Jump to content

Swamp Ash or Mahogany?


rdegtyar

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I want to replace a strat-like guitar body and I can't decide between Swamp Ash and Mahogany. I've heard different things from different people. Some say mahogany is soft and Swamp Ash is bright. Some say the opposite. Others say that Swamp Ash has scooped mids. I am a little confused.

 

I want to get great rock sound, full and reach. Not extremly bright, with good sustain. No "mush" on the chords and riffs. Solos that can cut through the mix and really sing. What would you choose? Are there any samples, or any other sources of info on this? What guitars can I try and compare for the sound differences?

What guitar players play these type of guitars?

 

I have Warmoth ultra-wide neck and Bill Laurance pickups (HSS).

 

Thanks a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

You cannot really tell until you get the guitar built what your guitar will actually sound like. There are guidelines:

 

http://www.warmoth.com/Guitar/Bodies/Options/BodyWoodOptions.aspx

 

Mahogany is not a soft wood. Whoever told you that knows zilch, so avoid them in the future:~) But you find a lot of African mahogany these days, and it's not as toneful as Honduran (now endangered) according to the tone snobs. I've never owned a guitar that had the African variety, so I can't really say for sure, but the old timers at Gibson in the 50's hated it.

 

If you want your strat to sound like a strat with the clarity you describe, you should go with ash or alder. Again, a lot of wood that passes for swamp ash is just plain ash. Swamp ash is lightweight and quite porus; it's also light in color with darker grain, and it takes a transparent finish very well.

 

It sounds really snappy in the lows with an almost hi-fi quality near the top. The mids are slightly scooped--perfect for traditional Fender tones.

 

Mahogany sounds fantastic too--I always think of Angus with his SG and 50 Watt Marshall Plexi heads. His tone has amazing power and clarity, but there's a lot of mids forward in his setup. Mahogany really helps with that aggressive midrange thump that some of us can't get enough of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

You cannot really tell until you get the guitar built what your guitar will actually sound like. There are guidelines:




Mahogany is not a soft wood. Whoever told you that knows zilch, so avoid them in the future:~) But you find a lot of African mahogany these days, and it's not as toneful as Honduran (now endangered) according to the tone snobs. I've never owned a guitar that had the African variety, so I can't really say for sure, but the old timers at Gibson in the 50's hated it.

 

 

ive heard some people claim that the late 50's (59 burst included) were really african mahogany because of the light weight (and claims of gibson purchase orders for wood and even claiming they can see the grain differences). who knows. warmoth only uses african mahogany at the moment because south american is cites listed (though not endangered - yet).

 

anyhow, mahogany in general IS a softer hardwood. its softer than alot of pine. swamp ash is a little harder, alder is little softer. hard ash, maple, walnut, etc are far harder, and of course most rosewoods and ebonies are on another level entirely.

 

but theres alot of overlap and variability, and as you say, youll never know till you have the thing in hand. in the end though, while the wood variations do alter tone, its not really *that much*, so i say, buy what looks pretty and has a good weight!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think you can often see a difference between honduran and african...

 

african tends to have the dark/light striping...

 

african_mahogany.183143440_large.jpeg

 

And honduran doesn't...has more consistency of color and often times like this one...that arching grain pattern rather than straight on african.

 

Honduran%20Mahogany.jpg

 

Both differences I find noticeable under finishes. Obviously this is not an exact method but usually if I see a guitar and don't know..and guess based on the above...when I find out it's usually right.

 

As for differences...well all my guitars are african (japanese gibson copies) so I guess I'm a bit bias but I think there is no difference as apparently the densities of both woods are about the same. I think the key is getting a nice spongy not overly heavy piece of either. Still I kind of do want to get a honduran LP just for snob appeal...lol....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I think you can often see a difference between honduran and african...


african tends to have the dark/light striping...


And honduran doesn't...has more consistency of color and often times like this one...that arching grain pattern rather than straight on african.


 

 

all youve got there is a flat sawn and quarter sawn piece. when both are flat sawn they look very much the same. on quarter, the khaya tends to be a bit more ribbony, but both have striping and prominent medulary rays.

 

anyhow, i dont know (and dont really care) what gibson used. i just thought it was an interesting rumour that pokes at traditional thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It depends on which you like the looks, weight and price of better.

 

On a strat-style guitar your pickups are mounted to a plastic pickguard which causes them to float over routes thereby never touching the wood. Leo liked using pine quite a bit in the early days. Do the math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

all youve got there is a flat sawn and quarter sawn piece. when both are flat sawn they look very much the same. on quarter, the khaya tends to be a bit more ribbony, but both have striping and prominent medulary rays.


anyhow, i dont know (and dont really care) what gibson used. i just thought it was an interesting rumour that pokes at traditional thinking.

 

 

I sold a one piece African Rosewood Body and as I recall it wasn't even the same species of wood.

 

http://www.woodweb.com/knowledge_base/African_Versus_Honduras_Mahogany.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

all youve got there is a flat sawn and quarter sawn piece. when both are flat sawn they look very much the same. on quarter, the khaya tends to be a bit more ribbony, but both have striping and prominent medulary rays.


anyhow, i dont know (and dont really care) what gibson used. i just thought it was an interesting rumour that pokes at traditional thinking.

 

 

I sold a one piece African Rosewood Body on e bay and researched it a little bit, as I recall it wasn't even the same species of wood.

 

http://www.woodweb.com/knowledge_base/African_Versus_Honduras_Mahogany.html

 

Here's is a more specific link.

