[devellis]

I find that more often than not, I judge the tone first and then discover what top wood has been used later. I think there are some general differences. Engelmann, to me, responds to the lightest touch of the three. Not good on a guitar you intend to clobber. But on a small-bodied guitar that will be mostly fingerpicked, it can really sound great. Sitka is an exceptionally versatile wood. While perhaps not quite as responsive as Engelmann on average, it has a warmth and clarity that is very appealing. Adirondack takes some time to come to life. The old saw about an instrument sounding better in a few years than it does when new seems to be truest for Adirondack-topped instruments. Comparing new, otherwise similar instruments with Adirondack versus Sitka tops, rarely have I preferred Adirondack. Where I have preferred Adirondack from the get-go has been in special-run guitars that have been made exceptionally lightly. I'm not sure what exactly is the key factor but a couple of really light Adirondack guitars I've encountered sounded really open even when new. Adirondack can also be really great if you play hard. They get louder and louder without the sound getting distorted. But I have to say, a lot of Sitka guitars have done that to, at least at the volumes I try to coax out of a guitar.

There are examples of each of these woods that contradict what I've said but I think those general tendencies hold up on average. But I still strongly feel that it's better to buy by sound not by species of top wood.