anyone know if there are still logs gettting harvested from lakes
was thinking that it may have all been harvested by now but i wonder
the wood is supposed to be very sought after once it has been
seasoned via air drying
heard that instrument makes really like this wood for its stability
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 7:39:47 AM UTC-5, DerbyDad03 wrote:
Because he's not knowledgeable. Swamp water tends to be low in oxygen, so
it preserves boi-matter, rather than promote its decay.
Also, re: logs in the ocean: There are relative examples, i.e., sunken sh
ips for one. Off shore of Alabama, in the Gulf, there's remnants of an an
cient forest of bald cypress. I think the logs/area is protected against
San Francisco plantation, Garyville, La., today the site of Marathon oil re
finery: During the expansion of the refinery, some years ago, huge old 15'
+ tall cypress stumps were discovered. Silt had covered the stumps, since
the trees had been cut, back in the 1800s. The San Francisco Plantation f
olks recovered one stump, as historical record of what once had been part o
f the plantation property. The stump/log is on display on the remaining p
lantation site. All the other stumps, that were discovered, were reburied
off/away from the immediate construction site. I suppose it was too expe
nsive the salvage the logs and, also, Marathon didn't allow "outsiders" to
enter the construction site, that way. *This info is from my nephew, who
was the head Super, for James Construction doing the construction upgrading
. I, personally, never went to see the salvaged log or other logs, though
I've wanted to.
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 9:15:25 AM UTC-4, Sonny wrote:
so it preserves boi-matter, rather than promote its decay.
ships for one. Off shore of Alabama, in the Gulf, there's remnants of an
ancient forest of bald cypress. I think the logs/area is protected agains
refinery: During the expansion of the refinery, some years ago, huge old 1
5'+ tall cypress stumps were discovered. Silt had covered the stumps, sinc
e the trees had been cut, back in the 1800s. The San Francisco Plantation
folks recovered one stump, as historical record of what once had been part
of the plantation property. The stump/log is on display on the remaining
plantation site. All the other stumps, that were discovered, were reburi
ed off/away from the immediate construction site. I suppose it was too ex
pensive the salvage the logs and, also, Marathon didn't allow "outsiders" t
o enter the construction site, that way. *This info is from my nephew, wh
o was the head Super, for James Construction doing the construction upgradi
ng. I, personally, never went to see the salvaged log or other logs, thou
gh I've wanted to.
OK, color me confused...
"All the other stumps, that were discovered, were reburied off/away from
the immediate construction site. I suppose it was too expensive the
salvage the logs..."
Weren't they basically "salvaged" so that they could be moved? Instead of
moving them and reburying them, one would think they could have put them
on a logging truck and taken them off-site for sale. There must have been
a cost to move/rebury them, so some of the "salvage cost" was spent anyway.
I know that there are lots of other factors that I haven't even considered,
but it just seems a shame to let all that wood go to waste.
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 8:28:53 AM UTC-5, DerbyDad03 wrote:
From what I understood, the logs/stumps were huge. The one salvaged log,
salvaged by San Francisco Plantation, barely fit onto a flatbed semi and co
st 100K+ to salvage. James Construction didn't have a big enough dozer, o
n site, to move the log/stump units. Extra ordinary efforts were used to
extract and move the remaining log/stumps. It wasn't just logs, alone, bu
t the whole rootball/log unit to be dealt with.
I'll ask my nephew, further, for more specific info.
One rumor for years has been that one of the secrets to the sound of a
Stradivarius violin, and other Cremona instruments of the period, is
that the wood was submerged for months, if not years, due to the water
transport and ponding of logs during that time.
Although a spectroscopy study done a few years ago did not prove that
was the case, it also did not disprove it, and some of the chemicals
found, that are not found in wood, during analysis of the wood could
have been done by "aqueous" treatments.
I was using the term thusly:
a : of, relating to, or resembling water
I could be wrong, but seems to me, the last time I brushed on some
varnish, it performed exactly like a substance "resembling water",
i.e. a thin liquid. ;)
Visual art I agree, but the sound, and playability, of a particular
instrument is an apples to oranges comparison to visual art.
Recorded a Cremona (Amati) cello many times during a 25 year period.
While I can attest that much of the sound of any instrument can come
from the hands/touch of the player, this particular cello was owned by
two different individuals, played by at least four on dozens of
recordings during that time, both in my studio, and others.
Having been asked asked on numerous occasions, have never failed to
identify that particular instrument on a recording.
That is the "acid" that brings the big bucks in that type of "art" ...
I was not speaking of visual art at all, other than tongue in cheek. I
was speaking specifically to the art of building fine violins, guitars,
cellos and such, although it applies to art in spades.
Unfortunately, for those choosing to spend their Texas oil money on a
$45 MILLION Strad, they would be better off choosing a modern, high end
piece that costs far, far, far less because in double blind tests, top
players on earth discovered they liked the newer ones more for both
sound and playability.
Fortunately, they would be paying for hyperbole and rarity more than
anything, and that does have a price, and in this case a huge one, just
like much fine art. In the case of the Strad, I'm sticking with
hyperbolec acid, first because it's true, and more than that, I made the
term up, and I'm sticking with it, I think it's a winner...
Someone in the biz said the reason no one has been able to find out
exactly what it is that makes the Strad sound so awesome, varnish, water
soaked, piss in varnish (made that one up) is because nothing does, they
don't sound or play any better than any other top of the line piece,
even if made a few days ago. So far, tests have proven this to be true,
and actually a bit the opposite, they sound and play a bit worse.
An interesting insight I recall reading, people tend to think the Strad,
if sounding a little less than anticipated, it's the players fault as he
is not up to the task. Can't be the Strad, must be me.
Same situation with a comparable top end piece, and it is "what do you
expect, it's not like it's a Strad"
I think this syndrome might come into play a bit with power tools, but
damn, sure don't want to get anyone's panty's in bunch...
Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life.
They were very careful and had "lab reports" for the speaker cables
when they first brought them out, now .01db is measurable but not
audible. Does not matter really I have used at least 16 ga lamp cord
for my speakers, but I worked at Shure as tech in manufacturing and
R&D. So the mumbo jumbo of either Monster or Bose never matter much
cause I knew enough.
I can attest to the nonsense that is Bose.
The only time Bose sold a fair product was when Fry's (electronics
chain store) usta sell the 101 spkr fer $40 ea. Then Bose got greedy
and made Fry's raise the price to the MSRP of $120. Heck, one rock
star (iggy pop?) even warned against listening to his latest album
release ona Bose sytem.
Insanely overpriced junk.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.