# Your thoughts on exotic fretboard woods



## bostjan (May 31, 2016)

Anybody here have a fretboard made out of anything other than Rosewood, Maple, or Ebony?

If so, what are your thoughts?

I'll start. I have two guitars with Pau Ferro fretboards. I love them. They have a browner look than rosewood, and seem robust and durable to me, although I try not to abuse them. I've had them some years and have not noticed any drastic changes in colour - perhaps losing a little redness over time. The tone, I describe as warmer than Maple or Ebony, but brighter than Rosewood, but take that with a grain of salt if you wish. As far as feel, it's a little slicker than Rosewood, but not as slick as Ebony or finished Maple.

I'm particularly interested in Bloodwood (Satine), Granadillo, and anything that might grow in North America that can be used (certain kinds of Oak? Walnut? IDK) - how does it look and how does it feel and how does it sound?

I've seen Padouk on another guy's guitar once. It looked great and the guitar (Tele HB copy) sounded nice and bright. I've heard, though, that Padouk rapidly loses its colour after it's cut.

Any luthiers who have worked with these woods, I'm also very interested in your observations.


----------



## djohns74 (May 31, 2016)

Let's see, I built a neck with a bloodwood fretboard a while back, though it was for someone else so I had limited playing time on it. Liked the look, thought it worked and felt a lot like ebony actually. 

I've done wenge a couple of times and like the look of it but as it does have a tendency to crack and splinter, I'm not sure that it's a great choice for fretboards in general. With care and the right piece, it should be fine though. 

I've got a purpleheart board at home and for me at least, the color of the stuff when it's not freshly cut isn't super appealing so I probably wouldn't do it again. Super dense wood which makes it a decent choice, though it takes a ton of effort to radius by hand, even more so than ebony, I'd say.

I've got ziricote and padauk boards at home too, as well as a couple of others where I don't even remember the exact species any more, haha. I've made a point of doing a far amount of experimenting in my lumber choices over the last couple of years, but I haven't exactly kept a database of my findings either. 

For myself ultimately, as long as a wood is reasonably dense and stable, a fingerboard is 95% about the look and 5% about the workability. I do not consider sound for even a moment as I don't think fingerboard wood has any noticeable bearing on the sound of an electric guitar. Again, that's just me, not trying to convince anyone else here.

EDIT: Almost forgot about Macassar Ebony, which probably makes my single favorite-looking fingerboard when you get a nice piece. It also has the benefit that it's workability generally seems a lot closer to rosewood than to your typical Gaboon Ebony, for example.


----------



## ThePhilosopher (May 31, 2016)

I have a roasted maple board, but I don't think that's exactly exotic. I had a guitar with a Katalox board with a blend of the sapwood and heartwood that was super nice - though I chose it mostly for aesthetics. I don't know how it is to work though.

I have a guitar with an unfinished Padouk neck that I put together in 2012 and I think it's just as red as when I bought it (the neck). I don't know how that would compare to a fretboard though.


----------



## bostjan (May 31, 2016)

djohns74 said:


> Let's see, I built a neck with a bloodwood fretboard a while back, though it was for someone else so I had limited playing time on it. Liked the look, thought it worked and felt a lot like ebony actually.
> 
> I've done wenge a couple of times and like the look of it but as it does have a tendency to crack and splinter, I'm not sure that it's a great choice for fretboards in general. With care and the right piece, it should be fine though.
> 
> ...



I think I understand, but to be clear, you don't say there's any tonal difference between rosewood and ebony?

Which, then is your personal favourite? Rosewood? I've had maple boards get dinged up and I've managed to put some wear on rosewood boards on bass. As I've said, I tend to be pretty careful, but people also throw .... at shows, and there's nothing much you can do when a flying beer bottle flies out of the dark and hits your fretboard at 80 km/hr.



ThePhilosopher said:


> I have a roasted maple board, but I don't think that's exactly exotic. I had a guitar with a Katalox board with a blend of the sapwood and heartwood that was super nice - though I chose it mostly for aesthetics. I don't know how it is to work though.
> 
> I have a guitar with an unfinished Padouk neck that I put together in 2012 and I think it's just as red as when I bought it (the neck). I don't know how that would compare to a fretboard though.



Please tell me more about Katalox. How did you come across it? How does it look and feel? Do you have any opinion on the tone?


----------



## electriceye (May 31, 2016)

bostjan said:


> I think I understand, but to be clear, you don't say there's any tonal difference between rosewood and ebony?
> 
> Which, then is your personal favourite? Rosewood? I've had maple boards get dinged up and I've managed to put some wear on rosewood boards on bass. As I've said, I tend to be pretty careful, but people also throw .... at shows, and there's nothing much you can do when a flying beer bottle flies out of the dark and hits your fretboard at 80 km/hr.
> 
> ...



