Not really. Mostly cosmetic/aesthetic IMHO. I much prefer the rosewood fretboard on a strat, but not because of tone per se. Some people swear that rosewood has a warmer tone than maple. Maybe so, but I highly doubt anybody could tell the difference on a recording. I like the look of rosewood on a strat and maple on a tele.

Ryan
The Secret Samurai Website
The Secret Samurai on Facebook

Last edited: Oct 02, 2009 22:27:02

I can tell the difference between Rosewood and Ebony. Ebony has a faster attack.

I don't own any two of the same guitar with both a maple and rosewood neck so I can't judge the two.

Rosewood is a hard wood & maple is soft. I had a strat with a maple neck & hated the maple. Maple almost feels squishy, as if you were squeezing the charmin ( a slight embellishment ), which will make it appropriate to play "wipe out" .

Also, I believe Fender puts a finish or lacquer, whatever, on the maple. I don't like how it feels.

I have a maple fretboard on my 82 strat and rosewood on my 77 les paul, and I find there is a big difference in sound. Maple is brighter and Rosewood is a much smoother jazzier sound. Maple is also much smoother to play than rosewood.

hlieboff59
I have a maple fretboard on my 82 strat and rosewood on my 77 les paul, and I find there is a big difference in sound. Maple is brighter and Rosewood is a much smoother jazzier sound. Maple is also much smoother to play than rosewood.

The neck material, neck construction, and headstock angle are all different on those two guitars, the fretboard material would have less effect than these other things.

Ebony is my fav, rosewood feels to porus and maple feels good to

Maple is much brighter than rosewood

Give me reverb or give me death!
facebook.com/onenightstandards
https://www.youtube.com/scotstandard
scotstandard@yahoo.com

There are many factors that affect the 'tone' (timbre) of a solid bodied electric guitar. While I'd be hesitant to dismiss any of them as irrelevant, many other components would come under my scrutiny before I got to the wood of the fretboard. Perhaps it's true that rosewood is 'mellower' and maple is 'brighter'. I'm disinclined to give this assertion credence until I can hear the same guitarist play the same piece on the same guitar with two necks that are identical except for the fretboard wood. If you can't change just one factor and re-test, it's not scientific, it's subjective.

Personally, I prefer rosewood but my preference is mostly aesthetic. I like the look of rosewood (especially on a red guitar). There can be a difference in feel, too and this is no small matter. Maple 'boards with a urethane finish feel "wrong" to me. Lacquer finished maple is a lot better but there would have to be a lot of other positive factors in a given guitar before I'd decide to purchase one with maple.

It'd be interesting to do a blindfold test to see how many players could accurately tell the two apart.

-- Woody

It takes a lot of mussel memory to avoid clams.

I don't see how fingerboard material can make much of a quantifiable difference in tone on an electric guitar.

After all, if you're playing the thing correctly the string is stopped at either end by the metal of the bridge and fret, the not the wood of the fingerboard.

That doesn't mean people don't perceive a difference in tone.
Or that the tactile (or expected) differences in the wood cause the player to subconciously change the pressure and / or angle of their fingering, which could change the sound much more significantly.

I agree with Woodsurfer:
"Many other components would come under my scrutiny before I got to the wood of the fretboard."

JS

Von_Zeke
I don't see how fingerboard material can make much of a quantifiable difference in tone on an electric guitar.

After all, if you're playing the thing correctly the string is stopped at either end by the metal of the bridge and fret, the not the wood of the fingerboard.

When you are fretting the fretboard becomes the new nut. The frets are hammered directly into the fretboard and essentially become a new conduit for tone. The neck vibrates as well and the fretboard is directly inbetween the string and the neck. I'm sure you've held your ear to the neck of a guitar and listened, fretboard wood is essentially a buffer that the sound has to pass through first. A harder wood is going to allow more vibration to be passed than a softerwood. Which is why maple and rosewood fretboards have a difference on Fender necks.

Von_Zeke
I don't see how fingerboard material can make much of a quantifiable difference in tone on an electric guitar.

After all, if you're playing the thing correctly the string is stopped at either end by the metal of the bridge and fret, the not the wood of the fingerboard.

That doesn't mean people don't perceive a difference in tone.
Or that the tactile (or expected) differences in the wood cause the player to subconciously change the pressure and / or angle of their fingering, which could change the sound much more significantly.

I agree with Woodsurfer:
"Many other components would come under my scrutiny before I got to the wood of the fretboard."

JS

I agree completely I don't think there's any reason that the fingerboard material should be a major contributer to timbre. Now neck material probably plays a role in timbre and a one piece maple neck may have a different effect from a rosewood capped neck but I don't think this would be all that significant, just my opinion. I think that there's a lot to what you say about subconscious changes in fingering (and quite possibly the picking force) affecting sound. Even back to back A/B tests are vulnerable to this sort variation. I like the way you think Von_Zeke.

The artist formerly known as: Synchro

When Surf Guitar is outlawed only outlaws will play Surf Guitar.