Official Luthiers Forum!

I've read most of the posts on the major forums about the various kinds of top woods and I've participated in several of them. "Is there really such a thing as carmodie spruce", "What is the difference between Adarondack and red spruce", and so forth. I find these discussions to be both fun and enlightening and a certain degree of precision is useful when persuing a craft. However, I recently read a book about Stradivarius by the Hill brothers that shed a different light on the issue entirely.

The Hills refered to the wood of violin tops as "pine". They never use a term more specific. This book was written near the turn of the last century so I wondered if it was just a change in terms. After extensive research (ie. several minutes googling online), I've come to the conclusion that they were using the vernacular term pine to refer to all conifers. I remember using the word pine for all evergreen trees when I was young. Another possibility is that the Hills were acknowledging that they really didn't know which species of wood was used so anything other than pine would be inappropriate. I really don't know which but I think they considered spruce to be a kind of pine tree and didn't worry about it.

They did use the term maple for the the body wood but they didn't make any distinction between hard/soft/broad-leaf types of maple. It was just maple.

Maybe we're all just splitting hairs when we discuss top wood species and that the individual variance within a species of acoustic properties may very well be greater than the difference between species. What are your thoughts?

BTW. This reminds me of a joke I heard years ago. A couple of wood workers were examining an old floor and discussing what it was made of. One of them expressed the belief that the floor was made of fir. At that point the man's young daughter tugged on his pant leg and said. "Daddy, the floor isn't made of fur. It's made of wood".
Mike Mahar38974.4143287037

I believe you are correct in assuming they used pine meaning conifer. This does surprize me some as the species distinction between Spruce, Cedar and Pine goes back way past the turn of the century.MichaelP38974.4380902778

[QUOTE=Mike Mahar] .

Maybe we're all just splitting hairs when we discuss top wood species and that the individual variance within a species of acoustic properties may very well be greater than the difference between species. What are your thoughts?[/QUOTE]

Any given species can have a plus or minus 20% variance in mechanical and/or physical properties such as weight, density, strength, etc. according to published research by the US Forest Service Lab. This means that two same size pieces of a species on your work bench can be 40% variant at the extremes.

I am reminded of various indigenous groups of people who deeply know about thousands of plants and their medical and other uses for each. So, I suspect that violin makers and other luthiers of past centuries knew exactly what they wanted and used in their instruments. Now, maybe there was no commonly agreed language for each species or variety of wood and so those documenting such things had to fall back on some agreeable label for the wood being used. Even now, when biologists discuss plants and animals it can be very confusing, until the latin is used and even then there are disagreements.

I am pretty sure that the early luthiers were very particular about the stock they used in their work and maybe even used a little disinformation to hide their secrets.SteveCourtright38974.459224537

_________________
"Building guitars looks hard, but it's actually much harder than it looks." Tom Buck

There a lot of 'different" spruces in the world. By different I mean that they are individual species. One issue is that taxonomical names do change, as one of my college prof's once labelled taxonomists as either "lumpers" and "splitters"!". So sometimes hybrids will be labelled as one species or another or defined more closely and given a new/different species name. In my area of the world, the east Pacific Coast, we have many different spruces but only three that are used for instruments, mainly because they are the only ones that get large enough. Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis) is a HUGE coastal tree, Engelmann Spruce (Picea engelmanni) is moderate sized spruce that tends to grow at higher elevations and is common to the Rockies, White Spruce (Picea glauca) kinda fills the void between Sitka and Engelmann making it a broad ranging lower elevation tree. In a small part of the coastal range these three species can hybridize. This union is known as Roche or Lutz Spruce and has been labeled (Picea lutzii) by the "splitters". There is no such thing as "Kermode Spruce". This is a market name given by a local tonewood guy. The name "Kermode" is taken from a rare white phase of the black bear population that is peculiar to the area where we live. The market use of the name "Kermode" has actually been trademarked by the community I live in.

Anyway, I would interested in hearing more about the spruces from other parts of the world. Good start to a cool thread Mike!

