Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - Lutherie: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=22
- - - Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=137435



Message

buleria74 -> Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 15 2010 11:56:03)

hi everyone, players and Luthiers,

comparing Madagascar and Indian Rosewood, which is better for

flamenco guitars? what are the differences? how come they are not

very popular as Indian or Brazilian Rosewood among players and builders?

cheers.



Anders Eliasson -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 15 2010 23:55:54)

Madagascar rosewood is a very good and pretty tonewood. BUT its almost impossible to get a well cut piece because the tree is small and they have cut down most of the island[:-]

A flatsawn piece of Madagascar is what you can buy and so, Indian Rosewood is superior in tone.



Stephen Eden -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 16 2010 0:43:13)

yep wasnt it the chinese that demolished that island for the rosewood? I guess that could be why its not that popular for guitars in the western world as we dont have very much it? I think I remember one of my suppliers telling me this.

I wouldnt say either is any better for flamenco. Both are great tone woods and both can make excellent guitars, It's all in the execution!



Armando -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 16 2010 3:04:58)

quote:

Indian Rosewood is superior in tone.


I agree with Anders that Indian rosewood is superior.



Stephen Eden -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 16 2010 11:15:31)

I would say that Indian rosewood is more stable because of the cut but saying it is superior in tone is far to subjective.

Im pretty sure there are some great guitars out there that are made from flat sawn timber. that have not encountered any issues either. There are still quite a few guitars being made with brazilian rosewood most of which are flat sawn but they are still highly sort after.



BarkellWH -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 16 2010 17:00:18)

In reply to Buleria74: Everyone has his own experience and opinion regarding tonewoods for negras, and I certainly would not challenge anyone's opinion expressed in answer to your question. Speaking for myself, however, in 2007 I had a flamenca negra made to my specifications by Vicente Carrillo using Madagascar Rosewood for the back and sides. I can tell you without hesitation that its tone equals, and perhaps exceeds, any negra I have heard or played using Indian Rosewood. Additionally, the Madagascar Rosewood has a beautiful reddish hue, in contrast to the Indian Rosewood which usually is very dark.

Cheers,

Bill



estebanana -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 16 2010 18:01:12)

Plantation grown Indian is better. Better for the environment.

Rosewood is rosewood is rosewood.

Gertrude Stein.



buleria74 -> [Deleted] (May 16 2010 21:05:32)

Post has been moved to the Recycle Bin at May 17 2010 1:01:05



Armando -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 17 2010 10:51:03)

quote:

Rosewood is rosewood is rosewood.


I do not agree with this statement. Rosewood is not equal rosewood. There are big differencies among the different species just about day and night. To say rosewood is equal rosewood is about the same as saying a New Yorker is equal to a Texan just because they are both US citizens.

I don't know what kind of super Madagascar rosewood some people here have worked with, but the one that i have in my hands including the one i own is deffinitely less resonant than the indian that i have. I agree that Madagascar rosewood is visually more attractive but we should be careful not to confound visual qualities with tonal qualitiy. As we know beauty of tone is relative and always a matter of taste but i can only speak for me according to the experience that i have.

regards

Armando



aarongreen -> RE: Madagascar Rosewood/Palo Santo (May 17 2010 11:07:35)

Madagascar rosewood is best when quartered, it is not a wood that is very good when flat sawn, in my experience. All the quartered stock I have is too narrow for 2 piece backs, so I make them 4 piece and take a lot of time and effort to make it look like a 2 piece back. Not hard to do if you get the grain and refraction right.

In terms of which is better that is a personal call. I like them both and would not want to find myself in the position of not being able to use one or the other.

aaron



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET