Author Topic: More pot stirring  (Read 5015 times)

Gerald

  • Forum Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 44
More pot stirring
« on: July 05, 2009, 10:42:47 PM »
Just like last time I tried stirring the pot, you'll notice there is no neutral ground here.  So which is it, do you like crap or are you arrogant?  (If both choices sound a little too much like insults, remember, we've already established who's the dummy asking the question.")

Mark Bortner

  • Forum Journeyman
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • facebook/Soundman Mark Bortner
    • https://www.facebook.com/mark.bortner
Re: More pot stirring
« Reply #1 on: July 06, 2009, 02:43:19 AM »
ughhhh.......you really needed to leave some middle ground here!!! "High grade" plywood has it's place in quality work unlike particle board which only belongs one place.......the landfill!!!
Chose woodworking as my profession in 6th grade, been doing it ever since. Self employed furniture mfg. and set-up/maintenance man in a commercial woodshop. Pics of my old shop and furniture on myspace site and facebook.

Mark Arnold

  • Forum Master
  • ***
  • Posts: 276
    • Boston Woodworking Co., Ltd
Re: More pot stirring
« Reply #2 on: July 06, 2009, 10:35:13 AM »
Gerald,

You left no wiggle room so I went with the first choice. I've used both MDF and Baltic birch ply as a substrate--MDF because it is a consistently flat product and birch ply because it is dense and has no voids. I  have veneeered to solid wood as well and it can move quite a bit. While reconstituted sheetgoods are fairly recent, cabinetmakers have been making their own laminated pieces/parts for hundreds of years. Whether the unseen substrate for a panel is comprised of veneer or quartersawn strips does not weigh heavily on me. The real work is on the surface--the beauty of the panel is only skin deep.  So to my mind, the real question is "Do we shun plywood because we did not make it ourselves? Because the laminations are not adhered to one another with hide glue? Because Russian birch was not a secondary wood used in the Colonies?" To follow this line of thinking, we should shun ready mix varnish and Dover inlays. And some do. The answer to this question speaks to the definition of the word reproduction and is it even possible today to make an 'exact reproduction' of any piece. Or do we all practice at reproducing to varying degrees? For me, this is one of the more interesting aspects of making historically-informed furniture in the 21st century.
NBSS '96, Partial to the Federal Period.

frangallo

  • Forum Master
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
    • www.townsendreproductions.com
Re: More pot stirring
« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2009, 06:57:56 PM »
In these days of OSB, MDF, PVC trim for houses and vinyl siding I have come up with a term to describe all of these materials and a few not mentioned. Pus. Pus is the exudation we see from our bodies when an infection has been neglected. Back in the days when these materials were coming on the market we all dove in and to whatever extent embraced the new products. We neglected to tend the infection. Now all we can find, rather than materials better suited to our needs, is this pus. Mind you, for many, many jobs there is no better material than europly, baltic birch or MDF. But we as craftsmen are not here to shortcut the methods developed by those before us but rather to kindly minister to them with small improvements that would not bastardize  the work. Would you use Domino's in a true reproduction? Of course not, the only way is to hand cut tenons, otherwise it is not a reproduction but suddenly becomes a knock-off. I make knock-offs. I'm not as proud of them as I am of my reproductions but fair is fair and right is right around the corner. I bow to the market. A Queen Anne stool is not an important piece and allows a wide margin when it comes to construction. But so many pieces that have inspired us all to take to heart the masters ways need to be treated respectfully, else we come a stinker in the ditch.
There is a tide in the affairs of men which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune.

rococojo

  • Guest
Re: More pot stirring
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2009, 04:35:54 AM »
Gerald,

You left no wiggle room so I went with the first choice. I've used both MDF and Baltic birch ply as a substrate--MDF because it is a consistently flat product and birch ply because it is dense and has no voids. I  have veneeered to solid wood as well and it can move quite a bit. While reconstituted sheetgoods are fairly recent, cabinetmakers have been making their own laminated pieces/parts for hundreds of years. Whether the unseen substrate for a panel is comprised of veneer or quartersawn strips does not weigh heavily on me. The real work is on the surface--the beauty of the panel is only skin deep.  So to my mind, the real question is "Do we shun plywood because we did not make it ourselves? Because the laminations are not adhered to one another with hide glue? Because Russian birch was not a secondary wood used in the Colonies?" To follow this line of thinking, we should shun ready mix varnish and Dover inlays. And some do. The answer to this question speaks to the definition of the word reproduction and is it even possible today to make an 'exact reproduction' of any piece. Or do we all practice at reproducing to varying degrees? For me, this is one of the more interesting aspects of making historically-informed furniture in the 21st century.

Mark, I agree entity with you, but the past masters never had our option, they had one? Solid wood, possibly they would have died for plywood, or another  substrate? That kept straight before & after veneering.
 But they had solid timber.
 So new ways had to be found to try to keep it straight, one example: The Tongue and Groove, are used on table top ends, because this joint showed a glue line through there veneers, so a ploughed in hardwood strips on the end gain was tried, soon finding out that failed.  most of present day joints are the development from only having solid Timber.

                                                   Regards
                                                          Joseph
« Last Edit: July 07, 2009, 06:04:35 PM by rococojo »

msiemsen

  • Regional Chapter Coordinator
  • Forum Master
  • ***
  • Posts: 586
  • Full time woodworker, I sell tall clock movements
    • Green Lake Clock Company
Re: More pot stirring
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2009, 08:19:18 AM »
I went with the first choice. I don't use plywood much at all other than baltic birch for drawer parts on occasion. I typically use MDF core over veneer core. I wouldn't use it in a reproduction unless it was a PT Boat. I like veneered sheet goods because they are used in industry and if they weren't there wouldn't be any trees left. Look at all the nice timber they use for fixtures in the mall. Many malls require stores to replace their fixtures every 5 to 7 years, that is a lot of nice material in the landfill. the use of sheet goods cuts way down on this waste.
Mike
Mike Siemsen
Green Lake Clock Company
There are II kinds of people in the world. Those that can read roman numerals and those that can't

Gerald

  • Forum Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 44
Re: More pot stirring
« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2009, 08:06:37 PM »
Once again, Rob "The Tattooed Woodworker" has something interesting to say on a subject I have wondered about.  Not exactly where I was going with the original question but still relevent.  Check out his video blog on the subject of plywood at: http://thetattooedwoodworker.com/2009/08/05/new-workbench-first-look/
« Last Edit: September 14, 2009, 07:09:43 AM by Gerald »

Rick Lasita

  • Forum Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • First Light Woodworking
Re: More pot stirring
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2009, 08:26:48 PM »
I decided to go with option 2 for no real reason I can think of right now, though I do know the cost of any thing beyond construction grade is beyond what I want to spend. Baltic Birch, and I did try a Chinese version, which wasn't bad at all, is my limit if I do use ply. Rick
www.firstlightwoodworking.blogspot.com
firstlightwoodworking.blogspot.com