Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
Should I sell my classical guitar?
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
 RE: Should I sell my classical guitar? (in reply to Ricardo)
|
|
|
quote:
In the spirit of disseminating important info, can you point to some examples? It all looks "brown" to me with straight grain.
It's not a big deal, today East Indian Rosewood that suppliers commonly sell comes from plantations. In the past much IR came from larger wild trees.
There is no difference in the tree, but larger trees are bigger in diameter and the wood and figure looks different. Larger trees render lumber with less wood near the center of the tree and less wood near the outside of the tree. The guitarmakers Goldilocks locks zone for wood is wider in old growth trees. The larger trees usually have more wood for the sawyer to choose from and they can cut better backs and sides from each piece.
For making guitar backs generally a tree needs to be a minimum of 18" in diameter to avoid the center and cut off enough of the outside layers of the tree to get a back that is a nominal dimension of 8", the usual rough width of a back. Older trees give the sawyer more room mainly away from the center of the tree, which gives more room to get backs with less flat grain. A lot of Indian wood you can get today is from smaller diameter plantation trees and they often push the limits of how much they can cut from a smaller diameter log. If you have a trained eye you can see which lumber comes from smaller trees vs. older lumber that came form larger trees.
Larger trees are still available, but they are not as common as then used to be in the market place. Smaller trees which render wood cut closer to the margins of acceptability are far more common today. If you make guitars or are a seasoned wood worker you can see plainly which is which. To an unskilled eye most Indian rosewood may look all same. The older larger tree are preferred by hand builders. Backs from smaller logs may have close wavy grain near the center join of the back, while at the same time show some flat grain in the lower bouts. Backs from larger premium trees will show even grain from side to side, or show some beautiful marking or patterning in the grain like striations of gold and brown, but still maintain a nice even grain with not center grain or flat grain. That kind of quality only comes from bigger, older trees which are in high demand, but less common on the market.
Often times today the quality of the Indian rosewood is not as good, it can be excessively purple and also pithy. Some rosewood is soft and crumbly, which is really bad for making bridges. A lot of bridge blanks I reject are pithy, they have been cut from young small trees near the outside of the tree. Terrible wood for bridges. A lot of the rosewood sold for bindings is also poor quality, because it came from young trees and is cut from stock that was not good enough for backs and sides. It shows grain returns and twists, and warping and poor color, and excessive color bleed or the purple.
In the days prior to the internet guitar suppliers catering to beginners and hobby builders Indian Rosewood sets from old growth lumber were available and the standards were higher. The suppliers also sold to professionals and professional manufacturers like Martin, bad lumber would be rejected or remain unsold because guitar makers knew the difference between wood from small trees and premium wood. The wood was also rough dimensioned for the guitar maker and sold as wider rib stock, the rib stock was intentionally cut wide so a maker could rip the binding stock off the edge of the rough rib. Today the suppliers cut the rib stock narrower and sell the binding as a separate item.
Not only is the older wood more difficult to come by, but the sellers cut the stock smaller. So anyway, when a repair guy or maker sees an older Indian Rosewood guitar that has nice striated wood with good grain from side to side and no transition to slab cut wood it means old nice wood. Also once in a while a one piece back pops up or even a slab cut back that has beautiful markings. So much harder to find today.
Does that clear up any misunderstandings?
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 2 2016 0:53:46
 |
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Should I sell my classical guitar? (in reply to Cervantes)
|
|
|
Keith, yeah the purple turns brown when it eventually oxidizes.
The thing I'm getting at here is wood quality and for a player with the end product you may not get the picture because you don't really handle raw wood sets and compare how they work under the tools.
I'll try again, larger older trees are bigger in diameter and give the sawyer more choice of where to take the wood which renders the best flitch cut lumber. A flitch is a sawn log stacked in the order in which it was cut.
Younger tree small diameter trees offer less premium wood simply because they are smaller after they are rough milled. On a smaller tree the sawyer may have to take pithy less desirable wood near the bark, that often can get into the wood layers near the out side of the tree that are less mature and less desirable for backs as sides.
When logs are purchased in India for processing the saw mill has to cut the logs down and if the buyer chooses smaller younger trees which will be smaller in diameter the saw yer will have to make that work and will take wood that in a larger tree would otherwise be sub par.
That smaller log cut into a flitch may not be premium wood, but good enough to make guitars. The new growth wood in the small trees is often much less desirable for guitar making, but because the buyer bought for a certain price they will make it work.
In larger older trees the core wood not in the center nor at the outside of the tree is usually the best wood. It is also more rare and costs more.
It is also probably difficult to tell from sub par wood unless you have someone show you raw sets in person and point out the difference in feel, hardness, grain direction, run out and look, etc. There is also handing bridge blanks, they are not all the same, and some wood that is less mature and more pithy or is from new growth wood near the outside of the tree is less desirable, if at all suitable.
Older trees means better wood in most cases. Guitar makers who handle raw wood can spot better wood from bad wood, and older less coslty guitars often have fantastic wood that today would be kind of expensive.
This is some good Indian, not flashy, but clean and straight with even grain and no transition to flat grain in the wider bouts. I may have a back that has been cut from a smaller tree, but I cut it up for headstock plates as I won't use crap Indian on back. I pay for the better grades.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
 Attachment (1)
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 3 2016 22:02:33
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.078125 secs.
|
Printable Version
