I'm making a walnut cutting board and I want to inlay a pear in the center. I thought maple would look good for the pear but I wanted to see if any of you could suggest a tight grain exotic that would retain a greenish hue after a natural mineral oil finish for the leaves. Would poplar be too opened grained? This board will be used.
How about pear wood?
asked for that one
IMHO poplar probably wouldn't be too open-grained, but it wouldn't stand up very well to real use as a cutting board either. Might be OK if the user has enough sense to chop around it instead of across it.
That's just an opinion though. My only cutting board is a piece of tempered glass, and I know very little about them.
He wanted a greenish hue. Pearwood is anything but.
Rodney Myrvaagnes NYC J36 Gjo/a
"Religious wisdom is to wisdom as military music is to music."
Poplar is too soft. La Pacho (Tuberbuia avellanedae) comes to mind for the color you want.
Jim
cool.. thanks got a source for a small piece?
Cheers!
Jim
Jim Wilson schreef
That's why I included the botanical name.
The color is significantly more green, which is what the OP wanted. T.=20 serratifolia is brown sometimes with a hint of green; at least in all=20 that I have seen. T. avellandae has similar characteristics otherwise,=20 but is noticeably greenish when fresh cut, and grows greener with age.
Jim
Jim Wilson schreef That's why I included the botanical name.
The color is significantly more green, which is what the OP wanted. T. serratifolia is brown sometimes with a hint of green; at least in all that I have seen. T. avellandae has similar characteristics otherwise, but is noticeably greenish when fresh cut, and grows greener with age.
Jim
P van Rijckevorsel snidely remarked...
after previously stating...
(BTW, in my experience, it is, and that is why I wrote about it.)
and responded to my claim:
Look, pal, I don't know what your problem is, but I *am* speaking from=20 firsthand experience, and I tried to help the original poster. You, on=20 the other hand, offered nothing of value. You already admitted you=20 wouldn't know the difference, so why'd you pipe up to begin with? If you=20 have some *experience* to share, by all means do so. But quibbling when=20 you don't know what you're talking about is a waste of everybody's time.
How much of this stuff have you worked with? Although I've worked with=20 only two pieces of the T. avellanedae, I have worked a great many board=20 feet of what is commonly sold as ipe. In my experience, there's a marked=20 difference in appearance between the two species, and it is as I=20 first described. Why do you doubt it?
It so happens that I buy a considerable amount of exotic hardwood lumber=20 from Judy Mattart. Do you think perhaps that is why I might have=20 recommended her web site? If you don't believe me, give her a call and=20 ask. It's a toll free call; the number's on her web site.
Jim
P van Rijckevorsel snidely remarked...
after previously stating...
from that of Tabebuia serratifolia as to be worth writing about.
and responded to my claim:
serratifolia is brown sometimes with a hint of green; at least in all that I have seen. T. avellandae has similar characteristics otherwise, but is noticeably greenish when fresh cut, and grows greener with age.
with
greenish. Perhaps the manner of drying makes a difference? However if you actually saw the wood provided by this supplier then you have firsthand knowledge ;-)
firsthand experience, and I tried to help the original poster. You, on the other hand, offered nothing of value. You already admitted you wouldn't know the difference, so why'd you pipe up to begin with?
when you don't know what you're talking about is a waste of everybody's time.
only two pieces of the T. avellanedae, I have worked a great many board feet of what is commonly sold as ipe. In my experience, there's a marked difference in appearance between the two species, and it is as I first described. Why do you doubt it?
However you must keep in mind that the experience you have may be restricted to the wood at the trader, and may not be typical for the species. This may mean that your knowledge is valuable only in the here and now. If this same trader next year buys a new batch of wood from the same species, from the same part of the country, but from a stand a 100km onwards the wood may look different, yet again.
It so happens that I buy a considerable amount of exotic hardwood lumber from Judy Mattart. Do you think perhaps that is why I might have recommended her web site? If you don't believe me, give her a call and ask. It's a toll free call; the number's on her web site.
