# Chris Schwarz's Handplane Essentials Book



## Bodgers (29 Mar 2018)

Just got given this book as a present. It is a pretty comprehensive book. There is some good stuff on sharpening here and the comparison of different types of planes at various price points is interesting. Same sort of writing as his workbench book, but I like his style on the whole, at times it can get a bit 'over egged', but it is nice. There is a lot of information here, so it is a good value. 

Strange that all the pictures are black and white - not sure if it is a style choice or not. 

Other strange omission is an almost complete silence on wood planes. He doesn't seem to mention that this was a deliberate choice. Not sure what happened there.

I take issue on his review of the new Stanley SW planes as well. His second review in Popular Woodworking on the Low Angle Jack in 2010 he pretty much says he is happy (after the negative review in 2009) and then in this book, written in 2016 here, he re-hashes his negative comments from the 2009 PW review...

https://youtu.be/EuEbXDtmS6A


----------



## Droogs (29 Mar 2018)

2 ways to look at this. 
1. Like all good journos, he is being lazy and rehashing old material. Has bit him on the bum this time round though.

2 Has genuinely misssed adding the revised text from the later article to the book text.

Either way still prefer Gareth Hacks book


----------



## Bodgers (29 Mar 2018)

Droogs":36v8jd7t said:


> 2 ways to look at this.
> 1. Like all good journos, he is being lazy and rehashing old material. Has bit him on the bum this time round though.
> 
> 2 Has genuinely misssed adding the revised text from the later article to the book text.
> ...



I'll have to check Hack out, didn't realise he had any.

I like his hollow grind technique that I saw in a video - I have been playing around with that recently.


----------



## D_W (29 Mar 2018)

Chris knows a fair amount for a hobby woodworker, and his exposure to old sources should make him more accurate over time, but he knows a lot less than he thinks he does, and to my knowledge, has never made anything notable. 

These days, it's almost as if you have to give context to someone, like:
* 95% of my work is with power tools, but I need to fit joints, and I might like to smooth something once in a while, or
* I want to do all bulk work with power tools and all finish and joint work with hand tools, or
* I want to work only with hand tools

And then separate context about how fine of work you want to do.

Chris will make dumb comments concluding something about a sharpening regime, and then a few years later, he'll change his comment. Same with the stanley plane then and now. In terms of actually making something, I doubt it makes much difference. 

He's got a gaggle of people running around stating that you can't recover old tools, and it's a waste of time and money to try, that buying new LN chisels is money well spent. (that's debatable, certainly they hold value well, but if it's money well spent because that's supposedly a barrier to entry for doing good work, it's just dumb). 

Thomas Jefferson's quote about newspapers seems to apply in some cases. 

Not to mention, the old texts are out there and should be referenced first. The gurus should be referenced last unless they're actually doing notable work of the type you want to do and doing it the same way you want to do it. 

In the years that Chris has flip flopped on various things, the advice in Nicholson's material probably hasn't changed much.


----------



## custard (29 Mar 2018)

Nobody has a better grasp of hobby woodworking in the 21st century than Chris Schwarz.

Don't fancy going to a timber yard? No problems, rubbish pine from a DIY store is all you need.

Love hand tools but can't be bothered learning hand tool skills? Don't beat yourself up, it's perfectly acceptable to just nail stuff together.

Worried that all you can tackle is childish nonsense? Relax, Chris has some idiotically simple projects which he claims are in a proud but forgotten craft tradition, so you can still feel good about sinking thousands of pounds into them even though they're technically well below what fourteen year olds are doing in Woodworking O-Level.

Don't really want to make anything at all? That's okay too, Chris clearly understands that the future of the craft is _virtual woodworking_, it's just like real woodworking but, because it exists on the internet rather than in a workshop, there's absolutely no requirement to ever complete a single project.

Robert Wearing must be turning in his grave!


----------



## Bodgers (29 Mar 2018)

D_W":36c7z4if said:


> Chris knows a fair amount for a hobby woodworker, and his exposure to old sources should make him more accurate over time, but he knows a lot less than he thinks he does, and to my knowledge, has never made anything notable.
> 
> These days, it's almost as if you have to give context to someone, like:
> * 95% of my work is with power tools, but I need to fit joints, and I might like to smooth something once in a while, or
> ...


Interesting, yeah I suppose he is journalist/writer first, woodworker second 

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk


----------



## Bodgers (29 Mar 2018)

custard":20ko6hxf said:


> Nobody has a better grasp of hobby woodworking in the 21st century than Chris Schwarz.
> 
> Don't fancy going to a timber yard? No problems, rubbish pine from a DIY store is all you need.
> 
> ...


Lol. I think I bought the wrong book 

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk


----------



## custard (29 Mar 2018)

Bodgers":7nugsdmp said:


> Lol. I think I bought the wrong book



Let's say Robert Wearing and Chris Schwarz both wrote a book called _How To Speak French_

Wearing's book would be full of grammatical rules and carefully structured learning exercises.

Schwarz's book would say, just speak English with a French accent, that's close enough.


----------



## fiveeyes (29 Mar 2018)

D_W":ybrqt66x said:


> Chris knows a fair amount for a hobby woodworker, and his exposure to old sources should make him more accurate over time, but he knows a lot less than he thinks he does, and to my knowledge, has never made anything notable.
> 
> These days, it's almost as if you have to give context to someone, like:
> * 95% of my work is with power tools, but I need to fit joints, and I might like to smooth something once in a while, or
> ...


DW..have you made anything notable? If so, lets see it.


----------



## D_W (30 Mar 2018)

Only planes, but that is the only thing that I'd claim is notable. I'm certainly not the best plane builder, either, but I can build planes that work to a standard that nobody could complain about, and to an aesthetic that most would not. 

I could give a better (more accurate) class on making planes than Chris could give on anything, but you don't see me writing books or giving classes, do you? there are plenty of accomplished woodworkers and far superior older texts on most things for me to ever "play Chris" on any of them. 

I sure wouldn't be caught saying stupid things like "preparing old tools is false economy". 

The woodworking world is filled with George Wilsons, et. al. There's really no reason to read anything that Chris writes, though he does print other peoples' material quite well. I understand that is his profession.


----------



## StraightOffTheArk (30 Mar 2018)

Bitching aside, I find the Chris Schwarz thing interesting from a highly skilled marketing point of view - I can't claim any great skill in working wood and have learned from reading his books, and he does sometimes have interesting things to say, but personally, I don't like his journalistic style, but then, it's not aimed at me, it's aimed at rich guys who want an easy way to spend money while feeling in touch with their craft roots. I think Custard is bang on about him understanding the hobbyist woodworker, at least the ones with money to burn, partly because he is one of them writ large. He manages to promote himself as a 'Guru' while still seemingly a part of the hobbyist group - a very clever marketing trick, although if he didn't like being called out over poor sawing technique, not clever enough.

So I'd prefer Garrett Hack for the planing book, Robert Wearing/Charles Haywood for books about woodwork and Roy Underhill for slightly cheesy woodwork entertainment videos. I more or less follow 'The English Woodworker' for my blog fix - what would others recommend?


----------



## ED65 (30 Mar 2018)

D_W":mz3qyivp said:


> He's got a gaggle of people running around stating that you can't recover old tools, and it's a waste of time and money to try...


I wonder if that's because he absorbed Mike Dunbar's position? 

There's no doubt that CS has read Dunbar's book and at least among a certain set in American woodworking it's been quite influential. And he basically says not to bother buying tools in rough shape so as a result there are no real restoration techniques covered. As a result his book was a huge disappointment when I finally got to read a copy, library book thankfully, although it is good on what it covers (plenty on tuning and using) it does make the title a bit of a lie. 




fiveeyes":mz3qyivp said:


> DW..have you made anything notable? If so, lets see it.


With respect, he doesn't have to have to be able to criticise Chris Schwarz.

I was about to say my piece warning of the dangers of using Chris Schwarz as a primary source on hand planes myself and my credentials are far less impressive than D_W's. Doesn't make my comments automatically invalid, any more than any amateur's are. 

And for the record, I say this as an unapologetic fan of Schwarz's writing.


----------



## Paddy Roxburgh (30 Mar 2018)

fiveeyes":1rkg64ot said:


> DW..have you made anything notable? If so, lets see it.



Whilst DW can sometimes chat sh.. I would encourage you to check out the posts where he shows the planes he makes. Now I have never seen/used one in the flesh but they look pretty damn fine to me.


----------



## Silly_Billy (30 Mar 2018)

D_W":2mue6zhb said:


> Chris knows a fair amount for a hobby woodworker, and his exposure to old sources should make him more accurate over time, but he knows a lot less than he thinks he does, and to my knowledge, has never made anything notable.