I don't think anyone's really been able to clearly identify tonal differences between fretboards. Sort of the same thing with bolt-on vs neck-thru.


----------



## Microtonalist (May 31, 2016)

Padauk will change colour, but it's certainly not anything like an immediate change. It should be red for a few years at least, and even when it turns brown, it's not going to be bad looking.

I have a guitar with a Paduak body, I wouldn't choose it for a fingerboard because of the sound, really midrange heavy to the point of a loss of clarity imo. Sounded appalling with a Nazgul in the bridge. Ymmv of course


I've used Wenge for a fretboard, it's not the easiest thing to use as has already been mentioned. Ziricote is probably harder than ebony and certainly harder to work but I wouldn't hesitate to use it again.

Honduran Rosewood is nice, a bit harder than the usual types and lighter coloured.

Hardest stuff I've ever used has to be African Lignum Vitae (can't remember if it's actually related to the South American variety) it's really boring in appearance but I could barely touch it with the plane-and that's coming from someone who is used to ebony


----------



## djohns74 (May 31, 2016)

bostjan said:


> I think I understand, but to be clear, you don't say there's any tonal difference between rosewood and ebony?


Not from just a fingerboard on an electric guitar, no. To be fair, I have not tried two guitars that are otherwise identical so there's no real science here, but I've never found any evidence that fingerboard lumber would have a noticeable impact on tone. It is absolutely possible that my ears simply can't hear it though. Either way, it doesn't matter to me.



> Which, then is your personal favourite? Rosewood? I've had maple boards get dinged up and I've managed to put some wear on rosewood boards on bass. As I've said, I tend to be pretty careful, but people also throw .... at shows, and there's nothing much you can do when a flying beer bottle flies out of the dark and hits your fretboard at 80 km/hr.


I'd say Macassar Ebony is my favorite overall, though a nice piece of rosewood can be just about as good and generally cheaper. I have no issue with maple, if that's the look I'm going for, though I always put a finish on it as otherwise it will almost certainly get dirty with use.

I could see how some maples might ding more easily than rosewoods or ebonies, though I haven't had an issue with that myself. I've used birdseye and like it for some applications (it can be tricky to inlay into), though I'm more partial to a nice quartersawn piece with its subtle but straight grain pattern.


----------



## ThePhilosopher (May 31, 2016)

bostjan said:


> Please tell me more about Katalox. How did you come across it? How does it look and feel? Do you have any opinion on the tone?



I asked the builder for the specifications for selecting a board and was browsing a lumber site for suitable pieces that I thought would look good. It felt much like maple to me. Here are some photos of the guitar it was on.


----------



## bostjan (May 31, 2016)

ThePhilosopher said:


> I asked the builder for the specifications for selecting a board and was browsing a lumber site for suitable pieces that I thought would look good. It felt much like maple to me. Here are some photos of the guitar it was on.



The only way I can like this twice is to unlike it once, and I can't bring myself to do that. That looks incredible!



djohns74 said:


> Not from just a fingerboard on an electric guitar, no. To be fair, I have not tried two guitars that are otherwise identical so there's no real science here, but I've never found any evidence that fingerboard lumber would have a noticeable impact on tone. It is absolutely possible that my ears simply can't hear it though. Either way, it doesn't matter to me.
> 
> 
> I'd say Macassar Ebony is my favorite overall, though a nice piece of rosewood can be just about as good and generally cheaper. I have no issue with maple, if that's the look I'm going for, though I always put a finish on it as otherwise it will almost certainly get dirty with use.
> ...



Ok, gotcha. I don't want to beat a dead horse or put the worms in the proverbial canopener.

I love maple fretboards. My first electric has a maple board and it's held up pretty well over time, considering the use it's seen. I actually kind of wish, in some ways, it showed a little more wear to make me feel more pro. 

I have a guitar with a Macassar Ebony board. It's my main guitar in my avatar, actually. I love the look and feel and sound of it like nothing else. I don't think it's terribly easy to obtain, though.




Microtonalist said:


> Padauk will change colour, but it's certainly not anything like an immediate change. It should be red for a few years at least, and even when it turns brown, it's not going to be bad looking.
> 
> I have a guitar with a Paduak body, I wouldn't choose it for a fingerboard because of the sound, really midrange heavy to the point of a loss of clarity imo. Sounded appalling with a Nazgul in the bridge. Ymmv of course
> 
> ...



