I don’t know for sure if I wrote this but I found it in my archives and sure sounds like me. Either way I totally agree with it:

As for its effect on the “tone”, I can only comment that there is just no way to ascertain how changing any single element on a guitar is going to change it’s sound, when a guitar is composed of hundreds of interacting and interconnected elements—some of which you can consciously make decisions about, and others that you can’t. This particular builder can’t tell you–or if he could, can’t describe to you–the effect on the whole of changing just one of those decisions.

The sound of a guitar is the sum total of hundreds of decisions that the builder has made—and a series of givens the builder must simply deal with and accept. Some of these “givens” are the traditional form of the guitar. The bridge patch is there, traditionally, not to change the tone, but for more practical reasons. Attributing an after-the-fact precise and predictable tonal function to it is one of those “shaky premises.”

The other problem is in describing sound with words: I really can’t tell what sound you’re hearing in your head when you ask me about a “brighter” sound; or a “warmer” sound. Or a “darker” sound. Or a “clearer” sound.

Yes, my answer is unsatisfying. I could just tell you that rosewood bridge patches “allow for” a “brighter” sound. That answer would be more satisfactory, no doubt. But then you would be getting your information from a faker or a fool.