| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
I know there's no hard and fast rules on this subject but I think
common sense should have some bearing. The other week Norm built an absolutely gorgeous highboy from tiger maple. One look at the wonderfuly figured wood, gleaming brass fittings, elegant shape said it all: heirloom piece for sure - greatgrandkiddies will still be displaying this one. Then Norm pulled out a drawer and you got a good look inside. It could have passed as a crude example from a pallet factory's seconds pile! How can anything so lovely have such an ugly and utilitarian interior? Maybe I'm being hyper fussy but my inclination (were I able to craft to that standard to begin with) would be to take a great deal of care with the "hidden" components and make them almost as much a joy to behold as the exterior. OK, using good hardwood for cleats and dust frames and runners, etc. will cost more than ply or poplar. And maybe the economics of putting the NYW show together are tighter than we think. But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. FoggyTown |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
foggytown wrote: I know there's no hard and fast rules on this subject but I think common sense should have some bearing. The other week Norm built an absolutely gorgeous highboy from tiger maple. ... Then Norm pulled out a drawer and you got a good look inside. It could have passed as a crude example from a pallet factory's seconds pile! How can anything so lovely have such an ugly and utilitarian interior? ... OK, using good hardwood for cleats and dust frames and runners, etc. will cost more than ply or poplar. And maybe the economics of putting the NYW show together are tighter than we think. But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. On _The Antiques Road Show_ I've seen many antiques with poplar or white pine secondary wood appraised at several tens of thousands of dollars. But any part that showed in normal use, like drawer sides were well-executed. I've also seen antiques in a store with quarter sawn sycamore for the interior drawer sides and one had birds' eye maple plywood for drawer bottoms. I've read that at one time bird's eye was considered to be a defect and sycamore has poor dimensional stablity--it would almost have to be quarter sawn to be acceptable for drawer sides. So maybe both of those were examples of 'cheap' wood being used where it wasn't usually seen!! -- FF |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"foggytown" wrote in message
But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. Spoken like a man who never turned a hundred fifty year old antique around to look at the backside to witness the 19th century cultural equivalent of breast augmentation ... it's appearance that counts. ;) -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
wrote in message
On _The Antiques Road Show_ I've seen many antiques with poplar or white pine secondary wood appraised at several tens of thousands of dollars. But any part that showed in normal use, like drawer sides were well-executed. Incubator of the MBA mentality ... the master did the parts that showed, the apprentice the remainder. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"foggytown" wrote in message oups.com... I know there's no hard and fast rules on this subject but I think common sense should have some bearing. The other week Norm built an absolutely gorgeous highboy from tiger maple. One look at the wonderfuly figured wood, gleaming brass fittings, elegant shape said it all: heirloom piece for sure - greatgrandkiddies will still be displaying this one. Then Norm pulled out a drawer and you got a good look inside. It could have passed as a crude example from a pallet factory's seconds pile! How can anything so lovely have such an ugly and utilitarian interior? IMHO an heirloom is a piece that is functional and built well enough to last generations. Appearance has nothing to do with it. There are many people that do not appreciate the inner workings of furniture, they simply care about how it looks on the outside. Have you been in to the common furniture store lately? Open a dresser drawer and see if is even 2/3's as deep as the dresser caucus. If it has DT's, were they sanded smooth? |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"Leon" wrote in message
There are many people that do not appreciate the inner workings of furniture, they simply care about how it looks on the outside. Have you been in to the common furniture store lately? Open a dresser drawer and see if is even 2/3's as deep as the dresser caucus. If it has DT's, were they sanded smooth? For commercial furniture anyway, I'd guess it's a time and material cost cutting measure. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
Upscale wrote: "Leon" wrote in message There are many people that do not appreciate the inner workings of furniture, they simply care about how it looks on the outside. Have you been in to the common furniture store lately? Open a dresser drawer and see if is even 2/3's as deep as the dresser caucus. If it has DT's, were they sanded smooth? For commercial furniture anyway, I'd guess it's a time and material cost cutting measure. Sometimes you find drawers with the back inserted into a dado so that the sides extend an inch or more past the useable space in the drawer. I figured that was so that when the drawer was open 'all the way' it wouldn't fall out of the carcass. Other than that, I agree it makes no sense to make the drawer shallower than the carcass. -- FF |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
