Tortoise Shell figure? Quilt by another name

[harvl]

Originally Posted by BBWW

All I have left now is this little 13 1/2 foot board, it's so sad. But it's lowly sausage quilt from The Tree, not like the tortoiseshell that got forwarded to Harv. I gifted the consecutive slice from that billet to my good friend Jayson Bowerman at Jayson Bowerman Guitars. From his days with Breedlove on to his own shop he had always been very generous with me. I had always thought I'd keep the second one. So someone could still get a guitar made with that set....maybe I'll call him and order a build. LOL

I really don't feel that sorry for you... of course before long I too will have only photographic memories.... then I really won't be able to taunt you and you'll still have a bunch of the lowly sausage... and you know that like any good drug I'll want some of it...

Harv

[riorider]

Originally Posted by TimberlineGuy

no need to be modest. Your Baranik has the best (to me) set I've seen.

Thanks Will - I'm not sure of the exact provenance of that back set, but I'm pretty sure it goes back to BBWW. It's a beautiful set but it doesn't have the tortoise "veining" of those really rare sets.

All of this would be moot if it didn't also have an absolute fabulous mahogany tone - with more sustain and complexity than "normal" mahogany (whatever that means).

I have two other sets enqueue to be built - one by Tim McKnight and one by John Mayes. They are visually very close to the Baranik set. The Baranik has a cedar top; the McKnight will have an adirondack top; the Mayes will have an LS redwood top. The full spectrum - I'm looking forward to how each voice will work with the 'tree' mahogany - although most of that as we know is the excellent work of the luthiers.

Best,

Phil

[geordie]

Originally Posted by riorider

I have two other sets enqueue to be built - Phil

I have often wondered why so few custom guitar customers don't acquire their own selection of materials instead of relying on what the builder has in stock.

[Sandcastle Gtrs]

Originally Posted by geordie

I have often wondered why so few custom guitar customers don't acquire their own selection of materials instead of relying on what the builder has in stock.

What happens if the wood breaks when it is bent? LOTS of reasons and they center around what happens if something goes wrong...I think the big picture is it isn't work what you might save in many cases...and just cause it looks good doesn't mean it will sound good! Better letting pick the magical set!

[riorider]

Originally Posted by geordie

I have often wondered why so few custom guitar customers don't acquire their own selection of materials instead of relying on what the builder has in stock.

For the most part, the luthiers have been acquiring, assessing, selecting, and storing the best they can find and afford for years - perhaps decades. Most of them know how they plan a build and what will work with what to produce what tonally the customer wants. And, in my limited experience, they know much more than I about not only what wood works best but also what wood they have or can get will be part of the total package for what I want to achieve.

I will see pictures of perhaps 10s of wood sets; they will see, handle, and assess thousands. I know one builder who went through a literal 1000 spruce tops, keeping the top 250, and then selling the rest.

In this rare case of the tree mahogany, there are only a relatively few sets and billets left around (unless we can convince the Navy Seals to drop in on Skywalker Ranch and pull the paneling off... and even then that would only be a few dozen more sets...) and I've been more involved than I really want to be in helping locate potential sets for the builders. Turns out I really didn't need to - they had better contacts than I did and knew where to find them.

So - three reasons for me not supplying my own wood: builder-specific knowledge of the sets he/she has; builder expertise in selecting quality sets; and builder contacts which are much better than mine.

Not to say that if you found a stash of old walnut or redwood that your great-grandfather had used to build a barn, and you wanted a builder to use the best of that he could find, due to the unique history - that would be an exception I understand.

Best,

Phil

[JoeCharter]

Originally Posted by geordie

I have often wondered why so few custom guitar customers don't acquire their own selection of materials instead of relying on what the builder has in stock.

The politically correct reasons that luthiers give for not using the customer's wood is usually, as stated, the possibility that it might break.

There's also the possibility that the wood might be of such low grade that it would compromise the luthier's reputation for quality.

BUT...

Any savvy business person understands that the real reason behind this is $$$. Luthiers invest in tone woods and they make a fine margin with it.

What happens if it breaks? Who cares when you only paid 25% of the price? The luthier can break 2-3 more sets if he'd like -- and you still wouldn't be losing money.