I've read Chris' writing (including this particular book) and don't remember Chris ever claiming to have made anything notable. However, I enjoyed the book.

Chris is Schwartz is a journalist first and foremost, which means he writes well and his books are a pleasure to read. It doesn't make him a master woodworker and I can't recall him claiming to be one. You pays your money and all that.

If I want to learn from a master furniture maker, then I'll read someone like David C.


----------



## custard (30 Mar 2018)

fiveeyes":1tr423bd said:


> DW..have you made anything notable? If so, lets see it.



DW won his spurs by championing the largely discarded technique of the closely set cap iron, and he had to battle through endless scorn and scepticism to get his message across. That, to me at least, makes his views worth listening to, because having proved my assumptions wrong before maybe he'll do so again.


----------



## D_W (30 Mar 2018)

Silly_Billy":3g65pver said:


> D_W":3g65pver said:
> 
> 
> > Chris knows a fair amount for a hobby woodworker, and his exposure to old sources should make him more accurate over time, but he knows a lot less than he thinks he does, and to my knowledge, has never made anything notable.
> ...



There is trouble giving bad advice and then ducking behind "I never claimed to be a master woodworker, I just spend all my time giving advice to people about woodworking". 

You'll see little from me on furniture. I like to make tools (if I had more time, I would make clocks, though - and probably branch into furniture). 

David C. teaches lovely techniques (and, in fact, his videos are where I learned the basics of sharpening, etc, and I literally never had to deal with this agonizing stream of torture that a lot of people state they go through using dull tools). 

However, the definitive literature on furniture has been written for hundreds of years and is not match by anyone instructing to hobbyists currently. 

Chris is not alone - there are a lot of people giving inconsistent or bad advice because the market for the service is uneducated and really in general isn't serious about anything (and many would quit if you saddled them with the idea that they should be able to design, or at least discern good design and execute to a high standard at the same time). The difference with Chris is that when it is pointed out to him that he's wrong, and it's due to lack of competence, he gets very resentful. 

When someone proves me wrong, I'm a little bit embarrassed, apologetic and lit to learn to get it right. 

Though George Wilson is not known on this board, he is not at all above being corrected when he thinks there's a chance he could be wrong. In general, I'm in no position to do that. Not to be confused with the times when he knows he's right and takes no prisoners, that's different. But a completely different demeanor, just open to finding the right answer all the time and being very careful and discriminatory in terms of what it might be.


----------



## D_W (30 Mar 2018)

custard":1efzr2sv said:


> fiveeyes":1efzr2sv said:
> 
> 
> > DW..have you made anything notable? If so, lets see it.
> ...



My next project will be instructions for making a dovetailed Norris no 1, suitable for rank beginners who have never even turned a screw or changed a doorknob. 

..

Just kidding. 

I am making a Norris 1 right now, though - and trying to do it well.

(i recall Frank Klausz saying something that was recorded in a conversation about ten years ago that struck me, and I didn't want to be limited by it, but he was right. He was saying to a bunch of hobbyists "your problem is that you all want to try to do everything instead of learning to do one thing well". It still feels limiting - making tools and understanding them *well* pretty much eliminates anything else at this point, and I'd really like to try to copy some 18th century furniture and clocks)


----------



## sundaytrucker (30 Mar 2018)

I haven't read this latest revision of Schwarz's book but have read the Garret Hack one before selling to a forum member a few months back. 

As I became more interested in hand tools I was directed toward Chris Schwarz and read a lot of his material, some of which was useful. I have read both The Anarchists Tool Chest (overrated) and The Anarchist Design Book (enjoyable) and own a couple other Lost art Press publications. I am looking forward to Richard Jones' (Sgian Dubh) book Cut & Dried being released in the near future. 

I'd never pay the price for any Crucible tool. Absolutely not. $95 for a lump hammer, $187 for a pair of dividers and $135 for a single holdfast (1" no less!). I am definitely not the intended market.


----------



## D_W (30 Mar 2018)

Actually, I have quite a few of Chris's books, but they're books where the material is someone else's make, and he is the publisher. He does quite well with those, and the quality of the books themselves (physical quality) is lovely on top of the content. 

I did have a couple of other books of his early on, and probably still have them, but I'm not sure I'd give them away to someone new. 

I sort of empathize with their position making tools - they want to make high quality tools, but I think they're in the weeds solving problems that don't really exist. 

the bit about making a really expensive hammer head and then dickering with custom hammer makers who want to charge a fair fraction of the total handle price is kind of funny. 

(I haven't seen anything since they started and just had the dividers - that type is generally available in spades around here for a couple of bucks each. They might not be as perfect, but...well, they're a couple of bucks each - and oh my, I thought you'd get three for $187 based on the picture, but that appears to be the price for one). 

Never heard the term lump hammer and thought it might be something special, but nope, it's just a boutique equivalent of something available for about $5. 

I think Chris should stick to publishing other peoples' work. He's quite good at that, but the result of celebrity from that does give them a captive audience who might do something like buy a $135 iron holdfast that requires its own special holes.

I see in their description that they're going to make no nonsense tools that they "honestly need", with no limited editions, etc. (is that a shot at bridge city?). 

I wonder when they'll start doing that. So far, there's an expensive version of plastic draftsman's curves, an extremely expensive cast holdfast that requires you to make special holes in your bench (when the inexpensive bent wire holdfasts work a treat), and an extremely expensive set of dividers that holds promise of allowing you to never learn to pein a rivet. And a very expensive version of an otherwise crude tool still produce very well both domestically and by foreign makers for a tiny fraction of the target price. 

Jeez. 

(It pains me a little to criticize those items, as Raney Nelson is along for the ride and i hold Raney in high regard - he is generous, driven and very capable and knowledgeable).


----------



## Cheshirechappie (30 Mar 2018)

Might be interesting reading for some;

https://blog.lostartpress.com/2018/03/17/unto-others/


----------



## D_W (30 Mar 2018)

Selectively applied in his case, it appears. 

When they found a handle maker who wanted $35, it was too much. He must not have been an "artisan".


----------



## D_W (31 Mar 2018)

My apologies (a day after getting hot headed and maybe overly particular about this) if the kind of light "it doesn't have to be great" topical material is what some folks prefer. 

I just don't, but if you do, I don't expect your opinions to be mine, just because I voice mine a lot. 

I have particularly strong opinions about us being really good at something before we give advice, and keeping the "found it in a french barn" fluff to a minimum. I've been asked several times (for pay) to teach courses on plane making, to make planes for people for pay (and I've only done that a couple of times on condition that the proceeds go to charity), and to write articles (for pay) for magazines. 

In my opinion, nothing that i know rises above being something that should be given away for free, and if I started posting everything that I make or think (instead of just mostly plane topical material) it wouldn't really serve anyone but me. There's a huge market for that kind of thing, though and I don't believe we all have to be polite to each other and bite our lips all the time to stay friends or be helpful to each other (willfully helpful, not helpful expecting something in return or doing it to try to get people to like us or think highly of us).


----------



## CStanford (1 Apr 2018)

Somebody mentioned him in an earlier post, I don't know how closely Garrett Hack sets his cap iron, couldn't care less at this point, but I do love his work dearly:

http://www.garretthack.com


----------



## Phil Pascoe (1 Apr 2018)

God, those drawer knobs are ugly.


----------



## CStanford (2 Apr 2018)

He tends to show poor attention to little details....


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

CStanford":33gw46ou said:


> Somebody mentioned him in an earlier post, I don't know how closely Garrett Hack sets his cap iron, couldn't care less at this point, but I do love his work dearly:
> 
> http://www.garretthack.com



He makes nice furniture, but not a lot of it. Just enough to draw for classes and write books (but I guess there aren't a lot of folks making a living on furniture - at least not nice furniture, so you do what you have to do). I believe one of his boasts is that he's never had to replace his thickness planer blades. They must be PM V11.

I don't think Chris S could make the items he makes. I probably couldn't, either.

There are some fantastic makers and carvers on the various forums (Mark Yundt comes to mind), but I guess they're too busy making things to write books and teach classes.


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

phil.p":y6u4psrd said:


> God, those drawer knobs are ugly.



I kind of like them!

The whole little table is quite nice.


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

For Charlie's edification. From Garrett's book:

"To put a little more spring into the cap iron, tap it right at the point of curvature while it is held in a vise. Only a slight amount of tension between the iron and the cap is needed. Adjust the cap iron just back from the cutting edge for a smoothing plane and fine shavings"

Not bad. 

From Chris's blog four years after this:

"Chipbreakers do more harm than good in a handplane. Whenever I’m having trouble with a plane (especially if the plane is choking or refuses to cut), the first place I look is the chipbreaker. Whenever I fettle a new or vintage handplane and the pipper won’t behave, the first thing I’ll do is swap out its chipbreaker with another plane that has a working chipbreaker. In almost all cases, this solves my problem.