wrote in message oups.com... Sometimes you find drawers with the back inserted into a dado so that the sides extend an inch or more past the useable space in the drawer. I figured that was so that when the drawer was open 'all the way' it wouldn't fall out of the carcass. Other than that, I agree it makes no sense to make the drawer shallower than the carcass. The longer sides to keep the drawer from falling out very well could be the reasoning. Unfortunately if that is the case that practice is to make up for the wide margin of tolerance in the fit. When I build drawers there is no over hang and they will not fall out unless you pull them all the way out. It has to be a cost savings measure. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
In article ,
"Swingman" wrote: "foggytown" wrote in message But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. Spoken like a man who never turned a hundred fifty year old antique around to look at the backside to witness the 19th century cultural equivalent of breast augmentation ... it's appearance that counts. ;) I like the way you bring a discussion about 'pallet-like' interiors around to tits. Good job! ;-) |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
On 3 Mar 2006 05:27:21 -0800, "foggytown" wrote:
I know there's no hard and fast rules on this subject but I think common sense should have some bearing. The other week Norm built an absolutely gorgeous highboy from tiger maple. One look at the wonderfuly figured wood, gleaming brass fittings, elegant shape said it all: heirloom piece for sure - greatgrandkiddies will still be displaying this one. Then Norm pulled out a drawer and you got a good look inside. It could have passed as a crude example from a pallet factory's seconds pile! How can anything so lovely have such an ugly and utilitarian interior? Maybe I'm being hyper fussy but my inclination (were I able to craft to that standard to begin with) would be to take a great deal of care with the "hidden" components and make them almost as much a joy to behold as the exterior. OK, using good hardwood for cleats and dust frames and runners, etc. will cost more than ply or poplar. And maybe the economics of putting the NYW show together are tighter than we think. But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. FoggyTown Whats wrong with Poplar? I built a complete bedroom set out of soid cherry and all the interior dust frames and drawer sides were poplar. My kids will be fighting over it. It looks great if you join, sand, and seal as if you were going to see it all the time. In fact, I like the contrast between the cherry and the poplar at the dovetails when I open the drawers. Frank |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
My dad used to deal in european antiques -- a lot of the high
end furniture was like that. foggytown wrote: I know there's no hard and fast rules on this subject but I think common sense should have some bearing. The other week Norm built an absolutely gorgeous highboy from tiger maple. One look at the wonderfuly figured wood, gleaming brass fittings, elegant shape said it all: heirloom piece for sure - greatgrandkiddies will still be displaying this one. Then Norm pulled out a drawer and you got a good look inside. It could have passed as a crude example from a pallet factory's seconds pile! How can anything so lovely have such an ugly and utilitarian interior? |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
Leon wrote: IMHO an heirloom is a piece that is functional and built well enough to last generations. Appearance has nothing to do with it. Then we disagree. To me, an heirloom piece is an above-average example of craftsmanship and attractiveness. It goes beyond utilitarian. Take pocket watches, for instance. The best examples look as good inside the case as they do from the outside. Why? Nobody looks at the insides to tell the time. FoggyTown |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
wrote in message oups.com... But if they are pulled out so the inside of the back is flush with the face frame (which of course is a lot farther than they need to pulled out ot get to whatever is in them) that puts a lot of stress on the back uppercorners of the sides and on the lower lip of the face frame. Leaving some overhang in the back would distribute that better. This is true but I tend to overbuild to start with. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"Robatoy" wrote in message "Swingman" wrote: "foggytown" wrote in message But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. Spoken like a man who never turned a hundred fifty year old antique around to look at the backside to witness the 19th century cultural equivalent of breast augmentation ... it's appearance that counts. ;) I like the way you bring a discussion about 'pallet-like' interiors around to tits. Good job! ;-) Hehe ... All roads lead back to Rome. When you think about it, mother nature gave us eyes for two basic reasons: so we can find something to eat more easily, and to look at something that makes us want to procreate ... everything else is extraneous. That's the coonass version, and I'm sticking to it ... it's appearance that counts. ;) -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