I've never seen photos of old padouk, I've only heard anecdotes. I'd really rather stay away from anything boomy or muddy, though.

I'd also like to stay away from anything that will eat through tools. Unfortunately, I'm thinking anything bright sounding and durable is necessarily going to eat tools also.

Hey, BTW, what's with your screen name? Do you play microtonal guitar? I'll send you a PM...




electriceye said:


> I don't think anyone's really been able to clearly identify tonal differences between fretboards. Sort of the same thing with bolt-on vs neck-thru.



Yeah, I really don't want to open that can of worms.


----------



## Deegatron (May 31, 2016)

I've used Padouk for a neck and it's a subtle change from red to redish brown.. but it happens... over a couple years... I did a repair on a area and had to sand a spot down and refinish... you could CLEARLY see what was new vs old... but it eventually blended back in.... I actually prefer the more subtle look of the aged padouk vs freshly cut... but maybe that's just me...

I've also used Macassar ebony and love it... my #1 favorite fretboard wood... 

Oddly, I've never used rosewood or gabon ebony (cant afford gabon)....

I wouldn't dare comment on the tone of any specific species... I think that's more in the pickups/amp and the wood is more of a subtle effect....


----------



## pondman (May 31, 2016)

Anything highly figured or out of the ordinary is always my choice. 
Picking the right one is make or break on a build IMO.


----------



## Killemall1983 (May 31, 2016)

Ive used pretty much all the standard exotic woods for fretboards. 
Wenge
Pau ferro
Paduak
Zebrawood
Bubinga
Bocote
Ziricote
Chechen
Canary wood
Cocobolo
And a few others i cant remember right now.


----------



## bostjan (May 31, 2016)

Killemall1983 said:


> Ive used pretty much all the standard exotic woods for fretboards.
> Wenge
> Pau ferro
> Paduak
> ...



Never heard of Chechen.

I'd love to hear your thoughts about each of these.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (May 31, 2016)

My favourite fretboard wood is African Blackwood. I have a really nice piece on my Daemoness. Its really tight so it doesn't really pick up any dirt and had barely any build up after several hundred hours of playing. Its also super smooth on your fingers when bending. Tone? No idea. Acoustic players say its great. 






For my newest build I spent ages looking through fretboards trying to pick out something similar to African Blackwood with how it polishes to a really smooth finish so I went with Malysian Blackwood. 








pondman said:


> Anything highly figured or out of the ordinary is always my choice. Picking the right one is make or break on a build IMO.



The black palm fretboard broke a lot!


----------



## Killemall1983 (May 31, 2016)

bostjan said:


> Never heard of Chechen.
> 
> I'd love to hear your thoughts about each of these.


Also known as black poison wood. Ken lawrence uses it on a lot of his explorers. 
All those woods are great fretboard woods. The only thing about the paduak is that it oxidizes quickly and gets really dark red instead of vibrant orange, like it is when first cut. 
Wenge is my favorite out of all of them. Very hard, sands well, very stable, but open grain. 
Bocote looks amazing but is basically a block of oil. Takes forever to radius and clogs sandpaper after 1 swipe. 
Zebrawood is great as well.


----------



## MoonJelly (May 31, 2016)

Katalox is really tight and smooth grain, and hardness is very similar to ebony. It's easy enough to work with sharp tools. It's usually dark brown with a little purple or grey streaking to it. I think it's really beautiful.

Also, take a look at Macacauba. You mentioned you like Pau Ferro, it has a similar color/feel to it. It's more red than Pau Ferro, and also very hard, but not difficult to work.

You can get fretboards in both on LMII and their quality is A+


Some Katalox I recently procured:


----------



## cardinal (May 31, 2016)

Wenge and Pau Ferro are great. Supposedly their stiffness helps reduce deadspots. The guitars and basses I've had with those boards do tend to be pretty even.


----------



## Jaek-Chi (May 31, 2016)

cardinal said:


> Wenge and Pau Ferro are great. Supposedly their stiffness helps reduce deadspots. The guitars and basses I've had with those boards do tend to be pretty even.



Pretty sure Pau Ferro is just a worse type of Rosewood with a fancier name...


----------



## MoonJelly (May 31, 2016)

Jaek-Chi said:


> Pretty sure Pau Ferro is just a worse type of Rosewood with a fancier name...



 less expensive, not worse. More plentiful, plainer at times, but not worse.


----------



## HaMMerHeD (May 31, 2016)

I like katalox. It's hard and pretty and inexpensive.


