Tools vs skill

[Derek Cohen]

A recent thread on the choice of router plane lies behind a question that I would like to pose to the forum.

The thread was ostensibly about buying a router plane to use for trimming tenon shoulders. Warren replied that one should rather learn to saw straight. He also went on to suggest that a router plane is an unnecessary tool, with the implication that there are few tasks that one cannot perform instead with a chisel.

The issue is about tools versus skill. Does one simply pare back all tools to the very basics and learn skills, or does one continue to support tools for specific tasks? Do tools such as a router plane fall into the "special" category, or are they today more among the "common" group (such as a smoother)?

In my own mind there is no simple answer. I consider a router plane to be exceptionally useful and a boon for many tasks, such as tenon shoulders, stopped grooves and dados, inlay, hinge mortices, etc. At the same time I agree with part of Warren's message (if I understood him correctly) that one should strive to develop hand skills and that, as one does, the need for certain aids drops away. For example, while I may correct a badly out-of-square tenon with a router plane, this rarely happens to me these days since I can saw pretty straight, and then I do indeed (as Warren suggested) more often just use a wide chisel. Mostly I sharpen blades freehand, however I do continue to use a guide when specific angles are needed.

The associated question is whether it is actually possible for most, if not all, amateur (i.e. part time) woodworkers to develop the hand skills to forgo tools such as the router plane at the outset? This question assumes that (a) there is a hands-on time frame needed, and (b) that all woodworkers have the same mindset to achieve this objective. In reality these factors differ widely among amateurs, and I believe that laying down commandments will encourage some and discourage others.

In my thoughts there is also an unstated concern for newbies coming to our fine obsession (:) ) who believe they must purchase every tool imaginable before they will be ready to build anything. This reflects both the low insight and the insecurity of the inexperienced. We do want to send out a message that says "Just go for it" and "Learn work arounds". Practice does not necessarily mean "perfect"; however the more one practices, the more one develops a broader range of intellectual and practical skills. In time one can and may choose to use fewer tools. I just wonder if this knowledge calms and is meaningful to the heart of those starting out?

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Andrew Fleck]

I think with enough skill you could build fine furniture with an axe. The amount of time it takes to get that skilled is out of reach for most people. People use different tools for different tasks because they help them do a better job and sometimes they compensate for a lack of skill.

I think it really boils down to a couple of things for an amateur woodworker.

First, if your like me then you only get so much time in the workshop a week. Most of it is on the weekend with a couple trips during the week for a little while. It would take a very long time to learn the skills to be able to make presentable furniture with very basic hand tools.

Second, some people just enjoy using different tools for different tasks. I guess what I'm trying to say is that some people like the tools themselves. I may be able to saw a perfect tenon, but prefer to use a shoulder plane anyway simply for the satisfaction it brings.

[maximillian arango]

I enjoy working with my hands to make things or fix things, but avoiding frustration is key and a big part of me enjoy the task at hand. Sure having a router plane isn't necessary to do all work like Chris said in that thread but he also mentioned it is a very useful tool to have. I don't have any experience in wood working since I am still in the buying tools stage before to attempt first project. I could have started my first project already a month ago with what I had and made it work but with the tools that I have bought in that time and hopefully with the router plane(yea I'm trying to get one too) that I plan on getting I will be able to make my first project with out popping a blood vessel. I want to enjoy wood working through the whole process making each process as easy as possible helps and as I get more daring I may just try to cut strait to the line like Mr. Warren suggested but I will do that after my sawing skill gets better with other tasks.... Hell I'll take it a step further and do it blind folded.:cool: Don't tempt me or I will do it next year by this time with the skills that I have gained.

Tools first skill while waiting for skills to come.

[Adam Cruea]

I'm still starting out, and I don't want to go out an buy all the nifty little do-dads and gadgets that are out there. I'd much rather build the skill, but sometimes I prefer to just solve the problem at hand in the simplest manner possible.

Going off your example, Derek, I could purchase some sort of plane to square up my tenons, but instead I prefer to just saw straight (the simpler of two options). Does it take skill? Sure. But then I will turn around and use a "specialty" tool (router plane) to make a stopped dado, whereas someone wanting to go pure skill may want to use a chisel and marking knife.

Point being, it's all about what type of person you are. There's also the physical limitations one may have. My father has arthritis in his thumbs, so trying to chisel out a stopped dado while holding a chisel steady may end up hurting severely, so instead why not just opt for a router plane? Does that mean he has less skill? Certainly not; it just means nature is taking it's course.

[David Weaver]

I'm somewhere in the middle. An amateur, but by no means one who is a threat to make perfect federalist furniture.

When I first started out, I did honestly think that the folks like warren and others were trolling. It was easy to think that. We don't all know who warren is when we first start, and he doesn't exactly self promote. And most of the rest of the folks on the forum are willing to think the same, especially if the blogroll community is telling everyone something different and they, you know, go to dinner with everyone at WIA and smile more.

When you first start out, and you get the "wood show" tools...you know, the ones that are easier to use at first, but have virtues that the more experienced might not love so much (like irons that take longer to grind and lots of extra weight in planes, etc). Anyway, you get the wood show tools and it's hard to believe that something like a common stanley plane with a stock iron is going to become your ideal.

But over time it happens, and gadgets you relied on (like honing guides) become something that you abhor because they break work rhythm and take extra time.

My thoughts about all of the stuff go just about 180 degrees from where they were 5 years ago. If I'm going to make M&T in a respectable amount of time, I can't have anything else other than a couple of chisels around. It just happens that you get that way.

That puts us in a position where we're all looking to get different things out of the forum, and sometimes that causes friction when it comes to advice.

I pound the ground on the stanley 4, and the lack of a need for anyone really to have anything else as a smoother. Want? Sure, want's different. Need probably isn't for most people in the US with the woods we can get cheaply here. I know it turns some people off when I do that. I'm sure it would've to me at the time, but I don't want to go along with the "hey, everyone has an answer and all are equally right". It's just not always true.

Your distinction between why we have different answers at different points is a good one, though. And conditioning a response of "you might want to buy this to do that easily"....with "if you don't feel like you're going to be able to invest the time to develop the skill".....that kind of conditioning is a good thing, I think.

[Bruce Mack]

The brain is also a tool. Many of us have done our 10,000 hours in a discipline and have mentored others early in their training. Good teaching acknowledges that finesse will take years and errors. Good teachers remember how they began and enjoy the enthusiasm and, yes, the reciprocal teaching from their students. There are many approaches to a goal and I support the freedom to choose, when applicable. Hope for passion for your discipline and know that skills will follow.

[Sean Hughto]

Uh, who has ever said everyone has an answer and they are all equally right? Seems rather like a strawman ...

But "right" is not a single thing when it comes to woodworking tool choices. Tools are a means to an end - a quality result - and everyone does not have to take the same route. Now, quality, there is only one of those ....

[David Weaver]

Yes, there is often no single dominant choice. I might phrase it better by saying that such a conciliatory statement is usually made to imply that the answers from everyone are always equally credible.

[Sean Hughto]

Oh, I can think of some incredible statements:

you only need a single edge razor blade to build a Philadelphia secretary.

you can't build a decent highboy until you master the CNC machine.

etc.

[Brian Ashton]

The issue is about tools versus skill. Does one simply pare back all tools to the very basics and learn skills, or does one continue to support tools for specific tasks? Do tools such as a router plane fall into the "special" category, or are they today more among the "common" group (such as a smoother)?
Derek


I must be a freakin woodworking god then because I've traded everything with exception of my hammer and a file (used to sharpen the claw to use as a chisel/adze) on a oneway ticket to the UK. I don't need anything else. There's simply nothing I can't make or fix with my trusty, circa 1980, estwing hammer anymore. Even sorted out what to do with the cat...

I really don't think there's anything to answer to or discuss to be honest. One should do what one likes. To be honest, anyone I've met over the decades that was making high quality stuff and making a good living at it had very unremarkable tool kits - quite boring really.

[Jack Curtis]

I think money and storage space resolve these issues, no human intervention needed.

[Daniel Rode]

I like to think of this as the amateur vs professional. There is a theory that it take 10,000 hours to master a complex skill-set. The idea being that a novice will need to invest 10k hours of work to learn and master photography, golf, programming, woodworking or whatever. The exact number of hours is irrelevant to me. Although 5 years of full time work is about 10,000 hours (think apprenticeships). Regardless, it takes a lot of effort and practice over a long time and a person pursuing woodworking as a career should expect to work hard for years to become competent. Moreover, person working wood full time, will continue reinforce those skills (mental and physical) and typically add and refine skills over time.

Now consider the amateur who can dedicate some time on the weekend and maybe a little on a weekday evening. If one could spend a consistent 20 hours per week, it's going to take 10 years to reach 10k hours. The reality is worse. Most amateurs are not surrounded daily with masters of the craft. That kind of support is weaker, less frequent and often coming from other amateurs. In addition, there is a time delay between learning an practicing; between feedback and application. I think this delay also affects the rate of improvement. Add it all up and I see a span of 15-30 years of diligent work as an amateur to become a fully competent woodworker. Slow down a little more, say 10-15 hours a week and that number might approach never.

I'm sure I'm somewhere in the 20-never range but I have several years under my belt already. In addition, I have other work in the trades I did as a young man that helped me jump ahead with some of the basic skills. Reading a ruler and simple mechanical drawing, for example. Even still I will probably never master woodworking. I'm OK with this because mastery is not my goal. My goal to to enjoy working with my hands. I also enjoy having a house filled with things I built myself.

Onto the specific question about the ability for a part time woodworker to develop the skills necessary to use only the most simple tools. Yes, no, maybe. I was pretty sure that I could not learn to hand sharpen chisel and plane irons. It's a physical skill. A kinda of "feel" thing. Muscle memory from lots of practice. I would need to guess at how it's supposed to look or feel and then practice the, maybe, right way until I could repeat the process on demand. I'm doing to to some degree now, so it can work. The questions is can I maintain it across the times when I am less active. Maybe.

I think I can learn a subset of skills and maybe over time, layer more on top of those.

The last comment I have is about choice. I choose to do some of my work with tools and techniques that are more suited to 1814 or 1914 than 2014. I do this not because it's faster or more efficient but because it's more enjoyable. Some of that enjoyment is learning how to use a particular tool well. Sometimes, it's finding a way to work around an under-developed skill or a missing tool.

[Jim Koepke]

an unnecessary tool, with the implication that there are few tasks that one cannot perform instead with a chisel.

This could be said of many tools. Imagine some of the old timers were saying the same thing when the first hand plane was being proudly shown to all the other carpenters at work. "Those young whipper snappers always trying to find a way of getting out of doing some honest work."

Could I get along without a router plane? Of course.

Does it make some tasks easier or more accurate? Of course.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

I do this not because it's faster or more efficient but because it's more enjoyable. Some of that enjoyment is learning how to use a particular tool well.

For me there is joy in seeing a translucent shaving curling out of a plane. There is even more joy when that shaving is curling off the bevel of a chisel going across a tenon.

