Regular Mortice Chisel or Bevel Edged for your Mortices
- Thread starter John15
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
MikeG.
Established Member
bugbear":nas1e6r8 said:
The quote button is in the bottom right hand corner--------------------->
Cheshirechappie
Established Member
May I present an alternative view?
Let us suppose that you're an ordinary regular chap or chapess living normal life. You've got a stressful job, a fractious family, the bills keep arriving and there always seems to be month left over at the end of the money. Or perhaps you've lived through all that, reached retirement, and want something less stressful to while away a contented day or two now and again. Or perhaps you're younger, struggling to find worthwhile decently-paid work. You want somewhere to just unwind and slough off the stresses of life for an hour or three. Or perhaps you've set up as an independent fine furnituremaker, serving clients with very specific needs, making individual pieces from rare and special boards of timber.
In those cases, batch production makes no sense. For the fine furnituremaker, you only have one or two special highly-figured boards of that particular timber, so you can't repeat that piece even if you want to. For the weekend warrior making a coffee table, well, how many coffee tables - especially identical ones - does the average household need?
Production techniques using hand work were VERY relevant back in the days when much furniture and joinery was done that way. Nowadays, we have IKEA, Oakfurnitureland and their ilk grabbing the mass market, and pricing the hand-made into a very small niche. Likewise with joinery - see any builder's merchants for any number of mass-produced doors, windows and trim. Not to mention the dreaded UPVC. Batch production by hand work in solid wood is, apart from renovation of existing works, pretty much consigned to history.
We're left with the happy amateur pottering about in the shed doing hand work (and a very few remaining fine cabinetmakers and heritage jioners, most of whom use machinery whenever they can to keep their costs down). For the happy amateur, efficiency takes second place to enjoyment. Old-time 'efficient' methods are interesting in passing, but rarely that relevant to what most of us actually want to do.
Let us suppose that you're an ordinary regular chap or chapess living normal life. You've got a stressful job, a fractious family, the bills keep arriving and there always seems to be month left over at the end of the money. Or perhaps you've lived through all that, reached retirement, and want something less stressful to while away a contented day or two now and again. Or perhaps you're younger, struggling to find worthwhile decently-paid work. You want somewhere to just unwind and slough off the stresses of life for an hour or three. Or perhaps you've set up as an independent fine furnituremaker, serving clients with very specific needs, making individual pieces from rare and special boards of timber.
In those cases, batch production makes no sense. For the fine furnituremaker, you only have one or two special highly-figured boards of that particular timber, so you can't repeat that piece even if you want to. For the weekend warrior making a coffee table, well, how many coffee tables - especially identical ones - does the average household need?
Production techniques using hand work were VERY relevant back in the days when much furniture and joinery was done that way. Nowadays, we have IKEA, Oakfurnitureland and their ilk grabbing the mass market, and pricing the hand-made into a very small niche. Likewise with joinery - see any builder's merchants for any number of mass-produced doors, windows and trim. Not to mention the dreaded UPVC. Batch production by hand work in solid wood is, apart from renovation of existing works, pretty much consigned to history.
We're left with the happy amateur pottering about in the shed doing hand work (and a very few remaining fine cabinetmakers and heritage jioners, most of whom use machinery whenever they can to keep their costs down). For the happy amateur, efficiency takes second place to enjoyment. Old-time 'efficient' methods are interesting in passing, but rarely that relevant to what most of us actually want to do.
StraightOffTheArk
Established Member
Cheshire Chappie - what you say makes a great deal of sense and is eminently reasonable, the only caveat is that, quite rightly, the majority of hobbyists also want to improve their technique/access to forgotten or hidden knowledge, this is all good of course, what I don't quite understand is why this can't be framed in the same measured and reasonable manner that you are using - something to do with the evil influence of the internet I guess. I blame the government - it's all a conspiracy to control us by breaking down societal norms of civil behaviour - starting with woodworking forums and sharpening threads!
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Thats a very strange point of view.Cheshirechappie":2txr7i70 said:
Most people doing craft work are interested in doing things efficiently and effectively, whether it's all trad hand tools, all machine, or anything in between. Most of this forum is about how to get things done effectively, whatever the chosen tools or materials.
It'd be the same if we were talking about mending bikes, knitting, making cakes!
Obviously batch work is often not appropriate for chaps in sheds but the idea usually comes up with reference to how to make a living rather than just having a hobby. Then batch work suddenly becomes essential.
bugbear
Established Member
Since Jacob rarely offers evidence in support of his assertions, I decided to follow suit.MikeG.":3oyt4z1h said:
But I'm right.
BugBear
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Very rare passing reference - usually as reply to someone else using the expression
search.php?keywords=%2Breal+%2Bwoodworking&terms=all&author=jacob&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search
search.php?keywords=%2Breal+%2Bwoodworking&terms=all&author=jacob&sc=1&sf=all&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search
bugbear
Established Member
Ooh - Jacob made an inaccurate generalisation, and is now retrospectively qualifying it.Jacob":115s81n8 said:
Where have I seen that before?
