The early Fenders were made out of pine, and they still offer that as a body option in the custom shop. I had a pine G&L bass and it always let my belly know when strings were vibrating and had sustain for days (not that I was looking for that @howard 
).
2 Likes
I definitely have strong preferences regardless of effect on tone, yeah
1 Like
The Squier 50s P has a pine body. For a lot less than the custom shop. I was telling a friend I would gig with my Sire 50s D5 because they are more comfortable, but I would record with the Squier as it sounds better.
I have a vintage Fender angle iron bridge on it, no reason to change.
3 Likes
I have had two instruments made from Carolena, which is basically pine. Both were great, and very light.
2 Likes
You are totally Right.
Agreed 100%. Pride of ownership is a huge factor. Iām sure @AnotherJosh would agree that his $3600 BFR is pretty much sound the same as the $900 Sterling Ray34 HH but feel far different. It makes you play differently. Nice instrument cost more because more people work on it by hand and not machine refining every point of touch.
Iām not a stranger to nice things I donāt ever recommend beginners to buy cheap bass just because he/she is a beginner. Most of us here are not in their 20s, we have play/own other things at high levels if we so choose. Though, the choices of instruments are ridiculous and the learning curve is steep.
2 Likes
I concur, I have another Stingray Special HH that I bought used, and it sounds virtually identical to my BFR Stingray Special. I think with the added cost, you may get hand selected wood, smaller team or individual attention during the manufacturing/assembling process. It doesnāt necessarily make it ābetterā than a regular Stingray, it just means more time and effort were spent in the manufacturing process. Same electronics, strings, bridge and tuners. No pickguard and pale moon ebony knobs were worth spending a few extra dollars, I am sure that has greatly improved its play ability 
1 Like
Iām too lazy to go back through 308 posts. Have we already had @John_E 's stock but brilliant answer which is right in most cases of nuance.
Depends?
2 Likes
From what I was able to gather by sifting through this thread was:
āYes, sometimes, but not all the time.ā
1 Like
Yeah more or less. āAre there differences? Yes. Does it matter? Depends.ā
3 Likes
Point in @terbās favor in this debate 
tl;dr, yes, despite pop science videos trying to debunk it, it turns out the physical composition of the guitar actually does make a difference.
Watch with monitors or phones, you can hear it yourself. The actual timbre is different, itās not just setup shifts.
Rhett also makes the larger point well too - while there is a difference, no one cares and it doesnāt really matter, unless it matters to you
4 Likes
By Pop Science - ok that was too harsh. I donāt mean to harsh on Jim Lill, I really really like what he is doing, but in the end I question his overall methodologies.
One example that stood out for me is in his mic test video where he went to great lengths to test every mic against a baseline. The problem is, he picked the Shure SM-58 as the baseline. The Shure SM-58 does not have a flat response; itās also sensitive in response to where the audio source is in the cardioid.
To his credit, he did report the results as basically āAre any of these mics better than a SM-58ā. Thatās good science.
However, all his mic comparisons are deltas from the SM-58ās response curve, which is not flat, and only for the SM-58 in that specific miking geometry, which can be varied. So the actual question wasnāt really answered, as it is just comparing against a single configuration.
Mic type, positioning and response makes a huge difference. Grab a high quality cab sim and listen to the many different combos they will have with different mics and positions. The difference is very large and easily audible. A Rode in the same position as a SM-58 will not sound the same.
So, in the end, yes mic choice does matter quite a bit after all, despite most of them testing pretty close to the SM-58 in his test.
The same type of methodological scrutiny, basically looking for a categorical fallacy on whatās actually being tested, can likely be applied to his ādoes tonewood matterā video. I havenāt, but largely because I have heard the difference myself in instruments and the ādebateā is over for me - I can hear differences, but much like for Rhett above, they donāt really matter.
Again, I really like what Lill is doing, and massive kudos to him for taking the time and effort to do it. Also for taking the time to question his own methods. He is definitely taking a sound approach to it, and itās great to have someone looking for actual measurable changes.
2 Likes
Iāll watch it later, but once you put it in the band mix Iām guessing it really doesnāt matter?
2 Likes
even soloed it doesnāt
but it is slightly different
2 Likes
To me what is more important than tone wood, is how comfortable an instrument is to you. How much confidence it gives. Cause if that rosewood fretboard makes you more confident as you play than itās worth it.
3 Likes
Oh yeah, big time. Feel is #1. But all of those choices can feel great, so itās not really in the same discussion.
2 Likes
My point is people focus on tone wood, when they should focus on feel. An what makes the comfortable in a bass. Tone wood matters more if the feel is right for you, than it does in tone.
1 Like
Yep.
If you think it matters, it matters.
But where would the internet be without these essential debates??
5 Likes
I agree. 2 guitars of the same neck material would also sound different when compared side by side. It would be wonderful if thatās the way we use our instruments, especially electric guitars. Without any tone processor or Tone bias amps. 
This tone wood topic has been cussed and discussed to death and back, here and everywhere else folks have an opinion and an Internet connection. This horse has been mercilessly flogged and it is dead. It is an ex-equine. 
1 Like