# Rosewood restrictions from CITES?



## Dabo Fett (Dec 7, 2016)

Wasn't sure where to post this question, but I was wondering what you guys thought the outcome of the whole rosewood/bubinga restrictions from CITES would end up being? From what I've heard builders outside of America need to get a permit to move the wood across boarders, taking 3-6months?

For many of us, we look at the guitar world as a global community, and I know there's tons of builders in Europe, Australia, Canada and the US that sell to all over the world. If there's restrictions, at the very least there's going to be delays and shortages, at worst price hikes on any rosewood on a guitar. 

While for the smaller builders it also could be an easy fix as many of them use more exotic woods, but how could this impact Fender, Gibson, PRS, Ibane, etc who either have a majority of their production line built over seas, or build their top of the line guitars in America for shipment all over the world. I'm waiting for a Fender Jazz Bass to come in stock at Sweetwater, by the time it comes in could it be much for expensive?

TL;DR-this could be nothing, or this could change the landscape right?


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Dec 7, 2016)

Its impossible to know right now but from what I gather the absolute worse case scenario is there will be no more rosewood fretboards on even budget guitars and selling an already made guitar where rosewood was used is going to become very hard.

The guitar industry is so depended on rosewood I can't imagine they'd be able to enforce and complete clamp down on the wood.


----------



## Dabo Fett (Dec 7, 2016)

That's my thoughts. But I guess it's all dependent on cost effectiveness for the businesses that make them. The independent builders might find a go around, but the big big business like Gibson, schecter, etc, if it ends up being too big a pain they'll cut it in favor of something else. We can hope for another tasty tonewood option but synthetic woods might become more prominent in their place and who knows how the community will react to that


----------



## blacai (Dec 7, 2016)

From Ola Strandberg
https://www.facebook.com/ostrandberg/posts/10154092247913240


> If you didn't know already, all genuine rosewood species will from Jan 2, 2017 require export documentation from CITES when crossing borders. This applies not only to containers of wood, but for example also to a single guitar with rosewood fingerboard. Needless to say, this will have considerable impact on the global guitar trade. Here's what the Swedish agency had to say on the topic: "The person you are trying to reach is away on a training course and will be back on Dec 9". Here is what the US agency (US Fish & Wildlife Service) had to say on the topic: "We look forward to working with you and issue the permits you need to run your business. Please understand that we have limited resources but that we hope to meet our planned 45-90 day processing time".


----------



## Nag (Dec 7, 2016)

I would SO love to see restrictions on rosewood. SO much. I hate how it feels at touch. I hate how it looks. And the guitar manufacturers put it on almost every god damn thing ever. It really pisses me off.

Honestly it could force the industry to either use a different wood, or to start looking for alternative materials. I know bluesdads might not like it, but composites for example are a smarter choice than wood, at least (or should I say especially ?) for fingerboards : no maintenance (read : cleaning and oiling), no reaction to weather changes (read : frets ends poking out when a touring musician changes climate zone).


----------



## Nag (Dec 7, 2016)

.

(Please delete. Computer derped, crashed, and decided to repost)


----------



## ThePIGI King (Dec 7, 2016)

Nagash said:


> I would SO love to see restrictions on rosewood. SO much. I hate how it feels at touch. I hate how it looks. And the guitar manufacturers put it on almost every god damn thing ever. It really pisses me off.
> 
> Honestly it could force the industry to either use a different wood, or to start looking for alternative materials. I know bluesdads might not like it, but composites for example are a smarter choice than wood, at least (or should I say especially ?) for fingerboards : no maintenance (read : cleaning and oiling), no reaction to weather changes (read : frets ends poking out when a touring musician changes climate zone).



I noticed Epiphone is starting to use composites for some fingerboards. Some red flying V a buddy of mine has from Epi has a composite board and it was really smooth and good looking. I also saw the new Brenden Smalls V has it too. I love the look of Ebony boards, maple, and other woods, but if the new "cheap" fingerboard becomes composite, than I won't be upset


----------



## NickS (Dec 7, 2016)

ThePIGI King said:


> I noticed Epiphone is starting to use composites for some fingerboards. Some red flying V a buddy of mine has from Epi has a composite board and it was really smooth and good looking. I also saw the new Brenden Smalls V has it too. I love the look of Ebony boards, maple, and other woods, but if the new "cheap" fingerboard becomes composite, than I won't be upset



I agree with both of you. Rosewood fretboards are actually a turnoff to me, in that I don't really like the feel, and more so the look of them. I definitely prefer maple, ebony, or some other variety. 

It will be most interesting to see what Ibanez does since it seems that they default to rosewood on almost every model.


----------



## gabsonuro (Dec 7, 2016)

NickS said:


> I agree with both of you. Rosewood fretboards are actually a turnoff to me, in that I don't really like the feel, and more so the look of them. I definitely prefer maple, ebony, or some other variety.
> 
> It will be most interesting to see what Ibanez does since it seems that they default to rosewood on almost every model.



im more concerned to see what fender does, considering 80% of the guitars they make have rosewood, and i don't see any customers being happy about their custom shop relic strat having a composite board, or having rosewood and being 10 grand


----------



## Nag (Dec 7, 2016)

gabsonuro said:


> im more concerned to see what fender does, considering 80% of the guitars they make have rosewood, and i don't see any customers being happy about their custom shop relic strat having a composite board, or having rosewood and being 10 grand



That's why I said bluesdads might not like it


----------



## CapnForsaggio (Dec 7, 2016)

I expect we'll get some alternative wood, dyed to look like rosewood 

Traditions being what they are. Guitar people are fickle about changes. Most do not know nearly as much as the self-selected group here.

They'll still sell alot of guitars with the "brown necks."