----------



## Killemall1983 (Jun 1, 2016)

Jaek-Chi said:


> Pretty sure Pau Ferro is just a worse type of Rosewood with a fancier name...


Worse? Not at all. More stable and nicer color. Definitely not worse.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 1, 2016)

Jaek-Chi said:


> Pretty sure Pau Ferro is just a worse type of Rosewood with a fancier name...



Why is that? I've had great luck with that material, personally.


----------



## Lemons (Jun 1, 2016)

Wenge feels awesome as a fingerboard I'm a huge fan of the open grain feel, oh and it looks pretty. Pale Moon Ebony honestly felt and sounded almost exactly the same as every other ebony type I've tried, except slightly more slick.


----------



## marcwormjim (Jun 1, 2016)

Phenolic fingerboards are my favorite. Between a fretless Variax bass and several Steinbergers with different radii (And Parkers/some Washburns with the 2mm carbon "boards"), good synthetic boards have spoiled me.


----------



## odibrom (Jun 1, 2016)

... on a side note, everyone knows that "PAU FERRO" means literally IRON STICK, because it is supposed to be as hard as iron... or as so it was named 500 years ago (give or take) by the Portuguese...


----------



## cardinal (Jun 1, 2016)

Suhr seems to say that Pau Ferro is harder/stiffer than rosewood. I think his website says something to that effect, and I've had a conversation with him on TGP about it.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 1, 2016)

I'm a fan of Pau Ferro. My Oni 7 has a neck and a fretboard both made of it. I also have a Fernandez with a Pau Ferro board. I'm assuming from the talk here that I'm not the only fan of it.



marcwormjim said:


> Phenolic fingerboards are my favorite. Between a fretless Variax bass and several Steinbergers with different radii (And Parkers/some Washburns with the 2mm carbon "boards"), good synthetic boards have spoiled me.



I've played more than a few guitars with phenolic boards. I was impressed, but I still prefer wood to phenolic (which is epoxied paper).

Carbon-fiberglass boards, on the other hand, are spectacular. However, only Parker ever makes them. Washburn and Emerald guitars with carbon-glass boards are manufactured by those companies with Parker's boards premade. This was a sticking point for me ages ago, when Parker made a fretboard for a seven string Emerald guitar, but told me that their machines were too narrow to make seven string fretboards.


----------



## Empryrean (Jun 1, 2016)

my build from high school used a bloodwood fb, it's been holding up great with few string changes and maintenance(since 2011)


----------



## TuffyKohler (Jun 1, 2016)

bostjan said:


> Carbon-fiberglass boards, on the other hand, are spectacular. However, only Parker ever makes them. Washburn and Emerald guitars with carbon-glass boards are manufactured by those companies with Parker's boards premade. This was a sticking point for me ages ago, when Parker made a fretboard for a seven string Emerald guitar, but told me that their machines were too narrow to make seven string fretboards.



Emerald makes all their own stuff now. They stopped using Parker stuff a long time ago. They currently can and will make damn near anything you want.

While I like pau ferro, I'm highly allergic to it. I won't use it ever again.

It does machine well, and looks awesome. My loss.

I've got some nice bloodwood, and some lacewood, and something really stripey that I can't remember the name of right now...


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 2, 2016)

TuffyKohler said:


> I've got some nice bloodwood, and some lacewood, and something really stripey that I can't remember the name of right now...



Zebrano?

Not used it for a fingerboard but I can't see why it wouldn't work


----------



## Killemall1983 (Jun 2, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> Zebrano?
> 
> Not used it for a fingerboard but I can't see why it wouldn't work


Ive used it plenty of times and it is great.


----------



## Andrew May (Jun 2, 2016)

I'm pretty sure that this really all come's down to aesthetics. I assume it's not coincidence that the most popular fingerboards are all tough/stiff woods. I assume originally it was down to the utility of having a tough, stable, hard wearing wood that would hold onto the frets, wear evenly and not warp. I'd say don't worry about the "tone" especially if you're playing in front of crowds that are hurling beer bottles at you. just go for something that looks nice and will last a long time.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 2, 2016)

Andrew May said:


> I'm pretty sure that this really all come's down to aesthetics. I assume it's not coincidence that the most popular fingerboards are all tough/stiff woods. I assume originally it was down to the utility of having a tough, stable, hard wearing wood that would hold onto the frets, wear evenly and not warp. I'd say don't worry about the "tone" especially if you're playing in front of crowds that are hurling beer bottles at you. just go for something that looks nice and will last a long time.



So rosewood? 

