Rosewood -- interesting article.

[Greg Ballantyne]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

"All that is in nature was provided for us to use"

Far too many humans holding this sort of perspective is a big problem.

[tadol]

Originally Posted by gitarro

Apart from the mystique, there is the appearance of the wood concerned. Its got to look nice to sell unfortunately. Sadly, osage orange is too...orange...it doesnt look vry special compared even to.the most common rosewood.

Besides the fact that a little stain or toner can dramatically change the way a piece of wood looks, my rather orange pernambuco guitar is much better looking than most rosewood guitars, and may sound better, too - but I'd not say that pernambuco could replace rosewood by any means - its probably rarer. But just because you don't like the color, doesn't mean others feel the same -

[TokyoNeko]

Bob Gramann makes quite a few guitars with the alternative woods. At affordable prices to boot.

[BrunoBlack]

There are many great alternatives. I own 3 guitars with "alternative" tonewoods that I like a lot. All have Adi (red spruce) tops. I should add, the 2 walnut guitars are the finest sounding guitars I've ever owned.

"Higuerilla" which is Micandra spruceana.



English Walnut



Bastogne Walnut

[mercy]

I have a walnut guitar and pretty as it looks it doesnt sound like rosewood so it will never replace rosewood.

[Mr Fingers]

This forum and others is filled with people who specify BR in their instruments. Until they stop doing this, we will continue to be part of the problem -- working and influencing others in exactly the wrong direction. I would be ashamed to spec a BR guitar, myself, not because I'm some great moral guy (hardly) but because I know someone would call me out on it, both for anti-environmentalism and selfishness.

[Ed-in-Ohio]

When it comes to tonewoods and building materials, I think the acoustic guitar community is often too bound and prejudiced by preconceived notions of what is needed to make a "great sounding guitar". Great sounding and playing instruments made using alternate materials (including carbon fiber) are showing us the folly of our prejudices. Moving forward, I believe we will have no choice but to get over these old, false, pre-conceived beliefs.

[Authentic]

Originally Posted by Mr Fingers

I would be ashamed to spec a BR guitar, myself, not because I'm some great moral guy (hardly) but because I know someone would call me out on it, both for anti-environmentalism and selfishness.

You should be ashamed for playing guitars, because guitars were once living trees, where birds possibly resided, cut down for your selfish entertainment purposes.

[mercy]

Someone above wrote, "Great sounding and playing instruments made using alternate materials (including carbon fiber) are showing us the folly of our prejudices". Different people would identify great sounding guitars differently. For me I dont like the sound of Gibson guitars and others think theyre great. This is not folly or a prejudice but my preference. For example Ive not played a lot of maple guitars but I have played several and they all have lacked what I call great tone. Other M woods that are lacking are mahogany and myrtle. It has nothing to do with appearance, except for OO, or expectation. It is what I think.

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by hat

I agree! Even though the amount of Rosewood used for musical instruments is a very small percentage of the total, we - as a group - need to own this. We all share in the responsibility of doing what we can to help preserve the planet we call home! Maybe you perceive your individual part as insignificant, and 'surely one more little guitar won't hurt', but yes it will. And it really doesn't matter if your buying a $10,000 custom from that 'world renowned luthier' or a $300 Pac-Rim import, the effect is the same. Consumption ( over-consumption) is what it is, no boundaries, no exemptions. No excuses.

"Skyrocketing demand for all rosewood and rosewood-like timber for replicas of imperial Chinese furniture (known as hongmu) is what drove CITES to act: an overwhelming majority of rosewood is logged for the hongmu trade in China. "

"Too many governments have turned a blind eye, since there is so much money to be made smuggling rosewood into China. The guitar industry is not a root cause of the global rosewood crisis, but it is going to have to figure out how to live with the new rules that were necessitated by this crisis."
---Tom Bedell, Guitar Aficionado, June 2017

'“The guitar industry’s impact on our tropical forests has been minimal,” Bedell says. “But to control the trade in wood for furniture, they had to list it all. "'
---Bedell, quoted in Acoustic Guitar, June 2017
[all bolding added by me]

If we take Bedell as being accurate (other sources are in strong agreement that the 65-fold increase in consumption by the Chinese for furniture since 2005 is the problem, and the reason for the new CITES rule, e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/environm...rosewood-trade), the guitar industry has not endangered the rosewood species; Chinese furniture production has.

I can find nothing in Bedell's articles or any other source which suggests that the endangered rosewood species would be saved if they were no longer used for guitars. And no one has suggested that the demand for rosewood Imperial style furniture in China has ever been motivated by rosewood used for guitars.

So by what logic has it become an imperative not to use rosewood for guitars, when this use did not cause the problem, and stopping this use would not fix it? The moral high dudgeon of some in this thread does not follow from the facts and any ethical principle of which I am aware.
-----------------------------

'"Rosewood is uniquely beautiful. It’s magnificent coloration and grain character are stunning in exotic furniture; the tonal characteristics of some species make them the most coveted of all acoustic tonewoods. It is the “Blood Music Wood”!'
--Bedell, Guitar Aficionado

Bedell seems to have no idea where the phrase "blood diamonds" comes from (they are diamonds mined in African war zones that are used to finance marauding rebel armies). Diamonds are not an endangered species; rosewood is not financing rebel armies. In his quote above, Bedell seems to think being richly colored and having great tonal properties is what makes something bloody. This is just a silly attempt at an analogy added for hyperbole and a catchy headline.

[KevWind]

Some interesting perspectives.

To my mind it is irrelevant that the guitar industry was not primarily responsible for the decline in some Rosewood species.
Because of CITES the guitar industry is going to have to deal with it, regardless of it's contribution to the problem.

The notion that "all in nature was provided for us to use " Says who ? The concept is absurd, not to mention also being at least partly contributory to the wholesale destructive effects of human Mis " use" of the environment.

Personally I can't think of a better use for the largest stockpile of Braz. Rosewood for guitars then Breedlove Masterclass, or better looking guitars to use it on.

[Brick is Red]

Originally Posted by Howard Klepper

"Rosewood is uniquely beautiful. It’s magnificent coloration and grain character are stunning in exotic furniture; the tonal characteristics of some species make them the most coveted of all acoustic tonewoods. It is the “Blood Music Wood”!'
--Bedell, Guitar Aficionado

Bedell seems to have no idea where the phrase "blood diamonds" comes from (they are diamonds mined in African war zones that are used to finance marauding rebel armies). Diamonds are not an endangered species; rosewood is not financing rebel armies. In his quote above, Bedell seems to think being richly colored and having great tonal properties is what makes something bloody. This is just a silly attempt at an analogy added for hyperbole and a catchy headline.

The author's name is Tom Bedell. It appears to me that you have quoted him out of context and ascribed an ignorance to him that is belied by the sum and substance of his essay. I could be somewhat receptive to your analytical interpretation had Bedell not specifically identified Madagascar in the following paragraphs and noted the political corruption and economic upheaval attributable to the international commodity market for its rosewood.

[Howard Klepper]

Originally Posted by Brick is Red

The author's name is Tom Bedell. It appears to me that you have quoted him out of context and ascribed an ignorance to him that is belied by the sum and substance of his essay. I could be somewhat receptive to your analytical interpretation had Bedell not specifically identified Madagascar in the following paragraphs and noted the political corruption and economic upheaval attributable to the international commodity market for its rosewood.

Thanks, changed the name. I take you to be only addressing whether "blood music wood" is an overstatement. I think it is when he plainly says that the music industry is not causing the plunder of the rosewood forests and is a minor user of those woods. I think I quoted him accurately, and took the entire paragraph ending in "blood music wood" in order to do so. Perhaps it is arguable that "blood furniture wood" would be an acceptable stretch regarding Madagascar (but still an expanded usage from the original phrase regarding "blood diamonds" to finance war). "Blood music wood" implies something that by the terms of Bedell's own statements about the cause of the problem is false.

The gist of the article, and Bedell's comments quoted in AG magazine, is that the Chinese furniture industry is what motivated the new CITES regs, that they are a good idea, and that the guitar industry has to live with them despite not being the problem. He never says that we should stop using rosewood for guitars (on the contrary, the article ends with a plug for his own company's rosewood stash). I agree with him on this. But then calling rosewood "blood music wood" seems pretty wildly misplaced.

[greenshoe]

Question:

Would any of you spec out a new piano with real ivory keys? Or if you had an older Steinway where a few of the ivory keys had to be replaced, would you do it IF there was no regulations against it (or finding a way to buy it in the black market)?

I personally think we need to be responsible, and in some cases we will need some regulations to save ourselves from that "free rider problem" (honor codes work in small informal groups where everyone knows one another, but not in large numbers). Yes, trees grow and replenish - but it's all math - if you consume at a higher rate than the trees can replenish - AND there's no laws to minimize the temptation to cheat, then you can't replenish zero. Whether guitars are a big part or not, I don't think it's right to contribute to make the problem worse.

I love the touch of ivory keys. I love Brazilian rosewood - not just for guitars. But it's also not right if it's being depleted to the point of extinction.

[ii Cybershot ii]

So are those of us buying Eastmans just raping the planet?? (I own 2).