"So what is the purpose of the chipbreaker? My cynical view of the gizmo is that it became widely used so toolmakers could use a cheap, thin steel cutter and reinforce it with an inexpensive iron or soft-steel plate."

"In my view, the chipbreaker’s only real purpose in a modern plane is to mate with the tool’s blade-adjustment mechanism and to aid in chip ejection. Oh, and it exists to frustrate you."

"If you read Professor Kato’s study carefully, you’ll note that he had better luck with a chipbreaker that had a radical forward-leaning angle – 80°! This 80° breaker worked better even when positioned back a little on the cutting iron. I have yet to try this setup on a plane because the numbers don’t add up. Professor Kato is working with a bevel-down plane bedded at 40°. Do the math: Putting an 80° chipbreaker on an iron bedded at 45° with a tight mouthseems madness."

(all of that is incorrect. Even the last part. Bill Tindall got the paper from K&K that they wrote for hand tools (not super surfacers) and they don't recommend anything other than setting a cap iron by eye and checking the results). 

And since he couldn't figure out out:

"This mechanism allows you to easily set your tool to take the finest cut possible, which really will reduce tear-out."

(whee, you can spend all day - might as well just sand instead)

Didn't think this thread was generally about cap irons, but since you brought it up - it's on par with Chris's general level of accuracy. I hope that not too many people watched those videos and set their caps at 80 (potentially ruining them).


----------



## CStanford (2 Apr 2018)

Fascinating. I think I'd better take a blood pressure pill. The excitement is overwhelming.


----------



## custard (2 Apr 2018)

CStanford":2ezmqw2r said:


> Somebody mentioned him in an earlier post, I don't know how closely Garrett Hack sets his cap iron, couldn't care less at this point, but I do love his work dearly:
> 
> http://www.garretthack.com



I've met him a couple of times. I admire his work and his dedication, but in many ways he's the opposite of cuddly Chris Schwarz. He's taciturn, bristly and doesn't suffer fools gladly. He encourages people to stretch themselves way beyond their comfort zones, and doesn't conceal his contempt for anyone taking the easy way out. He also rails against the dumbing down of the craft, both the amateur and professional craft, by the magazines and the internet.

Spend a few years with Garrett Hack and you'd be a serious maker, spend a few years with Chris Schwarz and I guess you'd have lots of fun memories but you wouldn't have progressed far nor made much that's worthwhile.


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

Looks like Charlie stepped in that one. 

Can't much disagree with Hack's sentiment. It corners me (and other amateurs) into making only one thing if I'm going to do it well, but I'd rather make one thing well and be an expert (maybe in 20 years, I'll be an expert planemaker) at it than make a whole bunch of things poorly. If someone else wants to just make a whole bunch of stuff, that's fine, too, but they should probably refer to someone who has gone way deep on a given topic rather than taking the "my way is good enough, so it's good enough for other people" attitude.


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

CStanford":1ng4ol68 said:


> Fascinating. I think I'd better take a blood pressure pill. The excitement is overwhelming.



Perhaps you could give us your expert opinion on roof trusses or 1040EZs, Charlie, because you always seem to refer to someone else's work and then throw shade on the conversation when it doesn't go your way.


----------



## CStanford (2 Apr 2018)

I'd be happy to. What would you like to know? I've actually never prepared the EZ, but from what I understand about them I imagine you're able to file on one.


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

I'm too late, Charlie. I already filed, and almost paid turbotax for the pleasure, but they let me file for free this year. 

I do have to finish a lending library for the neighborhood, and I have an honest question. Where can I get a small amount of rolled asphalt roofing? Or anything that would be black and work as rolled out. I'm supposed to copy a library that the neighborhood bought, but it's commercially made and i'm actually struggling to find a suitable substitute to cover the roof without spending a glom of the neighborhood's money.


----------



## Bm101 (2 Apr 2018)

Just googled 1040EZs
Wow. Just have a meet and slug it out.

As a beginner I have a bit of a soft spot for Schwarz because it was his book that I read while lying on my (herniated) back a few years ago round my sister in laws house in Somerset while the family actually enjoyed their holiday that got me to actually follow up on a lifelong interest in trees, joinery, carving, live hedging, green woodworking.... all sorts of stuff really. 
F*** me I thought. I'm going to make a bench like that.
I can distinctly remember the moment.
I've learnt a huge amount since then. Mostly how little time I have to spend doing what I'd like to do.
That's fairly much where my attachment to Chris Schwarz ends though. Even fairly early I picked up Wearing from recommendations on here and realised there was a whole different league. No reflection on other comments, my brother in law has all those beautifully printed books by the Lost Art Press.
Lovely shizzle. You could pick those books up and believe you were an 18th Century Gentleman of Land and Good Fortune they are so well bound. Creamy pages, well bound, typeset by Elves from the High Council Of Elven Librarians.
My Wearing book was reprinted in '87. It's just a battered old book I bought second or third hand off the internet. When I want to check something it's my first point of call.

I have Garret Hacks book. 
It's just a book too. Bit more modern. Photos are nice.
I'd say it was the perfect balance of coffee table pictures and real content.
That's no damning indictment. It's a compliment. My Dad could pick it up, scan through it while waiting for a Dentists appointment. He'd be happy. Someone interested in making planes could use it as a reference book. Someone getting interested in planes, sharpening etc could use it as a guide. It's full of content_ AND _nice pictures. I know which book I'd choose. No contest.
Cheers now
Chris


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

That question is open to more than Charlie (suitable rolled material for a small roof 2x3 feet roughly and a single slant - not a triangular roof with an apex), but I'm going to Charlie on this one because I know he's got a lot more exposure to building materials on a day to day basis than I do. 

https://littlefreelibrary.myshopify.com ... -two-story

This is the thing they purchased (actually won) and the one I'm building is slightly taller and wider. Not having a clue about external building practices, I can only say that they put some sort of rolled material on the top and some light angle steel around the edges to tack it down.


----------



## D_W (2 Apr 2018)

Bm101":1g6b7ieh said:


> Just googled 1040EZs
> Wow. Just have a meet and slug it out.
> 
> As a beginner I have a bit of a soft spot for Schwarz because it was his book that I read while lying on my (herniated) back a few years ago round my sister in laws house in Somerset while the family actually enjoyed their holiday that got me to actually follow up on a lifelong interest in trees, joinery, carving, live hedging, green woodworking.... all sorts of stuff really.
> ...



A good assessment. I, too, have some of Chris's books. You're in a conundrum with his material, because it's not really that great and when is it really worth shipping a $10 book to someone else, especially if you think they should be reading something with better roots? I may have thrown that one away, though (the workbench book). When I ultimately built a bench, I built it fast and with aspects that cater to building planes (because that's what I do), but with enough size to work wood entirely by hand elsewhere. I can say that buying the book was a waste, when I was a beginner, I pondered "which one" I would build and procrastinated. It had no influence on what I made, a need forced my hand and cost (well, that was self imposed) and time limited what I was going to do. No Roubo through tenons, no fancy tail vises, just a big brick of a bench. 

Garrett's book is also excellent eye candy, but I can't actually remember anything from it other than that I still have it somewhere. I had heard elsewhere (other than custard) that he can be interpreted as arrogant or come across quite sure of himself (but this was from someone a couple of notches above him - not George for those who will assume that's who I'm talking about - and not "one of us"). 

I could've made a presentation bench, but came to the same realization as you. I want to do something well. I don't just want to do something, I want to do it well. In my case, I have a minor fascination with planes and their function, so I would like to build wooden and infill planes well, and nearly or almost nearly entirely by hand (some parts of the infill require a lathe if they're going to have a lever). 

I'd love to try 18th century clocks, but time allows only for one thing at this point. If I switch, I will resent it. Getting volunteered for neighborhood projects and building a few pieces of case for the house (as well as kitchen cabinets) has been plenty to resent already. It is not fulfulling. 

There is nothing above average about me as a builder, in any context. I suspect that a lot of the rest of us who are mediocre would enjoy this hobby a lot more if we did as custard said hack advocates - push yourself a little bit and do things that might make you a bit uncomfortable, and with my add on if you're limited in time - pick one thing and do it well. Get immersed in it, really understand it. That extends to holding yourself accountable for design so that you don't carefully make something you resent (been there and done that).


