I'm pretty sure that this analysis of his is referring primarily to solid body instruments, except for the neck woods he mentions.

Laminate guitars are a more recent business for him. He has mainly been known for solid body basses.

I agree with most of what he says. Especially concerning neck woods. To my mind, (good) maple (Fender) neck has a more present upper midrange character compared to (Fender) rosewood board necks, which to my ear are bit more recessed in that area and a bit warmer in the low mids. They way the neck matches to the body is really important too, I always feel maple necks go with ash bodies better, especially on telecasters. And rosewood and alder go together well especially on stratocasters. But in general I agree with the adage, "the tone follows the neck" on those guitars, and body wood matters less. And there are a lot of variables with the idea that a lot of it is "subtractive", especially metals used and just plain dead wood that kills the sustain, all too common.

The issue becomes a lot more complicated on an arch top where you have acoustic tone as well as electric. Laminate vs solid, mahogany neck versus maple, rosewood finger board vs ebony, scale lengths, it all gets very hard to tell what is influencing what. I try to just take the guitars as a whole on arch tops. And the generalizations I make in my own mind kind of fall along the models and guitars made like them, ie L5, 175 etc. Between those models I definitely have ideas of the expected tone.