Official Luthiers Forum!

Hesh,

I love BRW as much as anyone and have, and will continue to acquire it when the conditions seem appropriate.

My only point here is that whatever advantage (questionable considering the wood's expense and inherant lack of stability) we as individual makers have in offering this stuff out, it will not be sustainable over time. Thus I for one am concentrating on other things which I hope will set my guitars apart.

Best!

David I agree with you completely and my remarks were not directed at you or anyone specific for that matter.

A favor please?  If and when you find a suitable alternative would you please let me know  I agree that a continued reliance on BRW is unwise.

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

Vendors absolutely get duped by people who claim to have legal supplies where the paperwork is either faked or never shows up. Not sure how how someone can think otherwise. The term "paper trail" that I used was meant generically to mean the whole process of the acquisition of the wood, the cutting of the wood, the process of obtaining paperwork legally from the Bazilian government to certify it as pre-ban stumpwood etc. It's too convoluted, and opens up vendors to dubious folk who take advantage by having good faked paperwork and a credible sounding story. Ask the OLF vendors if any of them have purchased wood without 100% clear paperwork being provided. I won't name names, but I know it's happened.
In fact, ask if any have purchased from Rodrigo, whose wood is now in question, even though all of us thought for sure it was 100% legal. It may pan out to be so, but right now there's some suspicion.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying & selling legally obtained Brazilian Rosewood. The problem is knowing 100% for sure that it is legal.

I would argue that "Any wood seller at any experience level can certainly tell the difference between legal and illegal BRW". That's a pretty strong statement, but is really only an assumption, one that frankly can't be backed up with proof except to poll every wood vendor of every experience level to know for sure.

Also, to make blanket statements that almost all the BRW being sold on ebay is 100% illegal (btw, there's no such thing as 99% illegal...it either is or isn't) is also an assumption that a person may make, but there are probably a good number of legal sets being sold too. How many former luthiers are selling off wood on ebay? I know someone who bought a beautiful billet off eBay that was being sold as part of an estate liquidation. It's been in the country since the '60's, does that make it illegal? Certainly not.

Is the BRW that I have sitting in my shop illegal? Should I not believe the little 70 year old lady who sold it to me and told me that her husband bought it back in the early 60's, and that it had been sitting there untouched in her garage for all those years after he died? Frankly, it's become almost a witch hunt on some of this stuff. Not all BRW is bad or illegal. Instead of treating it all like contraband, treat it as a rare valuable resource that should be cherished if you're fortunate to get some in a legal manner, and if you can't be certain beyond a reasonable doubt, then don't buy it.

I've asked eBay vendors if they can provide paperwork for their wood. If they can provide the paperwork up front, I might consider buying, otherwise...I'm staying clear like anyone else. But what if the paperwork looked legitimate, but turned out to be fake? How would I know?

_________________
"I want to know what kind of pickups Vince Gill uses in his Tele, because if I had those, as good of a player as I am, I'm sure I could make it sound like that.
Only badly."

[QUOTE=Don Williams]
I would argue that "Any wood seller at any experience level can certainly tell the difference between legal and illegal BRW". That's a pretty strong statement, but is really only an assumption, one that frankly can't be backed up with proof except to poll every wood vendor of every experience level to know for sure. [/QUOTE]

You are right, Don..I stand corrected. Obviously their are wood sellers at a certain inexperienced level that cannot tell wood cut in 1991 (the last year of legal log milling) from wood cut in the past few years obtained from compression stump and root sources.

I don't think anyone could tell the difference between wood cut in 1989 and 1993 either...it's not like the wood has the year cut in it's DNA. All we can go on is paperwork, and the word of the seller that it was cut prior to 1991. Who makes the determination? the Brazil government is the only authenticating source. I mean, who can tell the difference between two trees cut a couple years apart, one legally, and the other illegally? They both look alike. The question can't be answered with a 100% degree of certainty except by the cutter, and then the certification by Brazil. Of course the export of said wood is where it gets hairy...

Now, to support everything else folks have been saying...
The only way to ensure that the wood is protected is to eliminate the desire to have it built into a new guitar. That's where we need to become salesmen to players, to offer alternatives and educate the customer base. There are plenty of woods that can give great results like Brazilian Rosewood, and we should try to do our part to steer folks in those directions. Unfortunately, a lot of those woods are becoming endangered as well.

<sigh>

I fear we will be having this kind of debate of most woods we like to use over the coming years.

_________________
"I want to know what kind of pickups Vince Gill uses in his Tele, because if I had those, as good of a player as I am, I'm sure I could make it sound like that.
Only badly."

Don, you know exactly what I mean without splitting those hairs. One cannot mistake stump wood from illegal straight bole cut timber cut in the past few years which is what this is all about.