BugBear
<rolls eyes>
back to speed and efficiency, as I get older I find that I frequently enjoy the destination more than the journey and as much as I like a bit of pottering around I am generally pleased to discover techniques to get me there quicker. Perhaps it is the prospect of eternal oblivion that concentrates the mind in this way!
With my amateur historian hat on I also I am interested to find out what people actually did in t'olden days - as opposed to what was written about what was done, which is not always the same thing - so I am more than happy to hear about and experiment with traditional techniques. Horses for courses!
back to speed and efficiency, as I get older I find that I frequently enjoy the destination more than the journey and as much as I like a bit of pottering around I am generally pleased to discover techniques to get me there quicker. Perhaps it is the prospect of eternal oblivion that concentrates the mind in this way!
With my amateur historian hat on I also I am interested to find out what people actually did in t'olden days - as opposed to what was written about what was done, which is not always the same thing - so I am more than happy to hear about and experiment with traditional techniques. Horses for courses!
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
Easier and better for me, not necessarily quicker - in CC's terms - I'm a happy amateur.
Aside from the who said what distraction, there's an interesting point in what CC and Jacob have said about hobby woodwork and efficiency.
Offering myself as but a single data point, I definitely am interested in historical practice. I'm interested in analyses of rate books to see just how fast pre-industrial woodworkers could complete a piece.
Sometimes I might try to use some of their methods in my own work and see if I like them.
But I don't do that every time - because I don't need to and I enjoy variety. So I will mix things up, try a different tool or technique - the opposite of what a maximally efficient worker would do.
The other big difference is that I can't bring myself to leave under surfaces unplaned, nor could I just nail on an assortment of sawn boards as a back. That alone will identify the things I make as amateur work.
It's also worth remembering that pre-industrial pieces were made to a wide range of prices to suit different classes of customer. The best London work was NOT the same as was sold to the poor, or the deceptive 'slop work' designed to look flashy but not built to last.
Edit: Nabs beat me to it, but that's at least two of us who don't fit the generalisation offered.
Offering myself as but a single data point, I definitely am interested in historical practice. I'm interested in analyses of rate books to see just how fast pre-industrial woodworkers could complete a piece.
Sometimes I might try to use some of their methods in my own work and see if I like them.
But I don't do that every time - because I don't need to and I enjoy variety. So I will mix things up, try a different tool or technique - the opposite of what a maximally efficient worker would do.
The other big difference is that I can't bring myself to leave under surfaces unplaned, nor could I just nail on an assortment of sawn boards as a back. That alone will identify the things I make as amateur work.
It's also worth remembering that pre-industrial pieces were made to a wide range of prices to suit different classes of customer. The best London work was NOT the same as was sold to the poor, or the deceptive 'slop work' designed to look flashy but not built to last.
Edit: Nabs beat me to it, but that's at least two of us who don't fit the generalisation offered.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Arguable! One of the most obvious clues to amateur work is over finishing - under surfaces planed - and polished even.AndyT":20h57xi6 said:
Serious professionals need to know when enough is enough, and to not have 'principled' objections to nails.
MikeG.
Established Member
bugbear":1vr4vlvk said:
Your personal feud makes utterly tiresome reading for others. Maybe you might consider just knocking it off for the sake of the rest of the forum.
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
That is certainly the case with marking gauges. 
Tasky
Established Member
He's like the Mister Ford who can do huge great mortises fasterer and betterer than anyone else here, which is great for timber building joinery but perhaps not the be all and end all of the skillsets used to make small, delicate furniture... and if all you want to do is mortise huge great oak beams as fast as you can, for your own pleasure, that's great. But for those who want to get good at other things as well, or instead, not so much.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
Depends... mainly depends on that old Unbreakable Rule, again.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
One piece I was taught to play was a Dave Weckl one (that man has five hands, I swear) in which each instrument plays either a different count and/or time signature to the others. Drums were in 6/4. However, the whole piece just sounded stunning.
This was a cunning ploy on the part of my teacher to get me both hearing and playing different signatures in ways that still worked for the music... as I found when we then went on to study the Mission Impossible theme, which is in 5/4 as far as drums go, but can also be played to slightly different times..... !!
Darrell Scott in what way? I think he's on an Emmylou Harris album I have, but can't tell you anything beyond that.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
I'd also caveat the second sentence by saying I always enjoyed guitarists who understood the difference between actual speeding up and just creating a dynamic feeling, as well as understanding why (and when) I do play slightly ahead of the beat on certain songs and can restrain themselves from the urge to catch up or try and overtake me!!
