Replies

1. 
   Lataxe | Dec 19, 2009 03:51pm | #1

   BB,

   The journey and getting there are inextricably twined - unless you don't want to ever arrive; or you hanker for instantaneous "travel" in science fiction machines (i.e no travel). We needn't rush but must finish.

   What method of travel? All of them and via diverse routes. Why stay with one method and get blase/bored with it? Unless one is a professional (time is money, etc.). Me, I like to play.

   Handtool vs machinetool methods for M&T:

   The former is harder to get right, takes longer and needs much more practice to achieve competance. Thus it gives a certain satisfaction (if and) when mastered. Handtools impart a certain imperfection (Pye "workmanship of risk = unique instances of each joint).

   Machine tool methods are quick but noisy; more accurate (unless one is a master craftsman with the handtools) but generally identical, with what some feel is a soulless uniformity. I like woodrat best for M&T, as it gives immaculate piston-fitters, which seems like a good attribute for a glue-based joint that is also often invisible, so needn't look unique (or look anything).

   For through, wedged M&Ts I like the chisel and saw (and would like a router plane even better). However, a long upcut spiral bit in a router can make the main hole for the mortise if it likes, as I am a poor chisel chopper.

   Here is how I feel at this moment in my woodworking history: machines for precision joints that do not show; handtools for show-joints (and surfaces) albeit at the cost of time/risk of more errors.

   If the recipient is both in a hurry and has modern tastes for factory-like items (the two - impatience and desire for purfekshun - often go to together) I use near 100% machine tools, for both speed and look.

   Lataxe, with his fingers in all the Pyes.

   PS I'm just coming to the end of a hall table made almost entirely with Dominoes - some 50 - 60 of the rascals! Now, how long would that number of handtool-made M&Ts take; and how many would I get wrong, resulting in wasted parts and timber?

1. 
   boilerbay | Dec 19, 2009 06:12pm | #3

   Lataxe,

   "Here is how I feel at this moment in my woodworking history: machines for precision joints that do not show; handtools for show-joints (and surfaces) albeit at the cost of time/risk of more errors."

   I think that is where I am now. A few tails, especially with the new old Kenyon where the show goes and fall back on long previous years to templates and whirring and noise where minor travesties to the dignity of stock can be tolerated in their hiding. The eyes requiring ever closer lenses and the huge lighted magnifiers interfering with the chisel strike and the lower back screaming, the end result being that to finish for a client leaves much pain whereas to do a wee hoose project with Mr. Leigh and Mr Festool leaves one in a condition to enjoy it. (physical conditions are not really that bad but I'm getting inklings of the future)

   As to speed I feel a little like the old Saturday Night Live John Belushi skit " Cheeseburger. Cheeseburger" No matter what the client wants, it's six months. Match sticks -6 months, Desk. 6 months.

   6 Months! 6 Months! We dun't do no stinkin speed here!

   I do, for the most part rather enjoy the journey more.

   BB

2. 
   RalphBarker | Dec 19, 2009 04:19pm | #2

   I'm thinking of building a
   I'm thinking of building a CNC machine that would pick hand tools off the wall and apply them to tasks with great precision. ;-)

   I'm about 50:50, hand vs. machine, mostly mood driven, since I have no production motivations.

1. 
   boilerbay | Dec 19, 2009 06:18pm | #4

   Ralph,
   I think you have a
   Ralph,

   I think you have a device there. Lataxe will have to give up those small Festoolies and commit his pension to such a proper toy. I assume you would design it as to leave hand tooled looks. Now If you could add the additional capabilities of doing it all through Sketch Up while sipping a single malt, you would have your fortune at hand.

   BB

3. 
   lwilliams | Dec 19, 2009 08:25pm | #5

   I think the whole thing is just nuts.

   An acquaintance, Mike (Gus) Gray, completed his apprenticeship in Great Britain a lot of years ago. One of the lessons he tries to get across to those he teaches today is what he calls "the rhythm of the bench." It's a phrase he says he heard or used often in his apprenticeship and later in the trade. It's all about how a competent craftsman works with well maintained tools at the deliberate pace the work requires. He won't look or feel rushed but the work will flow quickly and efficiently.

   I don't believe either the hand tool woodworker or the machine tool woodworker get any special license to produce sloppy work. Where does that nonsense come from? The woodworking trades have always promoted a culture of craftsmanship where good crisp work was universally expected.

   I think Fine Woodworking would be much better served by filling their pages with stuff about traditional trade practices rather than this "race" drivel. Woodworking isn't rocket science. Traditional trade practices evolved so that a person with just average ability can easily achieve excellent and efficient results if they just follow the appropriate techniques.

   I suspect most woodworkers would get far more benefit from spending their money with a teacher like Mike than on FWW subscriptions if this is any indication of the direction of the magazine. I'm sure you can find Mike or any number of other woodworking schools/teachers with Google.

1. 
   Lataxe | Dec 20, 2009 05:28am | #7

   Mr Williams (it is Sunday),

   Many interesting points in your post. Let's put aside, though, the daft bit about getting a woodworking teacher for the price of an FWW subscription (you'd get about ten minutes for a 3-year subscription price). You FWW-bashers. Cuh!

   Your other points, however, have the sound of wisdom. "The rythm of the bench" makes sense to me, after 10 or more years suffering the consequences of rushing because rushing was a habit, no other reason. How many bad grain matches have I made through rushing; bodges that must be fixed; compromises to the design because I shied away from the necessary ten hours and used only 5 (plus the 12 bodge-fixing). I hope those days are over for me (but one can slip easily into habitual ways).

   "Sloppy work" versus "good crisp work".

   Well, sloppy - no. But I am persuaded by David Pye that there is merit in making furniture (of some styles at least) that allow the hand of the craftsman to show in the workmanship as well as in the design. Work that is not sloppy but which does deviate from the factory-precision look that many contemporary makers seem to strive for ("wood engineering", as Robert Ingham calls it).

   That crisp stuff is endemic in contemporary pieces. This is part of the reason I can't easily get to like a lot of it. The other reson is the designed-to-death sculpti-look. On the other hand, "crisp" does work with Shaker, Mission and (I suppose, never made any) Chippendale and Federal.

   One problem with doing good crisp work with handtools is that it takes ages to acquire enough skill (it does for me at least). Perhaps this is a good part of the reason for 5-year apprenticeships during which the lass must make 350 M&Ts by hand before reaching a standard of competance accepted by her mistress. I wish it were as easy as "following the appropriate techniques".

   Although it is, of course, when a machine tool provides help with the push and the guidance.

   Lataxe, who tries but can slide to slop if he doesnae get a grip o' hissel.

4. 
   WillGeorge | Dec 19, 2009 08:54pm | #6

   Not how fast you can do it but what is acceptable for your satisfaction?

   You said what you though in the first place. I for one never think of time... For woodworking or anything else... Why I miss my lovely family's Birthdays.. I think they understand these days,, I catch up about a month later...

   Rushing any woodworking is a disaster.