There is also joy in pulling shavings from the bottom of dados with a router plane knowing all the dados match and will line up square with the the pieces that will end up inserted in to the dados.

jtk

[Brian Ashton]

I like to think of this as the amateur vs professional. There is a theory that it take 10,000 hours to master a complex skill-set. The idea being that a novice will need to invest 10k hours of work to learn and master photography, golf, programming, woodworking or whatever. The exact number of hours is irrelevant to me. Although 5 years of full time work is about 10,000 hours (think apprenticeships).


Well lets take that idea and unpack (as mice wife likes to say)... Say a kid likes *insert sport here*. Practices 3 hours a day 4 times a week (0n average) for 48 weeks a year (excluding holidays away and being grounded), total about 580hrs/year. 17 years to become an expert. Does anyone really think it took Gretzki, Elway, Messi, or Jordan till they were in their mid to late twenties to be experts in their fields? Considering none of them really got going in their respective sports till they were at least around 10, but probably later.

Then lets consider an apprentice working 8 hours a day for 4 years, like Thomas Chippendale, Thomas Sheritan, James Krenov... At the end of 4 years do you really think they were top experts in their respective fields - I don't, not even close. At that point they were only just starting to stretch their wings on becoming real experts.

Do you think anyone coming out of university with a 4 year degree actually knows anything and is an expert in their chosen field - I know I don't, in either degree. Any expert will tell the new graduates to forget everything they've learned because now it's time to learn what you really need to know...

To be honest I think the most important factor in determining someone becoming an expert in anything is their level of obsession (or passion, what ever you want to call it) with what ever it is.

[Jim Matthews]

I would like to apply an analogy from my previous working incarnation; regarding amateurs with more money than time.

My first serious employment came teaching skiing in Vail, CO back when working stiffs could afford to live there.
Families would fly in from the East Coast and immediately go shopping for expensive new gear.
(One of the shops had an inclusive, $1850 special that was immensely popular.)

They would then proceed to the more difficult terrain where they would (in short order) spread all their new equipment and clothing
over the mountain in what was known as a "Yard Sale". I believe the rage in neon colors from that era was so you could find
everything that you left behind as you spun inexorably down the mountain.

Few, if any, of these people considered lessons as a sensible expense that would improve their experience.
Most ignored the warnings at the top of expert runs (clearly marked, with repeated warnings), confident
that the latest safety gear and boots suited to World Cup racers would make up the difference between
their training and the demands of the day.

Instruction from someone that has real experience shorten the development time to a given skill set.

There's no substitute for repetition in any practical endeavor.

Start small, before you Go BIG.

[Maurice Ungaro]

First off, thanks to Derek for starting his thread. I'm an amateur woodworker of intermediate skill. I started down the fateful path in 2002. For the record, my fist purchase was a LV Sanding block, on advice from a close friend. My brother said, "heck, just take a block of wood and wrap the sandpaper around it." Yup, that'll work. Then I gave him one for Christmas, and he extolled the virtues of that LV tool. I've bought many things over my learning curve, and recently purged a bunch of it. Like I said, it's a learning curve.

Similarly, the same happens in cycling. I've been a cyclist for forty years....before clip less pedals and index shifting, much less carbon fibre. All too frequently I see noobies deck themselves out in Tour de France grade equipment (see Jim's post above re: skiing), and not know what most of it does, much less the advantages of one grouppo over another. Heck, they don't even know the rules of the road, so in practice, they are a bit clueless on the road (read: dangerous). I used to bemoan them, claiming that they haven't paid their dues. Now, I just shrug it off. When I pass them, I exhibit proper courtesy, hoping that maybe they will learn in the process.

Bottom line: everyone's journey is different. From the perspective of an expert, options and choices are focused with precision and in effect, limited. To a novice, the choices are limitless. They have to make their own way and decide for themselves.

[john zulu]

I personally buy tools that help me to do the job. It could speed up the process that I intend to accomplish. Do I keep on buying tools for the sake of new tools? Nope. I will put it this way would a block plane suit leveling or jointing a 4 feet board? A router plane is definitely useful but does it bet a chisel for tenons? It depends. It is definitely helps to tune the tenon but it can be achieve by other tools like a block plane and chisels.

To spend on tools without using it would be sin :) Power to the user that can find more ways in doing the task with the tools at hand!

[Keith Mathewson]

Only an amateur, read someone who does this for enjoyment, would consider this a reasonable debate. The world of professional woodworking uses a few hand tools as possible and the bigger the company the fewer used, if any at all. If you are doing this for the pleasure it brings than the method to achieve the result isn't as important as the feelings derived from the process. The person who builds something with a Norm Abram's mindset is likely just as happy as one who uses a Roy Underhill one.

[maximillian arango]

Here's a question for the master craftsman, being that you have skill would you give up an unnecessary tool like a router plane?

I work on cars a lot with my free time I wouldn't consider working on cars being a skill I would consider more about being experienced. I often find my self in junk yards out West... in Pennsylvania(its west to me:rolleyes:) I've had to pull 4 engines in the past year with a friend(keeps blowing engines) with nothing more then a breaker bar, a few sockets, and our arms. We are able to pull a subaru engine out in about 30 minutes to an hour and a half depending how stupid we act(dropping the hood on each other, tying shoes laces to the car, and trips to the first aid bin) but when we do it at the junk yard it takes us an hour and a half up to 4 hours and a lot of 4 letter words. I know wood working and working on cars are two different beast but drawing from that experience I would rather be at home with my air compressor and cherry picker getting it done and having fun over being at a junk yard with nothing but basic tools and brute strength aided with the lubrication of 4 letter words.

Is woodworking different from this?

[jim hedgpeth]

Definitely an amateur here, but I'm more leaning toward the skill side of things, as long as there is one understanding.

For a beginning user like me, I find it best to invest in or borrow quality, almost ready to use tools when trying a new type of tool. I say almost ready to use, because even most new tools need final sharpening and adjustment.

Sometimes cheap/budget tools are only good for setting yourself up for frustration, and can steer you away from them in the future. At least learn with a good tool, then you know how they should behave and what to do to tune/help them work correctly.

My first attemts with an old "Great Neck" smoothing plane was anything but great. Knowing I could sharpen near well enough to split hairs, I thought it was me. Then I tried a Veritas plane at a WW show........... unfortunately we all know where that leads.:p

My current hand plane collection includes 4 Veritas, and 5 Lie Nielsen (if you include the spoke shave), as well as a pair of Stanley block planes.





As for tenons, why a router plane?
I use my shoulder plane to square them if needed, or a chisel if I want a slight undercut.
Not trying to be smart, just wondering what I am missing there/how they would work for that application?

Jim

[Joel Thomas Runyan]

Only an amateur, read someone who does this for enjoyment, would consider this a reasonable debate. The world of professional woodworking uses a few hand tools as possible and the bigger the company the fewer used, if any at all.

I think this statement exemplifies how nebulous the words "amateur" and "professional" are. Is anyone willing to say that a veteran handtool woodworker who never sold a piece to pay the bills is less skilled than any high-volume cabinet maker whose work primarily subsists in pressing buttons on machines? And yet these two words still carry with them the brunt of our connotations of skill level, even as they're technically defined only by purpose of sales. It seems that we lack (or have lost) sufficient words to describe gradation of skill, and so this word "professional" is supposed to indicate something of quality, when it is inherently silent on the matter. I've worked in a "professional" cabinet making shop, sans hand tools, and while the goods we produced were of consistently fine fit and finish, they were all made with what I consider unremarkable (and even inferior) materials and design; they will fall out of fashion and eventually fall apart, well before my time expires. This is because a large percentage of customers purchasing from "professional" woodworkers these days don't know the difference between joints and wood grades and all the rest; the ease of mass production and machinery has inevitably degraded the quality of work and design in favor of faster and cheaper. It would be nonsense to imply that the man who makes the most the fastest and cheapest is the authority to reference on woodworking, and so this term "professional", at least as it is commonly appears, is next to useless.

As to the original question: saying that one should learn to saw straight is just inane defiance. Wood is unruly; muscles, joints, and nerves are only so consistent and compliant. In the odd or often event that one has not sawn a tenon straight, how could one be faulted for using a tool that cut a clean consistent depth in repair? Because it has a depth stop? Very well, remove the depth stop, and read the gauge line... now we're cheating because the plane has a sole? Very well, we'll use a chisel, which is essentially all the blade was to begin with. Ah, but alas. We've used other chisel like objects held tight in metal bodies with soles. We must go back and process all of our stock by hand with this chisel... but perhaps it is too wide, and we better use the 1/4" to really display our skill, and... well it goes somewhere very obvious from here. The appropriate tool is that which does the work with no sacrifice to it. Amount of time, quantity of bank account, bends of personality... all vary. The only constant is people telling you that whatever worked last time is wrong or impossible.

[jamie shard]

Tools should make the work easier, accurate, and enjoyable. (Edit)You can tell a bad tool purchase because they make it more complicated and not any more accurate. The more skill you have, the less tools you truly need for easy, accurate, and enjoyable... but no one starts off with skill and different people find different things enjoyable.

[george wilson]

I use whatever tool makes my job easier. For lowering the background on this lion's head violin neck carving,I used a little router plane that I threw together,with a bit 1/32" wide. It worked very well,and with a sharp bit,I got a good,smooth back ground.

Why would I not use something that makes my work easier or more accurate? Just so I could say I could do it with a sharp rock?

This was the only router I owned,by the way. Just purpose built for this application. Normally in my type of work I do not need a router. I still do not own a larger,commercially made router. The Master,and his cabinet makers regularly used routers of the 18th. C. style,in their work.

[Brian Holcombe]

My first job was in a machine shop in that experience I learned that a machinist will create a true surface or start from a previously trued surface. In woodworking you are creating a trued surface and progressing from there, each tool provides a range of capabilities and will either true a surface or work off a trued surface (or both).

An experienced woodworker is likely to have an in-depth understanding of this and how he can work with it, check it for flatness and so on, where an amateur who is in the beginnings of this hobby may not even be able to discern a truly flat surface from one that is not quite flat, so he is more likely to feel he needs to reach for a tool more capable of providing a trued surface than one that relies on his ability to create one. An experienced woodworker is also likely to have a very well equipped shop, even though often times he may not need to rely on anything other than marking tools and a set of chisels, the amateur however may feel disadvantaged because he has neither the breadth or knowledge nor the tool chest of someone more experienced. His first steps may be to buy the tools, since it's half of the process.

There is no need to fault someone for wanting to equip their shop with the tools they may find themselves to need, it's no more ill advised than the expert who continues to collect tools with a diminishing set of tasks that each tool can accomplish. Their reasoning is not that different, they both want to accomplish something with less struggle than previously required.

Also, there is a side benefit to the amateur's interest in all of this; I'd be willing to bet that companies like LN and LV are selling much more often to amateurs than experienced professionals, driving their ability to further provide the engineering and capital required to issue more and more redesigns of vintage tools. The rare tools bought up by experts only exist because LN and LV sell a lot of jack planes and panel saws.

