Official Luthiers Forum!

I was in a local guitar store yeaterday and played the most expensive guitar they had on display,

a K. Yairi similar to this.....



with a price tag of ?1699 which is nearly $3500.

it felt and sounded delicious.

tone was sweet and ballanced and one of the store guys commented that the tone was great, as he hadn't heard it being played before.

from the front it was lovely, with a subtle bit of bling round the soundhole.

the back was another matter.

Described as Brazillian Rosewood, it was a mess.

there was all sort of discolouring, stains and what looked like bruising.

If it had been walnut in my favourite dumpster I'd have left it there.

I know that it's endangered and all that, Is ALL the BRW on the market now like this, or is there any that's actually bearable to look at?

_________________
My soundclick xx luthier blog xx luthier soundclick

<groan>

It's not all about the looks, it's all about the tone.
Say that again...it's about the tone.
If we're ever going to train customers to accept alternative woods, we're going to have to buy into that ourselves.

I have some wonderful rosewood in my shop from Guatemala. It taps with a very musical quality, and the smell is reminiscent of Brazilian. It has a few small bug holes in it, and where the little critters bored through it, the wood is a bit darkened. Does this mean the wood is no good? Why?!!! It will make Fantastic instrument wood, even if there are some cosmetic issues. I like this stuff enough to build a guitar for myself out of it, because for me, it's all about tone.

And no, not all the Brazilian on the market looks like that, but folks use what they can get their hands on.

_________________
"I want to know what kind of pickups Vince Gill uses in his Tele, because if I had those, as good of a player as I am, I'm sure I could make it sound like that.
Only badly."

Actually my classical instructor has an older Ramirez that has Cedar top and BRW back and sides. The back and sides on this guitar look almost like the wood was painted with mustard in color house paint but it is not painted, It is just plain (expletive deleted) ugly and very monotoned in color. Maybe the most non-impressive piece of BWR I have ever seen.

But Like Don said the tone is magnificent. I am sure Jose did not choose this piece for the visual aesthetics so there had to be an other reason he used it.

Hmmm...not really.

I was in Intersound, in Dursley, and played a STUNNING Brook Tamar with Braz Rosewood back and sides, with sapwood. I was rather reluctant to let it go, mainly because of the tone, luckily it was the A?3,500 pricetag that put me off...

[QUOTE=Don Williams] It's not all about the looks, it's all about the tone.
Say that again...it's about the tone.[/QUOTE]

Don if ANYONE appreciates that, it's me, have you seen how rough my building is?

I was just amazed that a GOOD builder like Yairi would let this even through his doors.......

_________________
My soundclick xx luthier blog xx luthier soundclick

it is interesting that Kamuzo Yairi is market in Europe but not in the states other than under the Alvarez Yairi trade name. looking at the K. Yairi site they use the same model #s but are some what different in appearance besides the logo. Must be a contractual issue. Alvarez Yairi's have always been one of my favorite guitar makes. my first top of the line guitar I ever owned was an AY 9 string. EABGgBbEe. A great guitar more less half a 12 sting

The fact is that because rio is so much in demand any and every single available piece will find its way on the guitar market.

but not all rio is suitable.
just because its rio doesn't make it suitable.
as luthiers we know this but quite often the end user has no idea.

unfortunately this will encourage some builders/manufactures to build with unsuitable wood to increase profits.

Also some hobbiests will sometimes be targeted by sharks who will sell inferior wood at sky high prices because they don't have the skill and experience to tell the difference.

This gives rio a bad name but it doesent mean that there isn't wonderful wood out there but unfortunately its getting scarcer by the day as the thread about the recent bust proves.

As with any wood there re two types, wood you would build with and wood you wouldn't and its up to you to decide which is which.

Joel.

You can get some very nice BZ sets for $800.00 to $1,500.00 a set. Straight grain, nice spider webbing, gorgeous color...but that doesn't go on $3,500.00 guitars, it goes on $10,000.00 to $26,000.00 guitars.   I just saw a pile of such wood at Jeff Traugott's shop.   He was buying from the right guys at the right time. You should see the stuff we cut a few years back...veneer backer boards from the 1930s. ..looked just like "golden era" Martin wood...good for about a $5 K up-charge.

"It's all about the tone"

Try telling that to some of the customers. I've got a small stash of old BRW that's tonally the bee's knees, but when I show pics of it on line people don't want it: too boring. Then they send along pics of stuff that they got that is warped, checked, and discolored; wood I would not build with on a bet if I could help it. But it's got every sort of color and figure you could imagine from the buttress of the stump. The fact is that most people buy with their eyes.

I saw a BRW clock in a museum once that was the color of a pumpkin. The only way you could tell the material was from the tag, and the spiderwebbing. Some of the wood I've got is really black; it makes you understand the botanical name of the wood; Dalbergia negra. Over time the finished guitars I've made of it have gotten lighter, so that you can actually see the grain. Eventually they may end up like that clock. I suspect a lot will depend on the finish.

I'm beginning to wonder what's going to happen in the future. Will BRW become so 'politically incorrect' that it will become hard to sell? Will the increasing utilization of substitutes with similar properties, like Osage and Black Locust, speed up that transition?   

    I was able to acquire a large log of Dalbergia Nigra from a barn in
Quaketown, PA where an elevator paneling compnay stored their wood
stock.

    The log was 24 feet long and had one side cut flat to keep it from
rolling. The old guy who was liquidating the stash told me that it had
been there since the late 50s.

   The funny thing was that the entire log looked like it was covered in a
black syrup-like skin almost like tar. When I scraped a little section and
saw and smelled it, I asked how much he wanted for it and he basically
gave it to me since I'd just got done buying all of his Maple, Walnut and
Cherry.

   Once I got it to my resaw guy, it showed the kind of dream color that
old Martins are built from...that deep dark brick red with classic black
spidering through it.

   I remember hearing about Jeff's situation with that beautiful wood he's
been using for a few years now. There are lots of cool stories about the
wood that didn't get away.

   It is all about the tone, but a nice piece of old growth Brazilian with that
great red/black contrast and those dramatic lines does alot for the
guitars built from it, too.

   The sets I have left from that log and few other forunate encountrs i've
had with wood vendors are no longer available and will stay in my wood
vault until I retire, most likely.

   Alot of the stuff that is showing up now is really horrible looking, but it
sounds good.

Regards,
Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars

Every year in this country lots of 1800 era barns are torn down and salvaged. You ould be amased at the amount of BRW that was used for structural timber back in the lat 1700s through the 1800s I am not sure how the paperwork is done on this reclaimed timber but have been told that most of the BRW that is reclaimd is going to tonewood suppliers. I don't know how much truth there is to that.

[QUOTE=martinedwards]Is all BRW rubbish NOW?[/QUOTE]



Not by a long shot...

[QUOTE=MichaelP] Every year in this country lots of 1800 era barns are torn down and salvaged. You ould be amased at the amount of BRW that was used for structural timber back in the lat 1700s through the 1800s I am not sure how the paperwork is done on this reclaimed timber but have been told that most of the BRW that is reclaimd is going to tonewood suppliers. I don't know how much truth there is to that.[/QUOTE]
I have seen a show where they were salvaging old barns and the guy mentioned that lots of mohogany and imported woods were used in their making. It was cheap and plentiful during those time.

_________________
Guitars, guitars and more guitars.

I should add that i prefer the look of a nice rosewood or some other exotic timber but I still prefer the tone of plane old mahogany. I think a mohogany back and sided guitar sound better then a BRW guitar. just my opinion.

_________________
Guitars, guitars and more guitars.

Not long ago I obtained some uncut BRW from a museum stores that had it's store tag on which gave its date of acquisition as 1840. With careful cutting I could have got a three piece back and sides from it. So off it went to the bandsaw, and I cut it up into about 50 bridge blanks and 6 fingerboards. Now that's what BRW reallty excels for.

We all know that Mahogany is better for the back and sides don't we?

Colin

_________________
I don't believe in anything, I simply make use of a set of reasonable working hypotheses.

[QUOTE=Colin S] Not long ago I obtained some uncut BRW from a museum stores that had it's store tag on which gave its date of acquisition as 1840. With careful cutting I could have got a three piece back and sides from it. So off it went to the bandsaw, and I cut it up into about 50 bridge blanks and 6 fingerboards. Now that's what BRW reallty excels for.

We all know that Mahogany is better for the back and sides don't we?

Colin[/QUOTE]

Hmm. I've got three quartered blocks of brazilian I might be able to turn into 2 4-piece back guitar sets, but then again, there are also plenty of bridges and a few fingerboards in each, but cutting the pieces up into tiny ones just seems a bit wrong, somehow.

Besides, I have plenty of madagascan for bridges and fingerboards.

[QUOTE=Alan Carruth]I've got a small stash of old BRW that's tonally the bee's knees, but when I show pics of it on line people don't want it: too boring. Then they send along pics of stuff that they got that is warped, checked, and discolored; wood I would not build with on a bet if I could help it. But it's got every sort of color and figure you could imagine from the buttress of the stump. The fact is that most people buy with their eyes.


[/QUOTE]

That's because the guitar companies that are now using stump wood and other poor BRW have convinced the status-seeking buyers that BRW is supposed to look like that.

I was at a shop the other day and saw a really nice early 60s Martin D28 with BRW. A customer was arguing with the shop owner saying it had to be EIR because it was so plain looking and BRW has wild grain patterns. No one could convince this guy that good, old BRW had nice consistent grain. So he'll happily go off and pay thousands of dollars for poor BRW that has a dramatic appearance.

Jim

I don't agree with "It's all about tone". Of course we all want good tone. From the building standpoint, we want a guitar that not only sounds good, "BUT LOOKS GREAT TOO!" After all, all those hours we put into this, we want both. So I'm going along with Martin on this. It has alot to do with good looking wood. Would you buy a nice new car that ran that ran great, but had orange stripes? Most customers do want both. I just built a guitar for a well known Musician in my area, and the look of the wood was so important. Anyway, that's just my point for what it's worth. By the way, there is still some decent BRW out there. Just have to pay the price.

My father's '59 D-28 is strikingly gorgeous....spiderwebing with luscious black streaks...but still in many ways plain compared to let's say that picture of the PS in Taylor's last catalog...guess which one I'd choose?