Rosewood back- this ok?

TINMAN82 · December 2021

I know wood availability is dwindling etc, just wanted opinion re whether this EI rosewood back is acceptable on a fairly high end acoustic. Won’t mention make/ model etc in case it affects the answers!

To me aesthetics are fine. Clearly the grain widens considerably in the middle and the colour lightens, which might be seen as lower grade. Grain generally quite straight though and reasonable bookmatching. I’d have thought no major concerns. Anyone disagree?

earwighoney · December 2021

AKAIK the colour of the EIR has no bearing on the quality, IMO it looks excellent, great quality book matched quartersawn straight grain rosewood.

Btw, a lot of rosewood/mahogany we see in finished form has been treated with wood dye, so it will look darker than it naturally is.

bertie · December 2021

earwighoney said:

AKAIK the colour of the EIR has no bearing on the quality, IMO it looks excellent, great quality book matched quartersawn straight grain rosewood.

Btw, a lot of rosewood/mahogany we see in finished form has been treated with wood dye, so it will look darker than it naturally is.

this

ICBM · December 2021

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

Mellish · December 2021

Looks fine to me. Sure, I care about looks but tone comes first for me. If it looks a million bucks but the tone sucks, you're not going to play it, right, so what would be the point of having it?

TINMAN82 · December 2021

ICBM said:

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc etc.

I guess I’m also wondering if now is the time to pick up that “life companion” acoustic made of all solid premium woods.

It just struck me that this rosewood back looked quite orange and grainy in the centre..,and could that be a sign of poor/ immature timbre. Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

ICBM · December 2021

TINMAN82 said:

Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

That's a professional photo?! What does an unprofessional one look like?

It's completely out of focus, or such poor resolution that blowing it up looks like that.

That said, the shop I work for has a similarly appalling approach to photos for the website...

earwighoney · December 2021

TINMAN82 said:

ICBM said:

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc etc.

I guess I’m also wondering if now is the time to pick up that “life companion” acoustic made of all solid premium woods.

It just struck me that this rosewood back looked quite orange and grainy in the centre..,and could that be a sign of poor/ immature timbre. Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

Some of the best EIR is orange and grainy. Have a look at the Martin Forum and keep an eye for 70's Martins, there are quite a lot that look like the one you posted.

Some wild grain EIR, is flat sawn, that stuff is more likely to crack in the long run than the straight grain wood. When it comes to the wavy stuff, some of it is quartersawn nonetheless.

Indian Rosewood is one of the most consistent materials out there. Of course there are some stinkers but it's down to other factors, not the back and sides.

Is it the right time to pick up the life companion acoustic guitar? YES.

There are other factors I'd see to be more important, eg character (be it modern like a Taylor or traditional like a Martin), shape, bracing, string spacing, neck profile and so on.

TINMAN82 · December 2021

earwighoney said:

TINMAN82 said:

ICBM said:

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc etc.

I guess I’m also wondering if now is the time to pick up that “life companion” acoustic made of all solid premium woods.

It just struck me that this rosewood back looked quite orange and grainy in the centre..,and could that be a sign of poor/ immature timbre. Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

Some of the best EIR is orange and grainy. Have a look at the Martin Forum and keep an eye for 70's Martins, there are quite a lot that look like the one you posted.

Some wild grain EIR, is flat sawn, that stuff is more likely to crack in the long run than the straight grain wood. When it comes to the wavy stuff, some of it is quartersawn nonetheless.

Indian Rosewood is one of the most consistent materials out there. Of course there are some stinkers but it's down to other factors, not the back and sides.

Is it the right time to pick up the life companion acoustic guitar? YES.

There are other factors I'd see to be more important, eg character (be it modern like a Taylor or traditional like a Martin), shape, bracing, string spacing, neck profile and so on.

Appreciate your insights, thanks.

TINMAN82 · December 2021

@earwighoney just googled 70s Martin as per your suggestion and this was one of the first things to pop up on eBay! Orange grain eat your heart out.

Tannin · December 2021

Yep, a very professional photo, taken by a professional.

Not sure what sort of professional, maybe a professional storeman or a professional shop assistant.

artiebear · December 2021

That looks like a lovely piece of wood. Don't see why the OP was concerned ?

boogieman · December 2021

Tannin said:

Yep, a very professional photo, taken by a professional. Not sure what sort of professional, maybe a professional storeman or a professional shop assistant.

