• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

60th anniversary 1959 Les Pauls - Indian Rosewood vs. Bolivian Rosewood

E.M.

Active member
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
141
Does anyone have any additional info on why Gibson Custom is offering two different fingerboard woods on the 2019 '59 reissue run? What are the tonal differences between east indian rosewood and bolivian rosewood? Import/export issues? Aesthetics?
 

samsdad

New member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
406
Bolivian Rosewood is also Known as Pau Ferro
Pau Ferro Was Used On SRV Reissue Stratocasters for years!
And it is also called Brazilian ironwood,Leopard Tree,Morado
Found in Brazil And Bolivia
 

zombiwoof

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,565
I'm pretty sure that offering the optional Pau Ferro fingerboards is related to the CITES hoopla, a way for some who are concerned about the restrictions on rosewood if they are having the guitars shipped to another country or such. Pau Ferro is reportedly a good fingerboard wood, somewhat harder than rosewood and commonly a bit lighter in color than "good" RW, but some don't like it because it is not the traditional material. Anyway, my first thought it is related to the CITES concerns that have come up lately.
Al
 

Patek

Active member
Joined
Dec 4, 2015
Messages
415
So far on the 60ths I’ve seen in Germany the Bolivian boards are extremely dark, a lot darker than the RW option LPs
 

El Gringo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
5,657
Any difference in the tonal qualities between the 2 species of rosewood ? (I should have probably used a different adjective to describe the 2 types of rosewood )
 

samsdad

New member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
406
Any difference in the tonal qualities between the 2 species of rosewood ? (I should have probably used a different adjective to describe the 2 types of rosewood )
They do feel different to the touch of your fingers the Bolivian versus the Indian Fretboards
As far as sound tonal differences the Bolivian seems Snappier I had An SRV Stratocaster with a Pau Ferro fret Board
and at that time in the Mid 90's I had a 1963 Strat with Brazilian Board It was more mellow
That was over 25 years ago i did not like the feel of the Pau Ferro Bolivian Fretboard I think ii Harder and more dense
But memory's do fade and i can only say what i remember not sure if this helps but i tried
 

El Gringo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
5,657
They do feel different to the touch of your fingers the Bolivian versus the Indian Fretboards
As far as sound tonal differences the Bolivian seems Snappier I had An SRV Stratocaster with a Pau Ferro fret Board
and at that time in the Mid 90's I had a 1963 Strat with Brazilian Board It was more mellow
That was over 25 years ago i did not like the feel of the Pau Ferro Bolivian Fretboard I think ii Harder and more dense
But memory's do fade and i can only say what i remember not sure if this helps but i tried

Thank you kindly for your reply and it was helpful
 

Patek

Active member
Joined
Dec 4, 2015
Messages
415
Gibson are saying the Bolivian is an extremely similar but slightly harder wood, I can only see that having an impact on the attack if there is any difference. Ebony has a very quick attack and perhaps this steers towards that direction. I hope so anyway but I’ve got a feeling there will be no audiable difference / impossible to tell as every guitar is unique in its own way anyway, let alone when all components are almost the same. But if more attack is present, this is good news as faster licks do well with a bit more note definition and response. I’m very much looking forward to trying it out tonight (tracking says it’s being delivered today).
 

Attila

Formerly Are9
Joined
Sep 23, 2002
Messages
268
I could be wrong, but I don't believe that Pau Ferro is even a rosewood (despite having an appearance similar to rosewood).
 

samsdad

New member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
406
I could be wrong, but I don't believe that Pau Ferro is even a rosewood (despite having an appearance similar to rosewood).

If you Look Up Bolivian Rosewood on An Internet Search it Tells you all about And That it is Actually Pau Ferro And Has Other Names As Well
 

JPP-1

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2006
Messages
1,336
Any difference in the tonal qualities between the 2 species of rosewood ? (I should have probably used a different adjective to describe the 2 types of rosewood )

Anecdotal perception is more often than not erroneous. However, it does serve to create internet myths and legends.

In order to determine a tonal difference with any degree of accuracy you would need to compare at least 10 Bolivian and 10 Indian fretboards. Ideally, they would be swapped on and off the same guitar and the frequency spectrum of each would be measured. You would then derive the mean or average for each group of boards. Based on the mean or average frequency for each set of boards it could then be easily determined if these frequency differences would be detectable to someone with normal hearing.

Frankly, in the absence of good Brazilian Rosewood, I’d have no issue purchasing a Les Paul with either wood types.
 

ONEHERO

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
219
As much as I dislike indian rosewood, it's still much better than Pau Fero. Why? Becuase that's my opinion based on the various models I've tried.
However the question should be: Who decided that "Bolivian wood" is even Rosewood????:dang
 

J.D.

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
10,030
Pau Ferro is a Rosewood substitute (not a true Rosewood). I applaud Gibson for trying alternate materials but don't let the marketing hype fool you - neither EIRW or PF are BRW.

Property comparison (from Wood Database):

Pau Ferro
Density: 54 lbs/ft3 (865 kg/m3)
Hardness: 1,960 lbf (8,710 N)
Modulus of rupture: 17,750 lbf/in2 (122.4 MPa)

EIRW
Density: 52 lbs/ft3 (830 kg/m3)
Hardness: 2,440 lbf (10,870 N)
Modulus of rupture: 16,590 lbf/in2 (114.4 MPa)

BRW:
Density: 52 lbs/ft3 (835 kg/m3)
Hardness: 2,790 lbf (12,410 N)
Modulus of rupture: 19,570 lbf/in2 (135.0 MPa)

These alternates are good guitar fretboard materials in their own right but are not nearly as hard and strong as BRW. If you have the opportunity, tap and listed to the acoustic ring of these wood blanks. They sound different. And since the frets are seated in it, yes, it will affect the sound of the guitar to a certain extent.
 

Big Al

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
14,537
Pau Ferro is a Rosewood substitute (not a true Rosewood). I applaud Gibson for trying alternate materials but don't let the marketing hype fool you - neither EIRW or PF are BRW.

Property comparison (from Wood Database):

Pau Ferro
Density: 54 lbs/ft3 (865 kg/m3)
Hardness: 1,960 lbf (8,710 N)
Modulus of rupture: 17,750 lbf/in2 (122.4 MPa)

EIRW
Density: 52 lbs/ft3 (830 kg/m3)
Hardness: 2,440 lbf (10,870 N)
Modulus of rupture: 16,590 lbf/in2 (114.4 MPa)

BRW:
Density: 52 lbs/ft3 (835 kg/m3)
Hardness: 2,790 lbf (12,410 N)
Modulus of rupture: 19,570 lbf/in2 (135.0 MPa)

These alternates are good guitar fretboard materials in their own right but are not nearly as hard and strong as BRW. If you have the opportunity, tap and listed to the acoustic ring of these wood blanks. They sound different. And since the frets are seated in it, yes, it will affect the sound of the guitar to a certain extent.

Just what extent? AFAIK no one has ever been able to tell them apart based on tone in fingerboards. There is no notable or signature sonic signature associated with this fingerboard wood and the 2003 and more recent Les Pauls which offerd exact same models except for fingerboards proved their is no difference that can be said to originate with the board. Real tonal differences, not imagined, justifying inferences, are audible, measurable and recordible over groups of guitars. You should hear it every similarly equally equipt guitar and fail to hear it on those without. But, that isn't the case at all so how can anyone claim there is?

This was done, same as others, for export.
 

JPP-1

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2006
Messages
1,336
Hey Al you nicely recapped the point I was making earlier. The thing to keep in mind is that wood is organic and varies from tree to tree cut to cut. Some folks seem to be under this misconception that tone wood is like fine wine grapes and have certain tonal consistencies based on date of harvest.

Anyone who is so passionate about tone would do well to go to a guitar store stocked with a large selection of historics and put each one through its paces. You will find that they are all different. These differences will usually be subtle, but then again one may stand out. The same can be said for Bursts, Strats, Teles or any guitar with a lower output pickup where the guitar’s resonances are really driving the tone.

Does a fretboard contribute to tone, absolutely, so does the maple top, the ABR bridge, so do strings, and the composition and thickness of the pick. The thing is unlike tone woods, the latter three items are man made and can be replicated with exacting consistency.

Bursts were made with Swietenia macrophylla, Dalbergia nigra, Acer Saccharum, yet some Bursts sound better than others despite identical wood species. The same can be said for historics and so on.

If you are a stickler for details buy a Les Paul made with the correct wood species listed above. If you want a great sounding great Les Paul as mentioned earlier, play a bunch. See what speaks to you. A Les Paul made with say a Western Maple Top and Pau Ferro fret board may not be vintage accurate but could sound amazing, the only way to know for certain is to play it.




Just what extent? AFAIK no one has ever been able to tell them apart based on tone in fingerboards. There is no notable or signature sonic signature associated with this fingerboard wood and the 2003 and more recent Les Pauls which offerd exact same models except for fingerboards proved their is no difference that can be said to originate with the board. Real tonal differences, not imagined, justifying inferences, are audible, measurable and recordible over groups of guitars. You should hear it every similarly equally equipt guitar and fail to hear it on those without. But, that isn't the case at all so how can anyone claim there is?

This was done, same as others, for export.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: C-4

CatManDoo88

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2019
Messages
156
Hey Al you nicely recapped the point I was making earlier. The thing to keep in mind is that wood is organic and varies from tree to tree cut to cut. Some folks seem to be under this misconception that tone wood is like fine wine grapes and have certain tonal consistencies based on date of harvest.

Anyone who is so passionate about tone would do well to go to a guitar store stocked with a large selection of historics and put each one through its paces. You will find that they are all different. These differences will usually be subtle, but then again one may stand out. The same can be said for Bursts, Strats, Teles or any guitar with a lower output pickup where the guitar’s resonances are really driving the tone.

Does a fretboard contribute to tone, absolutely, so does the maple top, the ABR bridge, so do strings, and the composition and thickness of the pick. The thing is unlike tone woods, the latter three items are man made and can be replicated with exacting consistency.

Bursts were made with Swietenia macrophylla, Dalbergia nigra, Acer Saccharum, yet some Bursts sound better than others despite identical wood species. The same can be said for historics and so on.

If you are a stickler for details buy a Les Paul made with the correct wood species listed above. If you want a great sounding great Les Paul as mentioned earlier, play a bunch. See what speaks to you. A Les Paul made with say a Western Maple Top and Pau Ferro fret board may not be vintage accurate but could sound amazing, the only way to know for certain is to play it.


The comparison to fine wines and the harvesting of wine grapes really doesn't work. There is no real consistency based on harvest date. Wine is the great exemplar of the existence of microclimates. The same vine grown as little as 50 feet down the hill can be in very different soil, resulting in flavour differences, and have different sun exposure resulting in a totally different harvest date. If anything, a comparison to wine and grape growing, supports your point about the subtle differences in organic materials.
 

JPP-1

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2006
Messages
1,336
The comparison to fine wines and the harvesting of wine grapes really doesn't work. There is no real consistency based on harvest date. Wine is the great exemplar of the existence of microclimates. The same vine grown as little as 50 feet down the hill can be in very different soil, resulting in flavour differences, and have different sun exposure resulting in a totally different harvest date. If anything, a comparison to wine and grape growing, supports your point about the subtle differences in organic materials.

The point I was making with wine is in reply to the erroneous idea bandied about that that there are good wood and bad wood years for Historics as if they were wines. There are good and less good years for wine as grapes are typically harvested annually and tend to share certain characteristics based on whether it was warm and sunny or cool and wet that particular year. That is why good wines are typically rated by vintage with certain years or vintages being preferable.
 

emg32

Member
Joined
May 27, 2003
Messages
463
Pau Ferro is a Rosewood substitute (not a true Rosewood). I applaud Gibson for trying alternate materials but don't let the marketing hype fool you - neither EIRW or PF are BRW.

Property comparison (from Wood Database):

Pau Ferro
Density: 54 lbs/ft3 (865 kg/m3)
Hardness: 1,960 lbf (8,710 N)
Modulus of rupture: 17,750 lbf/in2 (122.4 MPa)

EIRW
Density: 52 lbs/ft3 (830 kg/m3)
Hardness: 2,440 lbf (10,870 N)
Modulus of rupture: 16,590 lbf/in2 (114.4 MPa)

BRW:
Density: 52 lbs/ft3 (835 kg/m3)
Hardness: 2,790 lbf (12,410 N)
Modulus of rupture: 19,570 lbf/in2 (135.0 MPa)

These alternates are good guitar fretboard materials in their own right but are not nearly as hard and strong as BRW. If you have the opportunity, tap and listed to the acoustic ring of these wood blanks. They sound different. And since the frets are seated in it, yes, it will affect the sound of the guitar to a certain extent.

I've seen very little effect tonally, actually none, between Brazilian and Indian Rosewood when used for the fretboard. Now an acoustic guitar is completely different if we are talking back, sides, top, etc... but for a fretboard Brazilian or Indian IMO will make no difference tonally. IMO there is a greater tonal difference between ebony and rosewood on the fretboard than the rosewoods listed tonally.

For me personally Pau Ferro does sound slightly different on the fretboard but IMO it is much different from the comparison between Indian and Brazilian rosewood.
 
Top