You seem to say you understand the words used in the item description but then say if it weren't for the sweetwater pics you'd have never noticed it wasn't a real top 

All I'm reading is that you're upset that manufacturers don't specifically say veneer or cap and blanket it with the more vague term Top. I agree they should disclose everything about the materials and construction but no one is forcing them legally.

If it is advertised with a Limba Top you're going to get a veneer.
Manufacturer/seller would be proud to advertise a legit cap if it had one, which is a telltale sign that a guitar does not have a real top.
Why clarify that it is a veneer when that will reduce potential sales.
Manufacturers will disclose the facts if you contact them directly, but there is nothing forcing them to disclose everything in a basic spec list used in the item's description.


----------



## loqtrall (Apr 3, 2014)

RV350ALSCYTHE said:


> All I'm reading is that you're upset that manufacturers don't specifically say veneer or cap and blanket it with the more vague term Top. I agree they should disclose everything about the materials and construction but no one is forcing them legally.



This is the exact reason for this thread. This thread wasn't made to inform anyone of anything, or to teach a lesson, or to learn anything. It was just me ranting (as I said I was) that I think it's stupid that big manufacturers don't specify between veneers and real wood caps, tops, whatever you want to call them, specifically on their higher-end models that people would assume have actual tops instead of veneers.

I never said I didn't know what a veneer is, I never said I had a hard time determining whether a guitar had a veneer or an actual top. The whole thing was about my stance one the fact that most big manufacturers advertise higher end guitars with "tops" without specifying that it's a paper thin veneer. The only reason I used my specific situation with the RG852LW is because that's a moderately new model for Ibanez, and there aren't many pictures of the side of the guitar, which for the most part is how most people tell if a guitar has a veneer or an actual wood top. I saw the guitar for the first time, saw the price and the spec sheet, and I wanted it. Now, for a MIJ Prestige model RG that costs $1,500, I was assuming that by "Limba Top" they meant an actual Limba top, not a piece of Limba paper.

And it's not that I'm mad that the guitar actually has a veneer, I've decided to still purchase the guitar. The thing that bugs me is that I would have been pretty upset if I just impulse bought the guitar, thinking it had an actual top, and then when I took it out of the box it just had a veneer. All of which could have been avoided if Ibanez, like PRS, just stated in the specs that it was a veneer and not a solid piece of wood topping the guitar. I'm not saying we need to start a petition to get companies to specify between veneer and cap, I'm not saying Ibanez or any of the other manufacturers are pieces of shit for doing so. All I'm saying is that it bugs that they don't specify on rather expensive guitars whether or not it has a veneer or a cap.

This whole thread is just a matter of my personal opinion. Nothing else.


----------



## VBCheeseGrater (Apr 3, 2014)

RV350ALSCYTHE said:


> ....but there is nothing forcing them to disclose everything in a basic spec list used in the item's description.



Good point - case in point - "Made in...." unless it's USA or Japan, rarely is it ever mentioned on the spec sheet.


----------



## stevexc (Apr 3, 2014)

VBCheeseGrater said:


> Good point - case in point - "Made in...." unless it's USA or Japan, rarely is it ever mentioned on the spec sheet.



I have to give Schecter props for including that on their (new) site, it's nice to be able to see which guitars are made where.


----------



## Alcoholocaust (Apr 3, 2014)

Blackmachine tops are 2mm and i don't see anyone complaining.


----------



## sehnomatic (Apr 3, 2014)

Alcoholocaust said:


> Blackmachine tops are 2mm and i don't see anyone complaining.



Given that the tops are ebony, and the likes of figured koa and figured burl, blackmachine gets a pass. 4-6mm ebony tops tend to be crazy expensive.


----------



## fastmerc (Apr 4, 2014)

Just a thought, but with all the ranting has anyone checked or asked for sure the thickness of this "top", while the pictures seem to make it look like a thin veneer, the back and sides seem to be a solid color. Might the "top" be thicker than it may appear in the pics and the actual thickness line is covered by paint?