Swingman wrote: Hehe ... All roads lead back to Rome. When you think about it, mother nature gave us eyes for two basic reasons: so we can find something to eat more easily, and to look at something that makes us want to procreate ... everything else is extraneous. That's the coonass version, and I'm sticking to it ... it's appearance that counts. ;) THREE basic reasons. You forgot watching football. FoggyTown |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"foggytown" wrote in message oups.com... Leon wrote: IMHO an heirloom is a piece that is functional and built well enough to last generations. Appearance has nothing to do with it. Then we disagree. To me, an heirloom piece is an above-average example of craftsmanship and attractiveness. It goes beyond utilitarian. Take pocket watches, for instance. The best examples look as good inside the case as they do from the outside. Why? Nobody looks at the insides to tell the time. If you like to think that. I don't know of any watch that does not look pretty darn good in side. They have to be pretty darn close to perfect to actually function. Furniture is an entirely different matter with tolerance requirements that are quite lax by comparison. n. A valued possession passed down in a family through succeeding generations. An article of personal property included in an inherited estate. .. The noun heirloom has 2 meanings: Meaning #1: (law) any property that is considered by law or custom as inseparable from an inheritance is inherited with that inheritance Meaning #2: something that has been in a family for generations |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"Leon" writes:
"foggytown" wrote in message oups.com... Leon wrote: IMHO an heirloom is a piece that is functional and built well enough to [...] . The noun heirloom has 2 meanings: Meaning #1: (law) any property that is considered by law or custom as inseparable from an inheritance is inherited with that inheritance Meaning #2: something that has been in a family for generations .... or a mispelled weaving tool owned by a woman -- Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869 Physikalisches Institut der Uni Bonn Nussallee 12, D-53115 Bonn, Germany CERN: Phone: +412276 76461 Fax: ..77930 Bat. 892-R-A13 CH-1211 Geneve 23 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"Swingman" wrote in message ... "foggytown" wrote in message But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. Spoken like a man who never turned a hundred fifty year old antique around to look at the backside to witness the 19th century cultural equivalent of breast augmentation ... it's appearance that counts. ;) I don't care much for antiques, but I look them over at auctions to kill time. It is amazing how poorly made some them are; yet they go for thousands. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 12:47:40 -0600, Frank Boettcher
wrote: [snip] In fact, I like the contrast between the cherry and the poplar at the dovetails when I open the drawers. Me too. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
In article ,
Juergen Hannappel wrote: ... or a mispelled weaving tool owned by a woman That's pretty oblique, Doc. Funny... but oblique. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
Yes, forget watching football. Now we're back to two.
"foggytown" wrote in message THREE basic reasons. You forgot watching football. FoggyTown |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
|
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 20:25:49 +0100, Juergen Hannappel
wrote: ... or a mispelled weaving tool owned by a woman Oh, the irony... -- LRod Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999 http://www.woodbutcher.net Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997 email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month. If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't care to correspond with you anyway. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
Meaning #2: something that has been in a family for generations
As a practical matter, for something to be handed down between generations it must both survive multiple generations and appeal to multiple generations. Therefore, by corrolary, an heirloom but be of high quality, and have aesthetic appeal which is able to transcend periodic trends. To me that generally means classic design elements. To the OP, I often leave a little wane on the underside of a tabelop glue-up. It doesn't bother me and I doubt that it will be a consideration for my ancestors. -Steve |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"C&S" wrote in message ... Meaning #2: something that has been in a family for generations Therefore, by corrolary, an heirloom but be of high quality, and have aesthetic appeal which is able to transcend periodic trends. To me that generally means classic design elements. It may only have a practical usefulness or simply sentimental value. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
Leon wrote: "C&S" wrote in message ... Meaning #2: something that has been in a family for generations Therefore, by corrolary, an heirloom but be of high quality, and have aesthetic appeal which is able to transcend periodic trends. To me that generally means classic design elements. It may only have a practical usefulness or simply sentimental value. Yes, in terms of quality it merely needs to be durable to survive, or even if it is not, the family just needs to take care of it. A friend has a keeping box that has been in his family for more than a century. It is quite crude, but it is also a family heirloom. -- FF |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