[Sean Hughto]

As for tenons, why a router plane?
I use my shoulder plane to square them if needed, or a chisel if I want a slight undercut.
Not trying to be smart, just wondering what I am missing there/how they would work for that application?

Jim

The router is useful as it references the side of the apron or stretcher or whatever and makes it simple to get a uniform thickness or remove a paper thin layer from the cheek to sneak up on the perfect fit:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3261/3121318003_0f3c36f2ef_z.jpg?zz=1

[Brian Holcombe]

I've made plenty by chisel but recently ordered a router plane. I see a thousand uses for it and they're relatively inexpensive ($140 IIRC).

[Tom McMahon]

Almost every development in professional woodworking since the industrial revolution was designed to remove the necessity for skill. The ideal profesional shop today produces an acceptable product with the cheapest unskilled labor possible. In today's world, skill is the hobby.

[Mel Fulks]

That violin is going to be impressing people for a long time. You can even see the lion's gums distinct from his mouth and teeth.

[Graham Haydon]

Nice thread Derek,

I think there is a lot to be said for just getting to grips with some basic skills before purchasing all the tools.

You can buy cheap very sharp disposable back saws and practice cutting to a line.

Ditto a chisel and a sharpening stone then learning to chop and pare.

A plane or two and learning to square and smooth wood.

These are foundation skills that allow progression, avoiding them or buying a work arounds could be compared to building a house on weak foundations. I don’t much mind what people buy, how much it costs or what they find works.

“There's no substitute for repetition in any practical endeavor.”

There it is in a nutshell for me. When building a foundation of skills this will be required. Nearly every piece we make is unique but what is common in nearly all of them at some point is cutting to a line, chopping & paring and using basic bench planes.

Reality, people like buying nice things, it’s a hobby to most and how anyone chooses to progress that is down to them.

The strange thing to me is how many people assume they are right. Buy this Stanley #4 or buy this special steel chisel, put your blades this wasy around etc, etc.

I had the pleasure of working with a higly skilled joiner who retired a few years back who had been in the trade from the age of 16>65. He loved his hand tools, they were not the finest, nor were they the worst nor did he use all of them exactly as intended. Years of practice refined his daily tool kit to what was essential and he knew how to use them.

My tip, avoid to much procrastination, take all advice with a pinch of salt and make things, your tools will suffer evolution, survivial of the fittest will come in to play and you will know what you need and what you don’t. That's where you really discover.

[Keith Mathewson]

Years ago I owned a furniture making school with an emphases on hand tool use for a few years, in that time I've met a lot of people. People from all walks of life and income levels, my advice on tools has evolved over time. I've met young fathers who were trying to build furniture to save money to someone who pulled up in a car which most likely cost more than my first house. From people who would spend weeks deciding on a $100 purchase to one fellow who's wife nearly bought him the entire Lie Nielsen line because he decided to take a week long beginners class. One fellow told me that this hobby is cheap to get into, that is compared to what he spent tricking out his Harley. The point is if you have more money than time buy any tool which makes you happy. If you have more time than money make do with what you have, you can build quite a bit which very few tools and you will get better over time. BUT if using fine tools brings pleasure to something you are ONLY doing for pleasure buy whatever and as many tools as makes you happy. If you find that you don't use certain ones later you can get rid of them, most won't. The people who I would see coming back for more classes were the ones who had a positive experience early on, the skills could come later.

[Frederick Skelly]

The point is if you have more money than time buy any tool which makes you happy. If you have more time than money make do with what you have, you can build quite a bit which very few tools and you will get better over time. BUT if using fine tools brings pleasure to something you are ONLY doing for pleasure buy whatever and as many tools as makes you happy.

+1. Well said.

[Mansell Bettez]

The people who I would see coming back for more classes were the ones who had a positive experience early on, the skills could come later.

+1 on this. Sawing to a line is important, but if you are making rails for Frame and Panel, you need to make 4 near perfect cuts for the tenons, and you usually have to do at least some cleanup with a shoulder plane or chisel to get that perfect fit. Using a router plane simplifies the whole process - it gets you to the line AND it gets you square. Eventually, your sawing "close" to the line becomes sawing on the line, but when starting out, you can practice on "real" wood, then complete with the router-plane, rather than trying to saw right to the line, and having to re-glue the cheek when inexperience happens.

[Jim Koepke]

My tip, avoid to much procrastination, take all advice with a pinch of salt and make things, your tools will suffer evolution, survivial of the fittest will come in to play and you will know what you need and what you don’t. That's where you really discover.

Great words to live by, the whole post was good Graham.

There are too many ways to get a project done to insist there is only one way to get to the finish.

May your milage vary.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

you can practice on "real" wood, then complete with the router-plane, rather than trying to saw right to the line, and having to re-glue the cheek when inexperience happens.

To me making mistakes like this is what made me learn to saw better.

jtk

[Rick Markham]

I'm going to chime in on this. First point Professional does not equal expert, in any field!

I also think it is very important that there is a difference between "skill building" and which tool is better for what discussion. In my opinion there is no substitute for classical training, whether that is a realistic concept in this day and age or not, is an entirely different discussion.

If you want to get good at something, anything technical, anything regarding your hands, any art, there is no substitute for shear repetition. The guy who wants "it" the most will be the one who works the hardest for it. "Talent" is a word that while society means well using, it really only hides the amount of effort, and work required by the artisan. It's easy to say someone is talented, it's hard to truly appreciate the lifetime of study and work required to achieve that.

Fundamentally we are only limited by our hand and dexterity, the tool matters less than the results! That being said in any art studying the fundamentals NEVER hinders your growth.

This is a big community of people of many walks of life, we each get our enjoyment from many different aspects. We all ended up here for the same reason, we want to know more! :)

[Derek Cohen]

There have been so far so many wonderful responses, and I hope many more are coming. I hope that the many insights help everyone equally - experienced and not.

It is difficult to be prescriptive because to do so requires that we catch someone at a time when they in a position to act on it physically, materially, emotionally and timewise.

I am fortunate to be at a time of life when I have less demands on my time from family than, say, 20 years ago. I have more time free on a weekend than some here may have in a year. However, some weekends I have no time free at all, and I never get into the workshop during the week. This no doubt palls into insignificance with others who get into their shops whenever they like. Time is a precious thing.

I enjoy the tool use as much as I enjoy what the tools help create. Over the years I have gained much satisfaction in seeing the furniture I build becoming more complex and recognising that my skills have improved to achieve this. What has helped a great deal is an acceptance that none of us will go through life without the occasional screw up - and I make more than my share - and that there is always going to be a fix. Anything done can be redone. Sometimes I think we should measure ourselves by the level of our fixes :) (Of course I am saying this in advance just in case I screw up the fingers of my chair build!). We advance by extending ourselves a little each time, by taking a little more of a risk .... by sawing to the line!

An aside: The recent FWW mag has a dovetail article that suggests that one saw away from the line and them pare to it - what is your reaction to this?

Tools - love them or leave them? I must admit that I have a multiple personality when it comes to tools. I enjoy fiddling with them, enjoy mastering a new tool, enjoy designing and building them, and of course enjoy using them when building projects. Sometimes it is just fun having a special tool for that certain task. But equally it is as pleasurable just making do with what is at hand, finding a workaround, and developing a new or extending an old skill. Sometimes I think that it is the amateurs who get all the fun in woodworking. While there is a part of me that loves the fantasy of doing this professionally, I know that really means having more time to play in the woodshop rather than making a living at it. I imagine being a pro is a different experience. And that a pro will have a different relationship with tools and a different attitude towards time available for builds. I'd like more of the pros here to comment on their experiences.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Jim Koepke]

I imagine being a pro is a different experience.


professional |prəˈfe sh ənl|adjective2 (of a person) engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime

I do not think it would be as enjoyable being a professional.

There would be an incentive to not waste a single minute during the day.

No more making fun things by hand that take two hours to make but can only sell for a few bucks.

I also enjoy working with the tools and on the tools. I do avoid fixing things that aren't broken.

There are also a lot of tools that one can find inexpensively with a bit of luck and perseverance.

jtk

[Sean Hughto]

An aside: The recent FWW mag has a dovetail article that suggests that one saw away from the line and them pare to it - what is your reaction to this?


I haven't seen the article, but I think the general idea is fine. I have no patience with the idea of tsk tsk-ing at methods that work. Why is anyone else entitled to be "offended" (or whatever word one might want to use for it) by another's means to achieve a woodworking end. Are the dovetails not as strong or beautiful? Tell me, how did I make these:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3140/2415369724_a18e66d7da_z.jpg?zz=1
or these:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3095/2864599314_94da5d121b_o.jpg
or these:
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2427/3575129018_e4d888a0cc_b.jpg

[Jim Koepke]

An aside: The recent FWW mag has a dovetail article that suggests that one saw away from the line and them pare to it - what is your reaction to this?

I know it takes much more time to do it this way. I know because that is how I first learned to make dovetails. It also led me to become better at sawing so that the paring is now minimal.

jtk

[Judson Green]

Sean -

This is neat! Could you explain how it attaches to your bench? I'm guessing the the little black knob has something to do with it?

283220

[Sean Hughto]

I didn't make it up. Rob Porcaro wrote about it in a PWW article a long time back. I routed a groove and put a T-track in the front edge of my bench. I've got a couple of these little sleds for different thicknesses and stuff. I don't use them that often these days, but from time to time they come in handy. Rob's blog is quite good btw: http://www.rpwoodwork.com/blog/

[Mike Holbrook]

Great thread. It seems that many threads end up in this or a similar discussion so I think it is great Derek has us taking this on as the main topic of a thread.

I have a very good friend who got me interested in wood working 30+ years ago. Over the last few years my friend has claimed that he would use more hand tools but he believes hand tools require more physical skill and dexterity to use. I think he makes a valid point. It seems to me that power tools are more of a planing and set up exercise whereas hand tools are more of a physical challenge. I personally enjoy the feel and physical involvement with wood as much as making things.

Certainly one can buy a great many hand tools for the same investment as one stationary tool. I think it follows then that it is easier financially to acquire a good set of hand tools than it is to acquire and set up a shop for power tools. In my case I can buy just about any hand tool I think may help or be fun to use and still save money vs what I originally was thinking I would spend on a power tools shop. Like Derek mentions above I also find hand tools fascinating and don't mind spending money on occasion just to try a tool out to see if I can learn to use it and enjoy spending time working with it.

Still, I don't find that throwing money into hand tools is any kind of guarantee of success or greater enjoyment. I like some of the tools I have made, some of the ones I have restored and some that I bought new or used. For me the whole "Neander" experience is not about producing more items faster it is about enjoying the journey.

Lately I find that I enjoy working green wood even more, partly I think because of the more basic set of physically challenging tools vs working dry wood. The other thing I like about green wood is I have a larger supply than I can use that falls in our creek or gets blown down. I am motivated to use the supply of wood I have vs spending time and money acquiring wood.... Someone above mentioned that one could probably make just about anything with an axe, one of the most basic green wood tools. I am amazed at what Drew Langsner, Jogge Sundquist and many others can do with a carving axe. I'm blown away by what a drawknife can do, even in my rank amateur hands. Don't even get me started on what guys can make with just a carving knife or knives. Spokeshaves are also a fascinating tool to learn to use.

I have read many threads in which posters talk about how much more pleasant it is to work softer woods. I'm here to tell you that green maple and white oak are even easier than soft woods when they are green/wet. If we are talking about the financial cost and time investment involved in woodworking maybe we should look at materials cost as well as tool cost. Maybe we could all save a good deal of money, not to mention many trees, if we simply started using the trees that simply fall down via natural causes. If I was starting off in woodworking I would start with green wood projects. Working green wood has many financial and wood education advantages and tool dexterity lessons that I think are very valuable for anyone starting out.

[Curt Putnam]

In terms of tool use I think that skill simply allows one to do something more efficiently than less skill allows. For example, precision hand sawing to a line is something that requires skill. When first starting out, one has to think about how to line up the saw, how to stand, how to hold the saw, how to push, etc. Then one takes a stroke and rethinks all these things. Warren, on the other hand, just grabs the proper saw without consciously making a choice and saws precisely to his line, again without thinking about it. Warren has been doing this day in day out for 30 or 40 years. The beginner will still produce a saw kerf. it will just take him longer.

The foundation skills must be learned to do hand tool woodworking. With the exception of Zach Dillinger I don't know of anyone deliberately starting a career as a hand tool craftsman. I assume there are others and that I just don't know of them. The point, however, is that I suspect that we can conclude that hand tool woodworking is largely a hobby activity. I also think that we would all agree that, with the exception of the few "naturals" out there, that skill development is a result of practice. The trade off for skill is time. Without the skill, I can still saw and chisel a tenon it is just going to take a lot longer.

"whether it is actually possible for most, if not all, amateur (i.e. part time) woodworkers to develop the hand skills to forgo tools such as the router plane at the outset?"

I think it reasonable to think that, for the large majority of folks, the answer is no. The admonition to learn how to chisel is correct, at least in my mind. It is just not particularly feasible, especially if there is an alternative. Most of want to get things done. Although we each have a different tolerance for time, ultimately we want to produce a product.

There are basic, foundation skills without which one will never progress. The list is fairly short. Swinging a hammer/mallet, sawing to a line, using a chisel, sharpening. After sharpening comes using a plane, chisel, edges in general. There really isn't much choice. One must learn these things well enough to proceed at the desired pace. How much is enough, how good is good, are questions to which we each have different answers, but they are iterative and evolving as the skill develops. Last year's answer to the question of how close is good enough is not the same as this year's answer.

Your question gets even harder to answer since, for hobbyists, the term need is no different than the term want. A hobby, by definition is an optional activity therefore there can be no "need." We use the term because once we are in the reality bubble of the hobby, some things just cannot be done without the tool. I absolutely need the saw. There is a sliding scale of usefulness which is different for each of us as we weigh the myriads of factors that into a tool decision. The saw(s) are at one end of the scale. The Anarchist's Tool Chest has, as its focal point, the attempt to define the minimum tool set that allows one to build furniture. I think that Chris did an admirable job with it and a whole lot of chests have built because of that book. Is his advice useful to beginners? I have no idea.

I can only speak to me and my situation. I'm working hard to develop those foundation skills. On the other hand I'm pretty far away from a minimal tool set and have no desire to get there. For me, there is an intrinsic pleasure in the tool itself. Do I need that exquisite Chris Vesper marking gauge made from 9000 year old wood? It does not increase my ability to do anything, but walking into the shop and looking at it gives me enormous pleasure. Need = Want. I have finally acquired a dovetail saw (from Isaac Smith, scored a ready to ship) that fits my hand, not perfectly, but useably well. Can I saw better with it? I think so - certainly I am more comfortable. It's a bit closer the absolute end of the scale.

I will end this ramble with the admonition that it's all good.

[Judson Green]

Clever. And I've got a T-track I'm not using too. Used to check out his blog, don't know why I haven't kept up with it.

Thanks

[Mike Holbrook]

Curt, I wonder if a large number if not the majority of posters are like me, somewhere between the hobbyist and the professional. I am not claiming to have "professional" skills, which may or may not as someone else mentioned be superior skills. I do justify a large amount of my investment in tools, materials and the time I spend with them in money and time saved vs paying a professional to fix, build something. My venture into woodworking has branched out into carpentry, construction even wiring and plumbing. In addition to a tool skill set I think one develops a certain confidence in ones ability to make, fix and problem solve things in general. Then again maybe if I had spent all my time in more traditional wood working...

An interesting video for me is the free 51 video series on Curtis Buchanan's Windsor Chair maker site, particularly the first few. The very strange and weird thing for me was noticing that other than a little brief work with a chain saw there is very little traditional sawing going on, which gave me pause regarding the relative importance of sawing. Curtis starts with a couple 12' logs. Most of the pieces of wood he uses are split from logs with wedges and froes. Until I saw it I would never have though it possible to split a single log into as many usable pieces as Curtis and other Windsor Chair makers do. How much wood do we save if there is no kerf for any of the pieces we make from a log? The other thing is splitting might even be faster! Before watching Cutis's video I assumed that splitting pieces was painstakingly slow and wasted lots of wood. I think the skill set required to choose and split trees to get the most usable material is a great skill/knowledge set to have no matter what sort of wood one uses. Chris Schwarz wrote an article entitled "10 Books that Changed the Way I Think" in the article he mentions Drew Lagsner's book "Green Woodworking"...

"Green Woodowrking" by Drew Lagsner. This book is like visiting a foreign country, a delightful foreign country. Even if yo have been woodworking for decades, this book offers surprises and insights on every page. It will make you more intimate with your material."

For me Curtis's videos did the same thing.

http://www.curtisbuchananchairmaker.com/videos.html

[Brian Holcombe]

I would venture a guess that many professionals building furniture of the quality that would find its way to boutiques are using a combination of hand and machine tools.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

If you purchase the dodad that I am selling, then that is all you need for perfect wood working :-) Otherwise, you need tremendous skill and lots of other tools! :D

More seriously, I attempt to choose projects that do not require tools that I do not own or cannot easily purchase. I do not own a bandsaw, so, I try to avoid things where I would need one. I am frequently able to compensate for my lack of tools by finding some other means, but, it is typically more time consuming.

If I am poor at planing wood, I may need to purchase already flat dimensioned wood. If I cannot cut dovetails, I use a different joint.

[Stew Hagerty]

Now, understand that my take on this is going to be very different than most of you. I used to be a general contractor. As such, I did plenty of trim work and some built-ins. However, I always wanted to be able to do some real woodworking. I kept making sure I had some space for it wherever I lived, but I just never found the time.

Then, in March of '08 I contracted a viral respiratory infection that nearly took my life. After 8-9 months, I was finally out of the woods and more than ready to start my recovery. However, during my physical therapy sessions, I began experiencing a weird kind of dizziness. I call it "spatial disorientation". I also found my leg losing sensitivity and awkward to move. As my neurologist performed test after test, my condition continued to worsen. Eventually I lost all feeling and function in my right leg and a reduction of fine motor control in my right arm and the "spatial disorientation" reared it's head whenever I was stressed or tired. Now in a wheelchair, I went to IU Medical Center, Cleveland Clinic, John's Hopkins, and finally to Mayo Clinic. It turns out I have something called Transverse Myelitis. It is a Immuno-Neurological disease in the same family as MS. There is no cure, and no one knows what causes it, however a large percentage of people have had a viral respiratory infection not too long before contracting the disease.

At first I was in intese pain that they tried to control with oral medications (the hard stuff!). They helped to a point, but the pretty much just knocked me out. Eventually I had an infusion pump implanted. It pumps a continuous flow of a drug cocktail directly to the point in my spine where the lesions are. It cancels out most of the pain (I live with about a 3 out of 10) without knocking me out. Finally after more than a year, I was able to be up and around, albeit in my power wheelchair.

So, now I finally had time for woodworking (I really needed to do something, because Id been going nuts from just laying around). So I spent several months building my wheelchair accessible workshop. Having been a contractor (and after watching Norm since episode 1 season 1), I set up my shop around the power tools I already had and the more woodworking specific ones that I didn't have, such as a drill press, full size router table, Band Saw, and Oscillating Spindle Sander. I also have a big traditional woodworking bench that I had inherited from my father-in-law. I planned on working primarily with power tools.

Time passes...

The more woodworking I did, the more hand tools I began incorporating into my repertoire. Now, I use my power tools for more of the prep work such as breaking down sheet goods, cutting stock to rough dimension, most jointing and thickness planing, and most of the sanding. Then I use my hand tools for bringing stock to final dimensions and removing machine marks with hand planes and, of course, joinery (except dadoes). I have a full set of vintage Stanley planes from 3-8, a wide variety of handsaws and chisels, a "Wall of Red" (Woodpeckers Tools), mallets, etc. etc.

What I have found is that working with hand tools makes me feel closer to my work; somehow more directly involved. That is how woodworking and the necessary tools required works for me, with my level of skills and capabilities. Every person is unique. Each has his or her own types of projects, physical capabilities, skill level, etc. Those are the things that make woodworking such a personalized hobby/profession. Each Maker is unique. What tools and techniques they use to achieve their goals is up to them. It is the end result and the personal satisfaction that matters.

Oh... And just for the record, I have four router planes. I have one very old Hag's Tooth made by an obviously very skilled but anonymous Maker that simply sits on a shelf, A modern ECE Hag's Tooth that I rarely use anymore, a Veritas Router Plane that basically replaced the ECE, and a Veritas Miniature Router Plane that I have found very useful for small hinge mortices.

My Shop:283229283230

[Keith Mathewson]

An aside: The recent FWW mag has a dovetail article that suggests that one saw away from the line and them pare to it - what is your reaction to this?
Derek

Complete waste of time. A dovetail joint is a sawn, not a pared joint. With the exception of one pin which had to be dressed with a float these drawers were sawn, waste removed and then glued and assembled. No test fitting or dry fitting.

[Brian Holcombe]

Pared to fit:

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c181/SpeedyGoomba/9EAD7E50-8506-4D31-8262-04E71821EC09_zpsoyevlrvt.jpg

[Sean Hughto]

Are your sawn joints better than Beckksvoort's pared ones? How so? And who made the rule about DTs are a "sawn joint"? Where can I look up the sawn" versus "pared" joints list? ;-)

[Keith Mathewson]

Are your sawn joints better than Beckksvoort's pared ones? How so? And who made the rule about DTs are a "sawn joint"? Where can I look up the sawn" versus "pared" joints list? ;-)

I've never seen his work so I couldn't say, I guess you'll have to be the judge. There isn't a rule about any approach that I'm aware of and I've no idea if you can look it up. My opinion comes from cutting hundreds of dovetails, I don't understand why someone would want to use a less efficient approach. If the paring approach or any other approach works better for you then that should be your approach. To reiterate I mark, cut, chop out the waste, apply glue and ensemble. I don't know how to be more efficient than that.

