Hmmmm.....

I think we're going round and round in circles.

Prometheus wrote:
On 24 Nov 2006 16:43:17 -0800, wrote:
While scribing the back to fit the wall may not be cabinet making in
and of itself, in a smaller operation, it's still the cabinetmaker's
job, and is a large and visible part of the overall project.

No, it's the installer's job. Sometimes the cabinetmaker plays
"installer" because he doesn't have a dedicated installer. It may be a
very visible part to the customer, and it may be the most complex thing
done on the job site, but it's not a large part of the job. It's one
of the last things to do before bolting the cabinet to the wall.

And
having made plenty of "fine" furniture using traditional joinery and
solid planks, I'd still say that scribing to a rough wall is usually
harder than any particular internal joint, including hand cut
dovetails and m&t joints.

I wasn't saying that it was harder or easier than any other part of the
process. I was just saying that scribing to fit a wall isn't
cabinetmaking. In fact, it's not "making" anything. The cabinet is
all made. Scribing is an installation task.

And while I'd love to agree with you that building a plywood carcass
and applying factory made doors and drawers is not cabinetmaking, I
can't.

It's really "cabinet assembly".

Step back and look at your total argument for a minute- you're
falling into the same error you've accused others of in this
particular case.

No, I'm not. And, I think that this is a very revealing point. I'm
saying that a person who pays someone else to do 90% of the
cabinetmaking job (doors and drawers) doesn't deserve credit for doing
the whole job. I recognize that there is room for differing opinions.

If you believe that this is analogous to the indicator vs traditional
methods discussion, then you must feel that 90% of woodworking is
setting up the machines. And, you would have to believe that using a
dial indicator is like paying someone else to do the setup for you
(i.e. "cheating").

I have limited respect for the cabinetmakers that
slap together carcasses out of plywood with pocket screws and mount
other peoples' doors and drawers on them, but that is a matter of
economics in a lot of shops- it's that same old march of progress that
you can love or leave, and it applies just as easily to the finished
woodwork as it does to the shop setup.

Sure. Finished cabinets can be delivered at a very competitive price
if factory made doors and drawers are used. But, those who don't have
the skills and equipment to make doors and drawers can't be regarded as
equals with those that do.

Making plywood boxes is 99% of the job for most cabinetmakers these
days. I'm sure that there are plenty that do things the old way, but
for every one of them, there are twenty (or more) that whack together
mdf boxes and push them out the door as fast as they can- they're
still cabinetmakers, because (drumroll....) they make cabinets. You
can't redefine the term to only include the ones who make the stuff
you like.

This is not an "old way" vs "new way" thing. The doors and drawers are
still being made by someone - just not the person you refer to as the
"cabinetmaker". This guy isn't applying the skills required to make
doors and drawers. The guy who uses a dial indicator is still doing
his own alignments and setups. He does 100% of the work, applying the
skills required to do the tasks. To say otherwise is to reveal that
you believe he is cheating.

Is it fine furniture making? I can't even really make that call- I've
seen some really expensive antiques that anyone would consider "fine
furniture"- but when you turn them around, the back is made from old
barn boards nailed into place. Using an engineered substrate is not
terribly different, provided the joinery is still well-excuted and the
veneers and finishes are attractive.

There is a very widespread misconception that it has to be old (or made
with old tools and techniques) in order for it to be considered
"craftsmanship". I've seen the same thing you relate here. A lot of
antiques are poorly designed and poorly constructed. There are a few
examples (like the Stradivarius violin) that reflect a level of
craftsmanship which is lost to history. But, they are darn few. The
knowledge, skill, understanding, and technology available today enables
craftsmanship on a level which couldn't even be dreamed of 100 years
ago.

Well, sure- but that was my point. If you have 20/20 vision, there's
no need for the glasses.

But, if you have 20/20 vision with glasses (or contacts, or surgery),
then it isn't "cheating", is it? Which one is cheating, the guy who
reads music or the guy who plays by ear? Your analogies really don't
speak to the issue. The glasses thing has to do with physical
disability which can be easily corrected. The music thing has to do
with talent, not skill. I think you are trying to say that various
people have different skills but end up accomplishing the same thing.
And, I think I've said that I agree (several times now!). I have no
argument with this.

