Sipo vs Mahogany

[Brick is Red]

Originally Posted by Swamp Yankee

I guess it's relative...

I'd say "SEEpo" and "saPAYlee" respectively.

But if I worked for C.F. Martin, I'd pronounce them as "mahHOGany" and "mahHOGany", respectively

I pronounce Sapele with a hard first e. Basically, "SaPEElee". I don't know anything. I looked it up a a few years ago and adopted what was being said by the wood cognoscenti.

[Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by Brick is Red

I pronounce Sapele with a hard first e. Basically, "SaPEElee". I don't know anything. I looked it up a a few years ago and adopted what was being said by the wood cognoscenti.

Yours is probably the right way to say it - but it would sound better my way if you said you wanted a sapele ukulele

[Sagebrush Tom]

I have an all Sapele 000RS1 Martin that sounds so good maybe Martin ran out of Sapele at the time my guitar was being built and substituted genuine mahogany instead.

Tom

[Mr. Jelly]

I guess nobody can answer my question. But thanks anyway everybody.

[arwhite]

Post #13 answered it probably about as well as you are going to get.

[Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by Dronfield

Hi

Sorry to confuse matters, but my Guild M-140 is built out of South African mahogany, can anyone please tell me what this is most likely to be, i.e. Sipo, sapele etc?

The guitar back wood is noticeably striped - bit of an orangy tint to it.

Many thanks for your help here.

Rich

It could also be khaya...and they all can exhibit striping and color variations.... Funny story I read about khaya which is particularly ironic considering the topic we're discussing:

'Legend has it that an early botanist visiting Africa many years ago, saw this tree growing in a forest and asked his guide what it was called. The reply being ‘Khaya’ – which in the guide’s language meant ‘I don’t know’. The botanist, none the wiser, diligently wrote this down and the genus was named accordingly.'

[George Henry]

I think that I can correctly identify sapele from other mahoganies most of the time. I worked for a manufacturer utilizing African mahogany so I got used to identifying it, most of the time. Often it was coarse grained but sometimes it looks close to genuine mahogany. I like the look of the mahogany Martin uses in most 18 series - that uniform looking wood without figure or striping or ribbon. Some might think it boring but I really like it. I like the mahogany Eastman uses in it's mahogany guitars, especially that with some curly figure. I don't know exactly what it is or where the get it.

I think that most mahoganies work pretty much the same for guitar making purposes - they are going to look and sound similarly. I think that genuine mahogany is probably more stable and might be the best choice for a neck. I know that my 1893 Luscomb banjo with it's Cuban mahogany (I think) is still straight after all these years.

Craftsmen who create artwork and hand carve mahogany have a better feel for the differences between genuine mahogany and it's distant cousins. Some would say that khaya doesn't deserve the name mahogany. But their criteria for the quality and suitability of each wood might be different than guitar makers.

[rokdog49]

I love the Mahogany Eastman uses



and some quilted from Larrivee'

[Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by Sagebrush Tom

If you want to know what "Tropical Mahogany" is, then go to Taylor's website. It's theirs and other makers term, not mine.

Tom

I emailed Taylor and this was the reply I received:


'Thank you for writing us here at Taylor Guitars.
When we use the name/term Tropical Mahogany, it is, in fact, Swietenia Macrophylla or we will state otherwise.'

Swietenia Macrophylla is commonly known as Honduran mahogany, but Taylor sources it from other countries besides Honduras, so it makes sense to me that they might opt to call it something else besides "Honduran mahogany".

[Dronfield]

Originally Posted by Swamp Yankee

It could also be khaya...and they all can exhibit striping and color variations.... Funny story I read about khaya which is particularly ironic considering the topic we're discussing:

'Legend has it that an early botanist visiting Africa many years ago, saw this tree growing in a forest and asked his guide what it was called. The reply being ‘Khaya’ – which in the guide’s language meant ‘I don’t know’. The botanist, none the wiser, diligently wrote this down and the genus was named accordingly.'