 

http://www.woodweb.com/knowledge_base/Mahogany__One_Name_Many_Species.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'll go with Swamp Ash any day for any guitar, if I had my choice. Everything you mentioned wanting in a guitar body is going to be found more easily in Swamp Ash than Mahogany too.

 

Strong, vibrant upper mid response with good highs and balanced low end. Wonderfully light and resonant, AND it looks great in clear finishes. If you want the 'warm and subtle' tone of Mahogany, use the tone knob :cop:

 

I would LOVE to play a Swamp Ash Les Paul...

 


On a strat-style guitar your pickups are mounted to a plastic pickguard which causes them to float over routes thereby never touching the wood. Leo liked using pine quite a bit in the early days. Do the math.

 

Same thing could also be said for a Les Paul and pickup rings. I gather the more important part is that the strings, via the bridge and neck/nut ARE touching the wood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I want to replace a strat-like guitar body and I can't decide between Swamp Ash and Mahogany. I've heard different things from different people. Some say mahogany is soft and Swamp Ash is bright. Some say the opposite. Others say that Swamp Ash has scooped mids. I am a little confused.


I want to get great rock sound, full and reach. Not extremly bright, with good sustain. No "mush" on the chords and riffs. Solos that can cut through the mix and really sing. What would you choose? Are there any samples, or any other sources of info on this? What guitars can I try and compare for the sound differences?

What guitar players play these type of guitars?


I have Warmoth ultra-wide neck and Bill Laurance pickups (HSS).


Thanks a lot.

 

 

The swamp ash should give you a traditional tone. But I think I'd go for the mahogany (Khaya ivorensis). It's related to Honduran mahogany. As they're both in the Meliaceae family of trees. And Honduran mahogany is endangered. I think the mahogany would give you a bigger tone. It's also a little heavier. Which should make for more sustain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Same thing could also be said for a Les Paul and pickup rings. I gather the more important part is that the strings, via the bridge and neck/nut ARE touching the wood.

 

 

The crucial parts are the electronics and the "witness points." On a strat, one end of the strings is attached to a bridge block that, in many many cases, is cheap pot metal. The bridge "floats" to provide the "tremolo" effect thereby minimizing to almost zero the coupling between the string and the body. The other end is either a plastic nut or the frets, which are attached to the neck, not the body.

 

My strat is the stratiest sounding strat you're ever going to find. The body is made of plywood. What gives it it's sound is the Custom Wound Mojotone pickups and the wiring. The effect of body material [and they make them out of masonite, plexi, etc.] on a solid-body electric guitar is negligible compared to the electronics.

 

And I'm not trying to start "this" argument again. You may choose not to agree, but please don't flame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
on a
solid-body electric guitar
is negligible compared to the electronics.


Body material has a big influence on the tone of a guitar. That's the biggest reason why synthetics haven't caught on. They just don't sound good. Guitars flex when they're played. The amount of flexibility, the weight, etc, all make a difference in how the strings vibrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I sold a one piece African Rosewood Body and as I recall it wasn't even the same species of wood.


 

 

um. african rosewood has nothing to do with mahogany, and i sure hope its not the same species.

 

there are 3 south american mahognay species, and 7 species of khaya (african mahogany). the theres utile and sapele, which are sister species sometimes sold as mahogany. then spanish cedar (also a mahogany), and finally toon, othewise known as indian red cedar which squier has been using recently.

 

and then theres the stuff sold as mahogany thats not mahogany all...

 

the 1 south american species that isnt endangered (honduran) is usually labeled "genuine mahogany" to separate it from the others, but the others are all in the mahogany family.

 

theres your wood lesson for the day.

 

as for ash or mahogany, i like ash, but if i was hand making the bodu or neck, id use machogany, just because its way easier to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Acoustic and semi-acoustic - agree 100%


Solid-body electric - urban myth. Tone is 99.9% in the electronics.

 

 

I think we've already had this battle this week! I agree with you, but there are a LOT of folks who feel that the the body material is a crucial component of what comes out of the amp. I don't think that either side is ever going to convince the other, unless we can find a PhD audio engineer or physicist with access to a lot of test equipment. Until then, it's pretty much all anecdotal...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I think we've already had this battle this week! I agree with you, but there are a LOT of folks who feel that the the body material is a crucial component of what comes out of the amp. I don't think that either side is ever going to convince the other, unless we can find a PhD audio engineer or physicist with access to a lot of test equipment. Until then, it's pretty much all anecdotal...

 

 

Thank goodness I missed it!

 

Having had this discussion many times over the years, I agree with you absolutely.

 

I have found a curious inability for some to distinguish between an ACOUSTIC guitar and a SOLIDBODY ELECTRIC guitar. Some tend to consider a guitar a guitar and what holds for one is presumed to carry over to the other. It doesn't help that the myth has been perpetuated by some manufacturers marketing departments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Personally, I'd love to get a quantitative analysis of the contribution of body material to tone, but I'm not holding my breath. It would be nice to know if the extra $$ you spend for exotic tonewoods in a solid-body electric have a commensurate affect on tone or not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Personally, I'd love to get a quantitative analysis of the contribution of body material to tone, but I'm not holding my breath. It would be nice to know if the extra $$ you spend for exotic tonewoods in a solid-body electric have a commensurate affect on tone or not...

 

 

pick up 2 les pauls in a store. they will sound a little different, even with the same types of woods. how meaningful that is, thats up to you. i personally think its not worth too much fuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...