----------



## CStanford (2 Apr 2018)

D_W":2vkor05t said:


> I'm too late, Charlie. I already filed, and almost paid turbotax for the pleasure, but they let me file for free this year.
> 
> I do have to finish a lending library for the neighborhood, and I have an honest question. Where can I get a small amount of rolled asphalt roofing? Or anything that would be black and work as rolled out. I'm supposed to copy a library that the neighborhood bought, but it's commercially made and i'm actually struggling to find a suitable substitute to cover the roof without spending a glom of the neighborhood's money.



I have no idea. I just frame roofs "roof cutter" (on occasion), I'm not a roofing contractor -- the guys who apply shingles and all that, two very separate and distinct trades around here. I'd do a search for a roofing contractor in your area to see if they'd like to donate the material, if not also the labor to put it on for you.


----------



## D_W (3 Apr 2018)

Well, in that case, i choose roll on rubberized bed liner. Not going to make a science project out of it. "volunteer" work and 2 hours of someone selling some kind of rubberized UV tolerant roofing last night for less than $50, and no dice. 

Don't know why I volunteer to do this kind of stuff, I have a million planes that I'd like to build and kitchen counters to fabricate (and a wife who reminds me of the latter every day).


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (5 Apr 2018)

Jeez, I've stayed away from this forum for too long! Forums in the states are now "dumbed down, politically correct" (besides, filled with Schwarz fan-boys) and I miss the down & dirty, truth be told postings.

As far as a publisher, I like a lot of the stuff Lost Arts Press puts out: I have all of the Hayward books, the Wearing book and a few others, including Anarchist Tool Chest (was this to be a parody book, as since Schwarz has moved into his Roy Underhill imitating store front, he also built an "out of sight" power tool room. OK, well, I use power tools along with my hand tools, but then again Schwarz can't admit that, otherwise he wouldn't be getting $3,500 a pop for the work chests he builds. Seems to me, there were a group of employees that came out of Popular Woodworking (some left on their own, others discharged) that have grouped together, to make an industry out of plying their wares to the fan boys. More power to them, but just because they call themselves instructors, doesn't mean they know anything.

For the record, now that DW has ventured into plane building, he can send all his natural stones my way. In fact, I was in his neighborhood this past weekend and I should have knocked on his door to get them! Also, I enjoy my hobby, even if I never progress past what some may consider ham-fisted constructioneering! Make fun of me and I'll take my $4.00 Harbor Freight "lump hammer" to your head!


----------



## CStanford (5 Apr 2018)

Schwarz has built most of the furniture for his home and office. Seems like some pictures appeared online at some point and to be honest the work was pretty damned stunning if memory serves. I've never been a huge fan of his, but he can work wood a little bit. I couldn't care less if he missed the boat on the cap iron. If my timeline is correct, and I think it is, he had plenty of projects under his belt by the time all that came out. It got done somehow, maybe with the help of power tools. Tisk, tisk.


----------



## D_W (5 Apr 2018)

Tony Zaffuto":11b3kce3 said:


> Jeez, I've stayed away from this forum for too long! Forums in the states are now "dumbed down, politically correct" (besides, filled with Schwarz fan-boys) and I miss the down & dirty, truth be told postings.
> 
> As far as a publisher, I like a lot of the stuff Lost Arts Press puts out: I have all of the Hayward books, the Wearing book and a few others, including Anarchist Tool Chest (was this to be a parody book, as since Schwarz has moved into his Roy Underhill imitating store front, he also built an "out of sight" power tool room. OK, well, I use power tools along with my hand tools, but then again Schwarz can't admit that, otherwise he wouldn't be getting $3,500 a pop for the work chests he builds. Seems to me, there were a group of employees that came out of Popular Woodworking (some left on their own, others discharged) that have grouped together, to make an industry out of plying their wares to the fan boys. More power to them, but just because they call themselves instructors, doesn't mean they know anything.
> 
> For the record, now that DW has ventured into plane building, he can send all his natural stones my way. In fact, I was in his neighborhood this past weekend and I should have knocked on his door to get them! Also, I enjoy my hobby, even if I never progress past what some may consider ham-fisted constructioneering! Make fun of me and I'll take my $4.00 Harbor Freight "lump hammer" to your head!



Jeez - $3500!! I'd make them by hand for that, and without so much pine on them. And without the machine planer lines that are running across the boards on the picture that someone linked on here. 

I thought maybe those were for charity or something. I've got a lot of natural stones left, but I'm sure you've got your share, too! Probably more than me. 

If you're in pittsburgh, you can bring your "pittsburgh" brand hammer over and i can get some of mine out and we can bang them together really hard until we find out what it takes to break a head free from the handles. Loser gets a hammer in the head!!


----------



## D_W (5 Apr 2018)

Tony Zaffuto":2z2kcao1 said:


> but then again Schwarz can't admit that..



Reminds me of an old post Chris had years ago when I was anew and read his blog (for about a year or so). He made a stubby little bench out of a solid cherry top and gassed out and cut the ends off with a circular saw. 

There's certainly nothing wrong with doing that (most people would probably make a better cut that way, anyway), but there's a simple thing that anyone with significant hand tool experience would do to cut an end off of a bench like that. Use a rip saw. 

It's just one of many little things that you could learn that would be useful....if you were reading from someone who was actually experienced more in using hand tools than writing about buying them.


----------



## Derek Cohen (Perth Oz) (5 Apr 2018)

Nice to see you here, Tony! I, too, have stayed out of this thread too long. 

As with many of the Internet/Magazine personalities, there is a line of fan boys that develop and stand behind them. You are on a hiding to none if one attempts to debate any with a reasoned argument. It is not only Chris Schwarz but personalities like Paul Sellers - just venture onto their blogs and read the replies and feedback section ... it can turn a strong stomach.

All this makes it harder to state something positive, and there are many positives. I have a love-hate relationship with Paul Sellers. I love that he breaks the work down and brings it within reach of those starting out. This is being a good teacher. But the rest of his self-promoting leaves me dead. Still, he is in business, and he has a good business model.

I view Chris Schwarz in a similar light. He is a good teacher of basic techniques. He is also a responsible writer insofar as he provides the sources of his information. He never states a technique is his invention (unlike Paul whathisname) - it is the fanboys who attribute techniques to Chris, not Chris. As I understand, he is simply providing a more modern and easily readable/accessible vehicle for the old methods. And good for him - he is infinitely more readable than some of the old texts!

The furniture he builds is clean and tidy. I consider Chris to be a good woodworker. The pieces he builds may be divided into three areas: benches and tool chests (which developed out his research at Pop Wood magazine), campaign furniture (he must have read my adventure here and decided this was a good time to pursue this line  ) and, thirdly, Welsh Stick chairs. The last area, which appears more dominantly of late, may be misunderstood by many since he has simplified/minimised the construction details. This comes across as dumbed down. It is to some extent, however there is nothing beginner like about curved chair parts and leg joinery. The campaign furniture is equally basic in looks because it does not contain mouldings are carvings. The fact is that he does all these very well. They may not be ornate, and this may appear less than the work of one who specialises in the styles of, say, the 18th century (and I could not say whether Chris could do so), but it does not make his teachings less relevant for many. 

Would I want him as a teacher? No, I really doubt he has much to teach anyone with moderately advanced skills. As someone who likes the contemporary style, one modern, contemporary maker/teacher I would like to rather share time with (in the USA) is Garrett Hack. There are many others, all of whom have demonstrated much more advanced work than Chris has demonstrated.

Can I learn from his use of tools? Is his book any help beyond a beginner-intermediate level? I really cannot say much as I have not read it. I very much doubt that it is aimed at the likes of you, David, Charles, or anyone beyond the intermediate level. I also do not expect that the content will be new, but will rather present old information in a fresh way. I know that he came to the chipbreaker late, but that is not the only focus in handplane use, and hand planes are just one of a wide range of tools used in building furniture. 

Personally, I would like to see books on blended woodworking. This is more realistic for today. That is, where power- and hand tools may be interchanged or used alongside one another. I believe that the rounded furniture maker needs to learn to use all methods. The extremists (who push extreme methods - all hand tools) bother me since either they are doing this for glory, or they are telling porkies. Chris has not hidden his use of power tools, however he does not state where he uses it and where he uses hand tools. I wish he would since I can imagine those attempting to follow in his footsteps obtaining a skewed version of how woodworking is done.

Regards from Perth

Derek


----------



## patrickjchase (6 Apr 2018)

D_W":2g58774v said:


> He makes nice furniture, but not a lot of it. Just enough to draw for classes and write books (but I guess there aren't a lot of folks making a living on furniture - at least not nice furniture, so you do what you have to do). I believe one of his boasts is that he's never had to replace his thickness planer blades. They must be PM V11.



Carbide.


