Poplar vs. Alder
Outlane
In the recent "Frontline", I notice that alot of current Strats are
made with Poplar, including the Deluxe Powerhouse Strat (of
which several recent posts have perked my interest)
We have all read about Maple vs. Rosewood.
What are the pros & cons of Poplar?
JN
Andy Niedzwiecke
Look in the "ask the pros" section of the FENDER website, near the bottom.
The woods in order of preference are listed as Alder, the "traditional
Stratocaster body wood, Ash, the other traditional Stratocaster body wood,
Poplar as a substitute for Alder because of similarity in tone, Basswood,
used in many Japanese made guitars and very similar to Alder, and Maple used
as a laminate instead of solid body because of weight.
I just sold a 1994 Fender Stratocaster which I suspect was Poplar and bought
a new 1962 re-issue Stratocaster. The tone difference is significant. I
suspect that the total build of the new guitar, including the vintage electrics
has a lot to do with it, but there is no comparison to the sound. the 1962
re-issue is a killer guitar with that low-end growl I remembered from my original
1962 Stratocaster I bought in February of 1962 and in a moment of lameness sold
in 1973. I could never get the 1994 Strat adjusted to the sound I wanted but
the re-issue is all I hoped it would be and more. Oh yeah to stay on the subject,
the re-issue is Alder.
Regards, Andy
Bogdan Cristian Jaliu
Poplar is a cheaper wood, which is why Fender probably went to it. All
of Fender's better guitars are still made out of Alder, I think. As
far as poplar's acoustic properties, I don't know, but I would rather
go with a strat made out of alder, or ash since those two woods have
been traditionally used in strats since their inception.
bigbadjohn
Outlane wrote in message
<199803252006...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>In the recent "Frontline", I notice that alot of current Strats are
>made with Poplar, including the Deluxe Powerhouse Strat (of
>which several recent posts have perked my interest)
>
>We have all read about Maple vs. Rosewood.
>
>What are the pros & cons of Poplar?
>
>JN
> Hey JN, I know very little about the particular tonal qualities of
poplar, nor do I play strats. I do know that poplar is a very beautiful wood
to finish in a natural finish. People make frames and other crafts and stuff
with it. This may not help much, but I would like to see a poplar guitar
stained and polyurethaned.
later,
>;-} Bryant
guit...@yahoo.com
If ya go back and do a dejanews search you will find Terry of Tacoma Guitars,
exposing the virtues of poplar (i believe in rec.music.makers.builders). He
said and i dont quote, that it was to him superior to basswood. He was
talking about building a guitar for Blues Sarciono(sp?). The stuff is much
cheaper than most hardwoods, by up to 90% a bd foot. While not a traditional
tonewood, it seems to have been used quite acceptable by washburn, jackson,
and others. The Gibson Blueshawk, is a poplar back. If ya havent played one
the sound is pertty cool. John
sorry bout not doing the search, but im workin here (hehe)
In article <6fcbi3$1...@camel19.mindspring.com>,
elect...@pipeline.com wrote:
>
> Poplar is a cheaper wood, which is why Fender probably went to it. All
> of Fender's better guitars are still made out of Alder, I think. As
> far as poplar's acoustic properties, I don't know, but I would rather
> go with a strat made out of alder, or ash since those two woods have
> been traditionally used in strats since their inception.
>
> out...@aol.com (Outlane) wrote:
>
> >In the recent "Frontline", I notice that alot of current Strats are
> >made with Poplar, including the Deluxe Powerhouse Strat (of
> >which several recent posts have perked my interest)
>
> >We have all read about Maple vs. Rosewood.
>
> >What are the pros & cons of Poplar?
>
> >JN
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Luke Faulkenberry
Hi,
I have read that Poplar is a very resonant wood imparting a good string to
string balance to an electric guitar (all other things being equal), but it
is softer than either Ash or Alder. The same article contrasted the
properties of Ash, Poplar, and Alder to each other, but I can only recall
Poplar at this time. All are desirable electric guitar tonewoods.
Good luck,
Luke
Bogdan Cristian Jaliu <elect...@pipeline.com> wrote in article
<6fcbi3$1...@camel19.mindspring.com>...
