The Guitar and Saving the Rainforest?

[Atheist-Lite]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15268169

Are Gibson guitars killing the rainforest?

Iconic US guitar maker Gibson is facing a criminal probe over claims it broke environmental laws while importing wood. So is music the next threat to the world's forests?

"Up here you grow up liking Fenders or you grow up liking Gibsons," says Billy Jack, 55, sat in a Nashville music store eyeing up a trio of shiny new Gibson guitars.

Cradling a $3,800 (£2,413) Gibson Les Paul, Mr Jack, a veteran guitarist, recalls riffs gone by as he explains his fondness for one of rock's iconic instruments.

"You can hear it in your ear. It's how quickly you can run through your chops. It's the tone. You just can't go wrong."

But things have gone wrong. On 28 August federal agents raided Gibson's Nashville and Memphis premises, seizing shipments of Indian rosewood and leaving the venerable guitar maker more than a little off-key.

(continued)

[PsychoSerenity]

I cannot take seriously the claim that the type of wood a guitar is made out of, makes any meaningful difference to the sound, especially for electric guitars. It would be interesting to do a double blind sound test to see if they really can tell the difference. - but even if they can, whose to say that the incredibly rare woods are the ones that are "better"?

The only real reason for making guitars out of rare and expensive woods is that you can then get a massively increased profit margin for each guitar made. And as far as I'm concerned that is no excuse for trashing through forests to cut down endangered species.

[Tyrannical]

http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/N ... 0825-2011/

Henry Juszkiewicz, Chairman and CEO of Gibson Guitar Corp., has responded to the August 24 raid of Gibson facilities in Nashville and Memphis by the Federal Government. In a press release, Juszkiewicz said: “Gibson is innocent and will fight to protect its rights. Gibson has complied with foreign laws and believes it is innocent of ANY wrong doing. We will fight aggressively to prove our innocence.”

The raids forced Gibson to cease manufacturing operations and send workers home for the day while armed agents executed the search warrants. “Agents seized wood that was Forest Stewardship Council controlled,” Juszkiewicz said. “Gibson has a long history of supporting sustainable and responsible sources of wood and has worked diligently with entities such as the Rainforest Alliance and Greenpeace to secure FSC-certified supplies. The wood seized on August 24 satisfied FSC standards.”

Juszkiewicz believes that the Justice Department is bullying Gibson without filing charges.

“The Federal Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. has suggested that the use of wood from India that is not finished by Indian workers is illegal, not because of U.S. law, but because it is the Justice Department’s interpretation of a law in India. (If the same wood from the same tree was finished by Indian workers, the material would be legal.) This action was taken without the support and consent of the government in India.”

Henry Juszkiewicz, CEO of Gibson Guitar Corp states: “According to this law, if you bought a guitar from us and you re-sell it, you are criminally liable…everyone who touches the guitar—the store owner who sells that guitar is criminally liable. And it doesn’t matter if he knew or not. It’s a pretty dangerous precedent in my opinion.”

Derek Prepon, a Gibson employee is concerned because the issue effects ”our vendors…. it’s our distributors, its our customers” and that it’s turned into a “political dog and pony show.”

Lady Antebellum guitarist Jason ‘Slim’ Gambill says: “I think its terrifying for musicians to know that they could be going through an airport and get stopped by a customs agent somewhere overseas and have someone say ‘I’m taking this because it might have potentially something illegal that was, you know, harvested, 60, 80 year ago and I’m taking it because now it’s a protected wood. It doesn’t make sense.”

[rachelbean]

I cannot take seriously the claim that the type of wood a guitar is made out of, makes any meaningful difference to the sound, especially for electric guitars. It would be interesting to do a double blind sound test to see if they really can tell the difference. - but even if they can, whose to say that the incredibly rare woods are the ones that are "better"?

The only real reason for making guitars out of rare and expensive woods is that you can then get a massively increased profit margin for each guitar made. And as far as I'm concerned that is no excuse for trashing through forests to cut down endangered species.

I don't know necessarily about more expensive/rare, but the type of wood absolutely has an effect on sound. It's a conductor, and depending on the weight, the density, the pores, how hard/soft it is, etc... of course it affects the outcome of the sound

[Gawdzilla Sama]

There are Stradivarius views as to how important the wood is.

[Clinton Huxley]

The timbre is affected by the timber.

[Atheist-Lite]

There are Stradivarius views as to how important the wood is.

That's the varnish I read somewhere.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The really weird thing is I got Stradivarius right on the first try.

[Tero]

I don't know, I think boreal forest conifers and birch would make good solid guitars. Fuck the rain forest! Leave it to the chimpanzees.

Why are thre still chimpanzees? We should have extincted smaller primates by now with our guitars.

[Tero]

Wood Heretic
http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm
says maple is just as good. Even birch works.

[Jason]

I cannot take seriously the claim that the type of wood a guitar is made out of, makes any meaningful difference to the sound, especially for electric guitars. It would be interesting to do a double blind sound test to see if they really can tell the difference. - but even if they can, whose to say that the incredibly rare woods are the ones that are "better"?

The only real reason for making guitars out of rare and expensive woods is that you can then get a massively increased profit margin for each guitar made. And as far as I'm concerned that is no excuse for trashing through forests to cut down endangered species.

I don't know necessarily about more expensive/rare, but the type of wood absolutely has an effect on sound. It's a conductor, and depending on the weight, the density, the pores, how hard/soft it is, etc... of course it affects the outcome of the sound

For electrics? :/

My old favourite (also a collectors item) has a Brazilian Mahogany fretboard, which is really nice, but the body is simple solid Maple (with a Cherry sunburst finish ). I've played other electrics with other types of fret boards (Maple, Cherry, etc..) and they don't feel as nice to play, but the sound really comes from the strings you use, the pickups, effects processors and pedals, amplifier and so on IMO.

As for acoustic guitars, yes the wood makes a HUGE difference in sound.

Gibson doesn't make Violins as far as I know.

[Tero]

I think the wood is there for sustain in electrics. If you just had a hollow metal box, the notes would die faster. I mean solid body electrics.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's the rain forest's fault if it get cut down. It shouldn't have just stood there.

[PsychoSerenity]