Re: [MedievalSawdust] Re: Capstan Table
- Thank yew
To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Sent: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [MedievalSawdust] Re: Capstan Table
I THINK the reference is to.... The paradigm sticklers have argued that the most feely available hardwood available in North America, Red Oak, has no real European conterpart, so using it in period furniture in insufficiently authentic. North American White Oak is much closer to European counterparts as to be nigh indistinguishable and thus preferable. -- -Chris Schwartz Silver Spring, MD
- Oh I do not mock you. Red Oak for one isn't period, and is a pain to work with. The open grain structure makes it hard to finish and rough to work with. I just finished a glastonbury with quarter sawn white oak seat and back supports, ash arms and walnut seat and back boards.I could easily crank out a bunch in red oak purchased from home depot, reverse the pattern so the top is wider than the seat and sell them at a reasonable price but I just can't bring myself to do it. I may contemplate making them in maple.StevePresidentLord Grey's Retinuewww.lordgreys.com
AlbionWood <albionwood@...> wrote:A kindred spirit! Or do you mock me, sirrah? :-D
Steve Vaught wrote:As long as it is not red oakSteve
Bill McNutt <mcnutt@pobox. com> wrote:Not the first thing, Im afraid. I ran into it on one of the tech blogs I follow. Any anything made out of solid oak is appropriate for this forum, right?Will
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
- In Medieval Europe they didn't have red oak. (Technically they didn't
have American white oak either, but what they had looks so much like
American white oak as to be pretty trivial.)
> It appears that I'm on the outside of an inside joke . . . .
>> A kindred spirit! Or do you mock me, sirrah? :-D
>>> As long as it is not red oak
>>>> Not the first thing, I´m afraid. I ran into it on one of the tech
>>>> blogs I follow. Any anything made out of solid oak is appropriate
>>>> for this forum, right?
- Definitely a kindred spirit, I see.
One of my goals for next year is to work with something other than white
oak for a change. I'm thinking Birch might be nice.
Steve Vaught wrote:
> Oh I do not mock you. Red Oak for one isn't period, and is a pain to
> work with. The open grain structure makes it hard to finish and rough
> to work with.
- You might want to try Ash too. Nice stuff to work with, though I
haven't tried carving it yet, and it's at the lighter end of the
Ashgrove, Barony of Angels, Caid
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, AlbionWood <albionwood@...>
> Definitely a kindred spirit, I see.
> One of my goals for next year is to work with something other than
> oak for a change. I'm thinking Birch might be nice.
- I've used ash quite a lot, especially for beds, where the
stiffness-to-weight ratio really counts. I like it a lot. It carves
pretty well too. I especially like the heartwood, which often displays
some interesting color variation, but is hard to find as most people
want the pure-white stuff (which I find bland). It does take stain
It can be tricky stuff to plane, though. Grain reversals on the faces
cause a lot of tearout. Need really sharp tools. (What else is new!)
> You might want to try Ash too. Nice stuff to work with, though I
> haven't tried carving it yet, and it's at the lighter end of the
> hardwood spectrum.
- Colin wrote:
> Yes, it's an inside joke. And, like all jokes,But the explaination lets us unworthy rabble feel a little more
> it isn't funny when you explain it.
included. Thank you for taking the time.