I mentioned this in the past but I'll bring it up again. Often when carvers talk about tupelo they mention the wood needs to come from the base of the tree and not the trunk. I'm suspect this is myth. Has anyone who makes that claim ever compared carving wood from the base and further up the tree? I doubt it. Most folks buy whatever chunk their supplier has on hand. Many of those suppliers get those chucks from the mill who got it from the timber company. Did anyone make certain the bases were kept separate from the trunks? I doubt it. Have you ever tried milling the bell shape versus the trunk? The bell shape is a heck of a lot harder to saw than the trunk. Meaning mills won't want to fool with them and they would require custom sawing, if at all. I suspect mills don't separate the bell shape base, instead they remove the taper and saw the entire log where it goes to the middleman who sells it to carvers who have no way of knowing. I talked to a forester friend (AU grad) whose family has been in the sawmill business for decades. He said in all his experiences trees that come from swampy areas with bigger bases, like ash and oak, the bases are harder, not softer than the rest of the tree. He could think of no reason why tupelo would be any different.
This base business is just something that smacks me of internet myth. I don't think people who say it like it is gospel have any evidence. So maybe you got a chunk of tupelo that did happen to be from the base and that is why is is too hard to carve. Who knows?