wrote in message oups.com... Yes, in terms of quality it merely needs to be durable to survive, or even if it is not, the family just needs to take care of it. A friend has a keeping box that has been in his family for more than a century. It is quite crude, but it is also a family heirloom. Many people are mistaking the definition of heirloom as something that possessed quality or beauty, which it may or may not be. |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"Leon" wrote in message
"C&S" wrote in message Meaning #2: something that has been in a family for generations Therefore, by corrolary, an heirloom but be of high quality, and have aesthetic appeal which is able to transcend periodic trends. To me that generally means classic design elements. It may only have a practical usefulness or simply sentimental value. And over time the original meaning of "heirloom" has been subverted. Under early English law (and it still may be so), an estate was generally handed down to the oldest son, was considered "entailed" by this custom, and items in that estate (heirlooms) stayed with the estate from generation to generation and could not generally be bequeathed away separately. Tools (looms) were entailed to the estate, so for wooddorkers of early days it paid to be the eldest son, otherwise, under law, that vintage Unisaw went to your older brother and you were SOL. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"Swingman" wrote in message ... wrote in message On _The Antiques Road Show_ I've seen many antiques with poplar or white pine secondary wood appraised at several tens of thousands of dollars. But any part that showed in normal use, like drawer sides were well-executed. Incubator of the MBA mentality ... the master did the parts that showed, the apprentice the remainder. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 Thats not the way I remember it when I was an apprentice..... |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
wrote in message ups.com... foggytown wrote: I know there's no hard and fast rules on this subject but I think common sense should have some bearing. The other week Norm built an absolutely gorgeous highboy from tiger maple. ... Then Norm pulled out a drawer and you got a good look inside. It could have passed as a crude example from a pallet factory's seconds pile! How can anything so lovely have such an ugly and utilitarian interior? ... OK, using good hardwood for cleats and dust frames and runners, etc. will cost more than ply or poplar. And maybe the economics of putting the NYW show together are tighter than we think. But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. On _The Antiques Road Show_ I've seen many antiques with poplar or white pine secondary wood appraised at several tens of thousands of dollars. But any part that showed in normal use, like drawer sides were well-executed. I've also seen antiques in a store with quarter sawn sycamore for the interior drawer sides and one had birds' eye maple plywood for drawer bottoms. I've read that at one time bird's eye was considered to be a defect and sycamore has poor dimensional stablity--it would almost have to be quarter sawn to be acceptable for drawer sides. So maybe both of those were examples of 'cheap' wood being used where it wasn't usually seen!! -- FF Antiques are generally considered to have been made before 1830 . The reason being production machinery for the most part was not available before then so pieces were basically hand made . By the way plywood [drawer bottoms] surfaced a long time after 1830 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
Antique has nothing to do with how something was made. If it's more than 100
years old, it is considered antique. There are a few antique people still running (walking?) around. "mike hide" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... foggytown wrote: I know there's no hard and fast rules on this subject but I think common sense should have some bearing. The other week Norm built an absolutely gorgeous highboy from tiger maple. ... Then Norm pulled out a drawer and you got a good look inside. It could have passed as a crude example from a pallet factory's seconds pile! How can anything so lovely have such an ugly and utilitarian interior? ... OK, using good hardwood for cleats and dust frames and runners, etc. will cost more than ply or poplar. And maybe the economics of putting the NYW show together are tighter than we think. But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. On _The Antiques Road Show_ I've seen many antiques with poplar or white pine secondary wood appraised at several tens of thousands of dollars. But any part that showed in normal use, like drawer sides were well-executed. I've also seen antiques in a store with quarter sawn sycamore for the interior drawer sides and one had birds' eye maple plywood for drawer bottoms. I've read that at one time bird's eye was considered to be a defect and sycamore has poor dimensional stablity--it would almost have to be quarter sawn to be acceptable for drawer sides. So maybe both of those were examples of 'cheap' wood being used where it wasn't usually seen!! -- FF Antiques are generally considered to have been made before 1830 . The reason being production machinery for the most part was not available before then so pieces were basically hand made . By the way plywood [drawer bottoms] surfaced a long time after 1830 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"CW" wrote in message