Imgur knocks the image quality down quite a bit. It might’ve been a reasonable photo to start with.

Tannin · December 2021

Not that much.

Jez6345789 · December 2021

“

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc ”

Yeah that group with the strong opinions that’s the same group blindfolded that can’t tell EIR from Brazilian, stork margarine from butter or a Stradivari from a Chinese replicas.

All things make a difference but wood colour and grain will not make much of an audible difference if at all, more important will be shape, the quality of the top the makers bracing are they good at building guitars etc etc .

ICBM · December 2021

TINMAN82 said:

@earwighoney just googled 70s Martin as per your suggestion and this was one of the first things to pop up on eBay! Orange grain eat your heart out.

I'm guessing Martin as well

.

My '71 D12-35 looks pretty much like that. Or it would, if it didn't have a massive piece of contrasting wood in the middle

.

meltedbuzzbox · December 2021

TINMAN82 said:

I know wood availability is dwindling etc, just wanted opinion re whether this EI rosewood back is acceptable on a fairly high end acoustic. Won’t mention make/ model etc in case it affects the answers!

To me aesthetics are fine. Clearly the grain widens considerably in the middle and the colour lightens, which might be seen as lower grade. Grain generally quite straight though and reasonable bookmatching. I’d have thought no major concerns. Anyone disagree?

If it sounds good and plays nice I honestly wouldn't think twice about the appearance of the back.
In the same manner that I don't wonder how the under carriage of my car looks when it's on the road

TINMAN82 · December 2021

meltedbuzzbox said:

TINMAN82 said:

I know wood availability is dwindling etc, just wanted opinion re whether this EI rosewood back is acceptable on a fairly high end acoustic. Won’t mention make/ model etc in case it affects the answers!

To me aesthetics are fine. Clearly the grain widens considerably in the middle and the colour lightens, which might be seen as lower grade. Grain generally quite straight though and reasonable bookmatching. I’d have thought no major concerns. Anyone disagree?

If it sounds good and plays nice I honestly wouldn't think twice about the appearance of the back.
In the same manner that I don't wonder how the under carriage of my car looks when it's on the road

Agreed. It’s just that common wisdom does suggest there may be objective clues as to the quality/ maturity of timber, hence my question. Seems there’s no cause for concern.

sev112 · December 2021

Given the effort that manufacturers put into the visual quality of the back of many acoustic guitars, it occurs to me that they should be hung back to front. I find the front of most acoustics to be particularly boring, but the backs very pretty normally

bertie · December 2021

sev112 said:

I find the front of most acoustics to be particularly boring, but the backs very pretty normally

have some red gum

Image: https://scontent-lcy1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.18172-8/14556715_10210641039883949_4345916687892489168_o.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=RPoYbBJ44lkAX-ry3Ts&_nc_ht=scontent-lcy1-1.xx&oh=00_AT8a2GOGkx9VMJ5hNYlY7WKHI5l9CzgSRJBnusKvW2tN8A&oe=61E0EF31

digitalkettle · December 2021

bertie said:
some red gum...

I'm guessing (based on another Brook I once knew) that it used to be a lot more red!

bertie · December 2021

digitalkettle said:

bertie said:
some red gum...

I'm guessing (based on another Brook I once knew) that it used to be a lot more red!

nope, they do vary - that was the best of what Simon had in at the time - the pic is from when I got it - 2008 it is a little more red in real life, I know they can add a wash of some kind to enhance the natural colour before the lacquer coats - but mine isnt

you're not Stuart R, are you ?

digitalkettle · December 2021

bertie said:

digitalkettle said:

bertie said:
some red gum...

I'm guessing (based on another Brook I once knew) that it used to be a lot more red!

nope, they do vary - that was the best of what Simon had in at the time - the pic is from when I got it - 2008 it is a little more red in real life, I know they can add a wash of some kind to enhance the natural colour before the lacquer coats - but mine isnt

you're not Stuart R, are you ?

A friend had one for quite a while a few years back...I do recall quite a bit of fade from the vivid streaks that it started out with.

I'm not Stuart R...he's 'stuartryanmusic' on here

bertie · December 2021

digitalkettle said:
A friend had one for quite a while a few years back...I do recall quite a bit of fade from the vivid streaks that it started out with.