----------



## Andy Kev. (6 Apr 2018)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> Nice to see you here, Tony! I, too, have stayed out of this thread too long.
> 
> As with many of the Internet/Magazine personalities, there is a line of fan boys that develop and stand behind them. You are on a hiding to none if one attempts to debate any with a reasoned argument. It is not only Chris Schwarz but personalities like Paul Sellers - just venture onto their blogs and read the replies and feedback section ... it can turn a strong stomach.
> 
> ...


There are no prizes around here for making a case in a reasonable, balanced and sane way!

I think you've hit it on the head although I would add one thing: he seems to be developing into a woodworking historian cum archaeologist and that looks like it is leading to interesting results in the form of his Mechanick Exercises book which, if the teasers on the LAP blog are anything to go by, could be very interesting.

You're absolutely right in that most of his stuff is invaluable for beginners/intermediate level woodworkers. I gained a lot of knowledge and saved a lot of time from his survey of tools in the Anarchist's Tool Chest (my review of which on here generated a hilariously heated argument with the funniest contributions coming from those who hated it but ... er ... had never read it). His critics seem to want to set him up as being in competition with the likes of Garrett Hack which I'm sure he's not: he's ploughing his own furrow and one does not have to take what is on offer from him, nor does learning from him preclude learning from others. There does at least seem to be agreement that he has provided a highly useful source of knowledge in the form of his LAP publications.

One would have to be a fool to be a "fanboy" of any woodworking guru but it is surely reasonable to be generally approving of e.g. CS or Paul Sellars.


----------



## nabs (6 Apr 2018)

I can only echo previous comments about his valuable contribution to sharing important historical works on woodwork, which him and his team are very good at. I enjoyed his 'workbench' book too, but find his journo style a bit off putting and that keeps me away from his blog.

Like Andy I am intrigued by his more recent forays into "woodworking archeology"and I am really interested to see the results of the research he as done on workbenches. Having said that, apparently I'm not so interested as to have actually bought the book!


----------



## D_W (6 Apr 2018)

patrickjchase":zuwodpbc said:


> D_W":zuwodpbc said:
> 
> 
> > He makes nice furniture, but not a lot of it. Just enough to draw for classes and write books (but I guess there aren't a lot of folks making a living on furniture - at least not nice furniture, so you do what you have to do). I believe one of his boasts is that he's never had to replace his thickness planer blades. They must be PM V11.
> ...



They are probably HSS or carbon steel. I'm assuming that he has an older planer with thick blades that are intended to be resharpened. 

The old lineshaft square head planers had blades that were intended to be refreshed with a file and reset. A set would've probably lasted a professional worker at least several years. 

That combined with doing a lot of teaching and not as much making, but it doesn't appear that "making" makes money, at least not as much as easily. If you can make furniture as nice as Garrett has on his page and not be inundated with commissions, why bother?


----------



## D_W (6 Apr 2018)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> Nice to see you here, Tony! I, too, have stayed out of this thread too long.
> 
> As with many of the Internet/Magazine personalities, there is a line of fan boys that develop and stand behind them. You are on a hiding to none if one attempts to debate any with a reasoned argument. It is not only Chris Schwarz but personalities like Paul Sellers - just venture onto their blogs and read the replies and feedback section ... it can turn a strong stomach.
> 
> ...



I agree pretty much 100% with that. I have less of an issue with Paul, can't say why. Well, I could, but I'm sure I'd have to think about the details and then I'd forget what this reply was supposed to be in the first place. 

I'm very much intermediate. Just curious intermediate, perhaps eccentric. And I agree that sometimes it's the fans that are worse than the person. Sometimes too many fans then enables the person, too. What comes to mind is the saw jamming episode on the Woodwright's shop and George's criticism of jamming saws. That drew fanboys out who never participate where George does, but they felt the need to register or revive their old accounts to see if they could get George in trouble. That snowballed into people going and telling Chris, and he threw a fit (he should've said "yes, it's problematic and I should do better", but instead, he made an excuse that the show rushed him or something like that and ...well, it ended stupidly with comments from moderators that all opinions are the same (which is good for advertising) and a public admonishment for George for defending himself. 

As an old professor of mine (Gerard Letac) used to say when someone asked a dumb question, "sheer stupidity!". 

I was put off of Chris right away when I started, not because someone told me anything about him (rather everyone said "you have to get this DVD" - rough to ready or something), but because I saw a segment of him using planes, and he looked incompetent, I didn't see the substance and don't enjoy things like golf tips from a 20 handicapper. To be fair, when paul sellers attempts to show dimensioning a board by hand, it's painful looking, too. 

re: the blended woodworking, I think though people won't call it that, such a thing is generally what is taught. Chris failing to cut the end off of a bench 18 inches wide, Paul being forthright about using machine planers, it's sort of the way things are already. A couple of chairmakers come to mind as doing everything by hand, but that's about it. I doubt many people are interested in doing everything by hand, anyway, but there is a vacuum of relevant instruction for those who do. There's another person (can't remember his name) who makes a project, writes a book, writes a project, makes a book. Does neat work, but agonizingly slow. Working by hand doesn't have to be that slow.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (6 Apr 2018)

Derek Cohen (Perth said:


> Nice to see you here, Tony! I, too, have stayed out of this thread too long.
> 
> As with many of the Internet/Magazine personalities, there is a line of fan boys that develop and stand behind them. You are on a hiding to none if one attempts to debate any with a reasoned argument. It is not only Chris Schwarz but personalities like Paul Sellers - just venture onto their blogs and read the replies and feedback section ... it can turn a strong stomach.
> 
> ...



Good to see you too, Derek!

Chris does an excellent job (as I have previously posted) with "Lost Arts Press". Though I already had copies of some of his reprints, what I have are old, vintage copies. As I am a American history buff, I have purchased a number of reprints of non-woodworking books through the years, and those of the quality that Chris prints, are generally priced higher than his pricing.

You made an excellent point that he would be doing aspiring woodworkers a service by speaking to his process.

In thinking through the "fanboy" problem, perhaps this is more a function of the Popular Woodworking business model and how the mag put its people out there (Woodworking in America, as one example). Who could blame Schwarz for capitalizing on his fame (I'm certain, he never expected it, when he first took the job as editor of PWW). If we feel the need to spend $100 on a "lump hammer" or "dividers", who does it harm?

In the end, we all have our God-given brains to make our own decisions.


----------



## D_W (6 Apr 2018)

I'm kind of incented to pein together some dividers and file them to a nice shape. There's a whole world of retired engineers, physicians, etc, who will buy those tools because they're unique and not factory made. No problem with that. I thought the "found it in a french barn" and "peining the pin is a daunting task, so we found a really expensive solution" kind of thing to be a bit hokey. The hammer is puzzler, though. If you say you're going to only make tools that you really need, where are those? 

So is the hold fast, though, i guess. The discussion around it is it's the only one that really works in everything (as if that will save you some labor by not having to have a bench that agrees with a specific hold fast). The strange part of it is that you need to modify your bench and dog holes to work with it, and in the end, it's just a crude rough casting for the same ballpark as something made by peter ross. 

Just a real turn for the weird. 

(peining things isn't that hard, of course. Sooner or later, one runs across very old scissors or clippers or something that are riveted - the ability to pein quickly is quite nice...tap tap, done. I'd far prefer it to any screw, especially when the solution to the problem requires you to buy a special fastener gadget - it's just created another problem, one that could be hard to find when you need it. That's a pain. Pein or pain, I'll take Pein). 

I think I'll start a plane-making company and make skew-infill shooting planes, and use the same motto. "only planes you really need". except making them is a pain, and you have to pein.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (6 Apr 2018)

David, David, David, if only we were smart enough to gain some sharpening fans and then start marketing slag from underneath the old Century III mall as the latest, greatest sharpening medium.


----------



## D_W (6 Apr 2018)

Nice. Brownfield stone. A green sustainable product.


----------



## Eric The Viking (7 Apr 2018)

I'm an amateur, relatively unskilled woodworker. I'm probably too old (and my hands are too damaged now) to ever make exquisite things, and I have the burden of neverending DIY, requiring all sorts of tools and skills I wouldn't choose to buy, and time I would far rather spend on other things. It's soul-destroying using a lot of "free" time fixing bodges done in years past.

But I digress. I'm simply explaining the perspective I'm writing from.

I like Chris S. I enjoy watching him riffing off Roy Underhill in The Woodwright's Shop, and his books sometimes make me laugh out loud - for the best reasons. I have both his first workbench book and his handplane one. 

The latter is interesting and enjoyable (for me), for one important reason: I have a small collection of planes, mostly bought as they've been needed. Chris gives me an introduction to and explanation of a lot of edge tools I don't own. Many I'm never going to own, but occasionally I can see the value of getting something for a specific task, and I will. He demystifies, and I find that helpful.