Thanks for your helap here Swamp Yankee - think I will email Guild and see if I can get a definitive answer.

Had always assumed it was sapele, but it could well be Khaya - they simply state it as South African mahogany.

Cheers

Rich

[DrewStrummer]

From everything I’ve read about Sipo (not Mahogany) it’s a fine replacement... cabinet makers are having the same problem with Hondours Mahogany, and find sipo is just as easy to cut, sand and stain, where as African Mahogany is hard and difficult to work with.

My thoughts are, just because a wood is easy to cut and stain, doesn’t necessarily make it tonely the same.

I also think it’s wrong for Martin to call sipo - Mahogany... in 2013 they introduce the highly praised CEO 7, which was widely reviewed ... after 1000 guitars, they decide to use sipo ( less expensive) instead of Mahogany.... I think the CEO7 line should’ve stopped being produce, or name changed to CEO7-S instead of still saying it’s made of Mahogany. After 1000, it’s not the same Guitar.

IMO... you can’t change over 50% of the wood on a Guitar, and because it stains and looks like Mahogany, don’t make it sound like Mahogany... if sipo is so excellent... why not put it on your new John Mayer guitars?

Everybody knows over time how Real Mahogany opens up over time and sounds wonderful... nobody knows how sipo will mature... I just just think it’s wrong to take a successful line, change the wood with no warning, a less expensive wood, a tonally unproven wood, charge the same price, then call the wood something it is not. Who knows, maybe 20 years from sipo is like Brazilian and everybody’s over paying for it, or in 20 years it’s a clunk... who knows... but to slip it in on a popular pricey line, selling 2000 more without anybody knowing is BS.

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

I want to think that is Marketing mumbo-jumbo.
I would have to compare two identical guitars with the two different woods and even then it wouldn't really prove anything.

These VS threads are mainly “mumbo-jumbo” themselves. Why they continue, I can’t figure out. The woods themselves mean very little, its the builder, bracing, body shape, etc., that should be compared.

I guess bracing is a little complex and boring compared to exotic woods and grain patterns.

[DrewStrummer]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

These VS threads are mainly “mumbo-jumbo” themselves. Why they continue, I can’t figure out. The woods themselves mean very little, its the builder, bracing, body shape, etc., that should be compared.

I guess bracing is a little complex and boring compared to exotic woods and grain patterns.

So the wood used on the back and sides have very little to do with the sound and tone?

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

These VS threads are mainly “mumbo-jumbo” themselves. Why they continue, I can’t figure out. The woods themselves mean very little, its the builder, bracing, body shape, etc., that should be compared.

I guess bracing is a little complex and boring compared to exotic woods and grain patterns.

I agree. I have three sitka spruce over hog guitars, a Martin, a Gibson and a Larrivee and the difference is like night and day between the three of them.

Originally Posted by DrewStrummer

I also think it’s wrong for Martin to call Sapo - Mahogany... in 2013 they introduce the highly praised CEO 7, which was widely reviewed ... after 1000 guitars, they decide to use Sapo ( less expensive) instead of Mahogany.... I think the CEO7 line should’ve stopped being produce, or name changed to CEO7-S instead of still saying it’s made of Mahogany. After 1000, it’s not the same Guitar.

I understand, to a point. However, carrying that a step further should all Style 18 and Style 28 guitars been renamed when Martin moved from red spruce to Sitka in 1945? Or should all Style 28 guitars have been renamed when Martin switched from BRW to IRW in 1969? I don't think so because the basic character of the guitar remained the same. Not that those changes don't affect the tone at all, but a 1969 D-28 is clearly in the same family as a 1970 example.

As far as Sipo goes, I cannot tell the difference (tonally) between it and mahogany. The difference in mahogany and sapele is more pronounced, but even that is not always clear cut. Sipo is the best tonal substitute for mahogany that I have heard, especially in terms of factory guitars.