Is this a “good” rosewood back?

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by DaveJTR

The guitar is a Martin OM standard series that I just pulled the trigger on (for those that are curious).

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

I believe that it may be an Eastman - E 20/40 OM or some such ?

Given that the owner of it, the OP, stated that it was a Martin OM, probably is what he said it is.

[DaveJTR]

It's interesting to me that a few people who obviously seem like they know what they're talking about have said that it looks like Brazilian rosewood.

I'm not too familiar with Brazilian rosewood - just know it's supposed to be the holy grail of back/side wood for acoustic guitars.

[ManyMartinMan]

Originally Posted by Guilty Spark

...It's a helluva lot prettier than the rosewood back of my HD-28, I'll tell you that. Mine is utterly non-descript, plain and............boring...

Actually a gorgeous set. I'm guessing you know that - you bought it.

Originally Posted by DaveJTR

... I have seen what people consider a “good” rosewood back (straight grains that run up and down), and this is not it.

It's a gorgeous back. Like many have said, generally I couldn't care less what the back looks like but this one is great.

[J Patrick]

Originally Posted by DaveJTR

It's interesting to me that a few people who obviously seem like they know what they're talking about have said that it looks like Brazilian rosewood.

I'm not too familiar with Brazilian rosewood - just know it's supposed to be the holy grail of back/side wood for acoustic guitars.

...that’s because it is closer in looks to average BRW than EIR....

[DaveJTR]

Touche brother.

I knew it was East Indian Rosewood, but I just realized I didn't mention that in the original post.

[kentwinterton]

That's definitely some find rosewood. I have 2 rosewood guitars and that one is a beaut!!

[Wade Hampton]

Originally Posted by DaveJTR

Not disclosing brand to eliminate bias. I have seen what people consider a “good” rosewood back (straight grains that run up and down), and this is not it. Is this preferred/ not preferred / subjective?

If subjective, what do YOU think?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/187707...hares-omdPj0/#

It looks good to me.


whm

[PAPADON]

And you don't have more important things to worry about?

[Dbone]

Originally Posted by paulzoom

Never understood why it matters. When I play I don't see the back of the guitar and when I hang it on a stand I don't see the back of the guitar. All I care is how it sounds.

Apparently it can matter from a “stability” standpoint. Technically it matters in that sort of way. A back that is quarter sawn will theoretically hold up better to environment abuses than a less straight grained non quarter sawn one. That is my understanding.

There is a reason why all guitar tops are quarter sawn.

[bufflehead]

Originally Posted by DaveJTR

If subjective, what do YOU think?

It looks nice, but I think I'd rather have a quarter-sawn back.

[Dbone]

Here’s the back of a rosewood guitar that I just recently took delivery of. I’m really happy with the clean looking grain. Aesthetically it comes down to preference. Stability/sensitivity over time is a different matter —>

[DaveJTR]

Very nice brother.

[Dbone]

I think in the end as long as you keep your instruments in proper environmental conditions it won’t matter all that much from a stability/sensitivity perspective. If you don’t then quarter sawn might help you out a bit more and be a little more resilient, resist dipping, etc.

[redir]

Originally Posted by Dbone

Here’s the back of a rosewood guitar that I just recently took delivery of. I’m really happy with the clean looking grain. Aesthetically it comes down to preference. Stability/sensitivity over time is a different matter —>

Perfect! Straight grain rosewood to my eye is not boring at all and you have the extra benefit of stability over time

[Italuke]

I swear that pic showed up here in another recent thread. Or at least one exactly like it. Thus, I think I know what make it is.