Which is better wood for guitar mahogany or rosewood?

I come to realize that over the years of my collecting that I owned a ton of acoustics with mahogany back and sides except for a Guild DC5E that I didn’t own for very long and ended up returning due to signs of the neck block having slipped. How does a rosewood back and sides acoustic sound in comparison to the mahogany back and sided acoustics? Is rosewood back and sided acoustics somewhat of a premium feature?

Gosh, if only someone would make a video on this!

In very general terms, mahogany has a woodier and dryer tone while rosewood produces more overtones. However, the character of the wood is only part of the equation as the build design has a large effect on the sound. So, YMMV.

Gosh, if only someone would make a video on this!

Yea only if I could easily access a video that compares both variants’ sound capabilities

I guess in the case of the D50 and D55 is the main difference the amount of “bling”?

As far as premium, rosewood has always been a more expensive wood, so it typically is on more expensive guitars. I tend to hear mahogany as a warmer, more blended sound, and rosewood clearer, more distinct.
(The natural was mahogany, btw; sunburst, rosewood.)

Oh boy a can of worms it is.
As the folks said above Hog is more dryer in tone the rosewood which has more warmth .

Mahogany has a quicker attack which means the once the note is struck its reflection back to your ear is well ..... Quick . Lol

Think of rosewood as a little bit A.D.D strike the note and it kind of wonders around a bit , think a reverbish sound .

The notes decay in Mahogany quicker then Rosewood. .
The Overtones battle in good guitars are about equal less how long they last between the two .

Ok so now the hard part . The warmth will be the most prominent difference between the 2 .

Build comes in hard and heavy next but also luck of the wood itself as each piece is different even if thier from the same section of the tree.

Each type has its place so it just depends what your ear likes the best . The more you investigate and play the different types of woods the more you'll learn.

I think why Roseewood and the likes has become a premium term is because of the introduction of it many years ago back to the Golden age.

Honduras mahogany was the primary wood used in guitars when Martin and Gibson and whoever else was in the running during those hay day years .

So when Rosewood came into the picture it was new , different, the new in thing so to say . So you know how things go , if its pretty and you want it you have to pay more . Lol

Thats pretty much when premium started along with the upcharge cost.
But now were more educated in the differences in tonality so to me there's no difference between the premium term , it makes no sense to me.

Mahogany gives you this and Rosewood gives you that as many other types have certain characteristics that are all disirable.

So basically its just the charge/cost for materials that says its premium more so then the sound or tone.

Hmm did I put my foot in my mouth again ???? Lol

Probably one of your best posts Ray...almost Al-ish in content.

Personally... I like hog

I think why Roseewood and the likes has become a premium term is because of the introduction of it many years ago back to the Golden age.
Honduras mahogany was the primary wood used in guitars when Martin and Gibson and whoever else was in the running during those hay day years .
So when Rosewood came into the picture it was new , different, the new in thing so to say . So you know how things go , if its pretty and you want it you have to pay more . Lol
Thats pretty much when premium started along with the upcharge cost.
But now were more educated in the differences in tonality so to me there's no difference between the premium term , it makes no sense to me.

Actually, when you go back & take a look at Martin’s history, rosewood was the more premium material going all the way back at least to the 1850s, and of course it was Brazilian until 1969. Parlor guitars from the early 20th century typically featured brw rosewood on higher line models, even with small manufacturers. I’ve owned a few of them & marveled at the beauty of the wood.

So essentially I would say that rosewood has always been considered the more premium wood for flattop guitars. But how that translates in actual use from piece to piece is another matter. I find the percussive quick-decay nature of maple to be my favorite tonewood (for my playing style), but also have rosewood & mahogany guitars I greatly enjoy. If I had to make a generalization about rosewood, I’d say it can often produce a deeper & more resonant tone compared to an equivalent mahogany instrument - But such generalizations are unquestionably made to be broken in the world of guitars, so every piece should be assessed on it’s own merits.

Hog is interesting. As a top wood, it's milder than Spruce, but.. as a back and sides. Ok, take a Martin D18 and beat the hell out of it, what do you hear? Same as on a D35, same basic woods/body shape, you hear a bark that reminds me of an SG going into a Marshall, I hear overdrive and distortion.

That in fact cuts through a room of unplugged but amped up bluegrassers like you wouldn't believe. Whereas that oh so pretty to look at Rosewood bodied guitar can get a little lost in mix in that situation, but alone in your room or entertaining a small crowd, it sounds really nice, I suppose with more overtones than Hog, but I like the way the overtones in as D35 work with my compositions, it's just right, and the slow decay is beautiful and haunting.

Then there's all the Brazilian cork sniffery, for those who can afford, will most assuredly claim that it is magical. Hell, I can remember decades ago, having a coffee at the donut shop reading the Sunday paper long before you ever even heard of the of a cell phone or the internet, and I see a '69 Martin D35 for a hefty price mind you, but I wanted it, iconic guitar, and the guy's wife answers the phone. He had left and taken the guitar down to the local Gibson Martin dealer to see about the wood in the back, huuuuuge freakin big deal about whether the back was really all Braz or the middle piece East Indian, the difference being like $1000 or more or whatever, gave up instantly. Don't need a guitar that bad.

Wood is wood. I got all these Airlines and Stellas made of Birch, each one sounds more fantastic than the other. They all have different voices.
A local celebrity roots country player good friend of mine who plays a Martin on stage every night picked up one of my Stellas one time, and he sounded so fkg good on it, it was unbelievable, the way his voice worked against that tiny guitar was magic. He wanted to trade me guitars for the one he brought with him that day on the spot and I said no.

At this point I've decided Hog/Spruce is pretty much the combo for me, just trying to pare it down between guitars that are Hog/Spruce but F vs D.

The F guitar sounds really pretty with impressive bass, but something about the D35 makes me go into a trance.

Rosewood was for a long time relatively more expensive but still common on inexpensive guitars--I have a c. 1900 Washburn Model 101 (the most basic model in the line at that time) with Brazilian back and sides. In Martin's modern (that is, 20th century) model lineup, the less-expensive -18 models are mahogany and the more-expensive -28s are rosewood. Same with Guild's solid-back lines from the 1960s. But in most cases, price differences were also associated with decorative elements, especially binding and inlays, as well as, say, fingerboard and bridge material.

As for sound, wood is just another variable in the build formula, as any luthier will tell you. And for every generalization about sound characteristics, there will be a counter-example available somewhere showing how bracing, size, top, and other variables affect the back/sides choice. Now, factory guitars, which depend on standardization of elements and measurements, will show off the characteristics of materials more reliably than will single-builder examples--I long ago decided that I preferred the sound of mahogany over rosewood in Guild's 1960s dreadnoughts, but I've played rosewood dreads and dread-like designs from other makers that I liked fine--my Goodall Standard, for example.

An example I have used before: a builder friend made three guitars as close to identical as he could, using rosewood, walnut, and mahogany for the back/sides. I wanted to buy a guitar from that batch and played all three a lot, finally settling on the rosewood. So wood does make a difference, but the other elements of the design gave the trio a very strong sonic family resemblance, and it was small differences that affected my choice.

So I owned my '76 D25M and a '99 DV52.

Both excellent guitars. I gotta give the nod to the mahogany one in terms of volume and tone, especially on the bottom end. The DV52 (rosewood) has a more balanced tone across all six strings, very nice for flatpicking leads and intricate fingerpicking.

Actually, when you go back & take a look at Martin’s history, rosewood was the more premium material going all the way back at least to the 1850s, and of course it was Brazilian until 1969. Parlor guitars from the early 20th century typically featured brw rosewood on higher line models, even with small manufacturers. I’ve owned a few of them & marveled at the beauty of the wood.

So essentially I would say that rosewood has always been considered the more premium wood for flattop guitars. But how that translates in actual use from piece to piece is another matter. I find the percussive quick-decay nature of maple to be my favorite tonewood (for my playing style), but also have rosewood & mahogany guitars I greatly enjoy. If I had to make a generalization about rosewood, I’d say it can often produce a deeper & more resonant tone compared to an equivalent mahogany instrument - But such generalizations are unquestionably made to be broken in the world of guitars, so every piece should be assessed on it’s own merits.

Ok my mistake I apologise .
Everything I've seen was hogs i honestly fo recall seeing Rosewood .

Huh maybe Mahogany should be the premium. Lol

I do think Rosewood is a step above Mahogany re price points, mostly. I think mfgs consider it a more premium wood vs hog.
Rosewood to my ears does sound fuller and I get more sustain.

That being said, I only own hog guitars now.

"Huh maybe Mahogany should be the premium. Lol"

There's a always going to be a lot of hype and hyperbole about a particular wood, but in fact the appeal of Hog is very strong, clean original M20 M30 guitars reflect that, and D25 hog top models are now catching up.

and i think Hog offers more control of the sound too for better clarity.

I’m this discussion, it would be interesting to know the price point difference between mahogany and rosewood back in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s. That is... how much the “tonewood” wholesalers were charging the guitar manufacturers. I have always assumed that rosewood was a rarer species, and that mahogany trees are more plentiful.

Hopefully, you have a toolbox full of tools. I gravitated from liking rosewood to liking mahogany as my playing evolved. Rosewood was bluring notes as I became a faster, cleaner player. The trailing overtones were still ringing as the next note attack was happening. I just did a recording experiment where I tried several guitars in the rhythm guitar track. My Guild D 35 sat in the track better than anything else. My Texan's bass interfeared with the bass track, and my Martin D 35 was just mud. But when I added a second sparse arpegiated part, the Martin shined because the was enough space to feature the overtones.

Recording an aggressive rhythm part is a dream with my 00 15. So to say which is best for me is a fool's errand. I called Bryan Kimsey up about modding a D 18 and ended up buying a Martin D 35 custom, primarily because it was a very dry punchy non D 35 like guitar. Solo playing on it is fine, recording not so much. I am primarily into mahogany, glad to have one rosewood. I suppose if I played just one style I could hone in on one guitar. But two is better.

I basically employ the same fingerpicking style on every acoustic instrument I play. Whether the body is maple, rosewood, or mahogany, there’s a spectrum of tone that I find satisfying. While each instrument’s characteristics may be significantly different, allowing the ears & brain to be motivated by these variations, tonally they fall within a range. If too muddy or too full of competing overtones, an instrument will fall out of the acceptable range & won’t work with my playing style.

The same can be said regarding my choice of electrics (with the exception of extended fretboard access, which is one of the primarily reasons I enjoy playing them). There will be a tonal range I find satisfying, but there’s a wide variety of ways to get there, employing different pickups, amps, & speakers.

So typically when assessing an instrument, body wood doesn’t drive my choice, but rather the instrument first has to fall within a particular tonal range.

Rosewood smells better. That ought to be worth a few extra shekels.