Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Wood for Queen Anne Dressing Table

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    San Anselmo, CA
    Posts
    323

    Wood for Queen Anne Dressing Table

    As I am going to the Lumberyard today, I'd like to pick some wood for a Queen Anne Dressing table (the wood will probably sit in the shop for the next six months till I start the project). As this will be my first period piece (a learning experience), I have a few questions.

    1-I'm going to use western (soft) curly maple and poplar as the secondary wood. Or, instead of soft, should I go with hard curly maple (about the same price)? I have never used maple in a project. I know--a subjective question!
    2-Should I use hard, unfigured maple for the legs? I don't see why not?

    Thx for your input.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    10,304
    To my eye, western maple (aka Bigleaf) is a different color than eastern maple. It is more copper-colored than eastern. If you're going to stain the maple, the color difference disappears, but if you're going to use a clear finish, you'll see it. Color differences are okay if you plan for it, but you do have to design for it.

    Your leg stock is likely to be 12/4 or the like. I rarely see western maple which is that thick. Dunno why.

    Instead of buying a whole plank of 12/4, you might want to buy turning squares. The boardfoot price is higher, but you buy only what you need. www.tablelegs.com is a good source.

    Macbeath's Berkeley store often has a good selection of curly western maple. It is usually only 4/4.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    2,854
    I build a lot of 18th century reproductions, but this is just my opinion:

    I wouldn't build your first piece out of maple. Any maple, whether it's called "soft", "hard" or otherwise is incredibly hard compared to the other "right" woods for Queen Anne style pieces - walnut, cherry, and in some rare cases, mahogany. There are definitely some strategies for successfully working maple with hand tools, but it's a lot tougher. Curly makes it tougher still.

    Any of these last three woods will be a whole lot easier and less frustrating to work, particularly with hand tools, for your first time out.

    Generally speaking, they're all available as 16/4 or 12/4 (for the legs) as well as the more usual 4/4 for the case. If you want authenticity, try to find a single board wide enough for the top. It's really rare to find a QA piece that has a glued-up top or sides.

  4. #4
    I'm with David. I'd stick with walnut, cherry or mahogany as your primary wood. I'd stay away from maple as a primary and a secondary wood as well. Maple was not a common secondary wood (or primary wood for that matter). There were plenty of pieces that used tiger maple as a primary wood but not nearly as many as were made with cherry, walnut & mahogany. Keep in mind that pieces from this period were basically all made on the east coast. If you want to stay true to the period, you would want to stick to east coast timbers. For the secondary woods this means tulip poplar, eastern white pine, and yellow pine. Of all these, I thing poplar works best with hand tools but EWP is really nice to work as well. Also, if you plan to add any carving to it at all, you will appreciate how well walnut, cherry & especially mahogany carve. Maple can be a bear to carve. It's just so darn hard.

  5. #5

    I am with everyone, except...

    I would use walnut. If you can't find English Walnut, then American Black Walnut would be the best choice. More existing examples in this wood.

    And don't forget to use Hide Glue.

    Stephen

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    San Anselmo, CA
    Posts
    323
    I went to MacBeath in Berkeley before getting a chance to read your replies--but they had a limited selection of Western maple, the hard curly stuff was also limited (and very$$), and there was no 12/4 for the cabrielle legs. So I got what I needed and will have to get the wood for the Queen Ann on another lumber run.

    The plans are from FWW and call for tiger maple--and overall it is a small piece. Based upon your replies--I'll make the piece in walnut--and if I can afford it, I'll get the hardware from Ball & Ball.

    thx again

  7. #7
    Hey Doug, good luck with your project, hope it goes well!! Which issue of FWW has this table in it? Im currently doing the QA lowboy in issue #201 in walnut. Almost ready for hardware and have been looking at Ball and Ball and Horton Brasses.
    If at first you don't succeed, look in the trash for the instructions.





  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    San Anselmo, CA
    Posts
    323
    Hey Jim,

    My plans are from the FWW book titled "Beds and Bedroom Furniture," 1997. The plans are by Norm Vandal.

    When you say issue 201--does that refer to a magazine? as I don't see an issue number on the book I have?

  9. #9
    Thats right Doug, magazine issue #201. I sure however that the plans from that book were probably also in the magazine at one time, just have to find out which issue!!
    If at first you don't succeed, look in the trash for the instructions.





  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    2,854
    Doug - the FWW issue numbers are on printed on the spine, at least since the 80's (not sure about the 1970's issues - I don't have those).

    Besides the ones mentioned, there's another source for hardware - Londonderry Brasses. Londonderry is the US source for brasses made by Optimum Brasses in the UK (you can buy direct from Optimum, but for a small order it's usually cheaper to get them from Londonderry because of the shipping).

    While I like and have used hardware from Horton and Ball & Ball, most of the hardware they make, in my opinion, has been modified a bit from the originals to fit modern sensibilities - generally, that means thicker, with perfect hole alignment. The ones from Londonderry are true to the originals - really thin, and in some respects, sort of coarse. The backs also look very much like the originals - they retain the texture from sand casting.

    BTW - the note on "turing blanks" is a good one. You can usually get 16/4 stock quite easily this way where it would otherwise be difficult to find it as wide boards. It also means you don't have to buy very much "extra", as a 12 footer will usually yield what you need for 4 legs.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •