padauk
 

Otherwise there's a reason why the less common tonewoods in this poll are not particularly sought after. They don't bring anything special sonically, they aren't especially visually desirable -- and they're not traditional. (JoeCharter)

Sorry, I need to disagree.

I have seen, and own, some spectacular Padauk. Many samples are blah, granted, but by no means all of them. Look at the Padauks made by the Kinnairds and Mark Hatcher and you will take it all back. Going further, I have seen and played some very nice, rosewood-looking Ovankol and have seen a number of pretty neat examples of Pau Ferro. And every piece of Zebrawood I have seen has been very striking.

There are many, including me, who will argue that these woods give up nothing tonally when used by someone who knows what they are doing. I might make an exception for Zebrawood, so will give you that.

But I will agree with your last statement that they are not considered traditional. To mess with you, let me mention birch. Most would not call it traditional but boy a lot of guitars in the 20's and 30's were made from it.

Let me add a significant vignette to your statistic: my Grandfather courted his sweetheart, my future Grandmother, with his White Oak guitar. It worked, and they were happily wed for decades. Which is definitive proof that alternative tonewoods can get the job done.

;)

Steve

I think alternative options when it comes to wood (as opposed to 'traditional' wood) is something that will be explored more as time goes on. And time seems short lately. There is one respected member here that speaks of osage orange (sp?) May not look as pretty as some but the sound may ease your pain. And builders build. That's the key.

Don't want to get to far off the subject but there is the incredibly resonant (and incredibly plain and almost ugly) Black Locust...

Gents, there's nothing to agree or disagree with...

We all spend our money on whatever we like. And the reality is that these "less common" tone woods are less common for a reason. Either these woods aren't that hot or the general population are deaf and blind.

As the owner of a yellow guitar (some would say it's a good match with my skin tone), I'm clearly not judging anyone -- simply describing reality as I see it. And as someone much wiser than me once said, reality is in the numbers.

In the fantastic world of guitars, tradition is very important. If you're going to break tradition, your idea better be muchos incredible otherwise its appeal will remain fairly marginal.

The numbers argument is 0. Because gangnam style has the most views, does that mean it's better than Bach or Miles Davis and if everyone knows about something does that mean it's the most important thing?
Consider the common Kenny G afficionado. Is he the smartest music listener? He is average at best. Most people are average. They like average things, like taylor swift, a batman movie and discussing soft superficial science or soft politics.

The emerging restrictions on the currently desired woods will increase their appeal until they become the norm. Future generations won't bat an eyelid because they won't know what it's like to use the current woods.

I was thinking about that. Will future generations speak of the 'good old days' or will they have moved on to what the future holds. I guess we should count our blessings as there is still access to the old and choices still available today. What was the question? ( I'm not old enough to vote.)

Ha! :) Might it not be seen as the 'bad old days' when this and past generations ravaged the Amazon and major forests which this wood will represent? We can only see it in the light of our present I have some of these woods in my guitar so I'm not moralising from a personal standpoint but of a possibly different common mindset in the future. Much like ivory is seen now, say, in the Western world. If I have another one made I shall ponder quite deeply on the subject of my choices from an ecological perspective. I quite like the look of some of the Padauk pieces i've seen and the positive, knowledgeable comments of some the luthiers here on the sonics makes it a distinct possibility for me.

Yes, we are lucky to be in the middle of this change and enjoy the choice.

I like that Kenny G has been invoked in this discussion

Yes. We have moved to a deeper level.

One more vote for padouk. It is every bit as resonant as BRW and if you shop around you can find plenty of pieces that are quite attractive. There is a lot of it out there so it's reasonably priced and not at all endangered. It is a little hard to bend. When making a florintine cutaway, to keep the tight beds from cracking,I usually thin the sides to the point where they need to be laminated with a supporting wood.

Padauk
 

There are three Padauk species: African (Pterocarpus soyauxii), Andaman (Pterocarpus dalbergioides) and Burma (Pterocarpus macrocarpus). We don't speak about rosewoods as a single species I am not sure why we do with Padauk other than wood sellers don't always provide good identification on wood they do not have good chain of custody on.

Wood--------------------Density (lb/ft^3)-----Hardness (lbf)-----Stiffness (lb/in^2)-----
African Padauk-----------------47---------------1,970--------------1,700,000---------
Andaman Padauk---------------48---------------1,630--------------1,754,000---------
Burma Padauk------------------54---------------2,150--------------2,050,000--------
Brazilian Rosewood-------------52----------------2,790------------2,020,000--------
East Indian Rosewood----------52----------------2,440-------------1,668,000--------
Madagascar Rosewood---------58----------------2,550-------------1,742,000--------

Keep in mind, Padauk's color tends to be fugitive and darken over time with exposure to UV. Padauks are similar in weight to rosewoods, but no where near as hard. African and Andaman being more akin to EIR in stiffness and Burma being more stiff like BRW. This doesn't speak directly to the Q of the wood tat some builders have spoken highly of as a very acoustically lively wood.

African: Heartwood color can vary, ranging from a pale pinkish orange to a deep brownish red. Most pieces tend to start reddish orange when freshly cut, darkening substantially over time to a reddish/purplish brown (some lighter pieces age to a grayish brown).

Andaman: Heartwood color can vary, ranging from a pale golden yellow to a deeper reddish brown. Color tends to darken to a golden brown over time. Yellow sapwood is well demarcated from heartwood. Overall, Burma Padauk’s color tends to be less red and more subdued than African Padauk.

Burma: Heartwood color can vary, ranging from a pale pinkish orange to a deep brownish red. Most pieces tend to start reddish orange when freshly cut, darkening substantially over time to a reddish/purplish brown.

Your post is quite entertaining but you'll notice I never said traditional woods were "better" than less common woods.

Just look at the higher end builds and the vast majority of them are using traditional tonewoods. Doesn't make them any better -- but I, like the majority of the market, prefer tradition over novelty when it comes to a significant investment like a musical instrument.

Saying that a certain wood is better than another is like saying that blue is better than red. It's non-sense and it's not what I said.

For the rest, comparing Gangnam Style with Bach is like comparing a guitar with a kazoo. They're both musical instruments but otherwise there's nothing to compare.

And Kenny G has better musicianship than all of us on the AGF combined...

Why the slagging of Gangnam Style??