Why Does Gibson Favor Sitka?

[Luna Pick]

Howdy-

Anyone know why Gibson seems to favor Sitka for top rather than red, Engelmann, Italian, etc. that others seems to favor these days?

Thanks.

[Kieran]

Only a guess but maybe they stockpiled sitka years ago and need to use it up.

[Ken Waltham]

Cheapest, most readily available.

[sunburst]

Yep. Easiest to get in large pieces and in large quantities (so far...), economical (so far...) and an excellent top wood.

[Luna Pick]

Thanks. You all probably know more than me and I don't disagree but I bet Collings makes a lot more mandos than Gibson, and it seems they use mostly red and Engelmann. And Gibson mandos aren't cheap, so would think they could "afford" other tops.

[DataNick]

Thanks. You all probably know more than me and I don't disagree but I bet Collings makes a lot more mandos than Gibson, and it seems they use mostly red and Engelmann. And Gibson mandos aren't cheap, so would think they could "afford" other tops.

There's an old saying:"Everything rises and falls on leadership"...if the leadership at Gibson(and I don't mean David Harvey) wanted to make it happen, they would! There's no reason that I know of that would limit their ability to make mandolins with sitka, adirondack, engelmann, european, cedar, or any other top. I mean if the pac-rim products (Kentucky, Eastman, Northfield, JBovier,etc.) can offer that kind of variety, then there's no reason that Gibson can't; other than their leadership chooses not to.
No idea why...

[sgarrity]

I always assumed they used sitka on everything to help drive interest in the Master Models. Also from a historical perspective Loars had red spruce tops and the Ferns switched to sitka sometime around 1925-ish as I recall. Maybe one of the Gibson history experts can confirm the actual date/timeframe of the switch.

[LBob]

Some of it is just the sound you are going for, though... it's not like a piece of Adirondack spruce is *that* much more expensive than a piece of Sitka... Adirondack is brighter, in my experience... not always what you want.

[BradKlein]

Ferns switched to sitka sometime around 1925-ish as I recall. Maybe one of the Gibson history experts can confirm the actual date/timeframe of the switch.

I've never heard that, and I'm skeptical, but willing to be corrected.

[sgarrity]

Just posted the question in the vintage section. Let's see what the real experts have to say!

[DataNick]

From the thread Gibson F-5 Fern vs Master-Model

Fred...we can fix that .

As for what woods are used in Loar era mandolins...it is generally considered that Red Spruce was what was used, however, the one thing we know about Loars is that nothing is set in stone. There may well have been a coupe that used Sitka. It is the same with the later 20's. They used Sitka primarily, but they also used what they had in the shop and we know there were woods used that did not seem to be from the later 20's in some of the mandolins. In other words, while it would be unusual to find a Loar without a red spruce top, I would never say impossible. I would also say it is highly possible to see a Fern with a red spruce top, though that would not be the norm. I hope that stirs the mud .

[Spruce]

... it's not like a piece of Adirondack spruce is *that* much more expensive than a piece of Sitka...

What, 2-to-3 times more expensive??
That would get the attention of the folks calling the shots, especially at a company like Gibson.

There's no reason that I know of that would limit their ability to make mandolins with sitka, adirondack, engelmann, european, cedar, or any other top. I mean if the pac-rim products (Kentucky, Eastman, Northfield, JBovier,etc.) can offer that kind of variety, then there's no reason that Gibson can't; other than their leadership chooses not to.
No idea why...

I do know that the folks calling the shots in Bozeman don't want to have anything to do with Engelmann, despite the fact they reside right in the heart of Engelmann country...
(Or, at least this was the case 20 years ago--the last time I dealt with them)...

At that time, it was a matter of taste, not economics...

[barney 59]

For a large manufacturer availability and consistency become major factors and probably over price. Case in point. I have a nice stand of black walnut trees on my little chunk of woods in West Virginia. In the 70's lumber purchasers from Rocky Mount would ride the roads looking for trees. I would get offers averaging $5000 a tree for a walnut tree that they thought might produce a veneer quality log, I always resisted the temptation because I really didn't want to let them go and figuring also that it was like money in the bank! 15 years later the price was way down--and I mean less than half. The supply was way down to the point that manufacturers couldn't depend on a reliable source to maintain a line of furniture so they went on to other things. A builder or smaller manufacturer has much more flexibility because they need less.

[DataNick]

For a large manufacturer availability and consistency become major factors and probably over price....A builder or smaller manufacturer has much more flexibility because they need less.

I get that Barney, but how do you account for the fact that for example Collings and Weber make a lot more mandolins than Gibson and they both offer red spruce topped mandolins in more models and for much less in cost than Gibson does?

[barney 59]

But how many instruments does Gibson produce compared to Collings or Weber? and is that a fact ,across all models or just Master models? For a number of reasons Gibson can get what they get for their instruments over and above some others --their long standing name and long standing world wide distribution network are at least a couple of reasons that I can think of. Gibson's ability to get their shiny new instruments into the hands of high profile musicians that could easily be playing any instrument they want can't be overlooked either-- Their prices are high for no other reason than they can get it...or maybe it is a cost factor after all--they have a good source and a good deal maybe --maybe they own a forest!

[sunburst]

Gibson makes a lot of guitars. I imagine they buy a lot of spruce. Why would they source spruce for mandolins separately from spruce for guitars? Maybe they do... maybe they buy book matched, thickness sanded guitar tops and book matcked wedges for mandolins, or maybe they buy billets, who knows, maybe even logs, but Gibson is a big company into lots of things. They are not a mandolin company. Mandolins are almost a sideline for them. As an idea of what the Gibson corporation is like, according to Wikipedia, "Gibson also owns and makes instruments under brands such as Epiphone, Kramer, Maestro, Steinberger, and Tobias, —along with the ownership of historical brands such as Kalamazoo, Dobro, Slingerland, Valley Arts, and Baldwin[ (including: Chickering, Hamilton, Wurlitzer". Big company.
Weber, on the other hand, is a mandolin company that started making guitars and Collings is a guitar company that started making mandolins. Their collective market is acoustic musicians, and a relatively large part of that market (compared to Gibson) is mandolin buyers.
Other than some amount (I don't really know how much) of market pressure from a fraction of their overall market (mandolin buyers), what reason would Gibson have to not use sitka for tops? After all, as I said, sitka is an excellent top wood.
The whole thing about different top woods giving players different sounds is way overblown, and the biggest part of it results from marketing. I bet nobody can reliably pick out a sitka top over an engelmann top or red spruce top in a double blind listening test. So, what reason, other than a small amount of market pressure, would Gibson have to regularly use top wood other than sitka spruce in mandolin tops?
Sitka spruce trees are much larger than engelmann, red and European spruce trees and there are still quite a few of them (though they are still being over-harvested, as far as I know), so for instrument makers, it is no problem to get sitka spruce in any size, any quality, any amount that they want. Just the thing for a large, diversified company that makes a few mandolins along the way.

[Luna Pick]

Is there another reason they use Sitka besides supply/demand/cost, which is a reason that intuitively rings hollow for me? Many builders, in addition to Weber and Collings are using seemingly everything else BUT Sitka (maybe a slight exaggeration).

Is it sound, tradition, strength, workability? Seems the other woods are strong in those characteristics as well.

[DataNick]

But how many instruments does Gibson produce compared to Collings or Weber?

Right now, I would guess that David Harvey & his small team might produce 30-40 a year? I'd bet that Collings produces at least 10-15 month or 120-150 at least per year; same for Weber. I'd bet they both produce anywhere's from 5-6 times the mandolins that Gibson does. Gibson is probably closer to Ellis mandolins as far as output these days. A Gibson rep told me as much at NAMM last year...

[DataNick]

Is there another reason they use Sitka besides supply/demand/cost, which is a reason that intuitively rings hollow for me? Many builders, in addition to Weber and Collings are using seemingly everything else BUT Sitka (maybe a slight exaggeration).

Is it sound, tradition, strength, workability? Seems the other woods are strong in those characteristics as well.

I think John Hamlett's post seems the most logical to me. Because they make a lot of acoustic guitars, they probably have a well sourced fairly cost-effective supply of sitka that doesn't "cost" them anything to outsource to building 30-40 mandolins a year with. The other 10 or so that are MMs are sourced from their small supply of red spruce that they pay for but more than makeup in costs with the $18k price tag on the MMs.

[FLATROCK HILL]

The whole thing about different top woods giving players different sounds is way overblown, and the biggest part of it results from marketing.

That must be the same marketing technique that allowed Ricardo Montalban to sell me a Cordoba. Rich Corinthian Leather my butt.

[pheffernan]

Right now, I would guess that David Harvey & his small team might produce 30-40 a year . . . . Gibson is probably closer to Ellis mandolins as far as output these days.

Not if you include the Pava line!

[almeriastrings]

Sitka is a pretty darned good top wood. There are some seriously nice guitars and mandolins built with it.

One area where it has an advantage, is that is easier to source cosmetically excellent sitka than cosmetically excellent Red spruce, certainly on wider boards, such as for guitar. To marketing departments (and many customers) cosmetics count, so that can be part of the equation.

That as certainly one of the key reasons C F Martin switched to Sitka circa 1945/6. Getting decent looking Red spruce tops was proving very difficult. Customers wanted tight, even grain, with 'silking'.. and finding wide boards of Red with that was just getting impossible at the time. That is what Mr C F Martin himself told me when I asked, anyway...and he was there....

I don't much care what they're made of as long as I like how they sound

[Ivan Kelsall]

From DataNick - "...but how do you account for the fact that for example Collings and Weber make a lot more mandolins than Gibson and they both offer red spruce topped mandolins in more models and for much less in cost than Gibson does ?" . Firstly - the decision to use 'which' type of wood is maybe based on Gibson's experience on the tonal qualities of the wood ie. if Sitka was widely used in the 'Fern' models,maybe that's good enough for them for their regular mandolin production,the 'Master Models' coming outside of that line. Regarding the price - IMHO,that goes with the name,
Ivan

[Seattle]

Companies use that is available locally the world over. If the wood isn't too soft or ugly it works.

[T.D.Nydn]

if Gibson is producing 30-40 mandolins in a year, let's say 36, that is only 3 mandolins a month! ( plus or minus)