About sawing wood
- Thread starter JC
- Start date
Well you basically answered your question. But again, I reiterate, when you turn a piece of wood, you expose ALL CUTS - flat, quartered, rift, and everything in between. So you cannot cut a piece of birdseye and visually see more eye. You have to obtain a piece with more birdseye. You can put a point at each quartered side, but then you're covering up the birdseye on the flatsawn side. A turning is just an infinite amount of cuts around the wood.
Maybe, just maybe, you somehow happened upon a sapling, or a branch off a tree, narrow enough that can be turned for a butt, and somehow it was birdseye. Then when you turn it, ever face would be a flatsawn side. And even then it would not gurarantee that the birdseye went all around.
If this was your first turning, maybe I'd say it's a fair question. Or maybe a customer asked this. Almost every cuemaker, pool player, and their mothers, have seen or played a birdseye maple cue at one time. That you just noticed this after four years of turning cues (and presumably many more of playing) strikes me as particularly odd, not stupid...
I thought the piece looked pretty nice as far as birdseye goes. I have had some birdseye that had eyes pretty much all the way around and it was an ugly piece of wood. It was mostly really dark heart wood instead of the nice colored sap wood we normally get. It came from almost the center of the tree. I think I let a cuenaker take it who planned to stain it with a dark stain. What you are seeing that looks like curly maple on two sides is just the side of the birdseyes.
JC
Coos Cues
Thank you for the explanation.
Call it odd if you like. This is the first piece of BEM I have ever cut or looked at closely. I don't have any more at this time and may never. I have just never liked it. But someone who I am building a cue for does so here I am. I find that it is particularly stubborn to cut with my tapered reamer which is strange as it's neither heavy nor hard compared to many other species that cut like butter but are much denser.
JC
What I find as an interesting thing, is how the beauty of wood changes over the years.
I can remember when if there were knots, and defects in the , including burl, it was shunned and thought of as an inferior piece of wood, compared to a plain very straight even grained piece of wood.
To me there is beauty to bee seen in all wood, you just have to be able to appreciate it.
Joinging pieces together to create the illuson of what does not occur in nature, unless it is the centre of the tree, I don't appreciate. I prefer looking at what it really is, what ever that may be. I will no doubt be in the minority of people like this.
I can remember when if there were knots, and defects in the , including burl, it was shunned and thought of as an inferior piece of wood, compared to a plain very straight even grained piece of wood.
To me there is beauty to bee seen in all wood, you just have to be able to appreciate it.
Joinging pieces together to create the illuson of what does not occur in nature, unless it is the centre of the tree, I don't appreciate. I prefer looking at what it really is, what ever that may be. I will no doubt be in the minority of people like this.
Well, harder and denser woods can be easier to produce chips, and can be more uniform in density regardless of grain direction. Kind of like aluminum - you can get something like 7075 which is hard and machines easily and beautifully and produces nice chips, or 3003, which is so stringy and soft and seems to build up on the edge of whatever tool you use...
I think marketing and necessity play a role here. Back when Brazilian rosewood was more readily available, guitar manufacturers such as Martin basically shunned anything that wasn't quartersawn and straight. Nowadays, most BRW guitar sets are wild grain because they come form stump wood. Beautiful to look at in its own right, but not as stable as the quartered stuff. While I love the crazy grained woods, I reserve them mainly for my "drop-top" electrics where they can be "supported" by a solid wood base, and save the quartered stuff for the acoustics. I used to throw out spalted, punky wood. It's prized now for electric guitar tops. Used to pass on some nice burl pieces that had incursions and voids. Then I saw turners fill those voids with crushed turquoise and make incredible turnings. I will use curly wood that's otherwise perfectly quartered, however. The dense hardwoods can almost always be used regardless of direction for acoustic guitars (provided it does not have severe grain run-off), though anything other than quartered has to be worked a little thicker, to keep the "integrity" of the wood. This has tonal implications.
Burl was always prized, but aside from slabs and such, was relegated to decorative features in cues. Now it has become the main feature of cues such as the forearm or handle, albeit cored (unless, maybe it was acrylic stabilized.)
I love wood so much that I keep almost every drop-off. There is beauty and utility in most every piece, and maybe, sometimes, this appreciation has to be learned. I was a cabinetmaker and woodworker, and when someone asks about a variance in grain, I'd tell them, "There's always Formica."
Look at it as hitting turbulence while flying. The eyes are basically little knots, with ripples of differing densities surrounding each eye, and as a core drill or reamer cuts thru, it's hitting those different densities on all sides, making it harder to cut cleanly, and follow straight. Coring curly maple is very similar. I haven't used a tapered reamer such as you have, I use a stepped core process using 2 different gundrills, and it does take longer to do with birdseye and figured maple than it does for, like ebony. The drill always wants to bounce/jiggle in highly figured maples if you go to fast.
Dave
Apparently, mis-information is allowed to flourish if left unchecked.
Twice now I've listened to members refer to Birdeyes as 'knots' or
the beginnings of knot formation. This may be your opinion and you're
certainly welcome to it, even if inaccurate. Scientists have been exploring the
Birdseye phenomenon for over 100 yrs and still can't explain the formation.
They certainly know knots when they see them and have gone to length to avoid
using that term (knots) in their description of the Birdseye wood.
"Bird's eye is a type of figure that occurs within several kinds of wood, most notably in hard maple.
It has a distinctive pattern that resembles tiny, swirling eyes disrupting the smooth lines of grain.
It is somewhat reminiscent of a burl, but it is quite different: the small knots that make the burl are missing."