[george wilson]

I just saw the dovetails,as seen in the harpsichord making film.

[Jim Koepke]

Oh... And just for the record

Thanks for posting this Stew.

Nice shop, much neater than mine.

To paraphrase Forrest Gump:

individual is as individual does.

jtk

[Sean Hughto]

Chris Becksvoort is the author of the article Derek referred to: http://www.finewoodworking.com/how-to/article/how-to-cut-and-fit-perfect-dovetail-pins-part-2.aspx

So you can look too if you like. He is a well known woodworker with a website too, fwiw.
http://www.chbecksvoort.com/

Sure, if people have good teachers and a chance to learn sawing to the point that they split the line and saw square every time, as well as how to mark well in the first place, and the time to practice sawing and develop that muscle memory and skill before making dovetails, definitely. Oh, they also have to practice how to deal with woods of different hardness - having pine or poplar DTs go together right off the saw is somewhat less demanding than having maple or oak ones do so, for example. And most importantly they have to wait to make any furniture with dovetails until they've got all this down pat, rather than diving in and getting some drawers and carcasses done with some paring where necessary.

[Pat Barry]

I just saw the dovetails,as seen in the harpsichord making film.
Where did you see them George? Were they in a harpsicord making film? I don't understand.

[David Weaver]

George made them in a colonial williamsburg film. Look up Colonial Violin and Harpsichord Making on youtube (you may have seen it here already, it's been posted a million times).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K48FezBoPWg

[David Weaver]

As far as the dovetails, by FAR the best thing to do with them is not worry too much about them being perfect and cover them up with something that's actually attractive.

One of the worst things the cosmans of the world has flung onto us is a world of sharp cornered furniture with rows and rows of dovetails and wedged through tenons, and no sense of anything that actually draws the eye and moves it along and massages it as it follows what we're looking at. It's like living inside of a watch and looking around at all of the gears all the time.

[Pat Barry]

George made them in a colonial williamsburg film. Look up Colonial Violin and Harpsichord Making on youtube (you may have seen it here already, it's been posted a million times).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K48FezBoPWg

Ahh, thanks David. Now I see where he saw them being cut. Mr Wilson demonstrates this at about the 3:50 point of the video.

[Sean Hughto]

I don't think Cosman invented the visible through or half dovetail. A lot of folks seem to enjoy those dovetailed blanket chests and visible dovetails on drawers of fine furniture.

[Sean Hughto]

And personal taste is a funny thing. I rather like wedge through tenons. Here's a detail from a cabinet I made that most folks seem to think is an intriguing bit of inlay instead of a wedged tenon ...http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3202/3062817842_78a2865044_z.jpg


And do you object to them in stools and chairs?

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7123/7457643766_1e0e195a93_c.jpg

[william nelson colorado]

Wow, Sean. That's a beautiful stool. Nice detail on the cabinet, too.

[Brian Holcombe]

I enjoy visible joinery when executed with discretion, so a minimum of contrasting woods, not to often per piece, ect. The Japanese enjoyed looking at the structural connections in their temples 1000 years ago, and I'm enjoying looking at the structural connections of furniture today.

there are plenty or examples in a variety of furniture styles, executed by masters, where visible joinery is celebrated.

[Jim Koepke]

there are plenty or examples in a variety of furniture styles, executed by masters, where visible joinery is celebrated.

Perhaps joinery openly laid bare seems unnoticed to the observer. It is but a texture before our eyes leading the mind into a daydream adventure.

jtk

[Eric Brown]

When I get a new "old" tool, I must try it. There are many times one tool is more suitable than another, however, many different tools can accomplish the same basic needs adequately. I enjoy studying how each tool works. Most makers claimed to have made the best, but unless you are doing the same thing over and over, you will usually find a different tool that can do it better than another in certain cases. For instance, the saw that can cut dried hardwood well will usually have trouble cutting wetter wood. Does that mean the saw that can cut wet can't cut the drier wood? Of course not. It just won't to it as well or as easy. The situation dictates the need. For instance, I have three large router planes. When I cut sliding dovetails I use a chisel to hog out the waste, one router (without fine adjustment) to take more out and another router (with fine adjust) to finish the depth. Its just easier to do it this way (for me). Lee Valley makes a tool that holds a chisel turning it into a handplane. While I am sure some people could do many different planning tasks with it, I seriously doubt they would enjoy flattening a bench top with it. Again, the situation dictates. In essence. a tool that is most suitable for the task will be easier to master than a less suitable tool. However, you must spend the time determining what "most suitable" really means. Then, you will gain insight in the tools you buy and yes, you will find you don't need as many. Perhaps the best way to help is to develop a list of questions one should ask of a tool. Does having a certain feature really effect the use of the tool? Is it suitable for what you think you need? Is there an easier or better way? The beauty of most wood working tools is that they are inherently simple tools. If they are sharp, they will probably work. Enjoy the journey.

[John Coloccia]

As far as the dovetails, by FAR the best thing to do with them is not worry too much about them being perfect and cover them up with something that's actually attractive.

One of the worst things the cosmans of the world has flung onto us is a world of sharp cornered furniture with rows and rows of dovetails and wedged through tenons, and no sense of anything that actually draws the eye and moves it along and massages it as it follows what we're looking at. It's like living inside of a watch and looking around at all of the gears all the time.

I would generally agree with that. I like a little exposed joinery here and there where it makes some sort of statement, but doing it just to show off your joinery skills is something I don't find particularly attractive. Either way, if you can do them right off the saw, great. If not, great too. It's sure faster if you can saw accurately, but this isn't a race, is it?

I say spend whatever money you want to spend and use whatever tools you want to use. I know I've spent a lot of money on tools over the years. I also know that I do probably 90% or more of my hand work with a very limited set of tools...we were just talking about this in the instrument forum, actually. I think over time people tend to simplify their processes and use less and less contraptions. That said, I don't really feel like anyone really needs to be the protector of hand tool purity and make sure that beginners develop all of the skills upfront before being allowed to work on something. If the tool helps you and you can afford it, buy it, but don't feel bad a few years from now if you just grab for a chisel instead and the wizbang tool sits unused in the corner.

[Chris Griggs]

Just checked out Becksvoort the article Sean linked to. Even the article being referred to says.

"When you cut the pins, your sawkerfs should, ideally, be right
on the layout lines. You could saw close to the lines and pare to
them later, but this is a slow and inefficient process. Better to put
the extra time into practicing cutting to a line beforehand."

So the article isn't really teaching a method by which you saw away from line and then a pare to fit. Its teaching a method by which you saw to the line with the intent of fitting off the saw, and then pare to fit if/when/where needed. That is an important distinction. For most of use things will need final fitting sometimes and it an important skill to have...BUT sawing away from ones lines with the intent of trimming everything to fit is counter productive (e.g. slower and less accurate)...based on this conversation (though honestly only I only skimmed it) I had assumed the latter was what the article was advocating, I was very glad to see that it was actually teaching the former.

[Sean Hughto]

Yes it is good to know of the most efficient way and to strive for it, but it is also useful to know practical alternatives to keep people building successfully even before they can accomplish the most efficient way. And a culture of looking down noses at alternative ways needlessly exalts form over substance. If I ever had a blog, I think I'd call it the pragmatic hobbiest and unashamedly show how to get things built - most efficient or otherwise.

[phil harold]

I go back to an old saying:
A bad carpenter blames his tools,
It is not the tools we use which make us good, but rather how we employ them.

[Derek Cohen]

Sean, I don't view a criticism of paring to the line to be "looking down the nose". If someone is to be taught a method, then sawing to the line introduces fewer opportunities for errors to creep in. Learning to saw straight is just an entry skill. The reason most do not try to do so is not one of lack of skill, but lack of confidence. We need to teach a "go for it" approach as much as teach basic skills.

Regards from Perth

Derek

[Chris Griggs]

Yes it is good to know of the most efficient way and to strive for it, but it is also useful to know practical alternatives to keep people building successfully even before they can accomplish the most efficient way.

No disagreement about that from me Sean. Actually, I couldn't agree more.

I just happened to fall into a trap when I first got started of slowly sneaking up on everything, and it slowed my down a lot and caused me a lot of frustration, so I like to encourage folks to push themselves. At the end of the day in the context of an individual project or task, a person should do what works for them or gives them enjoyment, to get the result they want.

I strive for efficient and accurate sawing and or planing but I certainly still do a fair share of fitting. If I have a sliding dovetail that going is to be kept visible, I will use a chisel guide to fit it if that's what its takes. My DTs certainly don't always fit off the saw, and if that happens I certainly won't hesitate to reach for my float to trim them to fit. I'm also still pretty piss poor at sawing plumb with large rip saws so if I am ripping something by hand that needs to be precise width I mark 2 lines. One to saw too and one to plane too. This allows me to practice getting the best saw cut I can without risk to the end result.

Even if one saws perfectly 99% of the time (I certainly don't come close to that) knowing how to make corrections in definitely and essential skill..a skill that many claim separates the good from the great.

[David Weaver]

And do you object to them in stools and chairs?

Yes, but those are nicely executed.

I support your proposed spoof blog (or maybe not a spoof) that suggests any method that does the work well is a method good enough to ...well, do the work.

I brought up cosman because he's got disciples all over the place repeating his boasts (things about always sawing to the line, etc) and casting stones at anyone who disagrees (or even like me, just doesn't care). I personally always shoot for sawing to the line, but if my dovetails don't come out looking perfect, but are at least handsome, I call that more than good enough. Gobs of 3/4" material with dovetails that have very fat tails and tiny tiny pins just put me off, more so than dovetails showing in general, because they look like someone is trying to protect a boast (as in, be able to prove they did them by hand) about something that shouldn't be showing, anyway.

A few beads, reeds and mouldings would look far better, but that kind of stuff wouldn't play well at a wood show where you have a headset on and are trying to work really fast to wow onlookers.

I'm going to set up a blog that says:
Beginners - the world has enough pens, fat lipped bowls and exposed dovetails. Let's do something you'll still like after you've been woodworking for 25 years.
(I'm kidding, I'd never set up a blog - there are more than enough of those by unaccomplished woodworkers, too)

[Sean Hughto]

Well perhaps I am reading tones into things that are not intended, but I've heard the tones in real life face to face conversations too, so ...

You are a phychologist, right? You detect no hint of a sort of machismo chest thumping as in "real men do it right off the saw" and "only unskilled loser pansies have to pare" in these sorts of discussions?

I'm tired of the debate. But I remember not so many years ago being intimidated by entry level skills like sharpening and sawing and so forth. I'm glad there was no one around to tell me I was somehow "cheating" when I found ways to overcome my lack of "entry level" skills.

[David Weaver]

You detect no hint of a sort of machismo chest thumping as in "real men do it right off the saw" and "only unskilled loser pansies have to pare" in these sorts of discussions?


I have detected it, and I am in the "way too lazy to pare" camp. It's kind of a goofy sentiment in general to worry about anything other than how the piece turns out, and how it was designed and whether or not when you step into a room and look at it, you notice "wow, that's a piece with nice proportions" or..."look a square box, but the dovetals sure are perfect, I couldn't put a pin between them anywhere". It makes the whole casting stones about paring (which I've never seen go the other way, from the parers to the saw-ers) goofy.

[Sean Hughto]

What's a "fat lipped" bowl? I'm interested as I consider myself a decent bowl turner. I wouldn't turn a pen if you paid me.

I dislike Cosman, but not because what he teaches leads to works with exposed joinery.

My blog proposal was not a spoof. I really do think the piece is what ought to be judged, not the path to it.

[David Weaver]

A small plain fat bowl, the kind you might find in a tourist gift shop. Something that would hold a pint of liquid and is an inch thick.

Not the artistic stuff that the fabulous turners below in the turning forum make with delicate proportions and such.

[David Weaver]

I dislike Cosman, but not because what he teaches leads to works with exposed joinery.



I wouldn't so much say I even have a dislike for cosman, I understand why he does things the way he does and why he targets the segment of the market that he does. But he does offer opinions that are boastful (such as giving the crinkle face and poo poo comments to professional woodworkers who pare, or pieces in competition that have been pared) and that results in his minions running around repeating them with vigor.

The second I care how you do your dovetails ...well, that will never come. But it would suggest I'm burning brain cells worrying about the wrong things when there's plenty of things I could improve on my own stuff.

[Sean Hughto]

or pieces in competition that have been pared

How would one possibly know which those were?

[Brian Holcombe]

I find that what maintains my interest in woodworking is what brought to it initially. As much as I can appreciate federal style, French Art Deco, ect it doesn't keep my attention.

You may feel that we all get to a similar place after 25years, my feeling is that we come back to where we started.

[george wilson]

Very nice work,Sean!!

I didn't SEE the dovetails in my film I SAWED them. The word saw has 2 meanings,and is confusing.

[David Weaver]

How would one possibly know which those were?

I suppose by asking, which makes the whole issue more ridiculous, doesn't it?

[Brian Holcombe]

I'm making interlocking joinery today, I'm sawing the line on the sides and paring away at the bottom....my head is about to explode.

[Chris Griggs]

I'm making interlocking joinery today, I'm sawing the line on the sides and paring away at the bottom....my head is about to explode.

[thumps chest] That sounds like a great method...For me to poop on....you should be sawing the bottom dead on those base lines with a key hole saw.

Soooo amatuer:)

[Prashun Patel]

I am quick to acknowledge superior (to my own) crafstmanship, skill, and design.

But I certainly make no judgment about an individuals methods or motivations at any skill level. Their craft is theirs; mine is mine.

These threads are starting to irritate me. Basically, many people feel they are being judged for the way they approach the craft, but I have yet to see even the most Neander of Neanders here pass judgment on anyone who does it otherwise. This judgment is (at least on this forum) largely in our heads. Anything you might have read here that passes judgment is very much the exception, not the rule.

[John Coloccia]

I suppose by asking, which makes the whole issue more ridiculous, doesn't it?

Cosman's got his thing. I have some of his videos. They're quite good, actually. I think he's a great teacher. Where I draw the line, generally speaking, is criticizing one method over another. I run across this in the guitar world BIG time. I've started using CNC to help in the shop. There are lots of people out there that think you just stick in a piece of wood, push a button, and out pops a guitar. Well, even if that's how it worked, so what? It's still my design. My ergonomics. My sound. That ISN'T how it works, btw. It's more like you get some rough parts that still need a lot of handwork, fitting, etc...not a whole lot different than pushing a router around one of my templates, only it does the pushing and I can be off doing other things that really benefit from hand work.

But there are endless discussions about the guitar sounding dead and lifeless if a CNC machine touches it. What nonsense...just absolute nonsense. These are the same people that complain that high end, boutique guitars cost many thousands of dollars. Well, if I put 100+ hours and $600 in materials and hardware into a guitar, guess what...you can't have it for $1000.

I've generally been fortunate that most people in the real world really don't care about any of this nonsense. They don't care if it's a guitar from 4 years ago when it really truly was mostly built by hand, or one from 2 years ago when I started getting better with jigs and did a lot on bandsaws, routers and tablesaws, or one this year that will be mostly roughed on the CNC with final neck/body contours done by hand. In my world, I'm 100% about end results and I consider all of these other concerns to be academic, at best.

That said, the more you do something, and the better you get at it, the easier it is to accomplish with less specialized tools, and that's a good thing. I'd be in big trouble if I constantly had to make jigs and fixtures for things that today I can just grab a knife, or a chisel, and just quickly do by hand and by eye. I don't see that as being a goal, though. It's just something that happens. I think we'd loose a lot of beginners if they had to master hand tool skills before actually building something. I think people should just build however it is they can.

[Sean Hughto]

Brings to mind that George Carlin joke about driving:

'Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?'

Judgments like this are human nature, I guess. Perhaps it is obvious to every reader here, but my point has been simply to let any newbies know: No one should think twice about whether it is "cheating" or somehow "less than" by using power or sandpaper or a specialty tool or a slower wood removal process, etc. Make stuff and have fun.

[Sean Hughto]

Here here, well stated, John. Nice post.

[Andy Cree]

As one with limited tools and even more limited skill, I could not go without a router plane. I think I use it just about every time I make something. I bought a shoulder plane some time ago and I think I have used it once, mainly because I use the router plane in its place more often. If I do not saw a straight enough, I used a shooting board, a router plane, etc. to get me back where I need to be so I can move on. I wish I could put things together right off of a handsaw, but I can't and might never will. But for me, I like tools and using another hand tool is part of the fun.

Andy

[Brian Holcombe]

Or is it??? Eh?

[John Coloccia]

As one with limited tools and even more limited skill, I could not go without a router plane. I think I use it just about every time I make something. I bought a shoulder plane some time ago and I think I have used it once, mainly because I use the router plane in its place more often. If I do not saw a straight enough, I used a shooting board, a router plane, etc. to get me back where I need to be so I can move on. I wish I could put things together right off of a handsaw, but I can't and might never will. But for me, I like tools and using another hand tool is part of the fun.

Andy

That's OK. I can't smooth anything out on the spindle sander or belt sander to save my life. I usually end up with all sorts of bumps, dips and gouges. I have to resort to shop made sanding blocks to really get it right. It's been years and I've just never gotten proficient at it! I see other people with complex shapes just take them over to various spindle sanders, belt sanders, etc and get exactly what they want. I cringe when I see that because I know I'd end up with just another piece of firewood. I'm also pretty sure that there are people that have seen me attack these same sorts of curves with edge tools and rasps, and wonder how in the heck I can carve that stuff, and wouldn't it be just SOOOOO much easier to take it over to the sander and do it like that? I think there must be some wiring in the brain somewhere that determines this sort of stuff.

[Tony Wilkins]

Brings to mind that George Carlin joke about driving:

'Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?'

Judgments like this are human nature, I guess. Perhaps it is obvious to every reader here, but my point has been simply to let any newbies know: No one should think twice about whether it is "cheating" or somehow "less than" by using power or sandpaper or a specialty tool or a slower wood removal process, etc. Make stuff and have fun.

Carlin - man I miss his wit - but "I saw like old people &#%@, slow and sloppy" ;)

[Graham Haydon]

'Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?'

Love it!

[Chris Griggs]

I love router planes. You can have mine when you pull it form my cold dead hand. Even though its not my preferred way to trim tenons anymore, I love it. It is always the ace up the sleeve, not only great for stopped work but helpful anywhere I need to be bailed out becasue of my poor paring skills. I use it in in lots of places where others say to just use a chisel.

No one should feel bad or judged about their methods of work.

The most efficient method is the one the works the first time. Having to remake an entire component is almost always slower. People should use what ever tool they want/need to get there. To me discussion about things like sawing to lines and not relying on tools/methods that might be slower is about personal goals surrounding the development of skill and efficiency. My buddy Paul who I'm working on my workbench 2.0 can attest to just how slowly and anally I work. The "craftsmanship of risk" is something I need to constantly push myself to embrace in even the smallest way (I love certainty much more than risk), but forcing myself to take risks and make mistakes has been very helpful to me. That's just me and my personal reflection/experience/goals, but given how beneficial taking more risks has been to me, I do encourage others to consider how risk might help them in the long run...but that's all it is, a consideration. obviously, whether or not they do is totally up to them and their desires.

[Brian Holcombe]

I'll share my recent experience, I'm building box frames for a local artist who is also a good friend. The inner frame which attaches to the canvas stretchers are simply made with half-lap joints, then the outside is rabbeted for the external frame to attach.

Normally I prefer to creep up to the fit, but in this case we're talking about a total of 240 fits (8 per frame). So, to save my sanity I'm sawing to the line. When I do the glue up I dry fit first and so far, worst case scenario I've had to slide a veneer into the fit to tighten it up.

The moral to my story, if you use a lot of oak, walnut, maple, cherry, ect, keep some veneer on hand of each wood, it comes in handy for fixing small errors.

[Chris Griggs]

I

The moral to my story, if you use a lot of oak, walnut, maple, cherry, ect, keep some veneer on hand of each wood, it comes in handy for fixing small errors.

You can say that again! Much to my surprise, one of the biggest contributions my bandsaw has made to my shop is providing me with an endless supply of shims and veneer for making repairs.

[Daniel Rode]

I believe that most craft-like skills can learned and mastered through effort and practice over time. But as a part-time woodworker, I don't have the time to concentrate on getting really good at everything. So I compensate. I pick and choose what I think is important and/or enjoyable and concentrate on those things. For the remainder, I find work-arounds. Maybe I use a specialized tool, or a power tool or even buy a pre-made component.

For example, I do rough dimensioning with power saw, jointer and planer. It's fast, accurate and familiar. This allows me to spend my limited time using hand tools on joinery, fitting smoothing and some shaping. The router plane is a little bit of both for me. It's a tool for automation but not a power tool. In fact, I'll be using it primarily to cleanup after power tool work.

Money is also a limiting factor. These tools are not an investment for me, the are an expense. I'm fairly new to hand tools and so I only have a small (but growing) number of tools to choose from. Sawing to the line is a nice idea but first and foremost, one must have the saw, then learn how to use it and finally, saw to the line of a tenon.

I think some thought should be given to woodworking goals. My main goal is to make things from wood, furniture mostly, as a hobby. I'm not a tool collector, I don't rehab tools unless I have to, and I have no goal to work exclusively with hand tools. I've made the choice to incorporate hand tools because they work better in many cases than the powered alternative and I enjoy the quiet intimacy they foster.

On this note, I'm making tables and these tables have mortises. Above all else, I want clean well fit joints so that my tables are strong and attractive. That priority affects my other decisions, like chisel and saw vs stacked dado and router plane.

[David Weaver]

Cosman's got his thing. I have some of his videos. They're quite good, actually. I think he's a great teacher. Where I draw the line, generally speaking, is criticizing one method over another. I run across this in the guitar world BIG time. I've started using CNC to help in the shop. There are lots of people out there that think you just stick in a piece of wood, push a button, and out pops a guitar. Well, even if that's how it worked, so what? It's still my design. My ergonomics. My sound. That ISN'T how it works, btw. It's more like you get some rough parts that still need a lot of handwork, fitting, etc...not a whole lot different than pushing a router around one of my templates, only it does the pushing and I can be off doing other things that really benefit from hand work.

All of the misinformation in the guitar world made it confusing for me when I was a buyer of guitars and had not yet begun woodworking. At this point, if I ever want to get another guitar and don't decide to make one myself, I will go to several stores and play guitars off the rack and buy whatever is reasonable quality and sounds good. I've gotten several high-dollar guitars from known makers that were duds because I bought into their explanation of all of the virtues. By far, the loudest and most pleasing (not necessarily two things that go together, but in this case they did) acoustic guitar I've ever had was a $699 guitar that was branded washburn USA about 20 years ago. No clue who actually made the guitars for them, doesn't matter. The biggest letdown was a martin d28 that had perfect looking wood. the best acoustic guitar I've ever played has a bolt on neck - it's under my bed now. It was the kind of guitar that you'd figure for the price that you'd not get a bolt on neck, but it is made top shelf. I don't know if they use CNC, but I understand collings does and collings gets huge money for some fairly plain guitars - I haven't ever seen anyone complain about their tone or how much life they have, though.

George and I have talked about this stuff a little offline. I only have a perspective as a buyer. If I ever become a buyer again, I'll will have much plainer guitars, and could care less if one guy bends one side and another guy bends the next. Or if it was from a smaller one-man shop like yours, you can remove the bulk of the material with a boat propeller if you'd like, as long as the guitar plays well and sounds good.

CNC may have gotten a bad name at first because of some of the SAGA/Samick/Cort or whoever was making all of those guitars that had a huge square heel that nobody gave appropriate attention to getting rid of.

It's sort of like ugly wood. If I could get an ugly wood guitar really cheap that sounded great, I'd be on it.

To switch the subject a little about losing members, I think warren summed something up elsewhere about woodworkers 200 years ago, that by the time they had technical competence, they also had design competence. I think lack of the latter causes people to peter out in the hobby.

[Brian Holcombe]

I would argue that the perceived competence in design of the layman was actually just them fallowing suit of the taste makers. As a woodworker of the time you probably apprenticed at a shop and took up their house style which was a combination of industry trend and the master craftsman's personal taste.

Much like today, I'm sure woodworkers who work for the majors are heavily influenced by what they're building. Similar in design fields such as architecture, the overwhelming style of the past 100 years was created and evolved by a handful of architects and in 200-300 years when the extent of the their influence is mottled by time I expect that architects and craftsman will look back and think that they all had an inherent ability to create wonderful design work.

[David Weaver]

I would argue that the perceived competence in design of the layman was actually just them fallowing suit of the taste makers. As a woodworker of the time you probably apprenticed at a shop and took up their house style which was a combination of industry trend and the master craftsman's personal taste.


Regardless of whether they were just doing what they were supposed to do back then, they could've designed elements that could be pleasing to the eye. Some of that is a matter of opinion, but there are levels of design where it becomes less opinion and if you polled a group of people a better design would always win as more attractive (be it proportions, lines, etc that create the issue).

As amateurs, we don't really have much design influence taught to us, we wait for sketch up plans or something to copy, but designing something tasteful that doesn't have an element or two where people go "ew, that doesn't look right" is not something most woodworkers can do, and it's not very well taught because what's taught to newbies now is what sells, I guess.

I don't know anything about architecture, but I'd imagine the goals now are much different than they were 200 years ago, and aesthetics does take somewhat of a back seat to other things that garner subsidies, future tax breaks and grants.

[Brian Holcombe]

I understand your position, but mind you, a lot of people today are emulating what they consider great design, much as was done back then.

Nakashima, Maloof, Krenov, Mogens Koch, Hans Wegner, Greene and Greene, Mackintosh, Wright, Stickley and Morris are just some of many who have used exposed joinery in their design work and who have had a great influence of what's being created today.

My opinion is that people want to see it, done subtly, because it helps to reassure them that the piece is of sound build. In the days when the federal style was the preferred style the country had not gone through the industrial revolution, which largely served to destroy the consumers confidence in what was below the surface in what they're purchasing, so the consumer was dealing directly with the shop building their furniture and could see first hand the kind of quality invested in it.

[David Weaver]

Yeah, with the exception of maloof, I consider most of that stuff pretty nasty -the kind of stuff people might build in another forum on here when they go nuts with a hollow chisel mortiser or a multi router. Esp. stickley, Grossy and Grossy, krenov's tall and skinny chests of spalted wood and little utility (though they don't look like mortiser run amok) and nakashimas hunk-o-expensive-wood-for-big-price..There's not much that was designed to be made with mixed in metal structural parts or designed to be made in the machine era or industrial design era that looks like something I'd want to make.

I do like maloof's chairs, though, but have no interest in ever trying to make a copy, and I have no regard fo other peoples' intellectual property when it comes to building something for myself. I'll build whatever I want.

I'd imagine my grandparents were of the generation where you verified that a local guy did what you paid for by pulling the drawers out and looking at them, and eyeballing to make sure that the joinery appeared to be glued or pinned and not screwed or worse. They were the last generation in my family to commission any nice furniture, my parents have had a good eye and bought stuff that is close to 200 years old and that has very thoughtful work and design. I'm not sure who clued them in, but they have picked well - I don't even know if they'd have had the same option my grandparents did as the idea of a local guy making nice furniture was probably dead by then, and the new thing in town was the unfinished furniture place that built stuff (very plain stuff) in house that you could sand and stain yourself.

We are overrun here with watered down "amish" furniture designs that are sometimes made by amish and sometimes not. Some of it is reasonably decent looking, but most of it is blocky with poorly finished parts on it somewhere (bandsawn parts on chairs that you can tell they were bandsawn, etc) - it's not the quality of furniture my grandparents bought, but I'm sure in relative terms its less expensive. It's main virtue is that it is mostly wood.

[Daniel Rode]

I'm no expert in furniture or any other type of design. Despite my lack of knowledge, it's something I'm quite interested in.

There are aspects of design that are very subjective and others that are more universal and general. I very much like some of the elements Stickley used and the overall designs but I've never wanted a copy of any specific piece. The same for G&G. The tables I'm building now are very much in the Stickley style but I drew them up without referencing any particular design of his. I happen to enjoy building then and having them in my home.

I find Amish, country or similar style furniture to be utterly unattractive. Despite watching Norm build Shaker stuff for decades, I still don't like it. However, I can appreciate the best of it for it's simplicity, proportions and utility.

I think balance and proportion or most often the key but they are just tools. One can design attractive pieces by following the "rules" or by breaking the same rules. I don't however believe that there is a right or wrong in design. Design is the visual language. Are we judging the intent or the execution; the message or the grammar? In addition, furniture often has a practical element. A dresser needs to provide storage for clothes and a bookshelf should be able to hold books. I can objectively determine that bookshelf holds books and doesn't tip over but it's a whole lot harder to determine if it's aesthetic design is successful. What did the designer intend and how well was that executed?

The last and most subjective point is whether it's attractive or not. FLW was mentioned earlier. I love the aesthetic and the ideas that drive it but I wouldn't want to live or work in anything he designed. I appreciate his work as art. Similarly, I love the design of a classic highboy but I don't want one in my home.

Again, I don't know much but the discussion is really interesting.

[David Weaver]

The Amish take on shaker style is like fattened up and rounded off. I guess that's a utility thing, if you've ever been in amish folks' houses (not talking about woodworkers, just amish folks in general), the appointments are pretty spartan and there may be a couple of pieces of floral furniture mixed with 1980s oak furniture bits.

I don't intend for anyone else to agree with the stuff I like, just stating it as a matter of discussion. The things made 200 years ago on the plainer side (e.g., a watered down chippendale chest with tasteful mouldings top and bottom) are very nice things to build by hand, and can be built very crisply without a bunch of hassle from styles that were intended to be made in a factory. They're a nice alternative if someone is coming up uninspired with a lot of the modern dovetail overload, displayed end grain, etc. stuff.

[Brian Holcombe]

Much of those I've mentioned, with exception to the professional amateurs, designed in the classical canon (classical proportions). Dislike the style if you prefer, but it is good design and worthy of classification of such. I admire the 18th century masterworks along with French Art Deco, ect, doesn't mean I want to build or own them.

Examples of pieces designed or built in the last 100 years that I find enjoyable;

283274
283275
283276
283277
283278

[Sean Hughto]

One cannot judge the aesthetic quality of things in categories of stuff one dislikes. If you hate jazz music, you cannot judge whether one jazz piece is great and another weak. If you hate all red wine, you cannot meaningfully judge a good cab from a bad. Now you can say that jazz and wine are things you dislike, and that is valid. But your personal dislike is not informative about the relative quality of specific example of wine or song. You really need to be a lover - a connoisseur - of something to judge examples of that thing.

[David Weaver]

Much of those I've mentioned, with exception to the professional amateurs, designed in the classical canon (classical proportions). Dislike the style if you prefer, but it is good design and worthy of classification of such. I admire the 18th century masterworks along with French Art Deco, ect, doesn't mean I want to build or own them.

Yes, I know that the designers were accomplished and knew what they were doing, I just don't like the result (including any of the pictures). There are things from 200 years ago that I don't like, either, but not generally wholesale like most of the stuff designed in the last 100 years. It can be cool when an entire house is kept original (which I guess is probably not that common for industrial design prior to 1950, but there's some folks with all original houses from late 50s and early 60s).

There is probably one thing true in design, you have to do something different if you want to make a lot money, and most of the designers we remember have had commercial success, and commercial success doesn't usually come by accident. If I was working for pay (which will never happen), I'd probably have a different design sense, because you can get a chest of drawers for $1000 that you probably wouldn't dream of making for yourself at that price, but some of the other junk that's made now and called original design can bring several thousand dollars. It's the era of "the customer's always ripe" for design at this point, at least in terms of the stuff offered to the general public without being someone known to have deep pockets. By that, I mean you can order yourself up any number of $5,000 chairs that aren't expensive to produce, but if you want to get to one-off stuff costing a multiple of that, you have to first find someone who is doing it and sometimes wealthy customers don't like to share information about who does work for them.

[Chris Griggs]

Somewhat off topic, but....

RE: Shaker. I think its a misunderstood form (at least among lay people...not necessarily among woodworkers). Anything that is "American looking" in origin, that is not overly adorned, and doesn't have a lot of curves gets called Shaker. I dislike a lot of stuff called "Amish", "Shaker", and "country", but I love a great deal of authentic Shaker stuff as well as much of the pre 1900 vernacular and country furniture.

Here are some example of Shaker furniture from the Phila Museum of Art....some of it is pretty typical Shaker...some may surprise you...the use contrasting figure and tone in the second photo was a of particular surprise to me. Not that Daniel or anyone else has to like it or even appreciate it for that matter (I don't love everything Shaker)...I just find that what gets called Shaker and what is Shaker are often different.

283281 283279 283280

[Daniel Rode]

The center image is a little unusual in that it has more decorative elements than I'm used to seeing. That cabinet is actually quite striking. IIRC, adornment was considered frivolous at best. They strove for utility and simplicity. Veneering was worse that frivolous, it was considered dishonest.

I love their innovation and balance of simple elegance and robust construction. Many of the pieces have wonderful proportions as do those in the images you posted. However, the overly simple designs leave me dissatisfied. I appreciate the design, I just don't like it.

[Chris Griggs]

The center image is a little unusual in that it has more decorative elements than I'm used to seeing. That cabinet is actually quite striking. IIRC, adornment was considered frivolous at best. They strove for utility and simplicity. Veneering was worse that frivolous, it was considered dishonest.


Yeah, they seemed to have stuck to that in general, but I'm learning that there are examples where they started to adorn things more. I really like those examples, and think they strike a nice balance. Next time I go to the Phila Museum I need to read the cards and see when and where that sewing cabinet was made.

I also like that they some how managed to pull off weird proportions and asymmetrical drawer arrangements i find aesthetically pleasing (for reasons I can't explain).




I love their innovation and balance of simple elegance and robust construction. Many of the pieces have wonderful proportions as do those in the images you posted. However, the overly simple designs leave me dissatisfied. I appreciate the design, I just don't like it.

Certainly, nothing wrong with that. No requirement to like it. I certainly don't like it 100% of the time.

[James Conrad]

Well, Derek started quite a topic that has jumped all over the place. Whether amateur or accomplished craftsman the end goal of our work is to create. What tools that are used to get there matters little, what matters is a final creative result, one that you can be proud of, that others may find pleasure in and is produced honestly. A number of years ago my life revolved around photography, art photography with large format cameras. My tools were chemicals, film, lenses, paper, shutters, and 8x10 and 12x20 cameras… In order for me to be free so that I could create, I had to become skilled with my tools so that they became secondary to what mattered - the journey and personal growth that came along with creating. The fact that someone else may find pleasure in my work was a major bonus. I adopted the same approach as a woodworker and craftsman. Whatever tools you choose in your work, you must become skilled with their use to be free from them so that your focus can be on what is being created. Along with this it is important to understand the history of your craft, where it has been and where it is going. Where you go in your journey as a woodworker is up to you, but whatever tools you choose proficiency will allow you to be more creative. The more you create with that freedom from your tools you grow personally as does your creative vision.


With all the criticism that can be leveled at show circuit woodworkers, and provided they are being honest in their endeavors, they choose the type of tools, processes, projects and design, often along the squared off mission or shaker styles for a reason. (I am by no means pigeon holing those styles) For entry level woodworkers who’s skills, vision and growth is at the begining of their journey, this design is easy to understand visually and in construction. They can be given credit for at least creating the spark to get the tinder glowing in those people. The more time you spend woodworking from there, you move on, you find other forms, proportions and designs pleasing as a natural process in growing as a person and woodworker. This can also be seen in how someone may view art and where they are in that journey. The large impressive landscapes of Ansel Adams are widely appreciated and easy to comprehend, but few know that he was really only productive visually for 12 to 15 years. Compared to his contemporary Edward Weston, who was productive during his entire life as a photographer, his work stands tall over Adams visually and in complexity and content. The point being, Weston continued to grow and see which is evident in his work, and his work is less likely to be fully appreciated by someone in the beginning of their journey. This can be paralleled in accomplished woodworkers contributions of today and the masters of the past. How relevant is their work, how productive have they been, is their work still widely collected, are they known for more than just a single chair design, or sharpening technique? I always cringe a little when I see the title “Master” applied to contemporaries as it really should only be awarded by historians and curators. But, I am headed down a topic for another thread perhaps.


So, use whatever tools you desire, learn the history of employing those tools, become proficient and skilled with those tools, and in turn whatever you create will be from the personal journey and not from the means. If you are more skilled at using a router plane instead of paring chisel, use whichever gives you the freedom to create, the rest will follow.

[Jack Curtis]

As one with limited tools and even more limited skill, I could not go without a router plane. I think I use it just about every time I make something. I bought a shoulder plane some time ago and I think I have used it once, mainly because I use the router plane in its place more often. If I do not saw a straight enough, I used a shooting board, a router plane, etc. to get me back where I need to be so I can move on....

I don't care that others use router planes, they're fine tools. I just find them inefficient due to setup time and the constant blade adjustment required, too many bits and pieces to assemble before use. Or maybe it's because I started woodworking before LV designed theirs. :)

[Brian Holcombe]

I actually piled a router plane onto a large order a few weeks back in sort of a 'what the heck' moment. I'm glad to see they're so popular…I receive it today.

[Steve Voigt]

Now, understand that my take on this is going to be very different than most of you. I used to be a general contractor. As such, I did plenty of trim work and some built-ins. However, I always wanted to be able to do some real woodworking. I kept making sure I had some space for it wherever I lived, but I just never found the time.

Then, in March of '08 I contracted a viral respiratory infection that nearly took my life. After 8-9 months, I was finally out of the woods and more than ready to start my recovery. However, during my physical therapy sessions, I began experiencing a weird kind of dizziness. I call it "spatial disorientation". I also found my leg losing sensitivity and awkward to move. As my neurologist performed test after test, my condition continued to worsen. Eventually I lost all feeling and function in my right leg and a reduction of fine motor control in my right arm and the "spatial disorientation" reared it's head whenever I was stressed or tired. Now in a wheelchair, I went to IU Medical Center, Cleveland Clinic, John's Hopkins, and finally to Mayo Clinic. It turns out I have something called Transverse Myelitis. It is a Immuno-Neurological disease in the same family as MS. There is no cure, and no one knows what causes it, however a large percentage of people have had a viral respiratory infection not too long before contracting the disease…


Stew, I meant to reply to this earlier and it slipped my mind. Your story is inspiring, and humbling. I'd like to think that if I were in your circumstances, I'd be as courageous as you are, but somehow I doubt it. Your post definitely puts petty arguments about dovetailing into proper perspective…hope you keep on keepin' on.

- Steve

[Daniel Rode]

Steve's post reminded me that I wanted to respond to yours. This thread is so long, I'm having trouble keeping up :)

I think you captured exactly why I like working with hand tools. It makes me feel closer to my work. It's quiet and intimate and there's a direct and tangible connection between my actions and the changes to the wood. I have to read the grain and then work with what it gives me.


What I have found is that working with hand tools makes me feel closer to my work; somehow more directly involved. That is how woodworking and the necessary tools required works for me, with my level of skills and capabilities. Every person is unique. Each has his or her own types of projects, physical capabilities, skill level, etc. Those are the things that make woodworking such a personalized hobby/profession. Each Maker is unique. What tools and techniques they use to achieve their goals is up to them. It is the end result and the personal satisfaction that matters.

[Stew Hagerty]

Stew, I meant to reply to this earlier and it slipped my mind. Your story is inspiring, and humbling. I'd like to think that if I were in your circumstances, I'd be as courageous as you are, but somehow I doubt it. Your post definitely puts petty arguments about dovetailing into proper perspective…hope you keep on keepin' on.

- Steve

Thank you Steve. My whole point was that it really doesn't matter. When it's all said and done, does a pared dovetail look or hold any better or worse than a cut dovetail as long as both are well made? The simple answer is no. The only difference is in the personal preferences of the maker. Now those preferences in my case are partly physical. On good days, I have enough control in my arm (of course it figures that I'm right handed) to cut dovetails reasonably well with little to no paring required. On other days I can't, so I cut then pare. Other makers preferences my be skill level, tool collection, or simply that's the way they learned. Speaking of tool collection... To me that has something to do with the way I do things too. I mean, who doesn't like new tools (new to the person, not necessarily new in age). And if you have a tool, why not use it. It's fun. Isn't that why so many of us do this? Because it's fun?

Anyway... Thanks again Steve. I do what I can, when I can, and enjoy every minute of it.
___________________________________________

Oh, and by the way. Daniel, that is what makes woodworking such a calming pastime. We are not alone in our feelings about working with our hands. So many fellow woodworker that I've spoken with express the same sentiment.

[Mike Holbrook]

Well said Stew,

I think woodworking is a unique "art form" in that there are so many tools and materials/mediums that one can work with. Certainly ones unique physical and mental characteristics combined with ones preferences in both tools and materials combine to produce an almost infinite way to create things that are not only pleasing to the eye but can fill functional requirements in our real world as well. I think you make an important point about the fun thing too. I have recently started working with a little different material/medium, green wood. I have many ways I might justify that preference but in the end I just find it more fun to work in a softer easier to work medium, especially with hand tools.

[Julie Moriarty]

Cosman's got his thing. I have some of his videos. They're quite good, actually. I think he's a great teacher. Where I draw the line, generally speaking, is criticizing one method over another. I run across this in the guitar world BIG time. I've started using CNC to help in the shop. There are lots of people out there that think you just stick in a piece of wood, push a button, and out pops a guitar. Well, even if that's how it worked, so what? It's still my design. My ergonomics. My sound. That ISN'T how it works, btw. It's more like you get some rough parts that still need a lot of handwork, fitting, etc...not a whole lot different than pushing a router around one of my templates, only it does the pushing and I can be off doing other things that really benefit from hand work.

But there are endless discussions about the guitar sounding dead and lifeless if a CNC machine touches it. What nonsense...just absolute nonsense. These are the same people that complain that high end, boutique guitars cost many thousands of dollars. Well, if I put 100+ hours and $600 in materials and hardware into a guitar, guess what...you can't have it for $1000.

I've generally been fortunate that most people in the real world really don't care about any of this nonsense. They don't care if it's a guitar from 4 years ago when it really truly was mostly built by hand, or one from 2 years ago when I started getting better with jigs and did a lot on bandsaws, routers and tablesaws, or one this year that will be mostly roughed on the CNC with final neck/body contours done by hand. In my world, I'm 100% about end results and I consider all of these other concerns to be academic, at best.

That said, the more you do something, and the better you get at it, the easier it is to accomplish with less specialized tools, and that's a good thing. I'd be in big trouble if I constantly had to make jigs and fixtures for things that today I can just grab a knife, or a chisel, and just quickly do by hand and by eye. I don't see that as being a goal, though. It's just something that happens. I think we'd loose a lot of beginners if they had to master hand tool skills before actually building something. I think people should just build however it is they can.

"the more you do something, and the better you get"

And that is it.

[george wilson]

Great things could be accomplished with CNC. The trouble is that most people oriented into thinking in that line just do not also have the aesthetic sense which could be combined with using the most modern manufacturing methods. Their brains are just coming from an entirely different place.