Is fine curl more desirable than course curl?

[tree]

Seems like I read somewhere that 18th century gunsmiths liked "sugartree, finely curled" for their stocks.

We experienced tremendous tree damage in my area from an early morning storm on May 11. I worked 4 days dawn to dusk helping to restore power with multiple out-of-town tree crews. But I did end up with an interesting piece of sugar maple.

Regrettably, it came from the butt section and has some defects that caused it to split out fairly rough, so there was more waste than I hoped. Also, I passed on a clearer piece further up because I didn't read much curl in the xylem when I removed the bark. But in retrospect, I should've taken that piece because this tree doesn't really show a lot of curl on the outer surface of the xylem (I learned when removing the bark), which you may be able to see (you can see the innner bark surface) in the second photo.



I could see the curl in the split part before I parked the truck. I've never come across such fine (tight) curl and just wondered (in general) if it was more desirable than coarser curl.

[sunburst]

In a word, no. Perhaps stockers like tighter curl better, but instrument traditions, violin, mandolin and otherwise, seem to be open to figure anywhere from tight intense curl to lazy ripples.

[Big Joe]

What John said.

[Charles E.]

What John said. Broad flame is more desirable in the Violin tradition if not in the mandolin tradition and if you can find wood where the flame is not perpendicular to the grain, all the better.

[George Roberts]

On the other hand, Clark, you are entirely correct about the 18th century gun makers; the tighter the curl, the better.
George

[tree]

The curl doesn't show in the photo nearly as well as it does in person, but I didn't have time to think much about lighting or composition. I could see the tight ripples before I parked the truck and knew I wanted a section of the broken part. I found it a little odd that the outer surface of the xylem didn't show the figure very well (at least to my eye) when I peeled off the bark over the weekend.

The tree crew I was working with had asked me earlier what I was looking for when I peeled the bark off broken limbs at several different locations we'd cleared. I showed them some faint curl in the radial grain of some broken silver maple, but even they could see the strength and tightness of the curl in this particular tree.

I've always admired the old gunstocks (and the back of instrument necks, and turned Shaker chair legs and posts) as the sexiest way to show off good curled maple. I'm not sure why, but my eye is pulled to the curl across those cylindrical surfaces like a magnet.

[sunburst]

Clark, I've worked a lot or curly maple that showed pretty strong curl on the radial surface and virtually none on the tangential surface. A tree such as that would not show much if any figure on the xylem with the bark peeled.

[Michael Lewis]

Extreme figure can cause the wood to be less stiff, and you can't tell just by looking at it, you have to test for stiffness.

[Big Joe]

The amount of figure in wood is not a way to determine anything but figure. No two pieces are identical and the figure is more an item to sell a product than to determine the quality of the instrument or the wood. It is also not a determinate of the tonal output. Some feel highly figured wood is less desirable tonally than non figured but use it because it is easier to sell because it is "pretty". Whether we wish to admit it or not, most still want it to look good even more than sound good. No body wants to admit that, but in my many years it has proven true. Most will take an instrument that looks GREAT but sounds good over an instrument that sounds GREAT and only looks OK. Not all, but most.

If you want to get an instrument based on tone then you should be blindfolded when you determine which instrument you want. Then, after you have chosen that instrument, remove the blindfold and inspect it for any potential issues and set up. That would give more people a chance at an instrument with the sound they love more than the sound they accept. Of course, our ears are a bit less fussy than our eyes so the eyes usually win. Nothing wrong with that, but don't determine the stiffness or quality of an instrument by the figure in the wood. It is merely cosmetic.