Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I know that Warmoth sells Padouk necks , but I was curious .... are there any draw-backs to using it? If not - why don't more people use it ? I don't mean strips or multi-lam , I mean 1 piece necks or solid blank/scarf HS .

What about as a fretboard ? Anyone with any experience? Thoughts ? opinions ? Wild guesses ???

Posted

I've never actually used it, but I've been told to wear a respirator or something to cover your nose because inhaling it turns your snot orange. That and you should put a layer of UV protection on it to help keep the sun from turning the orange brown.

Posted

Thanks guys . Reinhold- you should wear a dust mask with any wood - some more-so-than others , but all dust is pretty much carcinogenic and shouldn't be inhaled.

/ preaching

I'm currently doing two necks - one out of Mahogany and one out of Padouk . I'll weigh em' afterwards to check the difference. I do know the Mahogany was a BEEOTCH to rasp into shape compared to the 'Duke. :D

Posted

Ive got an all padauk washburn and it sounds fantastic. Im putting another one together for a bandmate and ive got 3 more solid padauk necks which I'll use aswell.

SANY0167-2.jpg

I prefer the feel of it compared to maple. It is quite heavy but on the right guitar it can be balanced out nicely. I also quite like the dark brown/purple colour padauk goes with age. In my experience it happens regardless of UV exposure, but UV definitely speeds the process up.

Posted

I dont remember Padauk being more toxic than any other wood. The problem with that statement is different woods effect people differently. With me Ebony always makes me sneeze and may not do the same for others. And yes you should limit your exposure as has been mentioned regardless.

Yes its heavy but it does not fall in the excessively heavy category. My issue with Padauk is bleeding into lighter woods such as maple when you sand. So if you are using it with maple it will be a pain to clean and using a scraper is the way to go. It also bleeds when using solvents which again will stain other parts of a guitar.

Also makes your shop look orange from the dust and tends to clog filters in dust collectors.

Other than all of that its a good wood for a neck

Posted (edited)
It looks like you left the pores unfilled - any reason in particular or just personal preference?

Im still finishing off that neck, Ive not shaped any of the heel section in that photo. I dont plan on using grain filler but I will oil and sand the heck out of it once its shaped.

As spoke said, a big problem with it is the colour gets everywhere and anywhere. As a fretboard Ive not played one before, but Ive seen manufacturers use it. I think there are better looking/performing woods to use for a fretboard and a padauk FB doesnt look good on a padauk neck IMO.

Edited by sam_c
Posted
As spoke said, a big problem with it is the colour gets everywhere and anywhere. As a fretboard Ive not played one before, but Ive seen manufacturers use it. I think there are better looking/performing woods to use for a fretboard and a padauk FB doesnt look good on a padauk neck IMO.

I got around this by sanding and sealing the maple first when I did my 'duke and maple V . kept the dust from getting into the maple like a champ. If I were to use it as a FB , I'd do it on a maple or mahogany neck , something with more contrast to it.

Thanks again for the advice.

Posted
As spoke said, a big problem with it is the colour gets everywhere and anywhere. As a fretboard Ive not played one before, but Ive seen manufacturers use it. I think there are better looking/performing woods to use for a fretboard and a padauk FB doesnt look good on a padauk neck IMO.

I got around this by sanding and sealing the maple first when I did my 'duke and maple V . kept the dust from getting into the maple like a champ. If I were to use it as a FB , I'd do it on a maple or mahogany neck , something with more contrast to it.

Thanks again for the advice.

I dont under stand how you seal and not sand half a joint. If the FB is a darker wood you have no issues if you use it as strips in a light colored neck or a topper on a light colored body only scraping will allow you to clean and level the joint without it looking like red dye seeped into the other side. even yellow glue will pick up the red color.

Try wiping a Padauk board with any solvent and see what you get on the rag..

Posted

Well, my V didn't really have "joints" between the maple and padouk , sort-of , but that was the one with the displays , so they were down in the padouk ( just to make it even more difficult to keep the dust out of em. :D ) - Comprehend it or not - I sanded , burnt and sealed the maple first , then the 'duke. and believe me , I know about the dust getting into and on everything - I've built with it before - I'm looking for specific qualities as a neck wood , not just as a wood in general. :D

Posted
Well, my V didn't really have "joints" between the maple and padouk , sort-of , but that was the one with the displays , so they were down in the padouk ( just to make it even more difficult to keep the dust out of em. :D ) - Comprehend it or not - I sanded , burnt and sealed the maple first , then the 'duke. and believe me , I know about the dust getting into and on everything - I've built with it before - I'm looking for specific qualities as a neck wood , not just as a wood in general. :D

Its just wood, nothing more, with a few issues that can be overcome using the right tools.. I mean even a razor blade with the edge ground dull makes a good scraper to clean edges against light woods. Its not a big deal really just another step.

