How do we know if we're getting REAL South American mahogany anymore?

[drive-south]

I've been away all day only to return and find out I'm an Internet know it all who doesn't know 1 iota about tone wood. I think I'll go lie down now.

[Halcyon/Tinker]

The best way to know you're getting genuine mahogany is to buy it from the real Slim Shady.

[email4eric]

Man, this thread is all over the place!

Regardless of whether or not you can tell the tonal difference of the various woods being called Mahogany, and regardless of a luthier's experience and effectiveness of using these woods, and regardless of a buyer's inexperience in understanding these woods; regardless of costs, availability, sustainability, tonal nuance and differences, you absolutely should be getting what you were told you were getting without bamboozle-ing, obfuscation, and misrepresentation of the woods involved -- something that is done with gusto by many guitar manufacturers. (Ha! World's longest sentence!)

I have five "Mahogany" guitars (sig), two of which are actually Genuine Mahogany (genus Swietenia) which means that I have three "Mahogany" guitars that are not Mahogany at all. These non-Mahogany Mahogany guitars are Sapele, Kayha, and Cipo (or Sipo) -- woods found in Africa and not found in the range of Genuine Mahogany (the Americas, or, new world). These are woods included in the same family as genuine Mahogany but not the same genus. As such, manufacturers take advantage of this distant relationship and muddle the relationship for the purpose of sales. These African woods are misrepresented absolutely by their manufacturers as being Mahogany by virtue of the fact that if you go back far enough, they are phylogenetically related to Genuine Mahogany. It would be akin to referring to apes as humans because we're related if you go back far enough.

Sure, I can pick up a guitar, like it, and be unconcerned with what combination of woods resulted in such a wonderful guitar. But if that's the case, should we not be satisfied with a guitar simply being advertised as being made of wood? Who cares what the top and sides are made of -- it sounds great! Who cares? Well, many of us do and for a number of reasons.

To those for whom the tonal qualities of the different wood species is important, knowing the specific kind of wood is important in comparison or for developing knowledge. Additionally, knowing what species is being held in your hands is an issue of authenticity and provides for appreciation regardless of the tonal presentation. As a biologist, this is very important to me but should also be to any consumer concerned with getting what they were told they were getting and for what they paid for.

Guitar manufacturers routinely deceive consumers and misrepresent the specifics of woods to deflect the perceived hit in sales sales they would experience from not using Genuine Mahogany.

Lastly (pet peave), genus is always capitalized, species is not. Both are supposed to be underlined or italicized though that gets old quickly in a guitar forum! Common names always are capitalized.

Anyway, this link might prove helpful:

http://www.wood-database.com/wood-ar...s-the-lowdown/

[Gallopinghost]

Originally Posted by JackNapier

So many makers have switched to variations of mahogany. Call me a purist, but I don't think they should be peddling guitars as "mahogany back and sides" if they aren't using real mahogany. Who knows how long this has been going on. I'm sticking with East Indian Rosewood. At least I know it is what they say it is. Any other thoughts?

How to ensure your guitar is constructed out of Real South American Mahogany in 3 easy steps

Note: If sound, tone, or play ability isn't important to you as real South American Mahogany, you can skip to Step 2.

Step 1: Choose a luthier to build your guitar or start building crappy guitars until they stop sounding crappy.

Step 2: Make sure you've beefed up on your life insurance, then buy a copy of R. Bruce Hoadley's "Understanding Wood", a plane ticket to Tegucigalpa and enough Honduran Lempira's for a chainsaw (unfortunately, the TSA still frowns on bringing your own as carry on), logging permits, bribes, a security force, marshmallows, mosquito repellent...

Step 3: Build your guitar.

Wah lah!

Will you be needing a REAL Carpathian Spruce top?

[tadol]

The failure to have everything pinned down to scientific precision is not uncommon to any of the fields of manufacture, and to be honest, it seems to be eluding most scientists as well -

Tradition and common use cannot be ignored - mahogany, without any further identification, has always meant a variety of species - just as rosewood, or walnut, or oak, or eucalyptus, etc, etc have long been used generically to identify a variety of woods. At least its not like the furniture industry, where walnut, cherry, and maple have come to mean only tbe color of the item -

I guess your hangup is with the word "genuine", although I've seen that applied to phillipine as well as cuban or african for a couple decades now - and not with guitars -

Personally, I'd rather they start identifying the fish they're selling more accurately - if it is fish -

[rwtwguitar]

Yes this thread is all over the place because the OP seems to be talking about different things.

Is it wrong to claim "genuine" mahogany and build it from sapele? I think most will agree that "yes". There is the small point that swietinia mahogani rather than swietinia macrophylla was the original "original" mahogany. But regardless, if you want swietinia macrophylla, you are told you are going to get swietinia macrophylla, and you are given Entandrophragma cylindricum you are probably justified in feeling deceived.