Antique has nothing to do with how something was made. If it's more than 100 years old, it is considered antique. There are a few antique people still running (walking?) around. That depends ... Your definition generally applies to North America where it may have some legal basis for customs and import duties. In Europe, England and other countries an item may have to be much older to qualify as "antique". -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"mike hide" wrote in message "Swingman" wrote in message On _The Antiques Road Show_ I've seen many antiques with poplar or white pine secondary wood appraised at several tens of thousands of dollars. But any part that showed in normal use, like drawer sides were well-executed. Incubator of the MBA mentality ... the master did the parts that showed, the apprentice the remainder. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 Thats not the way I remember it when I was an apprentice..... Maybe you're not "antique" enough? -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"Swingman" wrote in message ... "Robatoy" wrote in message "Swingman" wrote: "foggytown" wrote in message But I just feel that an exceptional piece should have exceptional (but not necessarily the same) standards throughout. Spoken like a man who never turned a hundred fifty year old antique around to look at the backside to witness the 19th century cultural equivalent of breast augmentation ... it's appearance that counts. ;) I like the way you bring a discussion about 'pallet-like' interiors around to tits. Good job! ;-) Hehe ... All roads lead back to Rome. When you think about it, mother nature gave us eyes for two basic reasons: so we can find something to eat more easily, and to look at something that makes us want to procreate ... everything else is extraneous. That's the coonass version, and I'm sticking to it ... it's appearance that counts. ;) -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 12/13/05 Tell that to any museum that will pay 1/2 million for an original and sell copies of it for less than a thousand.... |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 10:58:29 -0800, foggytown wrote:
Leon wrote: IMHO an heirloom is a piece that is functional and built well enough to last generations. Appearance has nothing to do with it. Then we disagree. To me, an heirloom piece is an above-average example of craftsmanship and attractiveness. Actually, only time can accurately determine what is an heirloom and what is dumpster fodder. But I like to think that pieces that are built sturdily enough to withstand the ravages of much use or pieces so attractive that others will desire to maintain them over time qualify for the term when new. That is, if the piece was built with the intention that it become an heirloom, then it may be referred to as one when new. Jes' my two cents worth ... all goods worth price charged. Bill |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 19:34:41 +0000, Toller wrote:
I don't care much for antiques, but I look them over at auctions to kill time. It is amazing how poorly made some them are; yet they go for thousands. Could it be that their better-made cousins were pitched by their better-heeled owners? Bill |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"W Canaday" wrote in message ... Actually, only time can accurately determine what is an heirloom and what is dumpster fodder. But I like to think that pieces that are built sturdily enough to withstand the ravages of much use or pieces so attractive that others will desire to maintain them over time qualify for the term when new. That is, if the piece was built with the intention that it become an heirloom, then it may be referred to as one when new. Jes' my two cents worth ... all goods worth price charged. Bill So, :~) Because that newly built piece that you are talking about can be called a heirloom before it actually qualifies as being an heirloom by definition, it can equally as well be called an antique because it is intended to become an antique. Does that sound right? ;~) |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
On Sun, 05 Mar 2006 02:40:29 +0000, Leon wrote:
"W Canaday" wrote in message ... Actually, only time can accurately determine what is an heirloom and what is dumpster fodder. But I like to think that pieces that are built sturdily enough to withstand the ravages of much use or pieces so attractive that others will desire to maintain them over time qualify for the term when new. That is, if the piece was built with the intention that it become an heirloom, then it may be referred to as one when new. Jes' my two cents worth ... all goods worth price charged. Bill So, :~) Because that newly built piece that you are talking about can be called a heirloom before it actually qualifies as being an heirloom by definition, it can equally as well be called an antique because it is intended to become an antique. Does that sound right? ;~) I dunno ... I just get toitally different vibes off "heirloom quality" than I do off "antique quality". How about you? Bill |
When the "heirloom piece" line is crossed.
"W Canaday" wrote in message m... So, :~) Because that newly built piece that you are talking about can be called a heirloom before it actually qualifies as being an heirloom by definition, it can equally as well be called an antique because it is intended to become an antique. Does that sound right? ;~) I dunno ... I just get toitally different vibes off "heirloom quality" than I do off "antique quality". How about you? Bill Well more accurately put so to speak, we hope the piece will one day become an heirloom and an antique. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:28 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter