Sam,
Four or so years ago when I was working in Dublin, Perfect Pitch had a Yellow Cedar/myrtle McIlroy in. It looked very nice and sounded good too - but then all of Dermot's guitars do
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Qualities of Myrtle as a tonewood. http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=11151 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Sam Price [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I am already thinking about guitar number 3, and am thinking of ordering in some more zoot for it to have plenty of time to acclimatise.... I seem to have a fascination with Myrtle; and would ike to know if any of you have built with it. What are your opinions of tone, and what is the stuff like to work with? The customary web research has been done; but I like more personal accounts. Thanks, Sam. |
|
| Author: | Sam Price [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I seem to be strangely drawn to "The Zootman's" stock...have you seen his stuff??? O_O |
|
| Author: | Heath Blair [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
have never worked with it, but if you check out the LMI web page there is a brief run down of the qualities of myrtle and some builders who have had success with it. |
|
| Author: | Homeboy [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 6:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I built a OO from Oregon Myrtle. I like the wood a lot. It bends easily (this was very figured as well) and it works nicely. Has the weight of maple or maybe a little softer. I say go for it. Blake |
|
| Author: | Sam Price [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 6:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thankyou for your reply!! ........do you have any pics, please? |
|
| Author: | Dave White [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 6:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sam, Four or so years ago when I was working in Dublin, Perfect Pitch had a Yellow Cedar/myrtle McIlroy in. It looked very nice and sounded good too - but then all of Dermot's guitars do
|
|
| Author: | A Peebels [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've never used Myrtle for a guitar, but I have used it for gunstocks, and it carves really well, and it probably would make a good neck as well as back and sides. Al |
|
| Author: | Homeboy [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I could post a pic but I put a sunburst on the guitar so you cannot really see the color of the Myrtle. Here is a link to my pic. http://www.dysonguitars.com/AllOverBusrt.htm Blake |
|
| Author: | Aust Tonewoods [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hi Sam, Just in case you are not aware, the "Myrtles" being discussed in this post are: 1: Tiger Myrtle which has the botanical name Nothofagus cunninghamii. This is the rare and "new kid on the block" tonewood that Hesh made his guitar from. I have several sets in stock at the momemt. 2: California Laurel, Oregon Myrtle (Umbellularia californical). Kiwicraig is in the process of building a fine guitar with this tonewood. I hope that has helped. regards Tim Australian Tonewoods |
|
| Author: | GD Armstrong [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've built several guitars & bouzoukis with Oregon Myrtle. It works well, bends like a dream & smells nice (a bit peppery). It can have a wide range of colors from dark greenish brown to a light tan. One of my favorite woods along with Taz blackwood & koa. Works especially well with a stiff Western red cedar top. I'm photographically challenged but I think my son has some photos I'll try to post. GD |
|
| Author: | Sam Price [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Aust Tonewoods] Hi Sam, Just in case you are not aware, the "Myrtles" being discussed in this post are: 1: Tiger Myrtle which has the botanical name Nothofagus cunninghamii. This is the rare and "new kid on the block" tonewood that Hesh made his guitar from. I have several sets in stock at the momemt. 2: California Laurel, Oregon Myrtle (Umbellularia californical). Kiwicraig is in the process of building a fine guitar with this tonewood. I hope that has helped. regards Tim Australian Tonewoods [/QUOTE] Thanks Tim, I'll check out your site. 
|
|
| Author: | crich [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sam, I built with Oregon myrtle. It works easily,bends nice and I think it has a really nice tone. I used it with lutz,it doesn't have the snap of mahagony,but that could be the lutz. I like the WRC idea. Playing several myrtle guitars,I believe they have a decent "complex sound" but with enough fundamental tone that it doesn't get washed out with too many overtones. My .02. Clinton
|
|
| Author: | Jim Kirby [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I haven't used any yet, but I found a wondrously flamed board of Oregon myrtle that I couldn't pass up, so there are now four back and side sets aging on the shelf. |
|
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sorry , just trying to put in some pics through photobucket , which didn't work out . Sure seems to be taking a long time to fix our picture problem ./ How long has it been ? I've just about had enough of it 
|
|
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
 
Thanks to my daughter for helping here . I think I must have about the nicest sets ever , thanks to L.M.I. for the American type and Australian Tonewoods for the Tiger . As Tim said ,they are in no way related Lawrence of Australia |
|
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
|
|
|
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
|
|
| Author: | Shawn [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 4:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have built flamenco's with Oregon Myrtle and really like it for a lighter colored wood. The thing to realize is that no two pieces of Oregon Myrtle look alike and the amount of color and figure can vary greatly, even in the same billet. Even when non-figured or lightly figured Oregon Myrtle has alot of natural chatoyance (reflected light) so that when the guitar moves you get flashes or light and color. I have not built a guitar from Rose Myrtle (Aussie) but have used it for bindings and I really like it. It is rich deep rose color that is nice contrast to most woods. I am working on a Flamenco at the moment that has figured Huon Pine (not a pine but smells like cloves) for the sides and back and a Lutz Spruce top. The binding will be Rose Myrtle with the purfling (side, top and back) being 1mm BRW/ 1.5mm curly london plane/1mm BRW). The fingerboard, headplate and bridge will be ringed gidgee (purple). It will look very flamenco but flashier than I could get away with on a classical. So from the sounds of it, both American Oregon Myrtle and Aussie Tiger Myrtle both are killer woods with a ton of potential...the more I use Aussie woods, the more I really like them. In the future I would like to try the combination of Tiger Myrtle back and sides with a king billy top...I think it would be an awesome fingerstyle guitar. If I could find a killer set of figured Kauri (old Kauri, not new whiter kauri) then that would be incredible and worth the price. |
|
| Author: | James Ringelspaugh [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
How hard is it? Is it dense? If no two boards look the same, I am wondering if there is the same variety of tap tone, density, etc. between specimens. Can anyone with experience with a number of boards speak to these qualities? |
|
| Author: | Sam Price [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Wow, thanks for all the information guys. This is fascinating stuff!! Thanks for the photos, Lawrence. *drool* I do really like the look of the Tiger Myrtle, but I much prefer the look of the Oregon Myrtle. I am definetely going to pull the trigger on a set from Bob. |
|
| Author: | Shawn [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oregon Myrtle is relatively the same density of mahogany but that can vary also. It is open pored but not coarse (similar to walnut or mahogany). It is easy to work like mahogany. The grain can be not straight but it still bends easily. The colors range from board to board but most of the boards are similar density. It is easy to work with...mostly it is a matter of laying out the pieces to get the combination of color and grain to work together. When it is highly figured it is tough to match. Aussie Myrtle is quite a bit heavier and has a more closed grain that it more like rosewood. |
|
| Author: | KiwiCraig [ Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sam , I've now finished the soundbox with that Oregan Myrtle and have to report it's ease of use .Bends super easy . I bent my sides @ .1 " ( 2.5 m.m.) with no problems . I was told it wouldn't need pore filling , but it does .Looks brilliant now with the zpoxy. It's got colour and curl . I haven't built a guitar with Tas. Myrtle as yet but have used the wood on other things , and it's also excellent to work. I'm looking forward to building with that Tiger ,,,,it's better in the flesh . |
|
| Author: | Alan Carruth [ Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I just shipped one in Oregon Myrtle/Bay that turned out quite well. I tested the back wood before I started. It had long-grain stiffness that was in the high end of what you'd expect for Indian rosewood, but the cross grain stiffness was lower. The density was at the low end of the IRW range. It has higher damping (a shorter 'ring) than IRW in general. As usual, take this with a grain of salt: that was just the piece I got. At risk of sounding like a broken record (you remember those...) I'll say that tone has a lot less to do with the wood than it does with how you use it. Each piece of wood presents possibilities, and sets some limits, but how many of those possibilities you can realize, and how close to the limits you get, are up to you. Most of us don't come close to getting the best out of any wood. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|