[QUOTE=Shane Neifer] Dennis,
In my most humble opinion using the term "Lutz Spruce" is very appropriate and is the actual common name for the hybrid harvested here. In labelling this wood as "Lutz" it is being defined as a unique wood holding it's own characteristics. This is the term found most often in the literature that describes the hybrid. It also follows a logic as seen in Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis). Calling it "Kermode Spruce" does not relate to anything that is published anywhere but is indeed a very fine marketing tool. It does not allow anyone, though, the opportunity to more closely describe the wood they recieve and present on finished guitars to their customers. I can very easily acquire pure sitka logs (as can Mario) and I recently turned down an offer on Engelmann logs. I guess what I am getting at is that I could call all of the spruce I sell as "High Mountain Super top grade you rock guitar top wood" and I could source logs from where ever that incorporate a bunch of different species, all of them good. But when you build with the stuff you would not know if some of this "HMSTGYRGTW" was sitka, engelmann or white spruce. So what I am trying to do is ensure that builders know the origin of the wood they get from me by using the published common name for this hybrid. I do remember that some time ago Mario was working out Prince Rupert on the coast and was trying some salvage logs which would have all been sitka. If it was sold as "Kermode Spruce" and you bought some, how would you be able to ensure that you could get more as you would only know that you liked it and not necessarily what species you were working with?
Dennis I am not at all trying to slag Mario, that is not my style. He does have a very good wood and he is very good at marketing and there are number of people that like being able to say that they use "Kermode Spruce". I am just trying to explain that there is a difference between using a common name set by science and published in literature and one set entirely for market purposes. I hope I am making sence!!
Thanks
Shane
[/QUOTE]
Hi Shane,
If "Lutz" is indeed the widely accepted common name that a forester or botanist would use, just as they might say "Englemann" rather than "engelmannii", or "Sitka" rather than "sitchensis", then I stand corrected. I thought it was your nickname for the species. You know, sort of like calling White Spruce (Picea glauca) "Glauc." The one publication I could find (RECOMMENDED VERNACULAR NAMES FOR COMMON PLANTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA) called it "
Roche spruce."
Like many of those afflicted with the dreaded WAS, I too have more tonewood than a beginner luthier needs (or could use in many years!) But, I peruse the tonewoods for sale like a kid with a toy catalog. In so doing, I have noted that Mario DaCosta does occasionally sell White Spruce or Sitka Spruce, and so does not label everything he sells as "Kermodie." I believe that everything sold as "Kermodie" is a Picea lutzii hybrid. I have had some confusion with some wood he labeled as "White Kermodie", but it is my understanding that he was trying to describe some characteristic of that wood. As you have noted, the taxonomists are probably not quite done with the Lutzii hybrid(s) naming yet, because along with the Sitka and White, there can be a third species (Englemann) in the hybridization. Even more confusing is that there are a number of varieties of White Spruce (though not all native to your area):
Picea glauca var. glauca (Eastern White Spruce)
Picea glauca var. densata (Black Hills White Spruce)
Picea glauca var. albertiana (Alberta White Spruce)
Picea glauca var. porsildii (Alaska White Spruce)
One thing that does not seem to be in question is the quality of the lutzii as a tonewood. My one and only guitar uses it (and I'm very pleased), and most luthiers that have used lutzii (whether they called it "Lutz" or "Kermodie") have raved about it. I think Stradivarius would have sold his grandparents into slavery for the treasure trove of tonewood in your and Mario's back yard!
Dennis