pulelehua
Well-known member
I want everybody to stop what they're doing and repeat after me:
Koa is a species of Acacia. There are many species of Acacia. Some are as soft as cedar, some are as hard as ebony, some are inbetween.
Repeat three times.
It feels good that we've all cleared that up doesn't it.
Ok, next issue. Why does Acacia have to vs. Koa? Are they battling to the death or something?
Next issue, You can't campare Acacia and Koa generally. They vary in their property's at least as much as the ukes built from them. You can compare a [insert uke brand here] koa uke with a [insert uke brand here] [insert another species of acacia such as Australian Blackwood] ukulele.
I have to say, this post strikes me as a bit patronising, particularly given that this point has been made many times in this thread already.
I suspect the issue that drives this question is the shopping angle. The real question might be:
"Why do Koa ukuleles often cost three times as much as Acacia ukuleles, if they're more or less the same wood?"
And, as many people have said, it's about build quality. That's the "why these two woods?" I think. People wonder if it's like buying two identical cars, one with a VW badge, one with a Skoda badge. Aren't you just paying for the badge? Similarly, are you just paying for the name koa, or is that ukulele better? Again, build quality.
Incidentally, I don't think you meant to come across as patronising. That's just how it came across to me. But I know there's a lot of frustration amongst some over this particular thread. And if you're a luthier, I can imagine wood vs. wood threads make you want to bash yourself in the head with blunt objects. I still find myself reading them, even though they almost always follow the same pattern.