> Poplar is a cheaper wood, which is why Fender probably went to it. All
> of Fender's better guitars are still made out of Alder, I think. As
> far as poplar's acoustic properties, I don't know, but I would rather
> go with a strat made out of alder, or ash since those two woods have
> been traditionally used in strats since their inception.
>
> out...@aol.com (Outlane) wrote:
>
> snip
Lektrkblus
>In the recent "Frontline", I notice that alot of current Strats are
>made with Poplar, including the Deluxe Powerhouse Strat (of
>which several recent posts have perked my interest)
>
>We have all read about Maple vs. Rosewood.
>
>What are the pros & cons of Poplar?
>
>
A little off topic, but I played 3 Japanese '60's re-sissues recently and
acoustically they blew the strings off just about every Strat I've played.
They were very light compared to my American Standard (which is a very
acoustically loud guitar). I happen to like the feel of a heavier guitar. The
poplar and basswood guitars seem lighter than alder. Some ash bodies seem very
light. I just have to say that I was very impressed with the basswood Japanese
re-issue.
Poplar is a less expensive wood from what I have heard, but I've eplayed some
Tex Mex Strats that sounded real fine. Since just about every Strat is made of
multiple pieces of wood glued together, I bet you could find a great variation
in any of the bodies regardless of what kind of wood it is made from. I say,
if it sings unplugged and has a good balanced feel hanging on your shoulder,
who the hell cares what is under the paint.
Chuck.
Lektr...@aol.com
DB>
Here's the viewpoint of a builder (and I don't use Pooplar any more,
thanks). Poplar is available in wide widths which makes it convenient (one
piece bodies are pretty easy to achieve), and it's fairly cheap. When you
get the right piece, it sounds great and often looks OK, when you get the
next piece it'll look funky (often has green stripes, which CAN be cool), or
it may have a bad tonality. Weight also tends to vary enormously from board
to board (bodies weight in anywhere from light ash to maple heft wise), and
this can be used somewhat as a gauge of tone.
On the plus side, out of a typical stack of raw boards of poplar a good
builder can actually build guitars with a RANGE of tonality anywhere from
something like basswood or alder to maple - just have to tone out the wood
as you go. Of course this means every poplar guitar is likely to be
different, perhaps radically. Alder is simply more consistent tone wise, as
is maple.
This isn't to knock poplar, I've used it before with some success, and might
even use it again sometime. FWIW, mahogany tends to vary a lot tone wise as
well (my experience with "swamp ash" is it varies a bit as well! Here come
the flames . . . ). One of the "secrets" of building a guitar is the choice
of the wood, and small builders can tone out each guitar individually, a big
mfr. has to take a load of wood, shove it through the production line, and
whatever comes out the back end is what goes out. This is why you HAVE to
approach guitars on an individual basis - I've seen cheap guitars that were
awesome, and expensive guitars that sucked. A lot has to do with the wood
(even plywood guitars sometimes ain't bad, strangely enough . . . ), as well
as how well the instrument was constructed and who made and set up the
instrument.
Hope that helps confuse the livin' daylights out of the issue! <G> Or maybe
at least shed some light on it . . .
Dave Blackhurst
Blackhurst Custom Guitars
Outlane wrote in message
<199803252006...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>In the recent "Frontline", I notice that alot of current Strats are
>made with Poplar, including the Deluxe Powerhouse Strat (of
>which several recent posts have perked my interest)
>
>We have all read about Maple vs. Rosewood.
>
>What are the pros & cons of Poplar?
>
>JN
>
Strings51
guitarman said:
snip ....>it may have a bad tonality. Weight also tends to vary enormously
from board
>to board (bodies weight in anywhere from light ash to maple heft wise), and
>this can be used somewhat as a gauge of tone.
This explains why the Mexican Strats and Teles vary so much in acoustic tone
and weight.
I had a beautiful looking Mex james Burton Tele, but it was quite dead
acoustically and had poor sustain. Now I have a solid Ash body Strat Pro Tone
(made from 2 pieces) and it rings a long time acoustically and has tons of
sustain plugged in...
Thanks for the explanation!!
-vlw