The Story of the "D" Log as Told by Steve Gilchrist

[Bill Baldridge]

OldSausage
After I got to bed last night I didn't find my post to clever itself. I intended it as a gentle ribbing, but I regret it now and don't see how I added anything of value to the discussion. Couldn't find a way to remove the post myself, so I apologize to you and the other members.

[Glennly]

Now you're just being silly, Dan. You would definitely need a 3D pick and and 3D strings, though..

If you have 3 D strings, your mando will sound a bit funny!

[OldSausage]

OldSausage
...I apologize to you and the other members.

No worries Bill, I took it just how you intended.

[Joe Parker]

Another myth D-bunked!! I guess I may as well trade for a banjo with one of those tone rings from the Bronze Age and the rim carved out of the reclaimed keel of the Edmund Fitzgerald...

[dang]

Came from up-state NY and was given the code "D" because it was spotted by a "Drunk" retired logger.

I believe I will use the "D" code in the future, based on my (or others) serendipitous finding of objects while intoxicated...

[MikeEdgerton]

Another myth D-bunked!! I guess I may as well trade for a banjo with one of those tone rings from the Bronze Age and the rim carved out of the reclaimed keel of the Edmund Fitzgerald...

The legend lives on from the Chippewa on down regarding that one...

[blindrobert]

First, book matched (traditionally considered best for tops and backs) means a piece of wood is sawed in the middle and opened like a book. The edges are then joined and glued to make a two piece top or back with a center seam and very similar looking grain to each side.
If the wood cannot be sawn that way for one reason or another (usually not thick enough), consecutive, end to end, pieces can be taken from the board. One piece is flipped over and joined to the other in a similar manner to a book matched set. The grain will not always look as similar to each side of the center seam, but it will look closer than randomly chosen pieces normally will. Purists may think it is an inferior way to make a two piece plate, compared to book matching, but there is no quality difference.

Hmm - this is different than what I learned in architecture school. Slip matched does not involve flipping the pieces, they are literally "slipped" off to the side so that the pattern is repeating but not Rorschach-like with near symmetry.

See these diagrams (maybe it's different in luthiery):
http://www.veneernet.com/matching.html

[sunburst]

Yes, slip matched veneer is not flipped, and a panel has a repeating pattern of grain going across the surface. Mandolin back (or top) wood can be done that way too, but in that case there are only the two pieces (normally), a repeating pattern is neither desirable nor possible, a book matched look is traditional, and flipping one half approximates that look. Maybe it's not technically slip matched because of the flip, and maybe Gilchrist didn't do it that way, but it's the way I've done it when I've not been able to get book matched pieces, and I don't know what else I would call it other than slip matched.

[blindrobert]

Wouldn't that still be a book match? If you start with a slab of wood that's 1" thick and split it into two 1/2" thick pieces, when you flip one over (like opening a book) it's a book match. When you slide one over you have to flip it to get a mirror image of the grain - there's no way to make it work if you don't flip one piece. If you slide it over and don't flip it, it's a slip match.

The OP described a log that was cut into slip matched pieces. Presumably, one could take two successive pieces of slip match and use them as though they were a book match. In the context of Mr. Gilchrist's situation it sounds like the individual pieces were of proper dimension to use as single-piece backs, so book matching wasn't necessary. Maybe I need to go read the oP again, I could be inaccurate in my recollection of the described events.

Edit: Mr. Hamlett, I misread your post. It sounds like you are talking about two similar, but not successive pieces of wood from the same tree. So the grain would approximate a book match but not line up perfectly the way true book matched pieces would. I am not sure what to call that either...Mad Libs matched?

[sunburst]

If you start with a slab of wood that's 1" thick and split it into two 1/2" thick pieces, when you flip one over (like opening a book) it's a book match.

It is.
I actually have some spruce that is one 1" thick and 6" wide. If I split that with my kerfless miracle saw ( ) that would give me two 1/2" pieces, but the best tool I have for the job removes at least 1/16" of wood, so I end up with two pieces under 1/2", but that is beside the point because I want to start with about 5/8" thickness to carve a top so I can't get book matched carved tops from that wood. The way I manage to get tops from it is to cut two end-to-end pieces, saw them to 5/8" thickness, flip one over, move it down beside the other piece, and glue them together in that position. That isn't book matched, but it usually looks like it unless the grain changes enough along that length for the pieces to look different from one another. I've always referred to that, perhaps incorrectly, as 'slip matched', and it was my assumption that that was what Gilchrist did with the maple, and I could be wrong.

[blindrobert]

Ah - thanks for elaborating. I want one of those kerfless miracle saws!

So, if I understand you correctly, you are starting with (for instance) a 6" x 36" x 1" board, cutting it in half perpendicular to the grain to make two 6" x 18" x 1" pieces (again with the kerfless miracle saw), then reducing thickness and doing the approximate book match thing. Is the back on the F-style #22 on your website an example of this technique? (It looks gorgeous!)

[sunburst]

Is the back on the F-style #22 on your website an example of this technique?

I don't want to hijack this thread completely, but; probably not. I bought a stack of that wood from someone's wood stash, already milled and marked as book matched sets. I can only assume it is book matched. I haven't done the "slip match" (or whatever) with maple, only with spruce, as in the top of #19.

[Fiddlesticks]

I don't want to hijack this thread completely, but; probably not. I bought a stack of that wood from someone's wood stash, already milled and marked as book matched sets. I can only assume it is book matched. I haven't done the "slip match" (or whatever) with maple, only with spruce, as in the top of #19.

The famous "D" log came from Old Standard Wood, the wood was taken on the slab in 6 inch widths, the two matched pcs. One from the outer slab and the second one right under it are slipped to lay side by side then one pc. Is flipped end for end. This is how most of the backs found in old Gibsons were cut and matched...we call this a slip and flip match and it is surprising how matched the wood looks when the instrument is complete. The whole tree was seasoned with our vacuum process, we also provided the Adirondack that is in most all of the D log instruments.

John @ OSW

[Pete Jenner]

I ran into Mr. Gilchrist years ago at the old Noppet Hill Bluegrass Festival in western Massachusetts. I told him I had a bunch of Adirondack Spruce on the woodlot behind my house. We had a nice talk about the Adirondack region and State Park. I invited him up for a visit but he hasn't shown up yet....

I'm sure he's just having car trouble or something and he'll be there soon...

[Pete Jenner]

...and I don't know what else I would call it other than slip matched.

Flip matched?