I don't know the answer to that question just from those pics.


----------



## JaeSwift (Apr 4, 2014)

sehnomatic said:


> Given that the tops are ebony, and the likes of figured koa and figured burl, blackmachine gets a pass. 4-6mm ebony tops tend to be crazy expensive.



Generally, the figured tops used by Dough (judging from Misha's and Nolly's Blackachines) are thicker than the ebony ones. I agree; it's hard enough to find ebony tops that are large enough for a guitar; let alone to the thickness of an actual top. In my book though, the ebony used on B2's is considered a veneer, simply going by what woodworkers usually state when I talk to them (which in and of itself already is a very varying conversation). 

Nothing wrong with a veneer imo. As long as it isn't one of those horrible photo-tops.


----------



## sehnomatic (Apr 4, 2014)

JaeSwift said:


> photo-tops.



Reminds me of Orville (by gibson). If only they had taken that extra step up to veneers, those would be selling like hotcakes,


----------



## Rev2010 (Apr 5, 2014)

Here's my take. Calling a veneer a top is plain false advertising. Industry standard is a top is typically an eighth of an inch to a quarter of an inch in thickness. That said, veneers aren't a bad thing. Firstly they are extremely eco friendly. They allow many guitars to have amazing looks with minimal impact to the environment because you can get many more cuts/layers from one piece of wood. So rarer woods require less trees to be cut down. Most of the time people get exotic woods are for looks rather than tone, and really do we even know how much an eighth or quarter inch of top wood affects tone? 

So overall veneers are great if it's looks you're after. Obviously if you're spending thousands on a custom you don't want a veneer you want a solid piece of wood like you paid for. But let's not demonize veneers themselves, just the false advertising of companies making guitars seem more exotic than they really are. 


Rev.


----------



## 8STRINGS (Apr 5, 2014)

I can more than understand using veneer when doing an ebony top. Some species of woods should be used in a way that's as least wasteful as possible. 

I don't see Ibanez calling these "tops" as deceptive though. Keep in mind that most of you guys are way more savvy than the average guitar buyer. Some marketing department probably wrote the description.


----------



## tommychains (Apr 6, 2014)

forgot to mention, my build has a flamed maple top and is close to a whole inch thick. now THAT is a top. i guess if you have to squint your eyes to see the thickness from the side, you have an issue. 

That being said, real expensive woods like burls or ebony do get a bit more slack seeing how expensive they can be.


----------



## Daniel Woods (Dec 18, 2020)

Jake said:


> I mean on my S prestige it's obviously a bubinga veneer but the guitar is too thin for a full thickness top.
> It's a nice veneer though
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Daniel Woods (Dec 18, 2020)

Veneer advertised as a top even to the point of saying the top adds high end sparkle blended with the dark tone of the mahogany. Check deans site. The description is right there. Its a great player. Especially for $1199.00 including case. Its got a nice real ebony neck. It came with the 1000 floyd series but ive since upgraded to the "1984" OFR. I said to myself maybe its like an 1/8 of an inch because it has pretty deep bevels all around the body. Turns out its some what of a "top". Its veneer thin up near the floyd route and down in the bevels and gets to about 1/8" every where else. So it does effect the tone a bit. Its brighter than an SG lets say. But still a veneer advertised as a "top"


----------



## Daniel Woods (Dec 18, 2020)

Daniel Woods said:


> View attachment 88017


This pic doesn't show the flame but its a nice one in person or a better pic


----------



## Daniel Woods (Dec 18, 2020)

Daniel Woods said:


> View attachment 88017


----------



## Daniel Woods (Dec 18, 2020)

Here's a better pic of the top. Basically a veneer but about 1/8" above the bevels. Still, to me when i hear flame maple top and they're advertising about the bright tone of the maple, Im sorry but I automatically think 1/4" top like a Les Paul.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Dec 18, 2020)

holy necrobump


----------

