Full Solid Mahogany vs Solid Top Acacia w Laminate Acacia Back & Sides?

What are your thoughts on Full Solid Mahogany vs Solid Top Acacia w Laminate Acacia Back & Sides for a tenor? These are caramel models and there is not a lot in it regarding price.

Which would give a better sound and be a better buy in your opinion? I am looking for a warmer rather than brighter sound.

I would go with the all solid mahogany. I think it will probably sound warmer 'out of the box' plus hog has a reputation for opening up over time, so it should just keep getting better

:agree: Solid mahogany should give you a nice warm tone, which I like - the acacia will be a bit brighter.

uke1950 said:

:agree: Solid mahogany should give you a nice warm tone, which I like - the acacia will be a bit brighter.

Click to expand...

:agree: as well.

However, consider that with any solid woods, you may need to humidify, depending upon your INDOOR RH%, and NOT what the weatherman says on TV, which is the OUTSIDE humidity level.

FYI: There are many recent threads on humidification and proper use of hygrometer for this time of year, for when the heat is running. You owe it to yourself to read those threads.

Thanks for your info I will go with the mahogany Humidity is never a problem here in rainy UK

Scatterbrain said:

What are your thoughts on Full Solid Mahogany vs Solid Top Acacia w Laminate Acacia Back & Sides for a tenor? These are caramel models and there is not a lot in it regarding price.

Which would give a better sound and be a better buy in your opinion? I am looking for a warmer rather than brighter sound.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately Caramel doesn't seem to have either available on their website right now. I have the their full solid mahogany and it does indeed have a mellow, sweet sound. Maybe you can contact them and see if they will coming back soon. They have some new models coming out this year as well. It may serve you best to wait.

I personally don't see a lot of upside in a solid back and sides in a lower end Uke(or higher end for that matter). I think a solid top is important for tone but the back and sides not so much as long as a good laminate is used. I love my caramel mahogany solid top but nothing south of $500 that I own compares to the wonderful tone of my solid acacia top caramel.

UkieOkie said:

I personally don't see a lot of upside in a solid back and sides in a lower end Uke(or higher end for that matter). I think a solid top is important for tone but the back and sides not so much as long as a good laminate is used.

Click to expand...

I used to think this.

But I'm sure I was wrong. It really depends on how the uke is built. I used to think the back and sides were just reflecting walls for the sound. And with many ukes.. that is true.

But on higher end/lighter builds, the back and sides do definitely vibrate and create sound.
Take a look at the other thread about damping the sound with your belly. The only way that works is if the back and sides are also vibrating.

On heavier built ukes, the back and sides I think don't contribute much to the sound.

But... on my better sounding/louder ukes... you can feel the back vibrating on your stomach, and even feel the vibration rippling in the neck.

That being said.. to answer the OP, I think it's really dependant on how the uke is built, and without playing them... it's really hard to say.

spookelele said:

I used to think this.

But I'm sure I was wrong. It really depends on how the uke is built. I used to think the back and sides were just reflecting walls for the sound. And with many ukes.. that is true.

But on higher end/lighter builds, the back and sides do definitely vibrate and create sound.
Take a look at the other thread about damping the sound with your belly. The only way that works is if the back and sides are also vibrating.

On heavier built ukes, the back and sides I think don't contribute much to the sound.

But... on my better sounding/louder ukes... you can feel the back vibrating on your stomach, and even feel the vibration rippling in the neck.

That being said.. to answer the OP, I think it's really dependant on how the uke is built, and without playing them... it's really hard to say.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that a lightly built back can vibrate more and can have its own sound, but I differ from you in that I don't think this is a good thing. Every string pluck only has so much energy. If some of that energy, that could be vibrating the soundboard, is vibrating the back then the back becomes more a part of the voice. That sounds like a good thing until you consider belly muting. I love the sound of koalohas but I don't like the deadening that happens when I stand and play them because the sound gets muted on my body. I'm not trashing koalohas. On the contrary, I think they are fabulous Ukes. I just don't like the dampening effect.

UkieOkie said:

I agree with you that a lightly built back can vibrate more and can have its own sound, but I differ from you in that I don't think this is a good thing. Every string pluck only has so much energy. If some of that energy, that could be vibrating the soundboard, is vibrating the back then the back becomes more a part of the voice. That sounds like a good thing until you consider belly muting. I love the sound of koalohas but I don't like the deadening that happens when I stand and play them because the sound gets muted on my body. I'm not trashing koalohas. On the contrary, I think they are fabulous Ukes. I just don't like the dampening effect.

Click to expand...

I think all backs vibrate. Just because you make it thicker, doesn't mean it's not vibrating, just that you don't feel it as much.

There was an interesting TEDx with a luthier that has changed the way I think about this.
His view, is one that when I think about it... I have to agree.

When we play, we apply some amount of force to a string. That's a fixed input force, that causes a string to vibrate with that force.
Anything and everything in a uke, takes away from that force and uses it somehow/where else. If that use isn't to make sound, then the instrument wastes the energy. Some waste is converted to color when the wood makes a sound of its own, which can be a good thing, like a warmth. But other things just eat the energy and kill the sound.

Assuming you have 2 identically built instruments, with thicker/thinner back/sides, the force leaving the sound board, must be absorbed by the body of the instrument. There's two things the body can do with the vibration. Make sound, or not make sound.

When we hold it against our body and it damps, some of that vibration goes into our body. When you have a lighter build, where the body resonates, some of that energy is making sound. When you have a heavier build, the body doesn't covert it to sound, and just eats it.