Of course I can see what the experts on here are saying: Chris is probably not the person to go to for truly deep, expert advice. But what some of our experts may be missing is that, for me, it's obvious he's not the right person to ask, either! Woodworking requires thought and judgement, and it's obvious when you need to do more research to get to the nub of something. So I read and watch, but not uncritically (in the best sense). 

He's an evangelist for woodworking as a pastime. As a novice, you come away thinking, "I want to do that!" AND that his skillset is attainable, and affordably so, too. 

For me it resonates with the bound back-issues of The Woodworker I have in the library - the inter-war and post-war periods were full of "enhance your life with things you can make and do yourself" writings. I see ghosts of those authors in Chris's work. 

And those, surely, are important and valuable things. 

E.


----------



## Chip shop (7 Apr 2018)

Was Chris Schwartz the one who wrote that book about making a totally impractical tool box, or was it that Cosman bloke? Someone lent me a copy and it left me a bit cold, as does all this lifestyle woodworking nonsense. The bit I seem to remember had the author waffling about a coping saw, I think I gave up then and looked at the pictures instead.

PS just checked; it was Schwartz who wrote the book. Rob Cosman seems to flog inordinately expensive saws.


----------



## David C (11 Apr 2018)

"And those, surely, are important and valuable things. "

Spot on. I am apalled by some of these ludicrous criticisms of Chris Schwarz.

His books are very useful for the beginner and his writing style is amusing, far more entertaining than a dry reproduction of old texts.

I have just glanced at the handplane book and am mightily impressed by the quantity of reviews and techniques.

best wishes,
David


----------



## D_W (15 Apr 2018)

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, David. I don't begrudge you that. I hope you recognize it's no more (than an opinion) than the rest of ours, though.

Thank goodness that for those of us put off by Chris's mediocrity, at best, there are folks like George Wilson to talk to, true masters too busy to shill and with no interest in that.

I have noticed that you guys (the video and book publishers) tend to run in packs, just as the boutique toolmakers do, and you get offended for each other with relative ease.

A lot of the stuff you guys publish makes it so that beginners get to walk through an unproductive, expensive and confusing minefield, making it difficult to ever get to the point of productivity making or designing anything. That's too bad. Aim low, shoot low.

I guarantee 30 minutes on the phone with George is far different than any of the slow paced off the mark videos that are all over the place.


----------



## stoopiduk (15 Apr 2018)

Speaking as a beginner: I don't have George's phone number.


----------



## D_W (15 Apr 2018)

Actually, if you post on sawmillcreek and have something you're struggling with and say something along the lines of "I don't want 100 opinions on this, I want something that will work", he'll probably tell you to call him. 

He doesn't much tolerate people asking for advice and then telling him they know better, though. 

Years ago, I got in touch with him because he saw me post a picture of a saw (that I thought I did a good job on making a handle for). Probably 20 posts about how great it looked (and at the time, I didn't have the sense to know that i didn't), and he said "I see potential areas of improvement and then you could have a nice saw". I thought at first that his demands were too much to ask of someone who had scarcely made anything at the time (especially the suggestion that I ought to understand the design elements that would make it better). 

He sent me a private message right after making that post and said what is your phone number, I'd like to talk to you. He certainly wasn't rude, but I felt like he was expecting too much. It didn't take long to figure out that he wasn't, I was just being lazy and had my expectations too low.


----------



## Silly_Billy (16 Apr 2018)

D_W":3hp6lrfe said:


> You're certainly entitled to your opinion, David ... I have noticed that you guys (the video and book publishers) tend to run in packs, just as the boutique toolmakers do, and you get offended for each other with relative ease.
> 
> A lot of the stuff you guys publish makes it so that beginners get to walk through an unproductive, expensive and confusing minefield, making it difficult ... off the mark videos ...



Whoa! Have you watched any of David C’s videos? I’m a beginner who’s watched one of his DVDs. It was excellent. David’s DVD made me more accurate and far more productive.


----------



## D_W (16 Apr 2018)

I've had three of them. Perhaps 4 (plane and chisel sharpening, a chisel method DVD and there was a summary video with five topics on it with a wonderful segment about sharpening scrapers). The sharpening video for planes was where I learned to sharpen planes, though I moved away from that method pretty quickly once I started working entirely by hand (it's a bit slow and limiting, but those aren't issues when you're starting and you just need sharp so that you can get moving). The scraper method was lovely, but I no longer use scrapers of that type (a slower method of achieving the same thing as a common plane with a cap iron). 

At any rate, limiting meaning, how will you sharpen your pocket knives? Your gouges? moving fillister planes that are askew? 

If you are never going to do any of those things, then sure, no problem. But watching George Wilson work in the colonial williamsburg videos....it doesn't look the same.

I have much more regard for David than Chris, though. It's just an opinion, a feel of who is credible and who is not. There are a lot of holes, though - what if you like to saw everything by hand? Why do most of the videos push beginners toward modern tools so much instead of having perhaps a separate video about the function of tools in general and preparation of them to a level of functionality less so than perfection. 

Why is it that when I make a statement (as I did last year) on here that you can plane a flat surface and keep it flat without taking stop shavings that all of the gurus work into dogma and state that you cannot? I haven't read about this in Nicholson (I don't have the nicholson text), but one of the older texts states that you need to be able to plane a board along its length and finish it. What is implied with that? The plane guru in the united states (larry williams) has everyone believing that there is some set of strange moves that you do with a small plane and that smoothing is sort of like picking dandelions. What happens when you have about 30 square feet of surface to smooth and you adopt that instead of just achieving the finish as a matter of lumber preparation itself?


----------



## El Barto (16 Apr 2018)

I like Chris. I've learnt a lot from him in the same way that I've learnt a lot from David Charlesworth and Paul Sellers and numerous people on this forum. As a hobbyist woodworker, unlike a traditional apprentice or what have you, you take packets of information where and when you need them and commit them to memory. When those sources of information present something you don't agree with or don't need, you ignore it or skip it because there are ten other useful things on the next page or in the next video.

People like Chris Schwarz undoubtedly assist in the widening of ones knowledge (particularly beginners) and broadening ones scope (within woodworking that is). I can't call myself a disciple of his but I do appreciate what he does and I certainly appreciate his enthusiasm and passion and ultimately, at the end of the day, who really cares if he is or isn't good at whatever? Why does it matter? If you don't like it then move on.

Thanks for the original review Bodgers!


----------



## D_W (17 Apr 2018)

It probably sounds like I begrudge people the opportunity to go that route (the lite route), but I don't. At the end of the day, you have to do what you enjoy. 

In terms of does it matter or not if the educator can do? It does to me, but it may not to someone else. It sort of reminds me of baseball (or golf, or anything of the like). If you're studying hitting, do you read Ted Williams, or do you listen to Bob Costas? Bob Costas is really excited about baseball, but I doubt he could hit one.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 Apr 2018)

What's "baseball" ?


----------



## David C (17 Apr 2018)

David,

I am so glad you found my sharpening DVDs useful.

Derek Cohen writes that "Chris is a good teacher and responsible writer". 

Tony Zaffuto says Chris does an excellent job with "Lost Arts Press". 

Eric the Viking and many others like his stuff.

I find comments like "Chris's mediocrity" very inappropriate.

For your information Garrett told me that he spends 1/3 of his year farming his own land, and getting timber with his heavy Belgian horse.
1/3 of his year teaching and writing, the last third making furniture.

I very much doubt that the definitive literature on furniture making techniques exists, as so much was passed down from Master to apprentice, without being written down.

Please try to persuade George to write a book.

David Charlesworth


----------



## Cheshirechappie (17 Apr 2018)

I posted a link to a blogpost from the LAP website, written by CS, earlier in the thread (page2). Here's what I consider the pertinent bit again:

"Your work will be better if you listen to a variety of voices. Don’t just listen to me. Learn what you can from all the other people out there. And pay special attention to the people who are also willing to listen to others.

Learning this craft from 100 teachers (instead of just one) is more challenging for you, the student. At some point you will need to say: “Wait, this particular bit of gospel is total BS to me.” But you will be a more resilient, informed and balanced woodworker as a result.

You will see the overall patterns in our craft, not just methods of a single teacher. And maybe, when it comes time for you to teach others, your mind will be open, and you will glady promote the work of others, even if it challenges the work you do every day at the bench.

— Christopher Schwarz"


----------



## Eric The Viking (17 Apr 2018)

That's a great quote, and it applies in so many other areas of life, too. Thanks for posting it.


----------



## D_W (17 Apr 2018)

I think I've probably said several times on here (and in other threads - perhaps a dozen) that Chris does great at what he's an expert at - publishing. When he compiles and presents someone else's information, it's quite lovely. And as Tony points out, the prices are better than most others who do it with lots of links in the chain. It's when he steps into the making and demonstrating that it goes downhill, but not everyone is wound as tight as I am about that (and some are wound tighter - I am not trying to get you to admit you are, but you are wound pretty tight when it comes to standards). 

As far as George writing a book, I think if you could get someone to follow him around for a year and organize it, you could come up with a book title like "fundamentals of doing fine work across a variety of disciplines", but I don't think he has much drive to do it himself - it's probably too late at this point. I know he's been badgered by publishers to write books in the past and has had multiple requests to open a school, but I don't think he can separate himself from the making and designing. A shame, but there must be scads of other makers toiling away taking their secrets with them in the end - not for lack of desire to share it, but it never rises to the top of the list.


----------



## D_W (17 Apr 2018)

phil.p":xzog1tjg said:


> What's "baseball" ?



It's sort of like cricket, but not quite, and ...well, it's better!

I know you guys like golf over there, though - at least some of the population does. 

Perhaps I should've said "like Colin Montgomerie writing an article for muscle and fitness".


----------



## RichardL (18 Apr 2018)

Unfortunately, the opinions of such authors can hold sway. I remember when I was searching for recommendations on new planes a few years ago, and having just come across the Clifton brand, the first review that Google provided me with was the initial Schwartz review. That review was potentially quite damaging to the brand although a subsequent review was quite the opposite. That first review remained the first thing that popped up for a long time. Equally, Paul Sellers endorsement of one brand over another can potentially unfairly damage a brand and promote another and his assessments are quite often just based on whether he thinks the tool is affordable to a student, not whether the ones he rubbishes or disregards are intrinsically good tools or not - they just aren't , in his view, such good value for money (cheap). That seems a narrow view and doesn't, for example, take into account that some more expensive tools may have a component of 'traditionally hand made' which is, you would think, something he might want to promote as it's his bread and butter. 
Cheers
Richard


----------



## Eric The Viking (18 Apr 2018)

RichardL":1qhphf5n said:


> ... That first review remained the first thing that popped up for a long time.



To be fair, that could well be the fault of the Clifton brand, not Schwartz.

Rule #1 of managing reviewers is: Don't ever, EVER send out poor quality kit for review. Get a batch of items, go over them well beforehand, etc.

And if the item was bought on the open market, be ready to (a) respond publicly, saying you've taken the criticisms on board, (b) actually do something to change the relevant process if that's necessary.

I was involved in a situation years ago when expensive items were being damaged on their way into the USA. "Why are you using such a rubbish shipping company?" We weren't. It turned out to be deliberate (sabotage), incited by a trade union that thought our stuff was "destroying American jobs." Ultimately people were sacked (they might also have been prosecuted, I can't remember).

The point being you manage your PR, AND you have a commitment to ongoing quality improvement in all areas you can be held responsible. 

Reviewers are rarely unfair, but the better ones realise they have a split responsibility to the readership and the supplier. The good guys make this clear. 

Do we want better products in a competitive market, or just one remaining supplier who doesn't need to care about quality as they have a monopoly? I think the first one is best, and honest reviews have a role in this.

It's also a matter of positioning: Festool can't afford to bother with the user who prefers Lidl because their tools are so inexpensive. Lidl don't care what a typical Festool user thinks (probably).

If someone doesn't put a Paul Sellers review into context (or Schwartz's either, for that matter), there's not much you can do about it.


----------



## CStanford (18 Apr 2018)

In order to maintain his objectivity and independence both in appearance and in fact, Schwarz asserts that he does not accept tools for review even if they are to be returned afterward. The tools are purchased on the open market and represent what you and I might get if we ordered one ourselves; i.e. they are not 'cherry picked.'

Whether or not he is qualified to review tools is up for others to debate, though he tends not to pen one hagiography after another by my admittedly loose reckoning. That's something at least.


----------



## Bodgers (18 Apr 2018)

CStanford":3boajyuj said:


> In order to maintain his objectivity and independence both in appearance and in fact, Schwarz asserts that he does not accept tools for review even if they are to be returned afterward. The tools are purchased on the open market and represent what you and I might get if we ordered one ourselves; i.e. they are not 'cherry picked.'
> 
> Whether or not he is qualified to review tools is up for others to debate, though he tends not to pen one hagiography after another by my admittedly loose reckoning. That's something at least.


Hmmm...not sure if that is always the case as he refers to Stanley sending him the low angle jack for review. Twice. 

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk


----------



## richarddownunder (18 Apr 2018)

Eric The Viking":2ye6ptv8 said:


> RichardL":2ye6ptv8 said:
> 
> 
> > ... That first review remained the first thing that popped up for a long time.
> ...



Yes, I guess that is all true. The point was even though any perceived problems had long been cleared up (in the Clifton case - so taking onboard point b...a might not be so easy unless you can get the item re-evaluated which Clifton did eventually) that was the first review that appeared and had been quoted many times and who's to say what biases came into play originally. The power of the internet I guess.


----------



## CStanford (18 Apr 2018)

Bodgers":daxybo15 said:


> CStanford":daxybo15 said:
> 
> 
> > In order to maintain his objectivity and independence both in appearance and in fact, Schwarz asserts that he does not accept tools for review even if they are to be returned afterward. The tools are purchased on the open market and represent what you and I might get if we ordered one ourselves; i.e. they are not 'cherry picked.'
> ...



If true, then I guess he's a liar. He would have to reconcile what you've said with what I recall being unequivocal statements he made some time ago about how he goes about reviewing tools. I'll leave that to him. Maybe somebody can put the question to him via his blog.


----------



## D_W (18 Apr 2018)

Why do we care if he keeps tools from a review? I don't. He worked (at the time he did most of his reviews) as editor (managing editor, grand poobah?) at a magazine that relied on advertising from tool companies whose tools he was reviewing, and was personal friends (still is, I'm sure) with a lot of the makers. The chance to see a negative review for a tool from a large advertiser is pretty minimal, and he mentioned (don't know if this is still true) that if he gets a tool that he doesn't like, he just doesn't post a review. 

Your second point (the competence) is more important, who is competent to review. He calls the tools that you use "false economy". He'd say the same thing for George's single set of Marples chisels that he's used to make everything he's made since the 1960s.

I don't get the sense at all that the guy is dishonest, though. Even if he says things that conflict over time, it's awfully difficult to wake up every day for a couple of decades and say exactly the same thing over the entire period.


----------



## D_W (18 Apr 2018)

Eric The Viking":2envtl3o said:


> RichardL":2envtl3o said:
> 
> 
> > ... That first review remained the first thing that popped up for a long time.
> ...



Clifton had a problem other than that in the states, several, as follows:
* they were priced the same as LN more or less (I think they're more now)
* they didn't go to A2 when everyone else did (and all kinds of reviews came out glowing about A2, but the makers were using it mostly because it was easier to work with)
* there was a limited number of retailers
* their tolerances weren't as tight as LNs and LV's, at least not in tools reviewed. I believe our own David Charlesworth may have found a plane at one point that was 7 thousandths hollow, which is almost impossible to work with if it's not a jack plane. David, correct me if that wasn't the make. 
* there were at least two very public instances on the US forums where people bought Clifton planes that had problems from manufacture. I remember the details of one well, it was posted by a guy with the handle "rfeeser" on woodnet. He had an unusable plane from new and he'd been in contact with Highland Hardware and Clifton, both, several times, and nobody ever rectified the issue, though both claimed they would. At a time when LN and LV would take a plane back even if it was just because the buyer was an silly person and saw ghosts, that was a killer. And it dragged on. 

For the non-forum readers, Chris's first review would've been a killer, but it's unlikely clifton would've sold much against LN here, anyway. LN appeared after them, surpassed their quality standards and kept going. Clifton flopped on the shore for a while (At least in terms of how they handled problems over here) without doing the same.

That said, I doubt Chris would've posted the review at all if it had been LN, but he's friends with TLN. That's the discretion that he has as a reviewer.


----------



## D_W (18 Apr 2018)

I don't think the thing about purchasing on the open market is true, either. It may be for some tools, but it's certainly not for all (and it's probably not possible for some of the small boutique makers). It doesn't matter, though. You accept the fact that anything he gets from a maker or a dealer (who sees his name) will be looked over a little harder than it would for the rest of us.


----------



## CStanford (18 Apr 2018)

I'm simply repeating what Schwarz has said. He apparently thought it mattered enough to state his policy on at least a few occasions. I personally couldn't care less. My last significant expenditure on woodworking tools was about ten years ago, to replace some things lost in a fire.

Your employer misses you David. Get back to work. Somewhere, somebody has made an unrealistic assumption about pension fund investment returns. Don't let it be you!


