Splitter?

[Leon]

I have had that one a few months and it is a great unobtrusive improvement.

[Greg Millen]

Swingman,

I have seen some of his work and it is first class. Suffice to say, regardless of whether you like what he says, or how he says it, he knows his stuff and 'walks the talk'.

I also hope he posts some more of his work, it's inspiring.

[Swingman]

How about showing us some of your work?

[Swingman]

Your word is good enough for me, Greg. But you're right ...the proof of the talk, is the walk ...and what I do like is to actually gaze upon the works of professional woodworkers, whether in person, or in picture.

"some more" ... I must of missed that, where?

I am glad to hear that, as inspiration is in short supply around here and, in particular, at my shop. All the more reason to ask for examples on a website, or ABPW, or anywhere?

[J. Clarke]

In 1890 Gottlieb Daimler was tooling around Germany in the first production car in the world. I guess that that means that we should all be driving cars identical to his, without all the geegaws like a roof and doors.

In any case, do you have any documentation that demonstrates that featherboards and other movement-control devices were not used in Terry's shop?

You are correct that ultimate responsibility lies with the craftsman, but with power tools part of that responsibility lies in "setup", configuring the tool to perform the particular task at hand, and that includes doing whatever is necessary to control the movement of the stock so that it goes where he wants it to go and not somewhere else. And if using "geegaws" helps him control that movment then he is remiss in _not_ using them.

So what? I fail to see how the existence of machinery at a certain date bears upon the desirability of using devices such as featherboards to control the movement of lumber through a saw.

So I guess that we should abandon this newfangled "electricity" crap and go with good old fashioned water wheels.

You mentioned featherboards above as "geegaws". I use featherboards with great regularity. I have never bought any and nobody has "sold" them to me except in the sense that I have accepted a simple, obvious, and very reasonable idea. Took about fifteen minutes to make them out of a couple of scraps. The ones that you see in stores are the same basic concept, molded in plastic or equipped with various kinds of attachment, that may or may not be more convenient than the simple ones made from a scrap and held down with a clamp or two, but they are hardly anything conceptually novel. "Board Buddies" and the like are the same basic idea implemented in a somewhat different matter.

I find myself wondering how it is that someone who has been in woodworking at least since the 1970s has never seen a shop-made featherboard in use and thinks that they are some new idea.

So? Grok the concept--Olympic athlete in peak condition can for a brief time using his whole body put out maybe 1.5 horsepower. Table saw motor can put out two or more times that until Hell freezes over (or the bearings die of old age, whichever come first) and somewhat more than that for a brief time, and apply it all to the point of a blade tooth. In fight between saw and operator, saw wins. When saw decides to throw stock at you, you are _not_ going to be able to control that stock with your own physical strength and if you haven't experienced a kickback in all the many years of experience that you claim, then either you have not been working with a powerful saw with circular blades or you have been a manager of some sort who let others do the actual work or you are the luckiest SOB that ever walked the earth. And if that last is the case then when karma catches up with you you're probably going to need major surgery as a result.

As for the "finest detail in wood" a carving chisel is not going to pick up a piece of 16/4 ipe and throw it through the wall of your shop, which a large saw is quite capable of doing.

No. Your advice, if followed, is eventually going to result in someone getting hurt who if he had followed the more commonly recommended practice of using movement-control devices (not necessarily store-bought) appropriate to the task would not have gotten hurt.

[daclark]

For all your unfounded rant, and lack of understanding, it would be a safe bet that I have cleaned more sawdust out of my belly button than you've ever made in shop... If you are experiencing so much human error, that you need to seek safety from your own machine, then obviously, that machine is not setup properly. But, there is a limit to how much setup is required to perform a basic task. Twenty years ago, I made featherboards and push sticks, too...then, I found a better way to do it. So, don't think you can one-up me by twisting my words, and quoting the recommendations of some self-proclaimed authority. That damned book you read was written by a professional writer, not a woodworker. In the woodworking business, you get paid to cut, shape, and fasten the wood...you don't get paid for setup. Even if you are not a professional, you should appreciate saving time at the work you do in shop...yeah, there is the occasional kickback...so, what? I can tell you, the last time I cut myself on the tablesaw was about fifteen years ago. I felt that tingle, looked down and saw that if I pulled my hand out I would loose the piece, it would kick back and be ruined, or I could take that corner off my thumb and loose a little skin and blood. What do you think I did?

