Haha... Lightice... you surely do not sound so light... a little like sourgrapey.. a sarcastic kill the discussion kinda reply
Precisely the point that glue used is likely to be stronger and more consistent transmitter of vibration than the wood. As such theoretically speaking, the more pieces joint up together, the more layers of glue would be transmitting the vibration. When the combined tonal vibration transmitted by layers of glue exceeds that of the wood, the pieces of would would serve more as mass and lesser as tone material. Plywood perhaps is one example of this. Of course one can argue that given the other variables such as pickups, pre-amps, amps, 'the soundman:mrgreen:' - a good guitarist would be able to pickup any guitar yet still able to find the tone. However, in many cases, the guitar goes places with the guitarist rather than the pre-amps, amps, cabinet etc.
I'm not so sure if the conclusion you made about 1pc vs 2pc vs 3pc as purely aesthetics is theoretically sound. one thing for sure, to have a one consistent piece cut out from a tree would roughly inform that the tree may be quite mature and chances are, the grains are tighter, it is denser and moisture content lesser. My hunch is that the two piece US strat body is not only prized for aesthetics (not sure how that'll be evaluated under thick solid colour coats similar to the multi pieces mexican strat). A book matched two piece would mean that both halves of the guitar body is made of wood from the same part of a tree thus implying consistency of the wood characteristics. However, a non book matched two piece body would imply that the two halves may come from different part of a tree or different trees altogether. Wood from different part of a tree varies, higher up the grain is tighter and the wood is denser. Consider then a four or five piece body (p.s. I'm not talking about those multipieces body made by design).
I personally started this project guitar trials trying to convince myself that guitar wood types makes little difference to the tone. Fortunately, as a trained researcher, the best of me would want to control for several factors including pickups, pots and cap. As far as possible, even the neck (I don't have a stockpile of the same neck type so where the neck joint fit without need to drill holes, I'll use it). Fortunately, apart from basswood variants, other wood types that I've tried have very distinct characteristics. Of course, due to the nature of wood to even consider pin-pointing the tone (i.e. 95% accuracy) of two guitars even if they're made of plywood is absurd however, the point here is really to make educated guess of the tonal leaning of each wood/ construction type. The fact is that even body shape affect tonal qualities. Yes I agree with you and know very well that what is described on those manufacturer sites are guidelines not a law. However, I am trying to learn as much as possible first hand to whether the guidelines are as close as they're described.
The concern here is, to get 'that' tone, much discussions centers around pickups, pedals and amps. There is very little discussion on the main item itself, i.e. the guitar (apart brand, from where it is made, and stuff like that). Surely, just as we educate ourselves with the electronics, it would not hurt to learn more and take pride in the choice of guitar not simply because it is branded (brands die) or where it is made (3/4 of production operators in Singapore factories are likely to be foreign nationals... don't think it is much different in the US, UK, Korea or Japan) or that a big name artiste endorses it (without much reference to the intricate customisation and sound engineering support the artiste receives).
DIYing a guitar can be a hit or miss if done un/mis-informed. At the same time, it can be an attempt to seriously engineer the sum of parts.
Anyway, care to describe the experience of that one try that led you to your conclusion?
Cheers!