You have certainly reminded me that there are wood sellers, wood seller wannabes and consumers who do not know what's up. My bad for giving to much credit.

You're welcome to the last word on this as I've got other things to do.

I probably should keep my mouth shut, since I'm likely to be misunderstood. But: what is the harm of dalbergia nigra becoming extinct, or found only in a few isolated spots and botanical gardens?

Stephen Gould (hardly a species abuser) wrote an essay many years ago about the disappearance of endangered species in which he argued that the mere loss of a species is not bad; the vast majority of all species that have existed are extinct, and it is part of natural history for this to occur. He said that for the extinction to be a bad thing, it must cause some harm to humans or at least other sentient beings.

To anticipate some responses, and suggest replies (not to draw conclusions so much as to get more quickly into the interesting issues):

1) It may be discovered to contain a cure for cancer, etc.
     reply: pure, unsupported speculation, and equally as true of any species of anything. Imagination about "what if" is not enough reason for preserving everything.

2) Future generations won't get to enjoy guitars made of it.
    reply: speculative, in that there appears to be a good chance future generations will be too busy trying to survive to worry about fine guitars [Old BR guitars may be valued mainly as paddles for the rafts used in what remains of the coastal cities.] Another answer: present enjoyment counts just as much as future enjoyment; perhaps more so when it is more certain than the future enjoyment; e.g., there may be other materials that are preferred in the future.

3) It's against the law to use it if cut post-ban. Illegality is reason enough.
   reply: not in itself sufficient reason. Helping runaway slaves was once against the law, too.

4) Use is bad for the people and animals where it grows.
     reply: a big assumption here about what is good for people we don't know very well. Use may well create an economic reason to preserve old forests, and prevent worse effects such as slash and burn agriculture.

Please don't flame me.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

sorry if some of my statements may be mis interpreted.

of course there are cases when leagle brw comes up on ebay.
but we all know that a large portion of the stock that comes from brazil is
dodgy.

as for the whole we should not use the stuff stance,i have a large
invontary of old stock wood available to me that i would not see made
into anything else but guitars it would be wastfull.

At the end of the day we will all have our own opinions on this matter and
we have to use our own discretion as to whether to use/sell/buy it or not.
but we are all adults and i am sure we can make educated decisions on
the
matter.

i think that larry is right any wood dealer worth his salt will tell you if you
have old growth/new growth or stumpwood stock.
what he wont be able to tell by looking is exatly when that wood was cut.
but if its stumpwood its likely to be post ban wood (not necisarily
ileagle).

anyway i think i have made my position clear and i have put a note on my
site to say that i will not be listing it due to ethical reasons.

this was a very hard decision for me and may do me more harm than
good in the long run but hey we have to stand by our ethics.

joel.

Howard I can't imagine anyone flaming you for the mention of Gould and his rather prolific works.  This is actually a very appropriate thing to consider when we are speaking of a species that may become extinct. 

Others of prominence have also argued that extinction of any species, including the human race, may be part of the natural order of things.

I'll throw this out there for it's philosophical value and it is not intended to be a reference to religion, any religion.

The original Buddha was reported to have said the following:  We all have 23 problems of which the nature of these problems we can do nothing about.  Should we somehow find a way to solve one of our individual 23 problems it will in short order be replaced by a new problem and again we will all have 23 problems.  Only now the new, replacement problem, may be worse then the problem that we somehow solved........

It is also recorded that he went on to say:  If you do not believe me then you my friends now have 24 problems........

So does interfering with the natural order of things, history, create new and potentially worse problems?  Perhaps.  Perhaps not.

Does the human race as a species and the foot print that we leave on this planet qualify as the natural order of things?  I don't know but I am practicing treading water and hope to see you on the boat Howard.  I am an excellent sailor....

_________________
Ann Arbor Guitars

Larry, ok, I apologize for splitting hairs...my bad.


Howard, I always like a philosopher's take on things. Stephen Gould's thoughts are interesting, but I would like to think that we have somehow been given stewardship over this earth and its resources. If we were to take that attitude, perhaps some of the great things of beauty in this world can be saved. I for one don't believe for a second that there is much in the world that the world itself would be better without. I realize that there is a certain degree of the survival of the fittest that goes on, and that little natural selection argument comes into play as well, but our part as humans can either destroy or preserve like no other species in history (that we are aware of) has been capable of, so in a sense it falls on us to be caretakers of what is, if for no other reason than the fact that we have the capacity to understand these things. With great power (knowledge) comes great responsibility. Just ask Spiderman.

_________________
"I want to know what kind of pickups Vince Gill uses in his Tele, because if I had those, as good of a player as I am, I'm sure I could make it sound like that.
Only badly."