Official Luthiers Forum!

I've noticed a wide variety in the way stained mahogany guitars look. On one end you've got guitars like the Martin 15 series that have a dull and muddy look to the mahogany, the wood looks completely flat and doesn't catch the light at all. I used to think this was simply caused by staining the wood directly and that if you wanted the wood to catch the light you have to tint the finish but...

I recently stained the mahogany back,sides, and neck on my first build with aniline dyes dissolved in alcohol. I'm still waiting on the tru-oil I to cure but even without polishing it yet I've noticed the mahogany really catches the light and changes as you turn it in the light, it's very iridescent. On the nitro finished mahogany neck on my Santa Cruz it catches the light a little but not like the guitar I'm building.

Is it in the stain? I know the top coat will affect this, a satin finish obviously is going to make the wood underneath look flatter but even my Santa Cruz with gloss nitro doesn't look very iridescent. Is it the clarity of the stain? The the alcohol mixed stain I made looks very translucent in the jar. I could imagine some stains having a paint like quality that would dull the look of the wood.

_________________
Jeremy Douglas

A lot of things, type if stain. type of application and of course top coat media and sheen. I think Martin did omay still used a past type stain on mahogany.

Pure conjecture here. It could be that the lower end mahogany finishes use pore filler over bare wood, while the higher end could use stain, then sealer, then filler. The former would tend to stain the wood with filler, which is not the most translucent of finishing materials, while the latter would keep the filler in the pores only, leaving translucent stain on the surface.

Pat

_________________
formerly known around here as burbank
_________________

http://www.patfosterguitars.com

Thanks for the replies. The paste not letting light through makes sense. Todd, I was totally unaware there was a difference between stain and dye. So it turns out I didn't stain the wood I actually dyed it and that's why it has those nice reflective properties.

_________________
Jeremy Douglas

Actually you can stain it and get those same properties. I think what was said is a paste filler will flatten the depth of the grain and thus make it less deep and reflective. In a HS shop class the shop teacher had me grain fill with a stain colored paste. I recall with great disappointment how my beautiful mahogany bookcase had turned dull and lifeless. No amount of finish sanding/finish/buffing could restore the luster I had seen in the wood before filling. Paste filler is fast, but not necessarily the best looking.

I was refering to this part "Dyeing the wood - versus staining - also makes a difference, with dyes being ground to much smaller particle size. Dye particles are so small that they are carried into the wood's structure, rather than laying on top of it or clogging pores."

Maybe I misunderstood but I took it to mean the dye wouldn't impair the light reflection while the stain covered the surfaced and impaired the apparent depth of figure.

_________________
Jeremy Douglas

With any species, some boards just exhibit more luster than other boards. Also, with regard to staining wood directly and pore filling, it's all in the technique. You can get incredible results staining the wood, dying the wood, staining while filling, filling clear, or shooting tints in your finish layers. They can all be fabulous. Sometimes opinions are stated so many times for so many years that they tend to be accepted as gospel. And a lot of the time, they are accurate. But not always. Wood coloring-staining-tinting-dying-pore filling-etc. etc. etc. is one such example. It's not necessarily the medium. It's the technique. I'll say it again: They can ALL be fabulous.
Patrick

A stain that is a "masking" stain can cover the grain, but most stains enhance the grain and don't hide it. I've had the opposite experience, in that dyes have dulled the look by making the wood more uniform rather than enhancing the differences. I think it depends on application. But I've found that if a coloring agent attaches to the soft and hard sections of grain evenly, then the pattern of grain is more masked. I've found, by and large, that stains attach to the soft parts of the grain more than the hard, thus enhancing the look. My personal experience, your mileage may vary.

I agree with the sentiment that it's never a bad idea to test out on a scrap piece of wood. My shop is "littered" with scrap wood with stain and finish samples. All marked up on the back indicating what I did. My wife once asked "Do you need all these stains?" I responded "Yes."

As to my comment on paste fillers, I have not used a paste filler that didn't flatten the look of the wood. That's the intent as far as I am aware. There are other fillers that fill and don't obscure the depth of the grain. In effect they are clear and let the depth show and allow you to form a "smooth as glass" finish on the wood.

Hi, Jeremy. Todd and Joe are both giving great advice by urging you to try a range of materials and techniques. Your oil over dye treatment is obviously working for you, and I suspect there are other systems that would work for you, too. You'll find some that won't be to your liking. I probably drew the discussion a bit off topic, without intending to do so. To answer your first question, the difference might be in the wood itself, it might be in the materials, and it might be in the application of the materials. There's a lot at play here, and it's true that what is acceptable to one person might not suit another person. Let us see your instrument when it's finished!
Patrick

What year is the Santa Cruz, I have worked with them on a new stain/dye that is now in full swing at the production shop. It gives the POP you are talking about. The stain they used for many years is now gone the company that made it is gone, so SCGC was working with some other stains for a couple of years and as of about 3 months ago I have found a stain that we feel looks great. It is on all the new mahogany necks and mahogany bodys. Just a little info to add to the topic.