Posted

The pertinent hard data for you, courtesy of the www.woodworkerssource.com species library; I've also included the same information for hard maple and East Indian Rosewood so you can see how it in context with well-known neck/fingerboard woods.

Padauk:

Stiffness: 1,688 1000psi.

Weight: 45 lbs/cu.ft.

Janka hardness: 1725 lbs

Hard Maple:

Stiffness: 1,830 1000psi

Weight: 44 lbs/cu.ft.

Janka hardness: 1450 lbs

East Indian Rosewood:

Stiffness: 1,737 1000psi

Weight: 53 lbs/cu.ft.

Janka hardness: 1720 lbs

Posted
The pertinent hard data for you, courtesy of the www.woodworkerssource.com species library; I've also included the same information for hard maple and East Indian Rosewood so you can see how it in context with well-known neck/fingerboard woods.

Padauk:

Stiffness: 1,688 1000psi.

Weight: 45 lbs/cu.ft.

Janka hardness: 1725 lbs

Hard Maple:

Stiffness: 1,830 1000psi

Weight: 44 lbs/cu.ft.

Janka hardness: 1450 lbs

East Indian Rosewood:

Stiffness: 1,737 1000psi

Weight: 53 lbs/cu.ft.

Janka hardness: 1720 lbs

Awesome ! so , according to these nice folks , it's as heavy as Maple , which kills the "too heavy" theory....... it's as hard as Rosewood or slightly harder, and not as stiff as either one , but real close to both ..... Interesting.

:D

Thanks for that info . Good stuff.

Posted (edited)
Awesome ! so , according to these nice folks , it's as heavy as Maple , which kills the "too heavy" theory....... it's as hard as Rosewood or slightly harder, and not as stiff as either one , but real close to both ..... Interesting.

:D

Thanks for that info . Good stuff.

Keep in mind, though, that the numerical data there only represents the average of the wood samples that they tested. There's a huge variation within species from tree to tree, and even variation within the same tree: wood from the bottom of a tree is (fairly consistently) heavier, stiffer, and stronger in almost every way than the wood from the top of the tree, according to the research I've seen so far from people who study trees for the lumber industry (and have nothing to do with instrument construction).

So it's a rough guide as to the differences between the woods, but that's all: it's rough. I have two nice pieces of curly Red maple that weigh 35.5 lbs/cu.ft and 38.6 lbs/cu.ft., but the species average is only 35 lbs/cu.ft. Weigh and compare everything you can, and keep notes from one instrument to the next! I would suspect that generally, heavier pieces are denser & stiffer than lighter ones. (Cast the words "strength to weight ratio" far from your mind right now. Just forget them. They're almost useless once one realizes that stiffness is proportional to thickness and shape, not overall weight.)

Just be careful that your wood isn't unusually heavy because it's not dried out entirely!

Edited by B. Aaron
Posted

I agree with all those statements. Thats what the little reading guy was about. Even with the "data", every tree , and indeed - individual piece of wood has to be examined.

I'm sold on the 'Duke as a neck wood though. First go with it proved it to be easily worked. Its just the little splinters and the red dust.... :D gotta love it.

Posted

there are many other woods i consider more suitable for that purpose. I am not saying it wont work - just that i would rather use something else

Posted

No doubt. Not a loaded question at all , just trying to see your angle on it. :D If , ( if ) I ever use it as a FB , it'd be because I have a slice of it left over and it fits as one. Right now , I'm building a mahogany neck with a teak FB , just to see how it sounds/plays . Now that I have a handle on removing FB's without killing the neck , I'm not as afraid to try something new. I can always just steam it off if its a total dog. Should I ever try it out ( 'Duke ) , I'll be sure to tell about it.

Posted

i have some nice bloodwood that would match the colour nicely and give a much better feel

tbh i dont like grainy fretboards and padauk would come under that. I use wenge occasionally and some rosewoods can be quite grainy ( i avoid those)... but play a few 40 year old wenge fretboards and you will see why i dont like grainy fretboards, i dont see that situation being better with padauk

having said that... i am just finish sanding a mando-guitar that has a flatsawn wenge fretboard with loads of pale/softer grain that disappears on old wenge fretboards... but the frets are so close together i dont think i will ever touch the fretboard. and its all built from scrap - not even sure what the body wood is.

Posted
...but play a few 40 year old wenge fretboards and you will see why i dont like grainy fretboards...

They don't even have to be that old. I've seen 10 year old Wenge fretboards that had such pronounced grain ridges that you could not only feel them, but SEE them.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...