Posted on July 7, 2024July 9, 2024 by Dale Phillips Questions: Lacey Act Amendment Questions: Lacey act amendment by Ric Larson, Chuck Erikson, Anne Middleton, and Michael Greenfield Originally published in American Lutherie #103, 2010 Lucy from the Internet asks: The Lacey Act amendment that went into effect in 2008 may have great impact on makers, wood merchants, instrument dealers, and the general public. What is it and how will it affect my ability to get the raw materials I need to build musical instruments? What will it mean for importing finished instruments to sell in my store? And what consequences will it have for the supply of wood I have accumulated over the years? I am planning on requiring all wood suppliers I deal with in the future to be able to indicate botanical names and country of origin for every piece of wood I buy. Are they prepared to do this? Ric Larson from Vikwood in Sheboygan, Wisconsin replies: We have been requiring all our wood suppliers to comply with the Lacey Act for the past year in anticipation of the actual effective date (April 1, 2010). In addition we have asked them to go back and send us copies of all their nation’s government permits for harvesting, cutting, and exporting the various species they sent us during the past two years. Fortunately we have only the most scrupulous and honest suppliers so this was an easy, albeit time-consuming, job. I am by no means any kind of expert regarding the Lacey Act and struggle to find answers. We don’t know how to account for the inventory that dates back in some cases almost twenty years for some of the slower-moving species. It would seem to make sense that this inventory would not be affected by the law since it predated the effective date, but we don’t really know. Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page. If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.
Posted on July 7, 2024July 9, 2024 by Dale Phillips Questions: Douglas Fir Stradivari Questions: Douglas Fir Stradivari by R.E. Bruné Originally published in American Lutherie #102, 2010 James Condino of Ashville, North Carolina asks: I used to have an article from a guitar magazine in the ’80s about one of the Stradivari guitars. The article claimed that the top was made of Douglas fir. How likely is that? R.E. Bruné of Evanston, Illinois answers: In reference to Stradivari using Douglas fir, this is a virtual impossibility. The wood is not native to Europe, and was not in commercial circulation in Europe in Stradivari’s day. Perhaps the confusion arises from the nomenclature of wood in which Americans tend to call most conifer soundboards of European origin “spruce” and the British use “pine” to refer to the same materials. In actuality, most are of the genus Abies or true fir, of which there are many varieties native to Europe such as Abies pectinata and Abies alba. (Google these and other species for more information.) Douglas fir is not a true fir, being of the genus Pseudotsuga. Picea is the Latin name for true spruces which are also used for instrument soundboards, of which there are also many varieties. All of these are difficult to positively identify once they are on a completed instrument, especially one that has aged for several centuries. ◆
Posted on July 5, 2024July 8, 2024 by Dale Phillips Blood, Sweat & Sap Blood, Sweat & Sap by Nicholas Von Robison Originally published as Guild of American Luthiers Quarterly Volume 10, #2, 1982 Sometime last spring I dreamed I was back in the Northwest for a short vacation. I had gone there to enjoy the trees - and was stunned to learn there weren’t any! All the forests had been paved over for condos, trailer parks, ski lodges, and fast food joints. I don’t know just what triggered such a nightmare. I have learned in recent years that beer and pizza don’t go down as easily after midnight as they used to. More likely it was something I had read. I often read things (and more often write things) that are equally indigestible. But never after midnight. No, it was probably the conversation with a luthier friend of mine, a splinter group agnostic who confessed to me that he really doesn’t believe that trees have a life of their own, that they speak to you in voices loud and soft, or that they should be approached as shrines. He tossed off Torres, Stradivari, Orville, C.F.; had only started his preachings on epoxy, graphite, fiberglass and polymers before I straight-armed him with a braced soundboard and tapped out a few tones. He recoiled of course, but on his way out the door parleyed that he could never accept the divinity of the old masters although they were great teachers. I’ll never attend woodshop vespers with that fellow again! Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page. If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.
Posted on July 1, 2024July 9, 2024 by Dale Phillips Letter: Natural Shell Material Clearance Letter: Natural Shell Material Clearance by Chuck Erikson Originally published in American Lutherie #100, 2009 Dear G.A.L. staff and members: A great big howdy and a coupla doodies to ya! We’ve been getting increasingly numerous complaints from luthiers that instruments containing any type of natural shell material are being challenged by Customs agents at the U.S. border, causing delays in delivery, generating extra fees and paperwork, and incurring the risk of impoundment or even confiscation. All of this can be easily avoided if care is taken to include proper details on the customs forms (not only about shell but also bone, fossil ivories, and woods). As the major supplier of all things nacreous, we can assure everyone that none of the shells offered are controlled, banned, endangered, listed, or protected and they’re all openly brought in under our U.S. Fish & Wildlife Import/Export Permit. But just because they’re “animal products,” F&W bureaucrats can cause unnecessary hassles and raise funding through various charges such as so-called “inspection” fees (even though any given package may not even be opened and nothing get actually inspected). A few years ago, during a private conversation with a F&W customs agent, he claimed huge numbers of these bogus “fees” were initiated in many government agencies during the Clinton administration as a behind-the-scenes method of increasing revenue while at the same time being able to announce publicly that taxes were not being raised; already understaffed, overworked, and underfunded, he indicated F&W employees were not at all happy with the added burden of now becoming unwilling “tax collectors” for the government! Our website (www.dukeofpearl.com) has full info about each shell species including common and Latin names and country of origin. On customs export forms it helps to mention that the shell is from a commercial fishery. If subsequently questioned, it can also speed things up if you then supply a copy of a sales receipt from whoever sold you the shell. But don’t include this with the instrument’s original paperwork; as with the IRS, never volunteer more than the necessary minimum of information when dealing with any government agency. Also, don’t bother protesting any customs charges. Just pay the extortion money and hope you drop off their radar the next time through. Complaining will only generate an official “file” on you, the last thing you want! If you’re still having difficulty getting clearance, have the agent contact us and we’ll supply a valid license number and any other information they might want (such as country of manufacture). Keep on luthing!
Posted on July 1, 2024July 9, 2024 by Dale Phillips Questions: Walnut Log Questions: Walnut Log by Bruce Harvie Originally published in American Lutherie #101, 2010 Lee Pendergrast from Etowah, Tennessee asks: I know where a hundred-plus-year-old 20"×12' walnut log is in the river near me. How would it need to be sawn for best use in lutherie? This log has been in a place where the river rises and falls often, leaching out the tannins. I’ve read that the very best wood for instruments has been soaked in water; microbial action and leaching produce hollow cells which are more resonant. Bruce Harvie from Olga, Washington replies: Walnut can be a fine wood for instruments, but unless it’s highly figured (which it probably isn’t), not all that valuable. It has been used historically by many companies, most notably Epiphone for its archtop guitars. An article in Reader’s Digest many years ago contributed to the public’s perception that walnut logs are extremely valuable, but in the world of tonewoods, this is not all that true unless the tree is highly figured, in which case it can be highly sought after. But these figured trees are rare indeed, and usually found in orchards in California, not in the indigenous black walnut forests in the Midwestern USA. Another tonewood myth created by the press (mostly by a few publicity-hungry companies on Lake Superior) is the high value placed on logs soaked in water and the quality of the wood produced. It may or may not be true, but to use it as a ploy to place exorbitant prices on logs hauled from the bottom of lakes is disingenuous, in my opinion. A log soaked in water or floating in a river for a hundred years is just as likely to suffer defects from this sort of treatment.