If it bothers you to think that it takes skill to properly use a dial
indicator to align machinery, then that's a problem that you will have
to work out on your own. If you are insulted by people who find no use
for "jobsite coping skills" because they have learned other skills
(like how to use a dial indictor) then you are just going to have to
deal with it.

Here again, you've got this notion that everyone is insisting on trial
and error, and not acknowledging that an alternate approach may work
just as well, without being a half-assed way of going about things.

No, I really am arguing with those who are against using dial
indicators. Many of them advocate trial and error methods. Some
advocate other methods. But, the common thread here is that they are
opposed to using dial indicators in the woodshop. I'm not sure why I'm
arguing with you because you say that you are not opposed to using dial
indicators. Yet, you keep turning it around to try and make it look
like I'm attacking those who advocate anything but dial indicators.
Why?

As an example, on Tuesday I was making a part for myself (a metal
spinning toolpost for the lathe) that required nine holes (as I had
drafted it) each centered on the y axis, and equidistant from one
another and the ends. When I jumped on the mill, I found that someone
on day shift had dropped a vise on the indicator and smashed it.

Rather than skipping the project until a new indicator arrived, I
squared the vise by using the edge finder on both sides of the back
jaw of the vise. There was no "test cutting" involved, and the total
deviation between the first hole and the last was less than .001" over
a run of nine inches. It took a few extra minutes, but it did the job
just the same. Without the indicator- and without trial and error.
What it did require was the trade skill of using an edge finder to
determine relative squareness mechanically- just as other trade skills
can be used to setup machines using things along the lines of a square
and a set of feeler guages. Hell, I even sharpened the bit I used for
the drilling freehand- because it took less time than setting up the
sharpening jig.

That's great. But, you would have used the indicator if it had been
available, right? You wouldn't be against using an indicator to align
a milling vise, right? You wouldn't be advocating the use of an edge
finder over the use of an indicator, right? I'm not challenging people
for being creative or demonstrating ingenuity. I'm challenging people
who try to dissuade others from using dial indicators in the woodshop.

There was no waste of material in the project, and a minimal waste of
time that could not be avoided.

Fine, no problem. Congratulations. But, you aren't going to start
abandoning the use of dial indicators in the machine shop are you? You
aren't going to start ridiculing people who use an indicator to align a
milling vise, are you? Are you going to start saying that people who
don't use an edgefinder to align a milling vise have less skill? You
don't suddenly think that using an indicator is "cheating" do you? You
aren't going to start criticizing tool and cutter grinders are you?
People who use them as "cheating" or having less skill? If you answer
"no" to all of these, then I'm not sure why you keep coming back on
this topic.

Not true, though that may be in the case of the jointer setup thread.
(I don't own a jointer, and can't make any claims about it one way or
the other.) I don't have money to waste on wood that isn't going into
the finished project, so I set up the tools to be right without using
any test cuts. From what I've read in these various threads, most
people are doing that as well- just using different tools than you are
to do so.

OK, fine. Not all of them are advocating methods which waste time or
materials (using a square to set the blade to 90 degrees). But they
are all arguing against the use of a dial indicator. And, they do so
without trying it.

There's a communication block here, and it's directly centered over
the use of "trial and error". Perhaps you mean it in a manner other
than the way in which I keep reading it- what I take you to mean is
that you're envisioning people just casually tossing their machine
into a "sort of" alignment, and then making a cut, checking it,
adjusting a little, making a cut, checking it, ad nauseum.

That's exactly what I mean.

That's not
the case- in the case of setting a saw blade to 90*, a square will do
the job without that, and in the case of a jointer, I would imagine
that a straightedge would do the job of setting the knife heights
without test cuts as well.

Sure enough. So, not everyone who has spoken against dial indicators
is advocating trial and error. But, they are still speaking against
the use of dial indicators. And, they aren't willing to listen to
potential benefits (faster, easier, greater accuracy, etc.) or even try
the dial indicator.

While I have seen one or two sentiments that reflect exactly that
approach, I have to assume that you are saying that this is what I'm
advocating, as you replied to the statements I made.

Please do not assume. If I said that you are advocating trial and
error over using dial indicators then please point it out to me. If
you are talking about something other than trial and error when you
describe jobsite coping techniques being used in the workshop then
please be more specific.

The argument develops when someone falsely characterizes the use of the
dial indicator in an effort to dissuade others from using it. *They*
say that people who use dial indicators aren't craftsmen. *They* say
it's "the easy road". *They* say that using a dial indicator is
"harder", "more trouble", "difficult", "tedious", "time consuming",
cheating, etc.

*I* didn't say most of those things- the only thing that I recall
saying was that purchasing a dial indicator for home use, waiting for
it to be shipped to my house, and then making a jig to put it on
involved a lot more time and money than just using the square that is
already sitting on my saw. If I were to run to a local store to buy
one, it's far more money than it's worth to me ($38 was the low price
the last time I was at the hardware store)

Geez, this is really getting convoluted! I didn't specifically say
that you said any of these things. But right now you are arguing with
me for arguing with people who have.

Nobody said that you have to wait for a dial indicator. Nobody said
that you had to spend $38 on one. Nobody even said that you have to
try one - until you started being critical of those who use one. I'll
have no argument with you if you have nothing against dial indicators
and the people who use them in the woodshop.

But that is neither here nor there- the point I was attempting to
clarify is that for a guy that already has an adequate technique,
finding, purchasing, setting up and interpreting the measurements
returned by unfamiliar tools may well be a lot more time and effort
than using the old reliable way of doing things. From that guy's
point of view, it *is* harder, more troublesome, more difficult,
tedious and time consuming- and in the end, may result in no
measurable difference from doing it his way to begin with.

Fine, let this guy do it any way he wants. I don't care if it takes
him more time or less time or whatever. I challenge his method only
when he uses it to put down dial indicators and those who use them. In
the case of using a square on the table saw blade, I honestly think
that Stoutman's jig is easier, faster, and more accurate. Geez, it
even costs less than a halfway decent square. In the case of using the
"carry" method on a jointer, I think that using a dial indicator is
easier, faster, and more accurate. Advocates of both methods were
challenged to try using a dial indicator. So far, no takers (well,
there's one who claims he tried it but it's pretty obvious he hasn't).
Quick to criticize, not very quick to back it up.

You keep arguing about some sort of skills which seem to be completely
unrelated. Perhaps you have generalized my arguments against specific
traditional "trial and error" techniques to include anything a person
might learn anywhere that doesn't involve using dial indicators. The
examples you cite certainly seem to fall into this category. I know
that you say they all came from what you learned working on jobsites
(even if the examples don't always seem to line up). I'm sorry that
you feel like my arguments defending the use of dial indicators makes
you feel like I'm putting down the use of these jobsite skills. Like I
said, I see why they are appropriate for the jobsite. But, there are
better ways to do things in the workshop.

Well, that didn't save the coopering trade, or the thatchers, or the
blacksmiths, did it? If you've got the superior method, there's no
real problem with letting the naysayers howl away- this little corner
of the internet by no means represents even the "average" woodworker-
most of the regulars here have gone so far beyond the ken of what is
normally accepted modern tooling and technique that the average
carpenters and cabinetmakers I've met in real life regard most of the
things I've learned or discussed here the way they would some obscure
branch of ancient alchemy.

Hmmmm.... I'll give this a whirl...

First of all, nothing in business happens all by itself. I can't just
sit back and watch my sales grow. There is competition and if I am not
actively working on moving forward then I'm going to be sliding
backward. Yes, better methods eventually overtake inferior ones. But,
that doesn't mean that my business will automatically be successful.
The automobile eventually replaced all of the horse drawn carriages.
But, not all of the early automobile manufacturers are still in
business.

The wreck itself doesn't represent very much when it comes to actual
sales. But, it does represent a market that I have targeted. Yes, I
know that it is very different from what you know of jobsite
woodworkers and cabinetmakers. These are hobbyists. If you read the
hobbyist magazines you will understand them much better. The feedback
I get from the group is valuable to me. People here react the same way
that other hobbyists react when the see or hear about using dial
indicators for woodworking. The big difference is that they are
extremely vocal here. They don't care about insulting me, they just
say what they think. There's a unique dynamic here. I argue with them
to draw out their true motives. When I understand why they feel
compelled to dissuade others from using dial indicators I can develop
better approaches to reach those who haven't yet made up their minds.
I can address objections that will likely come to them when they ask
friends about my products (or when the topic comes up in discussion
groups). So, I will have prepared them in advance.

I could do this anonymously. And, I could do this without making any
contribution (sharing expertise and offering the annual special). But,
that's just not my style.

If you have trouble understanding this then please just let it drop.
I'm not going to sit here and argue marketing strategy in the NG.

Granted- though I was referring more the the fact that I do not recall
ever seeing Mr. Lee actively putting down potential customers. He
could easily be jumping in on these threads and spouting off about how
a Veritas plane is better than an electric jointer, but he doesn't.
He just sells stuff that is hard to find elsewhere- as you do.

Well, as I tried to relate, Rob and I aren't the same person. We don't
operate the same business. If he wants to do market research, he tells
his Marketing department to go spend a bunch of money with a market
research firm. And, there's nobody out there trying to dissuade others
from buying Veritas products. There is no group of people who feel
offended every time someone mentions a Veritas product. One of the
quotes I provided did show how Rob addressed a person who said a
particular product was overpriced and unnecessary. This is just about
as close as it gets but its still not the same thing. There are people
who have a philosophical opposition to everything my business stands
for. Nobody has a philosophical opposition to Lee Valley.

There is a fine qualitative difference between the behavior of Mr. Lee
and yours. I'm not trying to put you down- I was just making an
example of his superb aplomb when dealing with issues.

Yes, of course there's a difference. We are different people in
different situations doing different things. I really can't afford to
be like Rob in my situation. Give me a million dollars and then I
could probably afford to be a lot more like Rob.

I saw nothing
in the posts you linked to that compare to the issue at hand, though
everyone reads different things into the subtext. With one exception,
I've never seen a post from the guy that led to a flamewar- and the
other party in that case was really frothing to begin with.

I think it's safe to assume that Rob is here mainly to develop and
maintain a reputation for customer satisfaction. If this is true, then
his goals and objectives are much better served using an approach which
is very different from mine.

Nor am I saying that you are poorly behaved or boorish- you're
obviously an honest guy that is passionate about what he's doing. All
I'm getting at, 110% of it, is that you are either intentially or
unintentionally insulting some people in these discussions.

Yep, some people do get insulted. Not because I'm looking to insult
them. I don't engage them until they express their opposition. Then I
really want to know how they react when confronted with the facts and
logic of their own thinking. I want to know what motivates them to
actively oppose the use of dial indicators in the woodshop. I really
do not understand what compells them to be so strongly opposed my
products. In the process of finding out, they become insulted. Why?
Because more often than not their opposition is emotional, not logical.
And, when confronted by logic it looks pretty stupid.

plenty of ways to avoid that while saying exactly the same thing. If
you can keep peoples' hackles down, they're a whole lot more likely to
seriously explore what you're advocating.

Nope. Not possible. You can't explore the opposition or expose the
motives of blind pride without insult. The only way to avoid insult is
for the person to abandon their pride and look at the situation
objectively. That's a problem when the person can't even see their
pride. Just let me know when you are ready to start talking about
aligning and adjusting woodworking machinery (as opposed to all the
perceived insults).

Ahhhh... And how does one *build* a multi-million dollar empire? Or
maintain it?

While I'd like to think it's solely quality product and fair prices,
there's a fair amount of diplomacy involved as well.

It's a topic that goes way beyond this discussion or even the group.
Everyone I meet has platitudes about building a successful business.
You are right, having the best products or the best prices won't do it.
"Diplomacy" is important but it won't do it either. I can name a big
pile of extremely successful businesses that were built by people who
are pretty darn blunt. There is no simple trite formula. People
always look at a successful business and try to identify a particular
quality which is responsible. It's a lot more complicated than you
think. One thing is for sure - you can do everything exactly right but
if you don't have significant financial resources then the going is
incredibly rough.

Ed Bennett

http://www.ts-aligner.com