On the one hand, a heavier built uke seems to damp less against the belly. But really a heavier built uke is just all around self damping. It's why they are more quiet. A lighter uke, is less self damping, but we notice the belly damping more because its already starting from a higher energy resonating level.

Solid Mahogany. It is warm, with a little brightness ... and it is MORE RESONANT ... than Acacia ... the laminate back and sides will mute the sound even more.

I wouldn't even think twice about it.

That makes sense except I would add a third thing the back can do and that is reflect the energy back up to the sound board. Do you have a link or something I could search for on that tedx? I'd like to watch it. Thanks.

Happy Strumming,

Trevor

UkieOkie said:

That makes sense except I would add a third thing the back can do and that is reflect the energy back up to the sound board. Do you have a link or something I could search for on that tedx? I'd like to watch it. Thanks.

Happy Strumming,

Trevor

Click to expand...

it's this guy talking about it through the physics perspective.

Thank you sir.

Thanks all, I will watch the Ted talk with interest later on

A lot of people would disagree, but to my ear solid mahogany is the classic ukulele sound.
What size are you considering?
I find there is a big difference between soprano and tenor.
I'm most comfortable playing a tenor but I prefer the sound of a soprano. I think it comes down to string tension.

spookelele said:

it's this guy talking about it through the physics perspective.

Click to expand...

Ok Spookelele I watched the video and I took it as a confirmation of what I'm saying. With a fixed amount of energy if the back is vibrating, especially to the point that it be strongly felt in ones own body, then that is subtracting some energy that could be being projected toward the audience.

My apologies for the thread hijack. This is interesting stuff. Thanks to the OP and all for the insights.

UkieOkie said:

With a fixed amount of energy if the back is vibrating, especially to the point that it be strongly felt in ones own body, then that is subtracting some energy that could be being projected toward the audience.

Click to expand...

Energy and mass are related.

If you hit a golf ball, with a club, it will go so far. If you hit a bowling ball with that same club in the same way, it wont go so far. It's not that the bowling ball wasted less energy.

If a back vibrates, which it obviously does, that means there is energy going to it. If that energy makes sound, and you're trying to convert energy into sound, that energy isn't wasted as motion.

Speaker cones are made of light materials, not heavy, because their vibration makes sound.

If you think the back and sides don't participate in the sound, think of it like a guitar amp. If you sit on an amp, it doesn't make it less quiet. But if you lean up against the cone, it will damp. If you damp a uke on your belly, then the whole uke is vibrating, regardless if it's built light, or built heavy. Just because on heavy you don't hear it, doesn't mean it isn't soaking up the energy.

spookelele said:

Energy and mass are related.

If you hit a golf ball, with a club, it will go so far. If you hit a bowling ball with that same club in the same way, it wont go so far. It's not that the bowling ball wasted less energy.

If a back vibrates, which it obviously does, that means there is energy going to it. If that energy makes sound, and you're trying to convert energy into sound, that energy isn't wasted as motion.

Speaker cones are made of light materials, not heavy, because their vibration makes sound.

If you think the back and sides don't participate in the sound, think of it like a guitar amp. If you sit on an amp, it doesn't make it less quiet. But if you lean up against the cone, it will damp. If you damp a uke on your belly, then the whole uke is vibrating, regardless if it's built light, or built heavy. Just because on heavy you don't hear it, doesn't mean it isn't soaking up the energy.

Click to expand...

Think of a Uke like a racket ball court. They don't make the back wall out of something soft because that would absorb energy and would make the ball bounce back to the player with less energy because it would have spent some of its finite starting energy on the absorbent wall. The back wall is stiff to bounce energy back in the intended direction. Same thing here. That is why we see more dense/reflective woods more often used for back and sides when more vibratory woods are used for tops. Reflection is happening in the Uke, as is the back vibrating regardless of the material used. However there is a balance. All other things being equal, a Uke with a stiff reflective back should produce more sound through the soundboard than would a Uke which has a less reflective lighter back that soaks up energy through its own vibration or allows it to pass through to the players body. To reference the Tedx video, the goal would be to get as much back out of the instrument as possible.

sam13 said:

Solid Mahogany. It is warm, with a little brightness ... and it is MORE RESONANT ... than Acacia ... the laminate back and sides will mute the sound even more.

Click to expand...

About laminate sounding more dull, I feel that this can't be generalized. It depends on what exactly the laminated back is made of. Instruments with laminated back and sides may project better, and have more volume and a brighter sound, than solid b/s instruments. The back's main purpose is to reflect the soundwaves back to the top, it does not necessarily contribute directly to the sound, especially since most people touch the back with their body, so it does not vibrate. Luthiers seem to have different opinions about this. There are laminated backs/sides made with hollow space, making them more resonant than solid wood.

I think the bad reputation of laminate comes from laminated instruments often being entry models, so chances are that everything about them is cheap and inferior, and they'd be just as bad sounding even if they were made of solid wood (there is no shortage of overbuilt, dead-sounding solid wood ukuleles).

As for the UK not having humidity problems: Outside climate isn't the issue usually, but it gets very dry inside the house when the heating is on in the winter (where the air is dry outside also). German and English weather is comparable and I was convinced that humidifying wouldn't be necessary ... right until I got a hygrometer and saw it drop below 35% (down to 25%) in a heated living room, especially right after airing.

Knowing what I do know (and experiencing a guitar with laminated back/sides, laminated Kiwaya soprano), I'd consider buying the model with laminated back/sides. It removes a lot of the worrying and may well sound as good or even better. I'd make it dependent on the specific instruments in question and what they sound like.