ShaneShane Neifer38974.4901388889

_________________
Canada

Shane, can you clarify the parents of the Lutz hybrid (must be two)? There must be intermediate hybrids if you say that the Lutz or Roche hybrid is a result of three parents or are those two different hybrids?

Love this stuff.

_________________
"Building guitars looks hard, but it's actually much harder than it looks." Tom Buck

Hey Steve,

So the forest scientists that I talked too said that Lutz is basically a Sitka dominant spruce hybrid. The hybrid is predominantley Sitka nd White Spruce. In the area where I harvest the trees that are best suited for Tonewood grow at elevations between 900' and 1400'. My experience is that lower than this the trees grow too fast and the growth rings are to wide and above this they are too small or exhibit more twist. So, to carry on. Engelmann in this area is most prominent over 3500' in elevation. having said that, White and Engelmann hybridize very easily and it has been said that there are no pure Engelmann stands of commercial value and all hybridized with White. Our forest service labels this hybridization as "Interior Spruce". To cut to the chase here, the Lutz I process is a Sitka dominent White Spruce hybrid but the higher elevation trees will see a bit of Engelmann as well.

One more note, I don't think anyone could differentiate between White Spruce and Engelmann Spruce once the tree has been harvested, I believe taht all of the physical properties of these two trees are near identical, the morphological differences are also very minor.

I love this stuff too Steve!

Shane

_________________
Canada

Shane, what is correct pronunciation of "Lutz"?

Great thread so far Mike and everyone, i too would like to clarify some points like for instance Adirondack spruce, is it the the red, white or black kind?

Are there any kinds of pines that are really suitable for lutherie?

Has Larix Laricina ever been used for guitar making? I'm asking this one because i heard here that someone has used Picea abies as a top even if reknowned for having a lot of resin in it.

A lot more questions i have but if you can shed light on these 3, i'd really appreciate it!

TIA

Serge

Hey Larry,

The locals with that as their last name use the short vowel form, so it is "lutz" not "lootz". I did in the beginning use the later but now use the former. How is that guitar coming along?

Shane

_________________
Canada

If you look at more contemporary books on violin construction, they all use the word spruce for the top wood. I guess the Hills were "clumpers" when it came to their wood varieties.

I suppose the redwood top people are the worst when it comes to "splitters". They give each log a name. Actually, a letter combination (ex: LS)

If I were in the tone wood business, I'd care a great deal about the various species. However, when I'm at a luthier's conference and I'm going through the top wood stacks, I look for stiffness, tap tone, color and blemishes. I move from the red spruce to the sitka stack without blinking and pick out the wood that I like best.

Don't get me wrong, I can get as weird about wood as anybody. My next project is going to use some yellow cedar that I picked up at the last ASIA conf. Man! Does that stuff smell strange.

The Hills were Brits, of course, and the Brits sometimes use 'pine' to mean what we call 'spruce'. They also use 'fir' for the same wood. I think our pine is their 'deal', iirc.

The real estate listing for our NH farm house said it had 'fur' floors: I was anticipating a life of warm toes but, alas, t'was not so.

Serge,
you got me thinking about Larix Larcinia, that's a Tamarac or Larch isn't it? I've never seen one big enough for guitars around here, but maybe they make em bigger up where your at. I'd be interested to know though.

_________________
Horton, MI

Kirt, yes, Tamarac is the common name that was given by the natives, in proper terrain conditions, it can obtain respectable dimensions as any conifers but it sure holds a lot of resins, i wish i had a chainsaw sometimes!

If anyone has ever worked with it, i'd really like to hear their thoughts on this wood. There is another kind of conifer around here called "Pruche" that was used in the structure of old houses, i don't remember the latin name but will dig a bit on that, they too are interesting for the strength of their fibers.

EDIT: Just found the English name for Pruche, it's called Hemlock, anyone has used hemlock for tops?

SergeSerge Poirier38975.6611226852

My sister used a lot of Eastern hemlock that was cut on the hill out back in framing her house. It's hard, dense, and seems to have a tendancy to split. It also tends to be really knotty, since it's tough and doesn't drop its branches the way a pine will.