'Quoted from Wiki.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird's_eye_figure
That was my first stop in my search. Hopefully, the interested reader will be as astute.
As-in : Don't believe everything you read on AZB. Even if your source pretends to know what they're talking about.
Last edited:
KJ , I have a piece of pine that has birds eye figure in it. I showed to my father inlaw and he said he has seen that from time to time in what he calls sick pine trees. It is not a desirable trait as the wood is not structurally as strong as the clear wood. (in pine anyway) . So I hope to make a something out of the small amount of it that I have for a family friend. You have described it very well.
Neil
Neil
Well, a word to the "astute" - don't believe everything you read in Wikipedia. I've discovered ommisions, misquotes, lack of credit and/or credentials. Recently, I saw one article on alternating current that credits George Westinghouse but not Nicola Tesla for the generator at Niagara Falls. Whether ignorance, revisionist history, or whatever, this was glaring to me and another reminder that you should verify even sources that are "trusted."
I will say, they can behave like knots when machining through it.
Am I to read this underhanded insult as directed at me? Because it seems as much. I'd respect you more if you'd stop with the BS and engage me directly if and when you take issue. We can debate anything you like, any time you like. You don't have to be a jerk about it.
As for the words in blue that you are basing your insults on, you have completely misread the statement. The "knots" the statement is referring to is as it compares the surface growth of birdseye figure to that of burl. Burls form bulbous protrusions that resemble a pimple, with the tree's failed attempt at a branch resting at the center. Birdseye figured trees, however, form dimples where the branch should have been. The debate over birdseye isn't about what the figure is consisted of, but rather why it forms and why it does so in the manner it does. If you'd like, I can snap a picture of the two surface figures side by side so you can see exactly what the article is referring to. I can also show a pic of the end grain that clearly shows the knots crossing the grain, growing with each year just as a branch would do.
Next time you care to insult somebody's intelligence, especially in public for the world to see, you'd be astute to have yourself a solid grasp of the subject. Crow doesn't taste so well when served up cold.
JC
Coos Cues
You talking about this?
I went back and re read this thread and yes that's what I was talking about although it's not so distinct in the BEM photo you posted as in my piece. I was confused by the time you posted that for reasons I won't even try to explain.
Back to the original question I asked in post one. This thread got so far off track I almost forgot what prompted me to post my question and thought of new questions during the course of discussion. When you look at a nice straight maple shaft it will always have those two perfectly straight lines running from end to end on opposite sides where the longest tight grains come together on the edge in a tight swirling pattern but straight as an arrow. I don't know what to call this. I call it the "taint" because that's what it reminds me of. All I really wanted to know was if you sawed the wood differently could you alter the appearance of the "taint" so it doesn't run in such a straight line from end to end and catch your eye as a straight line. Thus the title of my thread "sawing" not "eyes"
Joey said grain over figure which makes sense but coring sort of eliminates this concern. Eric mocked me and I don't think he even understood what I was asking. Which is ok too. Sarcasm is good. Sorry everyone, I should have been clearer. Thanks for all your thoughts.
Here is a closer up photo showing the "taint" of this wood that I was asking about originally. Whether sawing differently could alter it's path from end to end. If I had some bigger chunks of this wood or any straight grained wood I would have just sawed them and found out for myself but I thought asking experts would be cheaper. I still think I thought right.:smile:
![S1920001 [800x600].jpg](https://forums.azbilliards.com/data/attachments/350/350874-461382dd11fc78a55d48030664577a86.jpg "S1920001 [800x600].jpg")
JC
Here's two pics of hard maple in birdseye and burl form, before being completely processed. First pic shows a burl with bulbous knots, and birdseye with dimples instead of knots. The second pic clearly shows the two are the same growth pattern, a failed attempt at growing a branch..........what we woodworkers know as knots. You can argue with me, but you can't argue with photographic proof. The burl obviously shows more eyes than the birdseye, but nobody on the planet can say they aren't the same type of growth, a tree's failed attempt at growing a new branch. Again, woodworkers and cue makers alike call that a knot. The biology student on wiki that you are calling an expert scientist can call it anything he/she likes, but those of us who work with wood call it a knot.
Attachments
Last edited:
I meant no harm. I genuinely believed your showing a nice piece birdseye and joking about its figure. I tried to be humorous, thinking you were being humorous, but apparently failed.
To answer your question again, no you cannot change anything by cutting it differently. The figure is what it is and will show up in some form or another no matter how you cut it. Tilting the grain will do nothing but weaken the wood. Rather than having grain run straight, you'll have run off.
To KJ, The Above quote from Louie is what I should have said, and was only trying to explain why he was having trouble with his reamer cutting thru it. A little less condescending tone would have been a nicer way to point out my mis-statement.
Thanks,
Dave
Once again, it does not matter how you saw the wood - the minute you turn it you expose everything. Athough I will say that looks like eastern hard rock maple; I don't think it's as prevalent with western maple, which happens to be a bit softer.
Even if you somehow cut the wood on a bias to the grain direction, which would be a complete waste of a finite resource, and even if you cored it, you may find that the grain runoff causes the wood to move rather unpredictably. So if you thought you had difficulty cutting relatively straight-grained birdseye maple, it probably would be worse if you turned one that had severe runoff.
Not to defend a guy, but looking back I don't think Eric meant any harm. I thought myself the question seemed to be strange coming from someone who works wood. Kind of like saying this piece of Brazilian rosewood is perfectly straight grained and quartersawn is like saying that McLaren MSO HS is just jet black. So one could construe that you were being facetious about your question.
OK now you're showing off :grin:... NICE stuff there!
I was gonna ask where curls from next.