Not that kind of tension... or at least, not the kind that is obvious. These are the subtle tensions that don't even get noticed unless you already know what you're looking for, and even when they do produce fatigue, aches and pains, it's still not obvious that they're where it came from. By then it's too late to correct and you have to start again when you're fresh... or establish better technique to stop the tension in the first place.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
The same thing happens in boxing, archery, driving, just about all the physical activities I can think of. Nothing to do with any specific activity, it's the human aspect and how most people naturally handle things.
Don't have to be professional, really, just good. Strangely, many do not lose that tension without changing something about how they play.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
For example, most people will naturally hold the sticks and play drums with their thumbs uppermost. You'll even see a good number of seriously BIG name players throught history doing this. However, it introduces tension along the forearms and the lower back, which then defines your position against the kit and affects the space you need to move around it, which puts further tension back in and to the shoulders and upper back. Trying to play through this tension and the limitations worsens things and by the end of a session you're aching and twingeing for no discernible reason. Some learn to play through it or just get used to being slightly cack-handed all their lives.
Others learn that the wrist is a hinge, not a ball joint and simply turn their hands 90º so the backs are uppermost.
TBH, it's sometimes the professionals that create the problems in the first place too, like guitarists and pianists doing those finger-stretching exercises... that's tantamount to ballet dancers ruining their feet just so they can pull off certain moves, IMO.
I'm talking about learning techniques, not learning a piece or finishing a product... although the later can still be achieved while practicing the former.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
Pretty simple - You build lots of different and interesting things that make use of the same techniques. For example, build a table, a bench, a door, a toy truck, a DM screen, a mouse, a trolley, a bird box and whatever else that makes use of M&T joints, if you want to get better at M&T-ing. It doesn't have to be the exact same item, just the same technique.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
How do you know what he's doing different, unless you already know what to look/feel for? And if you already know, why do you need to watch him? Why haven't you figured it out for yourself already?D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
In terms of constructing a complete product from start to finish, yes, but much of that will be things other than or in addition to good technique, or choice of most efficient technique.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
Unless you refer to repetitively practicing measuring and sharpening, as well?
Jacob":1f3jxpcd said:
Err.... actually yes, I have, technically speaking.arnoldmason8":1f3jxpcd said:
I have indeed cut a rectangular recess..... in the head of my snare... using a drumstick.
Sharpening is easy enough - Employ a heavy dose of cymbals, then combine with a Bossa Nova pattern alternating between rimshots and normal strokes played across snare and top two toms. Then fail to notice that your last tom rimshot snapped the head off the stick into a long, sharp bevel, before burying it in the snare head.
Best done while performing live, if you want to get a quality finish to your piece!!
If we're still talking drummers - Many Yanks these days are very good technical drummers. But as mentioned before, most play the drums with skill, rather than the music with feel.D_W":1f3jxpcd said:
TBH, I think that was the crux of the OP - John has used mortise chisels, because 'mortise', right? But he has since experimented with others' approaches, in particular choosing a method that Mister Guru insists was what was done by his own Mister Fords working In The Trade who taught him rather than what was seemingly written about (in tool catalogues, perhaps?).nabs":1f3jxpcd said:
John has found that both methods work "just as well".
Certainly ^this echoes back to what I said earlier about considering the messenger as much as the message itself.
Contrary to the post that brought the matter up, I'd say people actually care less about the messenger's hair today and just read the message... which is why they're buying all these new-fangled toys like chopstick making jigs for £300!!
OK, let's argue it, then!!Jacob":1f3jxpcd said:
Depends on the market, surely, if not also your definitions of professional and amateur?
Professional just means they do it for money. Some of those (many? most?) will indeed pull out tricks of The Trade, to get it done on time and within budget, so it's just up to standard for the lower/middle class demands to whom they sell. Others really would have to pull out all the stops and produce the absolute best even on parts never seen, because that's what they're being paid to do and since their reputation hinged on their work I suspect they may well have done so in many cases.
Now an amateur doing it for their own enjoyment, or because it's cheaper to DIY, does not have the constraints of someone else's deadline and budget, so is perhaps more free to apply whatever standards they personally demand of themselves.
But both are (or should be) fully capable of producing the most over-finished, over-planed piece of pedantic perfection, *if* they so choose.
thetyreman
Established Member
I'm finding the more I do this, the more I realise the importance of efficiency, even though I'm not professional, I have worked out methods that improve time efficiency when using hand tools. I don't think taking as long as you possibly can is wise, whether you are paid or unpaid.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Not as a rule. But sometimes they tend to over do it - you get sharp edges rounded over, or backs/undersides unnecessarily sanded, polishes over applied too many layers etc.Pete Maddex":17nopun8 said:
Tasky
Established Member
So a pro only does the minimum required, while the amateur goes the extra mile or two to create fine art... Still not seeing why the pro is supposedly better, here.Jacob":l9ed7frm said:
Similar threads