[J. Clarke]

I see, rather than counter the argument you launch a personal attack.

Uh huh. So tell us how to set it up properly then. You're big on criticism but not much on procedure, aren't you?

Yes, there is. However limited setup is not the same as no setup.

And that "better way" is?

"Twisting your words"? You're the one who said that featherboards were a "geegaw" fostered by "yuppies". If that is not what you meant then you should not have said it.

Which book was that?

That's funny, I was laboring under the mistaken impression that you got paid for a finished product. Silly me.

So you've clearly never worked with a saw of any real power. You claim that one is not paid to do setup. Well one is not paid to sit in the emergency room either.

Probably the last time you used one too. See, anybody can take a cheap shot.

"If you pulled you hand out you would loose the piece, it would kick back and be ruined?"

Now why, pray tell, would it kick back when you took your hand off of it if it had not kicked back with your hand on it?

In any case, it is clear that you are unable to defend your statements in any rational fashion, instead choosing to use the argument "me heap big woodworker, me know all, anybody who disagree with me heap big idiot".

[Greg Millen]

Last year he posted some work he was doing on ABPF. A series of carvings-in-progress that gave you that "Wile E. Coyote tongue falling on the ground, hang dog, ain't never gonna catch him" feeling. Similar to looking at Tom Plamann's work - good for the soul, bad for the ego type stuff.

I had a scrounge around my archives but couldn't find it, I was a little disappointed as I'm sure I had saved it in the Keepers Folder. Imagine when I peek in there and only found 1 (ONE) post - grrrr. I don't know what happened to them, I guess I'll spend the next few hours dumpster-diving into old archives and directories (folders for the non-DOS).

All this assumes daclarke is actually the real DA. It is getting hard to tell recently, though it seems likely it is him, the trolls are not as articulate. I hope so, we need a little philosophical discussion every now and again to broaden horizons and to expand the comfort zones. That is what he is driving at I believe, even the best of us should continue to learn and evolve in the craft, there is no single point that we reach where we can say - "I cannot improve any further". It is not like age, where we can state "We are as young as we are ever going to get", there are no absolutes and it's an evolving craft.

Anyway, I seem to have strolled off down another path, so, I'll get back on track by saying I hope he posts some of his work.

cheers,

Greg

[Swingman]

Maybe you're right. If that's who you're thinking about, the contrarian nature is there, but the work would tell the tale.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Orgasm?

[daclark]

You're absolutely right, Greg, working wood is a lifelong apprenticeship. The last few years I have been in hiatus, between projects, to refresh myself for what is to come...whatever that might be. I only know, that the best is yet to come. But, for now, no pictures. I spent time in the shop of a man who is winding up a forty-five year apprenticeship as a guitar maker. He began the trade working for old man Gibson, himself; became his protege, often eating Sunday dinner in the Gibson family home. He has contracted a debilitating disease, and I stepped in to assist in the completion of some contracts. I worked on a couple of archtops, a number of acoustics, and a few solid body twangers. It is an interesting product engineering, and an even more interesting production engineering situation...still, a box is just a box, but I learned something new everyday. Also, I met some interesting celebrities. Guitar prices ranged from five to fifteen grand, and one-spec built went to a Minneapolis music store for ten grand...but, it was his shop, his name, and his product, so no pictures. Then, last winter, I went in search of the Appalachian craftsman, but alas, it was just a myth. Funny though, one state has taken possession of the myth and is trying to capitalize upon it, by importing artists. It's going to be big business...so they think...if only they can perpetrate that myth. But, none of the professional program administrators, I talked with, had any understanding of the concept of apprenticeship. After millions of dollars, it's a flop. So, I am working on organizing a few projects on the 'puter, and dispensing my dangerous and unbelievable advice for the heck of it; or perhaps, I enjoy having pissants attack, so I can lambaste them with boring philosophies. Anyway, thanks to you, Greg, for your kind recommendations; I no longer have the pictures, either; and to you Swingman, I enjoyed your website. You seem to have acheived a high degree of competence in your 325 sqft shop.

[Alan W]

I also like this splitter, it is no intrusive enough I go out of my way to put it on, and with board buddies I can literally stop the cut halfway and the piece to the right of the blade will have NO saw marks at all with my WWII.

The microjig splitter is also short enough, that I can use it with my cross cut sled.

Alan

[Edwin Pawlowski]

What makes one so much more costly? Rarity of the materials? Labor? How much is for appearance versus tonal quality? Ed

[daclark]

"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote

You have hit on most of the relevant factors. The orgasm factor, or appearance, does not always denote rarity of materials, although cost of material is, of course, factored in. There are limited choices of material for certain parts on certain guitars, and unlimited choices for other parts. A solid body guitar, on the low end of the price scale, is rather hard to screw up, because its tonal quality is based upon the applied electronics, of which, there are a lot of choices. Price variables are electronics, wood, finish, and the personal or generic complexity of decoration. The body design is mostly about comfort. The Les Paul series has produced a different solid body design every other year, or so, for the last fifty years. A man working alone can produce a one-off in about three days; but, a five man crew could easily produce several hundred a month. The acoustic designs have been made for several centuries, and engineering for tonal quality are, for the most part, known factors; however, if you built five or ten guitars in a production situation, utilizing the same materials, each would have a distinct tonal quality. Maybe one in hundreds or even thousands would be considered to be quite unique. Even so, each guitar maker will tweak his design in various ways; choice or thickness of material, structural aspects, depth of curve...each seeking for that extra-ordinary sweetness in the tonal quality. The man I know, after forty-five years of apprenticeship, remembered and could count his special constructions on one hand...think about that. The archtop is undoubtedly the most personal of constructions. The maker minutely scrapes the recurved top plate to develope or find the instrument's voice. A man, who can do that...well, what can you say? I may have performed the task, but I did it with his ears. There is a very competent book on the subject; 'Making the Archtop Guitar' by Robert Benedetto. Price consideration is the same as with any other product. I suppose, the important thing to remember, this was a handmaking shop...one of a kind, one at a time...with a forty-five year history of success and a famous clientele. Thanks for asking.

[Swingman]

That's too bad ... hope you rectify that someday. Just gazing upon photo's of Tom Plaman and Judson Beaumont's work is inspiring.

Understandable. Luthier's have always fascinated me but, even being a musician, I've never had an interest in building instruments ... mainly because I've felt that I couldn't devote sufficient time to the task to do it justice. I've also recorded many "vintage" acoustic and electric instruments, from Cremona cellos and violins to to my own 61 Fender Jazz Bass, including many old Martin and Gibson guitars, and I can imagine the challenges in "production" shops, particularly those dealing in acoustic instruments.

I saw the tip of the iceberg in the apprenticeship system in England where, for a brief summer around '65, I worked for a family that had been building furniture and cabinets for close to 300 years. I was below the rank of "apprentice", worked in the carpenter end that summer, but I garnered an appreciation for the apprentice system in that short stint.

LOL ... I can appreciate, and mostly sympthasize with, a contrarian' viewpoint. :)

Thanks for the kind words ... and good luck in your future endeavors.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

You can probably say that people aare willing to pay handsoly to have an instrument made like that.

You have to admire sommmeone with that kind of skill.

Thanks for answering. Ed