Roger Blake wrote:I think the used furniture available by Ethan Allen is a great option... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBr7iawXvCg&t=8s
Thomas A. Gauldin wrote:
This may earn me some flames, but I see no real problem with even
the "highest quality" furniture using plywoods. Just as the highest quality products now use modern adhesives and fastening techniques,
why should the material itself be assumed better when solid than manufactured?
This is not a flame. One problem with plywood is that if the veneer
gets damaged its much harder to mend than solid wood. I can see that
for mass production, manufacturing tolerances, the stability of large surfaces dictates use of modern sheet goods. Of these, I suppose
plywood is best. However, I would much prefer that my surface of my
kitchen or dining table was solid wood.
Why do you suppose that plywood would be the best substrate? Manufacturers of cabinets and furniture stopped using plywood long ago in favor of particle board and medium density fiber board. Both of those substrates are much more stable than plywood. For the purposes of laying down a veneer, they can be machined to be much smoother than plywood ever could be. Veneers telegraph all
the lumps and imperfections that are found in the substrate (it's like wallpapering over a poorly prepared plaster wall).
Why is veneer harder to repair? Either you patch in a new piece, or work with what you have. With a little artwork, the history of your damage is rewritten.
Most people lose sight of the fact that veneer is THIN WOOD. Even the paper thin (1/64") veneers can be repaired and refinished (it is true that there is a much greater chance of sanding through to your substrate if you are trying to correct wear and tear). As a legitimate process that has more than 3000 years of history to it, it ought to command much more respect than it does. There is a canard that one must set up a dichotomy between veneering and solid
wood construction. The two are apples and oranges. They are often used together in most modern furniture. Many veneers are even put on over a solid wood core, not because the manufacturer has something to hide. This is done because you can do decorative things with veneer (marquetry, fancy inlay, repeating grain patterns, diamonds, reverse diamonds, edgebanding, etc.) much better than you can with thicker "solid" pieces of the same wood.
--
Daniel
To send an e-mail, write me at "shafner at webspan dot net", taking out the quotation marks and inserting the appropriate symbols.
/ `-' ) ,,,
| IU U||||||||[:::]
\_.-.( '''
On Monday, July 21, 1997 at 3:00:00 AM UTC-4, sha...@mail.webspam.net wrote:With digital transformation taking over many aspects of the workplace, the traditional working environment as we know it is changing as well. A new generation of employees is demanding a more comfortable and modern working environment. In response to
Roger Blake wrote:
Thomas A. Gauldin wrote:
This may earn me some flames, but I see no real problem with even
the "highest quality" furniture using plywoods. Just as the highest quality products now use modern adhesives and fastening techniques, why should the material itself be assumed better when solid than manufactured?
This is not a flame. One problem with plywood is that if the veneer
gets damaged its much harder to mend than solid wood. I can see that
for mass production, manufacturing tolerances, the stability of large surfaces dictates use of modern sheet goods. Of these, I suppose
plywood is best. However, I would much prefer that my surface of my kitchen or dining table was solid wood.
Why do you suppose that plywood would be the best substrate? Manufacturers ofI think the used furniture available by Ethan Allen is a great option... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBr7iawXvCg&t=8s
cabinets and furniture stopped using plywood long ago in favor of particle board and medium density fiber board. Both of those substrates are much more
stable than plywood. For the purposes of laying down a veneer, they can be machined to be much smoother than plywood ever could be. Veneers telegraph all
the lumps and imperfections that are found in the substrate (it's like wallpapering over a poorly prepared plaster wall).
Why is veneer harder to repair? Either you patch in a new piece, or work with
what you have. With a little artwork, the history of your damage is rewritten.
Most people lose sight of the fact that veneer is THIN WOOD. Even the paper
thin (1/64") veneers can be repaired and refinished (it is true that there is
a much greater chance of sanding through to your substrate if you are trying
to correct wear and tear). As a legitimate process that has more than 3000 years of history to it, it ought to command much more respect than it does.
There is a canard that one must set up a dichotomy between veneering and solid
wood construction. The two are apples and oranges. They are often used together in most modern furniture. Many veneers are even put on over a solid
wood core, not because the manufacturer has something to hide. This is done
because you can do decorative things with veneer (marquetry, fancy inlay, repeating grain patterns, diamonds, reverse diamonds, edgebanding, etc.) much
better than you can with thicker "solid" pieces of the same wood.
--
Daniel
To send an e-mail, write me at "shafner at webspan dot net", taking out the
quotation marks and inserting the appropriate symbols.
/ `-' ) ,,,
| IU U||||||||[:::]
\_.-.( '''
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 463 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 156:18:13 |
Calls: | 9,384 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 13,561 |
Messages: | 6,095,906 |