I'd love to someday own a guitar with locally sourced woods (local to where I live), but that doesn't seem to be in the cards for me this time around...

So, how do people determine if a wood will make a good fretboard? Pick up a plank and say "this seems stiff enough," and then give it a shot?


----------



## MoonJelly (Jun 2, 2016)

I feel that most hardwoods could do the job. However if you want specific criteria, look at hardness and the Janka scale. Anything with a Janka rating equal or greater than hard maple, I'd trust.

http://www.wood-database.com/wood-articles/differences-between-hard-maple-and-soft-maple/


----------



## Andrew May (Jun 3, 2016)

bostjan said:


> So rosewood?
> 
> I'd love to someday own a guitar with locally sourced woods (local to where I live), but that doesn't seem to be in the cards for me this time around...
> 
> So, how do people determine if a wood will make a good fretboard? Pick up a plank and say "this seems stiff enough," and then give it a shot?



Well, historically I suppose it was trial and error but rosewood/ebony et al were deemed most durable/readily available and provided the best sustain and so a tradition was established. 

But yes, now I think it's a case of "is it durable? is it pretty?" cool, let's build a guitar.


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 4, 2016)

bostjan said:


> So rosewood?
> 
> I'd love to someday own a guitar with locally sourced woods (local to where I live), but that doesn't seem to be in the cards for me this time around...
> 
> So, how do people determine if a wood will make a good fretboard? Pick up a plank and say "this seems stiff enough," and then give it a shot?





Most of this stuff is chance/availability. Maple isn't actually comparable to Rosewood and Ebony, which is why it usually requires a protective finish to stop wear.

Gibson et al used Rosewood because of the existing tradition (the les paul is a really conservative design all told) while Fender, who wasn't bound by tradition used Maple because it was cheap to get and manufacture with.

There are loads of people who want you to believe that tone wood choice is bound by holy golden rules of greatness, but it mostly comes down to circumstance.


Which is not to say that the holy trinity of fingerboard woods aren't good (I love Ebony and can't think of anything which tops it) but that there are many other woods which could be every bit as good. And that includes practically any hardwood, as has been mentioned, from Maple hardness upwards.


Electric guitar fingerboards are thin and the neck has a truss rod, so I wouldn't worry overmuch about stiffness.


----------



## Humbuck (Jun 4, 2016)

The protective finish on a maple board doesn't stop wear...it just keeps the maple from getting dark and dirty looking. The finish itself actually ends up wearing away on an old neck anyhow. A (good quality) maple board with no finish will wear just as long as any rosewood board will.


----------



## demonx (Jun 4, 2016)

Pau Ferro (also know as Bolivian Rosewood or Morado or Bolivian Ironwood) is accepted under the rosewood name as a less desirable alternative, but certainly no replacement for a true Dalbergia (Indian/Brazilian/Indonesian etc). It's not a true Rosewood, belongs more in the Ironwood family. I would not say it is prettier or uglier or more or less stable. It'll come down to the individual pieces. I have Pau Perro in stock that if it didn't have a sticker on it that said "Morado" I'd swear was Indian Rosewood.

I look at a lot of tonewood discussion like this: a luthier will recommend what is available to them. In some parts of the world you can go to your local timber merchant and they'll have boards of Pao Ferro stacked on the shelf, a luthier local to that area will recommend what he can buy easily and will say how awesome it is and how much better it is that other species. If your luthier is in an area where Indian Rosewood is readily available, then he will say that is better. If they use what is local, it's cheaper for them. Their product has more room for profit. I'm a bit dirty about this as I no longer have a local timber merchant for hardwood or exotics, so I have to freight everything in.


----------



## demonx (Jun 4, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> Electric guitar fingerboards are thin and the neck has a truss rod, so I wouldn't worry overmuch about stiffness.



I completely disagree.

The fingerboard is a major structural component of your neck, so choosing the right or wrong one can make or break your instrument. The fact it is so thin means that making the correct choice is even more important as there's less room for error.

if you have a soft fingerboard, it's not going to stop your neck from moving around. It's not going to hold your frets in place. Fingerboards should be quartersawn (although some timbers there are exceptions to this rule) to add to this stability.

There is a very good reason why ebony and rosewood are the bread and butter of fingerboards. They have decades long track record of stability and durability.

You mention truss rod as if it offers strength or support. The truss rod does neither of these. It has one job, which is to offer relief, meaning if your neck pulls up or back, the truss rod is adjusted to counter this. That is its only purpose. If you want to stiffen the neck, then carbon fibre rods do this. Not the truss rod.


----------



## AxeHappy (Jun 5, 2016)

I have a snakewood fretboard and a "waterfall" Bubinga fretboard. 

The snakewood makes Ebony feel like an un-maintained gravel road. Smooth and slick as hell. 

The Waterfall Bubinga fretboard is progressively scalloped from 10 up, so my fingers never touch it, but it sure looks pretty as all hell and I haven't had any maintenance issues with it.


----------



## thedarknightshreds (Jun 5, 2016)

I so want a guitar with a Bois de rose fingerboard. I was going to use it on a build but due to export laws, I doubt that will be happening any time soon..
Bois de Rose, dalbergia maritima from Griffin Exotic Wood


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 5, 2016)

demonx said:


> I completely disagree.
> 
> The fingerboard is a major structural component of your neck, so choosing the right or wrong one can make or break your instrument. The fact it is so thin means that making the correct choice is even more important as there's less room for error.
> 
> ...




Well, I totally understand what you mean, and believe me I really don't want to start an argument. However

the words "truss rod" are based on the idea of strength, as in a building. Martin guitars used to have nonadjustable ones. For strength.

Classical guitars don't traditionally have one. Why? Because the necks are big and strong (including a much thicker fingerboard) relief is dealt with during the build process.
As the trend for thinner and thinner necks increases in the classical guitar market, some makers are starting to put truss rods in. Why? Because they're worried about the strength of the neck.

When replacing the strings on an electric guitar with a much higher guage than it was set up for, a truss rod adjustment may be required, as you mentioned, to keep the proper relief. The truss rod is quite clearly a force of strength helping to hold the strings at this point, otherwise the adjustment would be pointless.

Finally, if what you're saying is true then the old school Ibanez wizard neck doesn't need a truss rod any more than a classical does. Go ahead, be my guest. Make a neck that thin, maple and rosewood, no truss rod or reinforcing. I guarantee you will have problems with "relief" at the very least.



Anyway, you are totally correct that Rosewood and Ebony are great woods, no dispute there  my point was just that there are a great many woods which weren't as readily available/not imported at all that are going to be viable alternatives.

And I do agree that stability is important. Stiffness, too but not a major factor


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 5, 2016)

Humbuck said:


> The protective finish on a maple board doesn't stop wear...it just keeps the maple from getting dark and dirty looking. The finish itself actually ends up wearing away on an old neck anyhow. A (good quality) maple board with no finish will wear just as long as any rosewood board will.



Yeah, you could be right 

Some of the rosewood 'boards I've seen have become more pitted than the other two just because people's nails got caught in the more open grain

However, my point still stands because all the European guitar makers back in the 1800s and before had maple and didn't use it.

Rosewood (ON AVERAGE) is still harder than Maple, and the only reason guitarists/guitar makers compare them as equals is because they happen to have been used for the same component.


----------



## demonx (Jun 5, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> Rosewood (ON AVERAGE) is still harder than Maple, and the only reason guitarists/guitar makers compare them as equals is because they happen to have been used for the same component.



Rosewood's and Ebonies on average is just under twice the hardness of maple.

I tend to steer customers away from maple as a board as it is no-where near as suited as the others, however in my opinion it just scrapes through a meeting minimum requirements, but not optimal. If however they insist, I will use it as I have done many times.

Re: the other persons comment on the clear coat over maple boards, yes, it offers only visual protection (until it wears through) as without it maple turns grey and horrible pretty fast after just standard playing. Darker colours tend not to show the oils etc from general play as much.


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Jun 5, 2016)

CA is a fantastic finish for maple boards, and a hell of a lot more durable than lacquer or polyurethane.


----------



## TuffyKohler (Jun 5, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> Classical guitars don't traditionally have one. Why? Because the necks are big and strong (including a much thicker fingerboard) relief is dealt with during the build process.



The tension on a classical neck with nylon strings is only a fraction of what steel strings put onto a neck.

Simply put, Classicals don't need a truss rod. Unless you want to be able change the relief. Period. They are NOT for strength.

'truss rod' does NOT 'mean' strength...

In engineering, a truss is a structure that "consists of two-force members only, where the members are organized so that the assemblage as a whole behaves as a single object".[1] A "two-force member" is a structural component where force is applied to only two points.

OK, enough of that tangent...

There are enough kinds of wood that are good for fretboards, lots to choose from.

My stripey ferretboard...







I've got these sitting in my shop waiting their turn.

Purpleheart, Bloodwood, Redheart, Paduak, Gonco Alves?, Lacewood, wenge, ebony


----------



## Humbuck (Jun 6, 2016)

Exactly. No neck needs a truss rod for strength...the wood is plenty strong. It is there for the adjustability for action and playability...period.