The OP, however, also seems to be saying that guitars with Entandrophragma cylindricum backs and sides have inferior tonal qualities to Swietinia macrophylla. That is where I think he is getting a lot of push back. There is no doubt that Swietinia macrophylla has qualities that make it an excellent wood for how well it tools, how dimensionally stable, how even in color. But that doesn't address the tonal qualities of guitars built with backs and sides made from it.

There are some who believe that if you built two identical guitars (an impossibility) you would not be able to perceive the tonal difference between the guitar built with Swietinia macrophylla and the one built with Entandrophragma cylindricum. I'm one of those people. I have built with both, and cannot predict the guitar's tone based on which I choose. Having also built with Maple, Rosewood, and Black Acacia I am not sure that the perceived difference in tone isn't psychoacoustic.

So, yes there is marketing deception in calling something "genuine" mahogany and using Entandrophragma cylindricum. On the other hand, they can do it because it has no perceptible difference in tone and playability.

If it matters to you exactly what species is used you are going to have a challenge. Without leaves or bark even experts have a hard time knowing for sure. The only advice I can give is don't buy a guitar sight unseen. Try to acquaint yourself with the subtle differences between the species and ask a lot of questions before you buy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr Bojangles]

Originally Posted by JackNapier

So many makers have switched to variations of mahogany. Call me a purist, but I don't think they should be peddling guitars as "mahogany back and sides" if they aren't using real mahogany. Who knows how long this has been going on. I'm sticking with East Indian Rosewood. At least I know it is what they say it is. Any other thoughts?

Aren't people being a little hard on the OP? I think he has a legitimate point. We can debate the pros and cons of different tonewoods, but there is something to be said for telling it like it is when selling a product. The problem lies in the definition, what is "real Mahogany"?

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by email4eric

I have five "Mahogany" guitars (sig), two of which are actually Genuine Mahogany (genus Swietenia) which means that I have three "Mahogany" guitars that are not Mahogany at all. These non-Mahogany Mahogany guitars are Sapele, Kayha, and Cipo (or Sipo) -- woods found in Africa and not found in the range of Genuine Mahogany (the Americas, or, new world). These are woods included in the same family as genuine Mahogany but not the same genus. As such, manufacturers take advantage of this distant relationship and muddle the relationship for the purpose of sales. These African woods are misrepresented absolutely by their manufacturers as being Mahogany by virtue of the fact that if you go back far enough, they are phylogenetically related to Genuine Mahogany. It would be akin to referring to apes as humans because we're related if you go back far enough.

I don't think anyone has called sapele 'mahogany' for a long time. Kayha, though, is what Larrivee uses for its mahogany models, isn't it? I may be wrong, but I seem to remember hearing that the branch of mahogany L. used was kayha.

[rosborn]

Originally Posted by ewalling

I don't think anyone has called sapele 'mahogany' for a long time. Kayha, though, is what Larrivee uses for its mahogany models, isn't it? I may be wrong, but I seem to remember hearing that the branch of mahogany L. used was kayha.

Yes, Larrivee does use Kayha and Kayha is considered true Mahogany, per every source I found online.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Bard Rocks]

I am on email4eric's side of the fence here. Being especially open-minded about wood, I have no problems with a substitute wood as long as I like the guitar. What I do have a problem with is being sold one thing and getting another. That's deception, pure and simple, no matter how good the reason is.

That is why new names crop up. "African Mahogany" is one that comes to mind or "Layered" if we were debating laminates. Manufacturers worry that their product will not be accepted if they use the wrong word, such as Sapele, Sipo or Khaya (and they have good reason to be, too), so they search for alternate names to avoid an outright lie or in some cases are tempted to cross that line.

As an aside, wouldn't "South American Mahogany" preclude "Honduran Mahogany" as Honduras is in Central America?

[Goodallboy]

I once played a McPherson with Sapele back and sides.

Best McPherson I've ever played.

But tone isn't part of this debate, sorry.

[GHS]

Like the late, great Frank Zappa once said;"Shut up and play yer guitar"!!!

[sminmt]

Originally Posted by PiousDevil

Can anybody tell what specific "mahogany" this is?

Looks a lot like the genuine mahogany back on my Martin D-18GE. Bet it sounds great.

[sminmt]

From one of my pricelists today for kiln dried flat sawn lumber suitable for production millwork :

4/4 Genuine Honduran Mahogany: $8.50 a board foot
4/4 African Mahogany: $4.53 BF
4/4 Sapele : $4.03 BF
4/4 Philippine Mahogany: $3.96 BF

[JackNapier]

Originally Posted by rosborn

Yes, Larrivee does use Kayha and Kayha is considered true Mahogany, per every source I found online.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Khaya is not real mahogany. No matter what jean larriveee says. Of course he's going to want people to believe it's the real thing ($$$). Truth is, it's not true mahogany. It's a substitute for mahogany. Akin to RC cola to Coca Cola.