And the argument about quality may hold true in certain situations -- but not when the end client can buy wood directly from the supplier if he chooses to.

And then there's the argument that the master luthier knows better than anyone how to choose a piece of wood that not only looks good -- but sounds good as well.

So when's the last time that you witnessed a luthier say "well, this piece of straight quartered BRW looks terrific, but when I tap it I just don't feel it -- so perhaps I won't even use it". Whoever believes in this myth is very naive indeed.

There are two valid reasons why clients should keep buying directly from the luthier, despite some of the margins being clearly excessive in my mind.

Primo, the luthier may have a better selection than your wood vendor.

Segundo, most luthiers don't particularly make a lot of money so it makes it easier for me to accept that they might make a 500% margin on a piece of BRW. If that's too much for me, I should simply go with EIR instead of busting their balls by high jacking the supply chain.

If one day I bump into a very special set, I may politely ask one of the builders who I would've worked with before their permission to use my own wood -- but that's a different than trying to cut their margin.

[riorider]

Originally Posted by JoeCharter

The politically correct reasons that luthiers give for not using the customer's wood is usually, as stated, the possibility that it might break.

There's also the possibility that the wood might be of such low grade that it would compromise the luthier's reputation for quality.

BUT...

Any savvy business person understands that the real reason behind this is $$$. Luthiers invest in tone woods and they make a fine margin with it.

What happens if it breaks? Who cares when you only paid 25% of the price? The luthier can break 2-3 more sets if he'd like -- and you still wouldn't be losing money.

And the argument about quality may hold true in certain situations -- but not when the end client can buy wood directly from the supplier if he chooses to.

And then there's the argument that the master luthier knows better than anyone how to choose a piece of wood that not only looks good -- but sounds good as well.

So when's the last time that you witnessed a luthier say "well, this piece of straight quartered BRW looks terrific, but when I tap it I just don't feel it -- so perhaps I won't even use it". Whoever believes in this myth is very naive indeed.

There are two valid reasons why clients should keep buying directly from the luthier, despite some of the margins being clearly excessive in my mind.

Primo, the luthier may have a better selection than your wood vendor.

Segundo, most luthiers don't particularly make a lot of money so it makes it easier for me to accept that they might make a 500% margin on a piece of BRW. If that's too much for me, I should simply go with EIR instead of busting their balls by high jacking the supply chain.

If one day I bump into a very special set, I may politely ask one of the builders who I would've worked with before their permission to use my own wood -- but that's a different than trying to cut their margin.

Sorry, Joe, but I'd disagree with almost every point.

This is a scarce item - not a commodity (even EIR). A supplier will simply not sell a given set to a "one off" buyer when they can keep an established and "continuous buyer" relationship going. That would be a foolish step.

I've known of several luthiers who will trade a given piece / set of whatever wood to others because it doesn't meet the standard. Remember these folks are going to invest a lot of time in a given set, and if it doesn't meet the goals at the end of the build they haven't wasted only the cost of the wood, but their time and the loss of opportunity of building something that does meet the goal.

Most luthiers I know have been saving wood for years. That means not that they buy it for some % of what it will be "worth" when they build with it, but they pay for it, pay insurance in case it gets destroyed or lost, pay to humidify and/or dry it, pay the a/c and heating bills to keep it at the right temperature, and then assess the risk of using it to meet the goals of the build. This is far from a simple investment in a stable chunk of some resource that will probably rise in value.

And what about the lean years? Many luthiers I know have had build queues affected seriously by the recession, and the number of emerging good builders with market-attracting entry level pricing has diverted some commissions they would have normally received. Meanwhile, that investment in wood sits there on the shelf making zip - so whatever the "markup" is divided by the years before it's used dilutes the investment increase (time value of $) and that's before the effect of inflation in a normal economy.

Not to mention that stash of formerly-legal Brazilian that you've paid and stored for years and is now completely UNMARKETABLE to potential international customers or those who travel across any CITES-signatory borders. Kiss that markup goodbye.

I'll buy the myth. If I were a luthier, I'm not selling just an "insert tab A into slot B" product. I'd be selling the whole package, and that would include my professional assessment of a given set of wood and how my skills can take that and the rest of the materials and produce an instrument of highest value. If you wanted to try to short-cut and ask me to use your set of wood, and put my name on the result, you would have to convince me that you had made the same high level of selection and care that I would have - and I suggest that would be a hard case to make.

Phil

[JoeCharter]

Originally Posted by riorider

Sorry, Joe, but I'd disagree with almost every point.

Hi Phil,

I think we're both reasonable folks and I'm not going to argue back and forth with you here.

I started my post with a cold business analysis -- and I will stand by it.

I also ended my post stating that I have no issues with builders making a healthy margin. I think my position is fair.

Of course, the Tree is a different matter altogether. I know the story, I've shopped for the wood, I'll get my Olson soon enough.

As for the price of BRW, I maintain my point. I know of luthiers who shop at the exact same wood vendors and resell at very different price points. I'm not blaming anyone for it and I won't get into specifics publicly. I'm just saying the margin is significant -- a lot more than needed to cover an accident.

As for losing the international market, I don't think this has had a negative impact on sales. In fact, the threat of short supply (which has been going on for many years indeed) has been a huge driver in driving the prices up.

At the end of the day, I'm happy to send my modest dollars to encourage luthiers whose work I admire -- and that's all that really matters.

[riorider]

ok - no worries and no argument. It may be just (mostly) the variance of experience and inappropriate extrapolation. What I've seen is with the small handful of luthiers I've worked with or talked to, and that's very much a small sample.

So, cheers, pax, and enjoy that Olson!

Phil

[JoeCharter]

Originally Posted by riorider

ok - no worries and no argument. It may be just (mostly) the variance of experience and inappropriate extrapolation. What I've seen is with the small handful of luthiers I've worked with or talked to, and that's very much a small sample.

So, cheers, pax, and enjoy that Olson!

Phil

Yeah I can't wait to get that Olson!

It's not like I had decades of experience either. My long post essentially meant that if people started to bring their own wood, luthiers would lose a significant portion of their (already not so great) income. Now, that wouldn't be the most elegant thing to say on any website...

Cheers!

Joe

[BBWW]

I don't know of any builder who marks up the wood 400%. I know of factory shops that in the end the MSRP of the upgrade is 400% however after the usual discounts the 400% is dropped down. If you are dealing with something like "The Tree", the wood is not only famous for its looks and its tone but also for the amount of sides that have been broken trying to bend it. I know of 6 builders looking for sides.

Holding a set for 20 years...you also have to look into inflation adjusted dollars and yes there is a cost to store it.

I understand your points. I do think builders should be able to mark up the woods. They worked at getting the best stuff they could. It does take time. Most trees don't fall in the back yard. (I've seen that happen! LOL) Anyway you look at it it is a premium. They are not just grabbing something off a pile.

I know some people who charge the public more for the wood than they do the builders to 'encourage' going directly through the builder.

But yes, we all want to make a few bucks to do it again tomorrow.

[JoeCharter]

My line of business is very similar to a luthier's.

I buy stuff, put it together and sell a package. Through the process I also charge for my consulting time, my judgment, my experience.

Just like luthiers, my clients could buy the base ingredients themselves if they wanted to -- and just pay for my consulting time.

When the package is pretty complex, it becomes difficult for my clients to figure all out the components. That's where the "magic" comes from. But there are situations where it's much more obvious to piece everything together...

So when an exceptional piece of wood has been stored for many decades, it complexifies the package. It's magic -- and magic is priceless. But when it's a nice piece of wood that has just transited, it's a bit more challenging to digest. Makes me think I'm paying for a "permission" rather than a "privilege".

It's all a matter of perception...

[BBWW]

Originally Posted by JoeCharter

So when an exceptional piece of wood has been stored for many decades, it complexifies the package. It's magic -- and magic is priceless. But when it's a nice piece of wood that has just transited, it's a bit more challenging to digest. Makes me think I'm paying for a "permission" rather than a "privilege".

It's all a matter of perception...

Humm, so a 100 year old perfectly quartered Brazilian set shipped from California to to New York for a build It's no longer 100 year old perfectly quartered Brazilian?

I know you have a logical argument but being old and slow I guess I just don't know where the magic happens other than in the hands of the builder and the quality of the materials. Not if it's been shipped to a builder who didn't have any by someone who did.

It's all a matter of perception." That we can agree on.