What wood is this?

[Doug Miller]

You're mistaken. :-) Oak does.

Here, look at this:

That's what quartersawn oak looks like. And if the wood in the photo were oak, some of that figure would be visible -- plainly -- at the right-hand side of the photo, where the grain is quartersawn. It isn't, and therefore the wood is not oak.

Figure such as is visible in the image I referenced above will appear in oak, regardless of how close together the grain lines are. It's caused by physical structures in the tree that appear on their edges when the board is flatsawn (whence the short, dark lines between the grain on flatsawn oak), and on their faces when the board is quartersawn (as shown in the image referenced above). These structures are present in all North American species of oak, and are visible regardless of the manner in which the wood is sawn, or the separation between the grain lines, or any other factor. That they are *not* visible in Don's photograph is incontrovertible proof that the wood in Don's photograph is unquestionably *not* oak. And neither are they obscured by the stain: these ray structures do not absorb stain nearly as readily as the rest of the wood, and staining makes them stand out even more.

As I've noted several times before in this thread, they are *often* confused. Ash is frequently used as a lower-cost substitute for oak, because most people can't tell the difference. Both are widely used in furniture making.

[Doug Miller]

It's a sour odor. Not quite like either of the more "familiar" ones.

The point is, white oak doesn't smell one damn thing like vomit.

[Doug Miller]

I meant, obviously, that he'll have an exact match to the wood, not to the finish. And anything that he might do to try to match the finish won't result in a matching product if he starts out with the wrong wood.

[Don Wiss]

Because my house is one of ten row houses. With the exception of a few things, like fireplace mantles and some extra trellises, all the houses were identical.

The missing finial is on the ground floor. Woods varied by floor. In my house the ground floor is oak. Then the parlor floor is mahogany. The upper two floors are poplar.

At the other end of the railing, and upwards through the house, the finials are simple balls with three engraved strips around them. This one is the only one like this. That is why I used a neighbor's house to photograph and measure it. I got a large caliper and we took very detailed measurements.

As for the recommendation for Rosenzweig to get the wood. Thanks for the suggestion, but my friend lives in Calgary and he says he can easily get either ash or white oak. (He was visiting when we measured it.)

Gee. I wasn't expecting to start such a long and controversial thread!

Don (e-mail link at home page bottom).

[Cabinets Galore]

oak - NOT ash - NOT

it is gum wood

many old world turned pieces were gum wood. that is what it looks like.

[Doug Miller]

Nope. It's ash.

This isn't in the Old World.

No, it's not.

[Cabinets Galore]

ash mistaken for oak? huh what the......... ash and oak are total different oak has deep grain whereas ash is like virgin wood,blemish free

stop making an ash out of yourself Douggy

dis-sed by a bitch again.........................ouch!

| >From the variety of answers it would seem that it doesn't matter what kind | >of wood it is inasmuch as no one can definitively tell. | | Speak for yourself. I can. It's ash. | | Ash is frequently mistaken for oak, as this thread clearly illustrates. But | oak has unmistakable ray flakes plainly visible in quartersawn grain. The | absence of this figure is absolute proof that the wood in Don's photograph is | unquestionably *not* oak. | | It's ash. | | -- | Regards, | Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) | | It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

I'd agree about red oak, but white is not so deep grained. Considering the age of the wood, the finish that has darkened, the quality of the photo, I'm not sure that any of us can say for sure what wood it is.

[whatever]

Mr. Miller

There are so many variables. You cannot tell with by this photo alone what species it is. One can only make asumptions for what was available locally. You need to physically have the piece in hand or a picture of the whole entire post for more clues.

I've graded/inspected all types of wood for 30 years. So I believe my opinion is fairly good.

Regards Dale

[Doug Miller]

Agreed -- and I didn't attempt to do that. I identified the genus.

Furthermore, it certainly *is* possible to tell from this photo alone a number of things that it is *not* -- for example, it is definitely not maple. It likewise is definitely not Douglas fir or western red cedar, neither one of which have grain that bears more than a remote resemblance to that shown in the photo. Nor is it any type of pine.

Do you seriously contend that it is not possible, on the basis of this photo alone, to identify the wood as a hardwood?

I'll go farther than that: it *is* a hardwood, and with 100.0% certainty it is

*not* any of the following:

- any species of maple

- American sycamore

- cherry

- walnut

- American beech

- any species of birch

- tulip poplar If you disagree, please cite which characteristics of the wood in the photo are consistent with one or more of these woods.

Not correct. Much can be told from photographs, to someone who knows what to look for.

If your opinion includes the possibility that this piece is maple, fir, cedar, or beech, for example, I disagree with your evaluation of the quality of your opinions.

[Don Wiss]

Hi Dale,

In dicussing the various pictures that I took with the friend that is going to do the turning, he suggested I put up a couple other pictures which he thinks best show the grain. So here are two more (also unreduced):

Don (e-mail link at home page bottom).

[vernal888]

Hello all wood detectives -- A quick first impression is that we may be looking at chestnut, especially if it's from an older house in the northeast.

[Doug Miller]

Hmmmm... hadn't considered that possibility, and you may be right. I still think it's ash, but I'm less sure of that now than I was previously.

I continue to stand behind my previous statements that it is not any sort of oak.

[Don Wiss]

Chestnut is often used in the houses around here. While I have poplar on the top two floors, some of the grander houses have chestnut on the floor just above the parlor floor.

Don (e-mail link at home page bottom).