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 6, 2016)

TuffyKohler said:


> The tension on a classical neck with nylon strings is only a fraction of what steel strings put onto a neck.
> 
> Simply put, Classicals don't need a truss rod. Unless you want to be able change the relief. Period. They are NOT for strength.
> 
> ...




I make classical guitars for a living, you don't need to tell me about those.

I didn't mention string tension because a set of 9s isn't so different to a high tension classical set.


Anyway, you just said it yourself-a classical neck doesn't need a truss rod, because it's strong enough all on its own. And yes, that is in relation to the light string tension as you mentioned.
I have absolutely no idea how you think that supports your argument.

Old school truss rods only adjust one way, against the pull of the strings.......
And yeah, it's about relief, because the neck would pull forward otherwise under the string tension and there would be too much.

Hey, I just thought, you guys must be really scared of fully scalloped 'boards


Back OT those are some really nice 'boards you got there

Any of you neck strength supporters tried the African Lignum Vitae I mentioned?
The piece I had was short grained as hell and it was still stiffer than the equivalent in ebony


----------



## demonx (Jun 6, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> Any of you neck strength supporters tried the African Lignum Vitae I mentioned?



I'll pass.

I'm not in the habit of hunting down timber that are on the endangered species list just to experiment with.

The whole genus is amongst CITES listed timbers.


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 6, 2016)

demonx said:


> I'll pass.
> 
> I'm not in the habit of hunting down timber that are on the endangered species list just to experiment with.
> 
> The whole genus is amongst CITES listed timbers.



I feel ya.
However, iirc African Lignum Vitae isn't the same genus, just a similar wood.
Pretty sure the stuff I bought was even FSC 

Could be wrong about that tho, I do know that it was just being sold perfectly normally and cheaply here in the uk on eBay when I bought it a couple of years ago. I certainly didn't search it out.


It is really ugly though  I got lucky with a buyer who didn't want to go down the ebony route


----------



## demonx (Jun 6, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> I feel ya.
> However, iirc African Lignum Vitae isn't the same genus, just a similar wood.
> Pretty sure the stuff I bought was even FSC
> 
> Could be wrong about that tho, I do know that it was just being sold perfectly normally and cheaply here in the uk on eBay when I bought it a couple of years ago. I certainly didn't search it out.



It's possible then that you bought it before it was added.

For example a few years back I imported some Cocobolo billets, not long after they were added to CITES. It's not that I sought out an endangered species as it wasn't at the time of purchase, but it does mean now that any guitars I build with it I cannot freight out of the country.


----------



## demonx (Jun 6, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> I make classical guitars for a living, you don't need to tell me about those.:



After reading back through the thread I noticed this comment which explains a lot.

I also build guitars for a living, electrics are my bread and butter using hand carving combined with CNC processes, however I also build acoustic guitars using more traditional hand built methods.

One thing I notice between electrics and acoustics is there are vast differences on the structural importance a of the build components and various focus points.

Things that are super important in a acoustic/classical mean very little in a electric and vice versa.

For example, we can talk about the importance or lack of importance of body timbers, yet if I'm arguing electric and you're arguing acoustic, then it's apples and oranges. I'll be saying flat sawn as quarter would be a waste of timber (imagining a 40-45mm thick body) and you'll be getting angry saying it has to be quarter sawn (imagining a 2.5mm top set).

When I'm building an electric neck compared to an acoustic neck, the electric is a much more focal point for importance as it is much longer, in baritones it can be about twice or more the length of an acoustic, tension effects the longer neck much differently than it does on the acoustic, where you can get away with much softer timbers without the elastic effect you'll get on an electric.

So yes, it might also pay to put a link in your sig to your webpage.


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 6, 2016)

demonx said:


> After reading back through the thread I noticed this comment which explains a lot.
> 
> I also build guitars for a living, electrics are my bread and butter using hand carving combined with CNC processes, however I also build acoustic guitars using more traditional hand built methods.
> 
> ...




Absolutely, I make classical mostly but I want to expand my acoustic steel string side of things as well. I've made/set up/modified electrics but that's not my business. I'm actually making a mandolin right now (on commission) so that's cool

I am very well aware of the constructional differences. Previous posts were made in relation to electrics and I continue to stand by what I said.

That excludes the Maple finish bit obviously, I'm only just using the stuff now for the first time (on a fretboard I mean, classical players only really like ebony) so I can't speak from experience. Quite happy to be corrected on that, thanks for being understanding.

I'd never use anything softer than maple, I think maybe some of you guys overreacted to my opinion a little bit. I'm not about to use any pathetic scrap as a fretboard. 



Anyway, it's all good in the end, I mean when I make a guitar, (whatever type it may be) it works. When you make a guitar, it works.

can we all be friends now?


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 7, 2016)

demonx said:


> It's possible then that you bought it before it was added.
> 
> For example a few years back I imported some Cocobolo billets, not long after they were added to CITES. It's not that I sought out an endangered species as it wasn't at the time of purchase, but it does mean now that any guitars I build with it I cannot freight out of the country.



Sucks to hear about your cocobolo man.

I thought I would just clear up the Lignum vitae business.
From a quick Google search it's a different genus to the "real" Lignum vitae from South America, and is apparently still available with an FSC stamp.

Must be one of those old trading name mistakes, a bit like how Port Orford Cedar is really a Cypress


----------



## demonx (Jun 7, 2016)

Microtonalist said:


> Must be one of those old trading name mistakes, a bit like how Port Orford Cedar is really a Cypress



A bit like when I was in a furniture store recently and the owner is telling me how bad of a timber Mahogany is, how it is unreliable and the furniture will fall apart. I said in a polite way that he's misinformed and blah blah blah, after a long winded argument/discussion his info just wasn't adding up and after a few questions I discovered he was referring to Malaysian Mahogany as this is where all the furniture his business was importing came from. With that little bit of very ....ing important info it all made sense to me, Malaysia doesn't have a Mahogany, what they do have and what they call Malaysian Mahogany and what they build all their cheap piece of crap export furniture out of is Meranti, which is not a Mahogany at all.


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Jun 7, 2016)

demonx said:


> ...telling me how bad of a timber Mahogany is, how it is unreliable and the furniture will fall apart...




Them's fightin' words.


----------



## Microtonalist (Jun 8, 2016)

demonx said:


> A bit like when I was in a furniture store recently and the owner is telling me how bad of a timber Mahogany is, how it is unreliable and the furniture will fall apart. I said in a polite way that he's misinformed and blah blah blah, after a long winded argument/discussion his info just wasn't adding up and after a few questions I discovered he was referring to Malaysian Mahogany as this is where all the furniture his business was importing came from. With that little bit of very ....ing important info it all made sense to me, Malaysia doesn't have a Mahogany, what they do have and what they call Malaysian Mahogany and what they build all their cheap piece of crap export furniture out of is Meranti, which is not a Mahogany at all.


----------



## MoonJelly (Jun 8, 2016)

They'll call anything mahogany these days. 
African Mahogany=Khaya (not a mahogany)
Mountain Mahogany=Cercocarpus (more in the ironwood family)
Phillipine/Malaysian Mahogany=Meranti (see above)
Santos Mahogany=Cabreuva (not even related)
Swamp Mahogany=Eucalyptus (not mahogany)
Sapele Mahogany=Sapele...this one, and Khaya, are fairly close relatives but not the same genus (_Swietenia_)
Sipo Mahogany=Utile...same story....

The same thing happens with rosewood. While _most_ of these examples are an excellent substitute/analog for mahogany, meranti is certainly not a prime choice for hardness/stability.

But anyway, on the original topic, you can use _many _species of woods for a fretboard, electric or acoustic, whether a true rosewood/ebony or whatever. There are also many you would choose to avoid.


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Jun 9, 2016)

MoonJelly said:


> They'll call anything mahogany these days.
> African Mahogany=Khaya (not a mahogany)
> Mountain Mahogany=Cercocarpus (more in the ironwood family)
> Phillipine/Malaysian Mahogany=Meranti (see above)
> ...



Swietenia is not the only variety of mahogany. Meliaceae is the mahogany family, and any plant in it can be accurately called mahogany.

Khaya, Sapele, and Sipo (and spanish cedar) are all in the Meliaceae family.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 9, 2016)

Don't forget the "Toona" genus of trees: "Indian Mahogany," "Chinese Mahogany," etc., which yields timber similar to red cedar. It's a hardwood (being that the trees are not evergreen), but can be easily damaged by hard objects (like cedar).

Maybe that's just the issue with "tonewoods" or whatever we call them or don't call them these days. When you say "maple," you aren't being nearly specific enough, yet, when people refer to a timber as "rock maple," colloquially, they may often be mistaken or speaking merely from assumption, and the timber might actually be just anything other than soft maple. Same goes for "rosewood," "mahogany," "ebony," and who knows what else. Because of this, there is a great deal of confusion at the consumer level.


----------