OTOH, I got a couple of Western hemlock tops at the ASIA meeting last spring that test out in the range of Sitka or Red spruce. We'll see how they sound at some point.

Thank you very much Alan, really appreciated! Looking forward to hear about the results.

Serge

[QUOTE=Serge Poirier]
Are there any kinds of pines that are really suitable for lutherie?

Has Larix Laricina ever been used for guitar making? I'm asking this one because i heard here that someone has used Picea abies as a top even if reknowned for having a lot of resin in it.

A lot more questions i have but if you can shed light on these 3, i'd really appreciate it!

TIA

Serge[/QUOTE]

Serge, Picea abies is the greatest top wood there is! It's good old European Spruce used on guitars, lutes and violin family instruments for hundreds of years. Growing widely throughout Europe, but known by regional names, Italian, Swiss, German, Carpathian etc, it's all European Spruce. BTW, Picea glauca, White Spruce, should really be called Blue Spruce as glauca is taxonomic for Blue!

ColinColin S38976.3907175926

_________________
I don't believe in anything, I simply make use of a set of reasonable working hypotheses.

Both Spanish guitarists that I know, who play spanish classical guitars with European spruce tops (almost certainly), refer to these tops as "pine". This seems to be the translation of choice into English.

JK

_________________
Jim Kirby
kirby@udel.edu

I have a set of Larch that someone sent me with a topwood order a few years ago. I haven't used it yet but it has a really nice tap tone and seems to be nice and stiff. Serge, if you can get your hands on a set go ahead and try it out.

I think I remember a thread over on the MIMF where Mario said he was familiar with Larch. Maybe he will chime in on this.Dave Rector38976.3780092593

_________________
Dave Rector
Rector Guitars

Colin, thanks a lot for these clarifications, i'll be on the look out for picea abies and the blue spuce(glauca) called white around here, i know we have plenty of them both in this region. Thanks

Dave, do you have a pic of that set? I'm asking because i saw a bench made of Larch and the grain popped really nice under finish! Thanks!

Looks like much of the coniferous woods are suitable for tops if they meet all the growth conditions that are required, great thread guys, thanks!

Serge

Serge Poirier38976.5383564815

Serge, I'll try to get a pic of that for you. Might be a couple of days though.

_________________
Dave Rector
Rector Guitars

Thanks Dave!

Thanks indeed, Colin. I have a Picea glauca top here that I bought from Don Musser years ago.
His name for it? "Blue Spruce".
It's lovely stuff, whiter than anything else in my stash.
Looks like Engelmann that's been bleached.

Steve

_________________
From Nacogdoches...the oldest town in Texas.

http://www.stephenkinnaird.com

[QUOTE=Shane Neifer] ... This union is known as Roche or Lutz Spruce and has been labeled (Picea lutzii) by the "splitters". There is no such thing as "Kermode Spruce". This is a market name given by a local tonewood guy. The name "Kermode" is taken from a rare white phase of the black bear population that is peculiar to the area where we live.

Shane[/QUOTE]
Hi Shane,

Isn't it true that there is no such thing as "Lutz Spruce" or "Kermodie Spruce"? Though I would agree that using the name of the (scientist? botanist?) Lutz is closer to the scientific name for the species, Picea lutzii, neither the common name or trademarked nickname is really right (or really wrong.)

Certainly "White Spruce" and "Black Spruce" and "Red Spruce" and "Blue Spruce" might lead to the conclusion that the Spruce family is very colorful, but we all know that's not true. I see nothing wrong with Shane Neifer calling Picea lutzii "Lutz" and Mario DaCosta calling Picea lutzii "Kermodie." It's the same wood, and "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." It also appears to be a VERY fine tonewood, based on the reports of dozens of luthiers that have built with "Lutz" or "Kermodie."

Dennis

_________________
Dennis Leahy
Duluth, MN, USA
7th Sense Multimedia

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

_________________
Canada