I think we'd all agree that different guitars (made of different woods, or using different construction techniques, or coming from different manufacturers) all sound different.
I think most folks who have played a lot of different guitars would also agree that the "same" guitars (i.e., different specimens of the same model) can also sound quite different from one another.
I came across this article a while back (written by John Calkin, a luthier with Huss & Dalton) , and it raises some interesting questions - how much is due to the wood, how much the luthier and what he does with the wood, and how much is due to the player and listener's subjective expectation?
http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htmThere is no question that there are vast differences in quality of materials and construction that have a huge impact on sound, but my interpretation of Calkin's thesis is that a good luthier can make any good quality wood, coupled with the right body shape, produce a wide array of different tonal palettes
From the article:
"First of all (and speaking from a steel string guitar perspective), let's discard the notion that some species of wood make good instruments and that others don't. The concept of tonewood is a hoax. Of the few things that we can do to a guitar and still call it a guitar, changing the wood it is made of will have the least impact upon the quality of the sound that it produces."
and later:
"The tone of a guitar lies more in the hands of the builder than in the materials from which it is constructed." ... "Psychoacoustics plays such a large role in this matter that it's difficult to discuss tone objectively."
I'd love to hear all of your thoughts on this.