----------



## D_W (18 Apr 2018)

Charlie, given the station you're in vs. where I am, I think you should be more worried about your work than mine. I don't need to send fake emails as you do. My obligations generally don't care if they're completed at 9AM or 9PM. Rest assured, nobody will write any news articles about my assumptions, either.


----------



## Tony Zaffuto (18 Apr 2018)

For what it's (not!) worth, about a half dozen years ago, I was asked to be a tester. I declined, as though I've used handtools for many more years than I care to count, I doubted my ability to provide an impartial review. There are others far more qualified to fill that role (and there are some, like me, that might be under-qualified to test and/or otherwise, review tools).

As far as Clifton goes, I happened to purchase one of my favorite planes, a #3, right in the middle of the "kerfluffle". Dayam near perfect, except the tote screw was a bit loose. The iron was as lovely a plane iron as any modern maker was making then or even now. The Clifton green and the stamped maker's mark on the iron just seemed so right, as a throw-back to when handtools were the only tools. Unfortunately in that time frame, forums were sprouting all over, in the US, with every person posting, that had more than 200 posts, an expert (albeit, a self proclaimed expert). I remember one goomer on WoodCentral that was going to be the Frank Klaus, or Tag Frid, of his time, with his do it all bevel up LV low angle jack (a fine plane in spite of the goomer). A2, as Dave said, was the material for irons, as the hairs on your arms would pop off if you walked by a plane with an A2 iron. 

We're, for the most part, reasoning adults here. If we want to let others make our opinions for us, then accept what is written for reviews as gospel. For me, I made many purchasing mistakes and still fall prey to shiny objects. But I also know deep down, the handful of tools that I constantly reach for, and with each use, subconsciously rule out ever changing (my jointer, a few smoothers, my large shoulder plane, my 45 as far as planes go). I've given up subscribing to woodworking magazines, but I continue to purchase books, many used on Amazon, and also new. As I have previously said, regardless of my feeling of Schwartz as a teacher or woodworker (I'm not qualified to criticize either), I think his publications are beyond excellent and will continue to purchase those for which I have an interest.

Dave W.: it's a hockey night in Pittsburgh, on Friday! If I have too many to be able to stroll to the Omni, I may have to drive to Wexford for lodging!


----------



## CStanford (18 Apr 2018)

D_W":dv1c10b2 said:


> Charlie, given the station you're in vs. where I am, I think you should be more worried about your work than mine. I don't need to send fake emails as you do. My obligations generally don't care if they're completed at 9AM or 9PM. Rest assured, nobody will write any news articles about my assumptions, either.



I worked for Mercer before I went to FedEx... you were probably still in junior high if even that.

I do miss the 1st and 15th, ain't gonna lie!

Not sure what you mean by fake e-mail. Maybe somebody has been spoofing you.

Everybody still using 8%?


----------



## memzey (18 Apr 2018)

Mercer? Pensions? I worked for Hewitt a few years back (before the Aon takeover) and am 20+ years deep in the pensions and benefits game here in the UK (still know a thing or 5 about 401k’s etc though). Are you guys in the same industry?


----------



## RichardL (18 Apr 2018)

That said, I doubt Chris would've posted the review at all if it had been LN, but he's friends with TLN. That's the discretion that he has as a reviewer.[/quote]

I think that was what I was suggesting. Whether there is bias, conscious or unconscious, or not, what I was thinking is that reviewers have a lot of influence and their comments persist and they should bear that in mind.


----------



## CStanford (18 Apr 2018)

memzey":1jnlw4pq said:


> Mercer? Pensions? I worked for Hewitt a few years back (before the Aon takeover) and am 20+ years deep in the pensions and benefits game here in the UK (still know a thing or 5 about 401k’s etc though). Are you guys in the same industry?



David is an actuary. I'm an accounting and finance guy, or rather was. I left industry to take care of a terminally ill family member. I never went back.


----------



## D_W (19 Apr 2018)

memzey":2xcgl8oa said:


> Mercer? Pensions? I worked for Hewitt a few years back (before the Aon takeover) and am 20+ years deep in the pensions and benefits game here in the UK (still know a thing or 5 about 401k’s etc though). Are you guys in the same industry?



I worked for Mercer for the first 8 years of my career. Learned a lot there! I learned to do work at night (which is what I'm off to do shortly), and to make sure my work was watertight to avoid becoming a scapegoat. And most importantly, I learned that if something is difficult and other people don't want to do it, it's probably an awfully good opportunity. 

How did you end up doing 401k work in the UK? I only know the slightest amount about the UK schemes because I had clients with operations in the UK and we had to get their results into disclosures. (And we had "incidental contact" with international pension schemes as part of our exam process, but only at a summary level).


----------



## D_W (19 Apr 2018)

RichardL":3dhsbtkp said:


> That said, I doubt Chris would've posted the review at all if it had been LN, but he's friends with TLN. That's the discretion that he has as a reviewer.



I think that was what I was suggesting. Whether there is bias, conscious or unconscious, or not, what I was thinking is that reviewers have a lot of influence and their comments persist and they should bear that in mind.[/quote]

Well put. Not a single one of us is unbiased.


----------



## D_W (19 Apr 2018)

Tony Zaffuto":35zjxjbk said:


> Dave W.: it's a hockey night in Pittsburgh, on Friday! If I have too many to be able to stroll to the Omni, I may have to drive to Wexford for lodging!



Wave on the way by! I'm only about halfway to Wexford, but you're welcome to stop by if you don't mind a messy shop.


----------



## David C (19 Apr 2018)

Well I don't know who Mercer are but I did have the misfortune to do the first review of the new Clifton planes, for F&C magazine.

Some of the ones they sent me had significant problems.

I was very unpopular with the management but felt they should have been more careful about quality control.

David I remember writing about a no. 5 which was 7 thou" hollow in its length, how it would not plane a straight edge with a fine shaving. 
Thought this was the Stanley which I was given just before the Sheffield works closed. I had been invited to come and talk to them about "What makes a decent bench plane". I keep that one in my cupboard to show people.

Best wishes,
David


----------



## D_W (19 Apr 2018)

Thanks for the clarification, David. I remembered your comments about clifton quality issues, and thought the 7 thou story was attached to them. Glad to know it wasn't. 

(IIRC, R.feeser's issue with his plane was that it couldn't be used for planing at all due to a mouth and frog that couldn't be lined up together. He stated that on woodnet, though, which has a one-year memory - and then all is gone forever, so there's no way to confirm it - and it doesn't matter, anyway. The general premise was that LN and LV didn't have those issues, and even when they had minor ones - or even when the user was the issue, they'd entertain fixing things. They still do. I once thought an iron I had was a little soft, and LN tested it for me and confirmed it was in spec - this was early on when I'd just started and the iron sharpened really easily - I should've appreciated it instead of worrying about it being soft. Anyway, the tech person at LN said they'd send a second iron along, anyway just to keep me happy. I refused that because I was embarrassed about troubling them in the first place, but going that far to make sure I was happy left a permanent mark -but a positive one). 

Mercer is unrelated, and I'm surprised to see it come up here, but their parent had $60K employees total when I was there, so I wouldn't be surprised if one has come through your shop.


----------



## memzey (19 Apr 2018)

D_W":f6x515de said:


> memzey":f6x515de said:
> 
> 
> > Mercer? Pensions? I worked for Hewitt a few years back (before the Aon takeover) and am 20+ years deep in the pensions and benefits game here in the UK (still know a thing or 5 about 401k’s etc though). Are you guys in the same industry?
> ...


Cool stuff David. I’m not an actuary myself (I’m in the technology business but not a techie) but have worked very closely with many during my time. Started out on DB schemes but almost exclusively working on DC now and more specifically pensions and benefits software. I was first exposed to 401k in the US (Chicago) when I was there for a little while with Hewitt but have been involved with a number of international arrangements since. Hewitt was a great firm back then before the listing and all the takeovers. My current employer is a US/Canadian firm as well by the way.


----------



## Chlad (25 Apr 2018)

After the first couple of pages into this thread I thought the book was a waste of space and I had wasted £14 for nothing. Thankfully after 7 pages of discussion the consensus seems to be that the Handplane book is a good starting point for beginner/intermediate level. Phew!


----------



## David C (27 Apr 2018)

I think you will find a lot of interesting stuff there.

Enjoy.

David Charlesworth


----------



## orchard (20 Jan 2019)

As a hand tool noob I like CS's work as an enthusiastic entry level broad introduction, and also LA Press' publications as an entry point for some further information.

Would I consider consulting him to attempt to perfect a technical skill in the future? Heck no!

Would I have built my Roman workbench (that I'm enjoying using and that I'll use to build my main bench) without his initial work and effort? Almost certainly not.

Thanks Chris.


----------

