Rosewood back- this ok?

TINMAN82

I know wood availability is dwindling etc, just wanted opinion re whether this EI rosewood back is acceptable on a fairly high end acoustic. Won’t mention make/ model etc in case it affects the answers!

To me aesthetics are fine. Clearly the grain widens considerably in the middle and the colour lightens, which might be seen as lower grade. Grain generally quite straight though and reasonable bookmatching. I’d have thought no major concerns. Anyone disagree?

earwighoney

AKAIK the colour of the EIR has no bearing on the quality, IMO it looks excellent, great quality book matched quartersawn straight grain rosewood.

Btw, a lot of rosewood/mahogany we see in finished form has been treated with wood dye, so it will look darker than it naturally is.

bertie

earwighoney said:

AKAIK the colour of the EIR has no bearing on the quality, IMO it looks excellent, great quality book matched quartersawn straight grain rosewood.

Btw, a lot of rosewood/mahogany we see in finished form has been treated with wood dye, so it will look darker than it naturally is.

this

ICBM

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

Mellish

Looks fine to me. Sure, I care about looks but tone comes first for me. If it looks a million bucks but the tone sucks, you're not going to play it, right, so what would be the point of having it?  

TINMAN82

ICBM said:

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc etc. 

I guess I’m also wondering if now is the time to pick up that “life companion” acoustic made of all solid premium woods.

It just struck me that this rosewood back looked quite orange and grainy in the centre..,and could that be a sign of poor/ immature timbre. Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

ICBM

TINMAN82 said:

Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

That's a professional photo?! What does an unprofessional one look like?

It's completely out of focus, or such poor resolution that blowing it up looks like that.

That said, the shop I work for has a similarly appalling approach to photos for the website...

earwighoney

TINMAN82 said:

ICBM said:

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc etc. 

I guess I’m also wondering if now is the time to pick up that “life companion” acoustic made of all solid premium woods.

It just struck me that this rosewood back looked quite orange and grainy in the centre..,and could that be a sign of poor/ immature timbre. Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

Some of the best EIR is orange and grainy. Have a look at the Martin Forum and keep an eye for 70's Martins, there are quite a lot that look like the one you posted. 

Some wild grain EIR, is flat sawn, that stuff is more likely to crack in the long run than the straight grain wood. When it comes to the wavy stuff, some of it is quartersawn nonetheless.

Indian Rosewood is one of the most consistent materials out there.  Of course there are some stinkers but it's down to other factors, not the back and sides.

Is it the right time to pick up the life companion acoustic guitar? YES.

There are other factors I'd see to be more important, eg character (be it modern like a Taylor or traditional like a Martin), shape, bracing, string spacing, neck profile and so on.

TINMAN82

earwighoney said:

TINMAN82 said:

ICBM said:

I can't see what it is that would even raise the question. What about it could be not acceptable?

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc etc. 

I guess I’m also wondering if now is the time to pick up that “life companion” acoustic made of all solid premium woods.

It just struck me that this rosewood back looked quite orange and grainy in the centre..,and could that be a sign of poor/ immature timbre. Could be the lighting I guess as it’s a professional/ shop photo.

Some of the best EIR is orange and grainy. Have a look at the Martin Forum and keep an eye for 70's Martins, there are quite a lot that look like the one you posted. 

Some wild grain EIR, is flat sawn, that stuff is more likely to crack in the long run than the straight grain wood. When it comes to the wavy stuff, some of it is quartersawn nonetheless.

Indian Rosewood is one of the most consistent materials out there.  Of course there are some stinkers but it's down to other factors, not the back and sides.

Is it the right time to pick up the life companion acoustic guitar? YES.

There are other factors I'd see to be more important, eg character (be it modern like a Taylor or traditional like a Martin), shape, bracing, string spacing, neck profile and so on.

Appreciate your insights, thanks.

TINMAN82

@earwighoney just googled 70s Martin as per your suggestion and this was one of the first things to pop up on eBay! Orange grain eat your heart out.

Tannin

Yep, a very professional photo, taken by a professional. Not sure what sort of professional, maybe a professional storeman or a professional shop assistant. 

artiebear

That looks like a lovely piece of wood. Don't see why the OP was concerned ?

boogieman

Tannin said:

Yep, a very professional photo, taken by a professional. Not sure what sort of professional, maybe a professional storeman or a professional shop assistant. 

Imgur knocks the image quality down quite a bit. It might’ve been a reasonable photo to start with. 

Tannin

Not that much.

Jez6345789

“

I was reading a little into wood quality and grain. There are some strong views around wrt light vs dark, heartwood vs sapwood, straight vs wavy, wild grain etc ”

Yeah that group with the strong opinions that’s the same group blindfolded that can’t tell EIR from Brazilian, stork margarine from butter or a Stradivari from a Chinese replicas. 

All things make a difference but wood colour and grain will not make much of an audible difference   if at all,  more important will be shape, the quality of the top the makers bracing are they good at building guitars etc etc .

ICBM

TINMAN82 said:

@earwighoney just googled 70s Martin as per your suggestion and this was one of the first things to pop up on eBay! Orange grain eat your heart out.

I'm guessing Martin as well .

My '71 D12-35 looks pretty much like that. Or it would, if it didn't have a massive piece of contrasting wood in the middle .

meltedbuzzbox

TINMAN82 said:

I know wood availability is dwindling etc, just wanted opinion re whether this EI rosewood back is acceptable on a fairly high end acoustic. Won’t mention make/ model etc in case it affects the answers!

To me aesthetics are fine. Clearly the grain widens considerably in the middle and the colour lightens, which might be seen as lower grade. Grain generally quite straight though and reasonable bookmatching. I’d have thought no major concerns. Anyone disagree?

If it sounds good and plays nice I honestly wouldn't think twice about the appearance of the back. 
In the same manner that I don't wonder how the under carriage of my car looks when it's on the road

TINMAN82

meltedbuzzbox said:

TINMAN82 said:

I know wood availability is dwindling etc, just wanted opinion re whether this EI rosewood back is acceptable on a fairly high end acoustic. Won’t mention make/ model etc in case it affects the answers!

To me aesthetics are fine. Clearly the grain widens considerably in the middle and the colour lightens, which might be seen as lower grade. Grain generally quite straight though and reasonable bookmatching. I’d have thought no major concerns. Anyone disagree?

If it sounds good and plays nice I honestly wouldn't think twice about the appearance of the back. 
In the same manner that I don't wonder how the under carriage of my car looks when it's on the road

Agreed. It’s just that common wisdom does suggest there may be objective clues as to the quality/ maturity of timber, hence my question. Seems there’s no cause for concern.

sev112

Given the effort that manufacturers put into the visual  quality of the back of many acoustic guitars, it occurs to me that they should be hung back to front.  I find the front of most acoustics to be particularly boring, but the backs very pretty normally

bertie

sev112 said:

 I find the front of most acoustics to be particularly boring, but the backs very pretty normally

have some red gum 

digitalkettle

bertie said:
some red gum...

I'm guessing (based on another Brook I once knew) that it used to be a lot more red!