hog vs rosewood- actual empirical data, for once

Discussion in 'Acoustic Instruments' started by feet, Nov 30, 2017.


  1. feet

    feet Supporting Member

    Messages:
    3,173
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
  2. feet

    feet Supporting Member

    Messages:
    3,173
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    been a long time hogger myself and got my first rosewood guitar last year. what was interesting to me was that despite the data right in front of me, i could pretty easily tell who was who, and generally can in recordings, assuming they aren't super ultra produced. the hog just has a kind of sweetness to it.

    they should have done maple, too. i have a few of those and still am clueless about it. i suspect it was omitted because martin was involved. have they ever made a maple backed guitar?

    i wonder if this data will be useful to me for eq'ing when i record and mix.
     
    Beagle1 and Outlaw like this.
  3. apalazzolo

    apalazzolo Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,909
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Yes ...
    They both sounded pretty bad.
     
    Chrome Dinette likes this.
  4. Bluzeboy

    Bluzeboy Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    5,037
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Seems they completely ignore the top wood, thickness, etc not to mention the way the braces are shaved and placed.
     
    snakestretcher, Beagle1 and Outlaw like this.
  5. s2y

    s2y Member

    Messages:
    15,259
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    Location:
    Caught somewhere in time
    I usually hear more of a difference between the D-18 and D-28 type guitars.
     
    Bluzeboy and Outlaw like this.
  6. s2y

    s2y Member

    Messages:
    15,259
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    Location:
    Caught somewhere in time
    I think have all heard worse in terms of overall quality. Something isn't right if there's not much of a difference between these two models.
     
    apalazzolo and Outlaw like this.
  7. GravityJim

    GravityJim Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,689
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    So, if the results of the experiment don't fit your pre-conceptions, there must be something wrong? American "science" in a nutshell.
     
  8. keiths

    keiths Member

    Messages:
    170
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Hey no reason to bring America into this.
     
    GravityJim likes this.
  9. Tone_Terrific

    Tone_Terrific Member

    Messages:
    24,022
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Location:
    Canada-GTA
    The RW sounded slight more nasal (mid hump) to me (twang if you will) is that what we all hear?
    If that is all the diff, neither one presents a good to horrible change.
    Neither will alter the fundamental ability to be heard or have your music be rejected due to bad tone.
    In a genuine recording mix far greater alteration is possible at the desk.
     
  10. s2y

    s2y Member

    Messages:
    15,259
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    Location:
    Caught somewhere in time
    Ok, if we're talking science and statistics, spill your educational background in these subjects.

    The beauty of science is that you can keep testing it. I own mahogany and RW guitars. Claiming to hear a difference should be fairly basic. The guitars in this study sounded virtually identical. How often do 2 acoustic guitars sound identical when there are different specs? While they identified the guitars were Martins, the microphones, positioning of said microphones, and other variables were not identified.
     
    Chris Scott likes this.
  11. zeffbeff

    zeffbeff Member

    Messages:
    1,519
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    That's the point. The data suggests that the different specs don't make a difference.
     
  12. Tone_Terrific

    Tone_Terrific Member

    Messages:
    24,022
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Location:
    Canada-GTA
    Specs or species?
     
  13. GravityJim

    GravityJim Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,689
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    I have long held that, while it’s true that different pieces of wood do sound different, the difference can’t be predicted based only on knowing the species. Two chunks of mahogany may sound just as different from one another as a chunk of mahogany and one of maple might.

    Wood is the processed corpse of an individual living thing. Pretty hard to quantify.
     
  14. apalazzolo

    apalazzolo Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,909
    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Yes ...
    From the article: "Our visualization isn't scientific."
     
  15. Social Exodus

    Social Exodus Lone Wolf Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    4,217
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Location:
    Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Great, now I don't want to touch my acoustic anymore.
     
    Outlaw and GravityJim like this.
  16. GravityJim

    GravityJim Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,689
    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    But I bet you'd eat a hamburger. :D
     
    Social Exodus and Adagietto like this.
  17. Social Exodus

    Social Exodus Lone Wolf Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    4,217
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Location:
    Coeur d'Alene, ID
    Yep, with bacon and everything.
     
    Outlaw and GravityJim like this.
  18. walterw

    walterw Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    32,344
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    haven't bothered to listen yet, but recordings of someone else playing are mostly not all that indicative of much gear-wise.

    a good player will tend to sound like "themselves" no matter what they play through, unconsciously adjusting their attack to make the instrument sound "right" to their ear and thus mostly the same to the audience.

    the player may love one instrument and hate the other, but unless it's a glaring difference (strat to les paul, say) the results will be similar.

    (it may even be that the reason we may love one instrument and hate the other is just that the other is harder for us to coerce into sounding like "us"; we may still manage it as far as the audience is concerned but it'll be harder.)
     
    Tone_Terrific likes this.
  19. TheoDog

    TheoDog Silver Supporting Member

    Messages:
    18,144
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Location:
    Bethany, OK
    What I heard was audio compressed for internet playback 2 guitars.
    I'm not sure about the OP's premier considering the text of the article clearly states, "Our visualization isn't scientific."

    I play a Rosewood cutaway dreadnaught as my main acoustic. I have an auditorium or 00 sized mahogany no cutaway as well. They sound different. Both the Rosewood of the dread and the smaller body of the 'hog lead my to hear them a little "sweeter" or "more intimate and detailed" than a more common Mahogany dread. I play them both differently.

    When it comes to music, and acoustic guitars, I personally don't need much science.
     
  20. guitararmy

    guitararmy Member

    Messages:
    1,806
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Location:
    The Mountain State
    Interesting comparison. I happen to have two Epiphone Masterbilt AJ 500 guitars, one in rosewood and one in mahogany. To my ears, the rosewood has an EQ curve like a smile and the hog one like a frown...
     

Share This Page