I'm not Stuart R...he's 'stuartryanmusic' on here

ahaa - no mines not faded at all - it is and has been kept in its case - whether that's helped I dont know - it was never very vivid, not sure Id have gone for something tooooooooo red

DannyP · December 2021

For reference this is my Harley Benton.

Tannin · December 2021

bertie said:

sev112 said:

I find the front of most acoustics to be particularly boring, but the backs very pretty normally

have some red gum

Red Gum? Really? Eucalyptus cameldulensis? It's a very odd colour for Red Gum. Red Gum is usually ... well ... red! (Usually, not always. It does vary, but this one is so far from the average that I wonder about it. Mind you, although I've seen a lot of Red Gum over the years, it's mostly been while cutting it up for firewood. Red Gum tends to be very heavy, fine-grained, and quite brittle. Making a guitar out of it, I imagine you'd have to choose the particular bit very carefully.) No matter: it looks fantastic, a really lovely instrument.

@sev112 you are right! Of course, nearly all of the favoured top timbers are plain to the point of being boring - they are favoured because they are strong, stiff, and light, not because of how they look - where many of the favoured back and sides timbers are favoured for other reasons - not least because they are tough enough to stand up to dings. There are a few back and sides timbers which go well as tops (mahogany, Blackwood, Koa), though with a different character. But it is very uncommon to make a top out of rosewood, Rock Maple, Queensland Maple - or (thank God) that awful plastic Ovation backs are made from.

TINMAN82 · December 2021

DannyP said:

For reference this is my Harley Benton.

Not sure a laminated veneer is a good comparison… but it is very attractive.

bertie · December 2021

Tannin said:
Red Gum? Really?
Eucalyptus cameldulensis? It's a very odd colour for Red Gum. Red Gum is usually ... well ... red! (Usually, not always. It does vary,

much like ebony isnt always.............black

- most red gum back/sides Ive seen are very similar to mine, with the only darker/redder parts a "flame" or partial -

for instance here - the outer parts and sides are the same as mine, the inner much paler, with only the "stripes" being distinctly redder

like this

Image: https://images.reverb.com/image/upload/s--SLvlbzg8--/f_auto,t_large/v1588936399/hccoxutef1hderxapi6o.jpg

Tannin said:

Red Gum tends to be very heavy, fine-grained, and quite brittle. Making a guitar out of it, I imagine you'd have to choose the particular bit very carefully.)

much like Ziricote Ive been told (well the heavy and brittle) , but they still do - red gum really isnt uncommon

Tannin · December 2021

^ Interesting Bertie. Red Gum is known as a back and side material here, of course, but is very seldom used. Eucalyptus in general isn't popular as a tonewood, neither of the major manufacturers use it at all and not many independent luthiers (though I'm sure most of them would have a go with it if commissioned). Red Gum is used less than Mountain Ash and probably one or two other eucalypts.

(More broadly, Red Gum is traditionally used for underfloor stumps, fence posts, bridge supports and marine piers, railway sleepers, and of course firewood. It is too brittle to make a good structural timber. These days, most of those uses have largely disappeared, partly because of the increased availability of concrete, partly because too much red gum swamp country has been cleared and turned into grazing land.)

Actually, the obvious musical use for Red Gum is for fingerboards. Hard, fine-grained (oddball examples above excepted), long-wearing and stable. You'd think it would be ideal. Taylor use dyed Tasmanian Blue Gum for fretboards, which is another odd choice. The main reason for using that species rather than the more sensible-seeming Spotted Gum or Red Gum is apparently that Blue Gums grow as weeds in California. Far enough: "use what you've got" is a sensible philosophy.

DannyP · December 2021

TINMAN82 said:

DannyP said:

Not sure a laminated veneer is a good comparison… but it is very attractive.

Yes @TINMAN82 I was just being cheeky

I suspect you could get 15 - 20 of these guitars for the price of the instruments we're talking about!

Solid top and great sound and playability though!

bertie · December 2021

@Tannin ;; (cant be bothered to keep nesting quotes, looks horrid)

not sure Ive seen RG used for fretboards, but certainly Brook isnt the only "small" luthier that uses / offers it - my first choice was actually Tasmanian Blackwood, but they didnt have any and supply was short at the time I ordered it

Ive got a leccy with a ziricote neck and f/board - but it is a little bit neck heavy (suede strap required !!) even tho it does look and feel amazing -

I think for us "retired" and now bedroom players its OK - not sure how durable it would be on a gigging acoustic.........

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Rosewood back- this ok?

Comments