I found that he was right time and again, i have less difficulty doing what he says nowadays!
I guess i had to learn the hard way! 
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| A Pertinent question http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=9157 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Raj Snake [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Forgive my naivete..I'm told that the overwhelming contribution to the tone of a guitar is due to the qulaity of the top wood .Why then is 'quality' back/side wood (Brazilian,ziricote,macassar ebony,madagascar rosewood....the list goes on....) so much more expensive when it contributes considerably less to the tone? |
|
| Author: | old man [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Spruce is abundant compared to the wild b/s woods. And it doesn't have to be imported in most cases. Most continents have some form of top wood. And people are willing to pay for wild and crazy tonewood. Ron |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
simple answer is spruce, Cedar, redwood are abundunt, fast growing and easy on the tools to process. Hardwoods are less abundant slower growing and harder on the tools. Also many of them are protected local laws and or international treaties that restrict or forbid the harvesting. Those are the ones like Brazilian Rosewood, and the price is very high because the lumber that has been harvested prior to the restrictions is all the lumber that is and will be available. |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 6:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
ah .... legally available that is!! |
|
| Author: | Mario [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Actually, the more common woods used for backs and sides are less expansive than tops. It is the more spectacular and/or rare of the hardwoods that cost more. |
|
| Author: | CarltonM [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Conifers, which make up most of the tops used on guitars, make boring veneer and fragile solid-wood furniture, which makes supply and demand a large part of back and side cost, especially when the wood is particularly beautiful. |
|
| Author: | Colin S [ Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Mario] Actually, the more common woods used for backs and sides are less expansive than tops. It is the more spectacular and/or rare of the hardwoods that cost more.[/QUOTE] Quite right Mario, as usual, I have almost always paid more for the top wood than the B&S sets. Only recently, under the bad influence of the people on this forum, have my B&S sets been going up in price. Even then it is the cost of shipping rather than the wood itself that has pushed the price up. A good Euro Spruce top, even in Europe is more expensive than a nice mahogany, walnut or EIR B&S set. Hesh is right though in that the B&S wood can influence the tone of the guitar, compare a mahogany guitar to a rosewood. The difference is there, but the difference between a spruce and cedar top is greater. Mario always says, and again he is right (Mario is always right when I agree with him!) it's all a matter of detail. Colin |
|
| Author: | Serge Poirier [ Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
|
I found that he was right time and again, i have less difficulty doing what he says nowadays! I guess i had to learn the hard way!
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|