Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Can someone explain this?
- Thread starter stevensivak
- Start date
If it was book matched on the front, it would be book matched on the back, no?
No. Not unless it was a perfecty quarter-sawn block to start with.
Because of the definition of book matching- which can be done with any grain type, it does not not necessarily imply quarter sawn... although that is what most have come to expect.
No. Not unless it was a perfecty quarter-sawn block to start with.
Because of the definition of book matching- which can be done with any grain type, it does not not necessarily imply quarter sawn... although that is what most have come to expect.
I can assure you it is correct. I don't know how many instruments you have built, I've only built 20 at the last count but I'm sure of my facts. Take a piece of timber with a marked grain pattern like pine, for instance. Is the pattern identical on both sides? If it is, and you saw it through its thickness and open it up like a book, it will appear to be book-matched on the back as well as the front. But the grain pattern is almost never identical on both sides, so the front will be book-matched but the back will have the original front and back surfaces side by side.
IMO
There are FSO made by companies that don’t compromise.
I own 1969 P bass, though a nice bass, it hangs in my den and never gets gigged. I play it at home one or two times a year.
That's all right now. Someone else figured it out already and bought the thing, without even needing to read all 5 pages of this thread for clues, so nobody else must.
Here's a more pedestrian three-tone sunburst Jazz--lots and lots and lots of 'em--for those who can't comprehend the deep dark mysteries of the bespoke Olinto in question or the optical illusions of trompe-l'œil.
Hopefully, everyone and everything will be okay from here on out.
For a made-to-order, one-of-a-kind bass?
Besides the fact, it's obviously not book-matched, intentionally so.
None that I know of. I'm just responding to a post that mentioned compromise.
The farther a surface is from the split, the more the wood pattern is going to diverge. This would be minimized with a perfectly quarter-sawn block but since trees are not perfectly cylindrical or conical there will still be divergence.
Imagine two slabs of wood cut from this tree. B is quarter-sawn, A is not.
The bookmatched surfaces of each slab are going to be where each slab is split along the dashed line. If the surfaces exposed by the split (call them 2 and 3) are used on the front of the bass, the outer surfaces of each slab (1 and 4) are going to be on the back.
For slab A there will be an obvious difference in the patterns on the outer surfaces (1 and 4). For slab B there will be less difference, but not none -- for example see how the rings cross the boundaries of B near the bark.
This photo above explains what I was trying to tell the guy who built 20 basses...
Book matching does not necessarily produce "mirror" like results...
Book matching does not necessarily produce "mirror" like results...
That's not some guy. That's Dave Higham, maybe check out his builds before lumping him in with the opinionatti.
Respectfully, this thread is filled to the brim with rando opinions and disinformation to the point where it's value is entertainment only.
I don't care if he built 2 zillion basses. If a solid slab block is book matched on the front it is by definition book matched on the back, regardless of what the appearance is. If you doubt what I am saying , just look at the tree diagram. And if that doesn't to convince you, then there is nothing to say.
Hold yer horses. The first time you brought this up, it was a question. It was explained a few times, by people who know the answer. I'm not sure you fully understand what the term "book match" means, in relation to woodworking. Maybe take a breath and digest what a few of the more experienced luthiers here are trying to explain, before getting snappy.
While I agree with you that the number of basses built isn't the important thing, Dave is still correct about this and he has built a lot of crazy nice things. Bookmatched doesn't just mean the two sides came from the same tree, it means the two sides were facing each other before being sawn apart and are thus symmetrical (give or take small variance from saw blade width and planing material removal). That's the bookmatched part. The back sides of those pieces are not bookmatched. Look at the picture from @ardgedee above. The 2-3 faces are bookmatched and the 1-4 faces are not. The 1-4 faces came from parts of the board several inches away from each other and will have some -- or a lot -- of difference in the grain.
Moderator insert: it is difficult to ascertain tone from the written word, so please don't make my job difficult. Very experienced people are answering this question, let's keep that in mind while discussing respectfully.
My comments above do NOT pertain to this bass. This pertains to wood or any material for that matter
Here is what I said and this is what Dave is arguing about:
If a solid slab block is book matched on the front it is by definition book matched on the back, regardless of what the appearance is.
And you guys are stating that is not true?
Here is what I said and this is what Dave is arguing about:
If a solid slab block is book matched on the front it is by definition book matched on the back, regardless of what the appearance is.
And you guys are stating that is not true?
Correct, that is not true. But, this is assuming that you're referring to very closed matched faces as a bookmatch...
Generally speaking, it is only bookmatched on the faces that were divided in half by the resaw cut. The outer faces may, or may not, be similar... but they are usually not close enough in appearance and pattern to be referred to as bookmatched.
Even very carefully bookmatched faces can vary from one another based on what the grain direction is doing respective to the resaw cut; and by how much they are further processed by planing and sanding.
To get as precise a bookmatch as possible, a quartersawn board can be used, which helps to maintain the consistent pattern after processing. In this case, the outside faces may be a close match, but won't likely be "great" bookmatch because their initial state was that they would have been much farther apart.
For perfect bookmatching to occur on both the inside and outside faces, a man-made material would likely have to be used.
Hope this helps!
Finally!....
Yes it is true that a thin piece of quarter sawn wood when re-sawn and opened will produce what is commonly meant by "book matching".
However, a 12/4 piece of non-quarter sawn wood might not produce mirror like results, per the log diagram above.
Dave seems to be hung up on the use of the term book-matching to ONLY mean mirror like results but book-matching is a process- that does not guarantee results.
Is this a syntax/language issue?
Yes it is true that a thin piece of quarter sawn wood when re-sawn and opened will produce what is commonly meant by "book matching".
However, a 12/4 piece of non-quarter sawn wood might not produce mirror like results, per the log diagram above.
Dave seems to be hung up on the use of the term book-matching to ONLY mean mirror like results but book-matching is a process- that does not guarantee results.
Is this a syntax/language issue?
Last edited:
