Swamp Ash for a Body?

[Telemnemonics]

The need to grain fill swamp ash or ash is correct in terms of finishing convention, but incorrect in terms of practical use where the OP wants a clear finish for the looks.
I've clear finished numerous swamp as bodies, never used a filler product, and they all look nice, even flat.
A solid color might show grain texture a little though, which either filler or more coats would mitigate.
In a way, swamp ash is easier to hobby finish than alder, because the uniformity of appearance of alder makes it need a more perfect finish, where the patterning of swamp ash looks nice more easily IME.

But for a solid color, yeah it's fair to say it needs grain filling.
I would not choose ash for a solid color, but I like nice looking wood to show.
Here the OP did say he wants a clear finish to show the grain, and IME that's a pretty easy home project to get professional looking results with.

Thanks for this.

If I'm making a Costello style JM with water based dyes that will show the grain, would I use the dye first to get the color I want, then go over it with the filler, and then put the final clear coat on? I'm having a hard time finding online at what stage to put the filler in. My instinct was to fill it first, but from what I read many people say dye doesn't take to the filler.

I would just skip using any filler at all since you want a clear finish, along with possible issues with the filler taking the dye differently from the wood.
Seems like the grain you want to pop deserves to not be covered with filler, right?

If you do go with filler because glass flat is a priority, I can't say how it should be done, and you'll likely have to do some samples on similar wood scraps before experimenting on the body.

[Rgand]

When I made my Telerauder, I liked the grain to show so my finish doesn't completely fill the grain. It's sealed but still isn't glass smooth. That actually accentuates the grain. It's a nice look if you're not absolutely sold on total fill.

[Craig Paddock]

Swamp ash is quite a vague term but it is meant to be of lower density.

My JM Is ash, probably standard ash, and my old Tele is Swamp ash. I haven't done a direct comparison of my JM wiht an alder one, but the swamp ash tele is very resonant acoustically - and that's the sound for which swamp ash is known. In conversations with Ken Parker, he reckons lighter woods are more resonant at useful frequencies and this gives a better sound. But there will doubtless be lots of variation, and the effect of that wood will only be one part of a bigger whole.

Love this perspective …
Thx!!

[ogpuprison]

interesting. Off topic a bit, but is American ash anything like swamp ash? I bought an american ash tele body recently, still putting it together. It weighs a ton, which is bit annoying...

[Embenny]

interesting. Off topic a bit, but is American ash anything like swamp ash? I bought an american ash tele body recently, still putting it together. It weighs a ton, which is bit annoying...

Swamp ash is a colloquial term for ash timber that is lower density. Ash is grown all over the US, so "American Ash" isn't a reference to anything different. It's like calling Sitka Spruce from Alaska, "American Spruce." That would be a true statement, but not one specific to a single species of tree.

[rodan]

I’ve made a couple of guitars from swamp ash. I’d never say the amplified sound is any different from/better than alder. However, apart from the lightness, they do feel more alive in your hands and up against your body. They feel nice to play. Pain in the ass to finish, though.