Jim
Easy does it ... PvR
Well, I disagree with this. I provided the common name as I know it, and the botanical name for the species, as I know it. Both can be found, together as well as separately, elsewhere on the Internet. If you believe they are weird or non-existing, the burden is on you to show that -- it proves nothing to merely deride them as such.
Kind of like maple, huh? Or maybe butternut/walnut? Specific species (redundant, I know) isn't important for the characteristics of the wood?
A potentially useful contribution! It would be moreso if it came from first-hand experience, rather than guessing. And you will acknowledge that you said none of it until now, so it wasn't part of the perspective you provided before.
Then ask; don't impugn. If you must ASSUME, then it is wiser to give the benefit of the doubt.
Fair enough, in some cases. However, I believe it presumes incorrectly in this case. And again, it does presume, which is a rather weak position to be arguing from.
Fair enough, again, and I apologize if I went overboard. Weakness of human nature, I suppose, to respond in kind.
Jim
the botanical name for the species, as I know it. Both can be found, together as well as separately, elsewhere on the Internet. If you believe they are weird or non-existing, the burden is on you to show that -- it proves nothing to merely deride them as such.
Perhaps more like Quercus alba versus Quercus macrocarpa. To most people this is just white oak, but there are differences.
restricted to the wood at the trader, and may not be typical for the species. This may mean that your knowledge is valuable only in the here and now. If this same trader next year buys a new batch of wood from the same species, from the same part of the country, but from a stand a 100km onwards the wood may look different, yet again.
Oh, I misspelled it in my first post! (And never even noticed it. When I DMGS after one of your previous posts, I typed the name correctly, so I didn't even get my original site in the search at all. This is one of the reasons I was confused by your messages.) Thank you for pointing it out! I wish you had simply said so directly at the beginning.
Of course, I did get the name from the LumberLady web site. She has been a good source for exotic hardwoods for me. I have bought a veritable rainbow of woods from her, and naturally (and unfortunately, as it turns out) referred to her site for the wood in question.
I apologize for the error. In retrospect, perhaps the botanical name is not merely misspelled, but wrong altogether. I really don't know. However, the wood I was referring to does have the desired characteristic; that much I can vouch for. Since the error is unique to the LumberLady site, I was certainly directing the OP to a solution, wasn't I? (G)
No. It's about color, remember? But again, I am now unsure about the true species designation for the wood in question.
Perhaps you give your reader too much credit? (G) IME, straight talk is generally more effective communication. Speaking otherwise is so often misunderstood and at worst may be perceived as obfuscation.
Not to mention missing things which were not there ;-)
Jim
I wouldn't worry about it anyway. Botanists change species around all the time, just so they have something to argue and write journal articles about.
I know nothing of the wood in question whatsoever, and will make no assertion one way or the other, but *generally* speaking, it's entirely plausible that the name you thought you knew is just out of date.
Silvan schreef
Although this does not affect the discussion, this actually is the case here. An older name for the tree in question is Tabebuia ipe. The current name of Tabebuia avellanedae is somewhat controversial, with some people claiming this species should be joined up with Tabebuia impetiginosa (under this name) and others disagreeing strongly.
Not in this case, just a careless misspelling. PvR
Jim Wilson schreef
DMGS after one of your previous posts, I typed the name correctly, so I didn't even get my original site in the search at all. This is one of the reasons I was confused by your messages.) Thank you for pointing it out! I wish you had simply said so directly at the beginning.
To most people this is just white oak, but there are differences.
species designation for the wood in question.
then put two and two together.
generally more effective communication.
you were reading things which were not there ;-)
Unsurprising. I'm not a botanist, but I've been a plant guy for a long time, and I gave up on trying to make sure I knew the most recent name for everything. Plants jump entire families all the time, and botanists seemingly live to argue with each other over minutiae.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.