It's an '02

_________________
Jeremy Douglas

from my experience there are two types of stains...penetrating and wiping....the penetrating is what gives depth and luster and wiping has always looked dull and lifeless to me...I admit these are terms I am familiar with and may not be the correct terms you all would use....

one can also get a dull effect by mixing actual stain solids from an oil based product into the lacquer (yes, this actually works as long as you don't put too much and make sure to use only the solids from the bottom of the can...I had to do it one night when something went really wacko and decided to try that as I had no compatible toners..there was a little reaction but the lacquer solvents 'burned' away the oil based solvents while I was mixing it up and way before it got shot onto the wood..weirdest thing I've ever seen, woods that I had hand picked to match and that looked great when wiping down with mineral spirits to decontaminate, yet one piece of HOG turned neon yellow and another went pink with green streaks... ). after I got done matching the colors the pieces were a tad dull, but in the big picture matched the rest of the bar very nicely

That would have the Clear water color company "Smooth and simple" Antique Cherry stain on it. A good stain for production. I put it on about 6000+ necks but the stain SCGC is using as of November of 2008 looks more like something a high end, non-production, guitar would have.

Great looking neck wood is always a plus with any stain

Beware adding oil based pigment stains to lacquer. The stain affects adhesion and the final hardness of the product. I've seen finishers do it to make a quick and dirty toner coat for cabinets, but I would never do it on something I wanted to have a "hard" finish (like a guitar's).

I agree that you should beware adding oil based pigment stains to lacquer. MEK Dye is one of the best things to add to lacquer, it will not fade and the colors look great. Just be safe with it! Very safe.

You can get the pigments out of a oil based stain by putting them in a coffee filter and washing with lacquer thinner. Let it dry and you'll have fairly pure pigment.

Cool, the neck looks good but I do think something with more depth would look better. I'll have to look for the stained mahogany next time I play some new Cruzes.

_________________
Jeremy Douglas

I just wanted to clarify on the stain added to lacquer concept...for one thing I don't like the look, because as I noted it kind of dulled the apparent depth of the wood. It was a desperate move made @ 2 am and only done to two pieces of moulding that went wacko when vinyl sander sealer was applied...I carefully masked off the rest of the project and sprayed 2 thin coats (I think, this was 5 years ago) of sealer with the stain solids having been mixed into the lacquer...the way I did it was to scrape some of the solids off the bottom of a can of cherry stain, let the liquid drip off and then stuck the stick into a cup of lacquer I was mixing up, stirred it around and then shot it...I did notice a little teeny bit of reaction in the mixing cup but that was all. As far as the comment about that technique softening up the lacquer, well I will take that to heart...I don't know if that aspect has that great of an effect, but I do know the bar I made is holding up very strong in the restaurant it resides in with no signs of finish failure (and this bar and its stained sister have received a lot of abuse by customers). As Todd adroitly points out, universal tints would have been a better move (and I have a fair selection of such along with some Behlens Solar-Lux stains that can be used as shaders in lacquers), but as noted it was late at night and I used what I had available.

I've never liked the look of opaque stains at all as I love the way natural grain looks in just about all woods. But there is a use for such toners, for example when finishing a large amount of wood that you want to have a nice consistent look (which can arguably be conceptualized as a cheap way of making sure the woodwork looks 'good'..I would argue that a good craftsman will sort through the materials and select pieces accordingly by color and grain pattern for application). In fact, I don't like stains at all unless a very light stain is used to simply make a basic attempt at equalizing some of the natural variations in woods. On the flip side, going for a natural finish (or close to...one of my favorite finishing schedules is to use minwax natural 'stain' to give some nice depth and shimmer to a product, basically a quick drying BLO effect that one can finish lacquer over the next day or so) can be dicey as different pieces of woods will react differently to finishes even when one uses the utmost care in selecting closely matching pieces. The point being I do respect the use of stains, though my personal preference is to make life hard on myself and avoid the practice.

I would think that with guitars the use of stains would not generally be needed unless one wants a darker look...the wood used is bookmatched from the same billet which means (leaving the concept of runout alone) that there should be no issue with different colors when finishing. Of course the sides and backs are not necessarily out of the same billet, but one would assume they are chosen to closely match each other and since they are not on the same geometric plane slight differences are negligible...

Great info guys. Thanks!

_________________
Jeremy Douglas