Difference in Tone of Mahogany verse Maple Guitars

[matsickma]

I have owned at one time or another a Maple top M65 and a Mahogany top M65. Now I didn't own them at the same time so I couldn't compare the tone differences. However my memory says the Mahogany was brighter.

I currently own a Mahogany SF4 with P90s, and a Maple SF4 with stock Dimarzios and also a late Westerly Maple SF5. To my ear the Mahogany sounds brighter and the Maple sounds "warmer". This stuff is pretty subjective.

However I thought I read a while back on LTG that the Mahogany was not as bright as a Maple body. Unfortunatly the Mahogany SF4 with P90 is thinner the the Mapele SF4 and SF5 so acoustically they may not be a fair comparison.

What do you guys have to say?

M

 

[Guild Beginner]

The mahogany should be darker. My 'hog M65 3/4ths is much darker than my maple CE-100D, but they aren't really comparable as the size/depths/pickups are different.

 

[dogberry]

Edit: oops, nevermind.

 

[telegeir]

Conventional wisdom has it that Mahogany is a lot warmer than maple. While figured maple certainly looks nice, it lacks the bottom resonance of other woods, which is why everyone from the classic violin builders to modern acoustic builders tended/tends to use it for the back and sides but not the lid, which is usually made from more plain looking but better resonating woods like spruce.

I do have a custom strat made from solid flame maple, and that was a concern for me. But my luthier claimed it would be OK, which it turned out to be. This guitar uses EMGs anyway, which tend to be more independent of the tone wood.

Warmoth has a nice description of tone woods here: http://www.warmoth.com:80/Guitar/Bodies/Options/BodyWoodOptions.aspx

Geir

 

[ave del noche]

Maple is brighter than mahogany, but I think with any sort of laminate guitar (like the m65 or SF4) it's hard to make any generalizations. I have a maple SF4 and M75 that are thicker/darker sounding than my mahogany and spruce/mahogany equivalents.

 

[telegeir]

That is true. If you have a thick body and a thin top, then the body by virtue of bigger mass will mean more to the sound. That is true even on a thinline type body. Also, they both (body and top) IMHO contribute less than the pickup. But then I subscribe to the theory that if you screw a Telecaster bridge and pickup to a 2x4" of any kind of wood, it wills sound like a Telecaster.

Geir

 

[MrBoZiffer]

This topic always interests me. I think the rules are good to go by, but you never know until you play the guitar. I briefly owned a Hofner archtop that had a spruce top and rosewood back and sides. It had no bass response whatsoever. My tiny Guild F-20 has more bass and the back and sides are maple. As does my CE-100, also maple. I sold that Hofner pretty quick.

 

[krysh]

my 2 cts:

usually with semi hollow laminated guitars the factor more important to the sound is the neck wood.
if I compare my maple-neck sf4 to a mahogany-neck sf4 I find the maple guitar more percussive and the mahogany more mellow. don't know if brighter is the right expression, I find maple a bit faster in tone development.

 

[mad dog]

Matsickma:

What's the story on P90s in your SF IV? I'm assuming you put them there. How does that one sound?

MD

 

[matsickma]

This link should answer most of your questions.

http://letstalkguild.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14511

M

 

[billydlight]

I find my Maple CE's to be much brighter than my mahogany SFIII's My Maple T100's are brighter as well.

 

[mad dog]

Matsickma:

Thanks for the link. The only remaining question is how do I get my hands on one of these amazing looking Guilds???

(This forum is a financial landmine just waiting for me to make a move.)
MD

 

[matsickma]

Well this guy was selling one a month ago. Maybe it is still available. p3pa@aol.com

M

 

[matsickma]

Thanks for all your comments!

I'll have to reassess how I characterize the sound of mahagony verses maple.

M

 

[kpsta]

Agreed on the warmer sound of mahogany... my '66 SFXII is much warmer than any of the maple-bodied SFs I've played.

 

[fronobulax]

Agreed on the warmer sound of mahogany... my '66 SFXII is much warmer than any of the maple-bodied SFs I've played.

Welcome to LTG, kp...

 

[kpsta]

Thanks, frono... I'm glad to be here. Until I stumbled upon the old SF, I had always sworn by Rickenbackers. Now, I've redirected all my G.A.S tendencies toward finding an old SFV or SFVI.

 

[capnjuan]

Hi kp and welcome to LTG; all I know about basses is that they are commonly fished for in lakes, ponds, and rivers. Welcome!

 

[Qvart]

I have owned at one time or another a Maple top M65 and a Mahogany top M65. Now I didn't own them at the same time so I couldn't compare the tone differences. However my memory says the Mahogany was brighter.

I can't speak for some of the guitars you all have been discussing, and my Guild electrics are 'hog and ash, so no comparison to be made there with maple. However, I just tried out an '85 G-37 (maple back-sides-neck, spruce top) and it was much brighter than my DCE1 (a lower line Guild), which is mahogany back-sides-neck and spruce top. The DCE1 has a lot more low end and a much warmer sound. Now, the sound of the G-37 was fine, just not what I'm looking for. Although if I were to want more than one acoustic in the stable I would consider maple so that sound option would be available. As it is, I dig the 'hog sound more and had to pass.

 

[marcellis]

My arch top is not a Guild. It's a hand-made Vietnamese with 'marcellis' on the headstock.
It's Mahogany with a carved Spruce top. I love it so much. It doesn't sound like
any other arch-top. And it kills most others in terms of sheer volume. It's a true
jumbo with a deep body. So it holds its own acoustically against flat-tops.

OTOH, for recording work on a flat-top, I prefer Maple. In my experience, Maple
sounds truer on my recordings.