----------



## tedtan (Dec 7, 2016)

I expect to see a lot less rosewood in the next year or two than we have in the past, and I expect that ebony will follow the same path in a few more years. 

Many acoustic guitars a re being built of carbon fiber, and Martin has been using composite fingerboards (richlite) on lower end guitars for years now. Companies like Fender can use maple, which is both sustainable and a traditional option for them so they can keep traditionalists happy. And even the baked maple fingerboards Gibson used a while back (maybe still use) are pretty good.

Given that, I don't think we'll miss out on nice options in the future, they'll just be different than they have been in the past. And the value of some guitars with rosewood or ebony may go up as supply of these woods decreases, acoustic guitars in particular IMO.


----------



## Blood Tempest (Dec 7, 2016)

Personally, I'm hoping this results in more maple boarded guitars across the board


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Dec 7, 2016)

Blood Tempest said:


> Personally, I'm hoping this results in more maple boarded guitars across the board



This is a lot more likely than a composite material. Mainly since guitarists are an incredibly stubborn bunch and maple is in abundance.

What does this mean for selling guitars second hand?


----------



## Blood Tempest (Dec 7, 2016)

Lorcan Ward said:


> This is a lot more likely than a composite material. Mainly since guitarists are an incredibly stubborn bunch and maple is in abundance.
> 
> What does this mean for selling guitars second hand?



Abundance, plus no rulings against getting your hands on it, plus most likely cheaper and a better solution (to most players) over a composite. Personally, I don't know how I would feel buying something that is "faux Rosewood." I wouldn't be completely opposed to it, but if I have the option of wood versus not wood, then give me the maple.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Dec 7, 2016)

http://www.musicinstrumentnews.co.u...s-threatened-cites-rules-questions-namm-2017/

It seems like nobody knows whats going to happen. It also depends on the country the instrument is being imported into.The export permit of £80 is a scary thought, since that could affect private sales. So along with shipping you will need to ad a permit fee too.


----------



## Blood Tempest (Dec 7, 2016)

Permit fee? Siiiiiggghhh. That's ridiculous!


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Dec 7, 2016)

this is just going to turn into a giant cluster...., I guarantee it.


----------



## 4Eyes (Dec 7, 2016)

There is an option - pao ferro, your fake rosewood. Used fairly often on guitars. Looks, feels and sounds like rosewood. It's sometimes called santos or bolivian rosewood, but it's not wood species of the rosewood family


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Dec 7, 2016)

4Eyes said:


> There is an option - pao ferro, your fake rosewood. Used fairly often on guitars. Looks, feels and sounds like rosewood. It's sometimes called santos or bolivian rosewood, but it's not wood species of the rosewood family



chechen is another wood that would work too.


----------



## Dabo Fett (Dec 7, 2016)

I'm not sure if the concern should be about what materials they go to as much as how much more are they going to charge. They're businesses and while the little guys may make it work, the bigger ones are going to charge us somewhere, whether it's justified by export taxes or retooling costs or increase cost of sourcing the wood, it will hit the general consumer


----------



## technomancer (Dec 7, 2016)

Hate to say it guys but if you look at CITES pretty much everything but ash, alder, maple, koa, and pau ferro that are commonly used in electric guitars are going to be restricted. Most species of rosewood, ebony, and mahogany are going to be on the list and require proof of provenance and permits to ship internationally.


----------



## narad (Dec 7, 2016)

This is going to kill guys like Vik that use really nice exotic woods with no documentation, and keep the prices generally sane. A lot of the euro builders -- huber, harting, teuffel -- already ship everything with CITES documentation, so in some circles, no difference. But I think the option for a braz board on my hartung was like $900.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Dec 7, 2016)

Pau Ferro is usually nicer in feel and tone than Rosewood, or at the very least on par. I've got to say, though - composite woods can be awesome. I have some sort of synthetic faux-ebony on my Amfisound and I prefer it to Ebony. The other plus here is that we'll see more Maple and Ebony boards from Ibanez. Who doesn't want that?

Edit: Oh, ebony is going to be regulated as well?


----------



## You (Dec 7, 2016)

If the guitar manufacturers use the alternative woods listed above, would the alternative woods eventually become restricted, due to the companies being forced to use them over rosewood? 

While I find the intentions of CITES to be good, the implementations of it would simply be horrid for the companies who depend upon exotic woods for guitars.


----------



## Dabo Fett (Dec 7, 2016)

the more i look into the worse it feels. itll either be nothing, or a gigantic mess. i guess nothing we can do but wait and see. its deeper than just guitars too, the woods in general are restricted so things like furniture too will be impacted. itll be interesting to say the least


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Dec 7, 2016)

You said:


> If the guitar manufacturers use the alternative woods listed above, would the alternative woods eventually become restricted, due to the companies being forced to use them over rosewood?
> 
> While I find the intentions of CITES to be good, the implementations of it would simply be horrid for the companies who depend upon exotic woods for guitars.



No. At least not as a direct result of guitar manufacturers using those woods as replacements. 

After reading a dozen or so articles about this, it seems the deciding factor in the ban was a booming luxury furniture industry in China that was depleting rosewood species native to South-East Asia. Unlike the ebony trade, which was substantially affected by the production of musical instruments (there's a great video out there of Bob Taylor talking about that), it seems it was less of a factor here. In fact, Indian rosewood, which is the type you'll see used most often in mass-produced guitars like PRS or EBMM, is not endangered at all to my knowledge. I even saw a few people complaining about this in their statements to the news outlets, since various subtypes of Dalbergia (official classification of what we popularly call 'rosewood') are in vastly different states of endangerment.

However, regardless of whether or not the musical instrument industry had any role to play in the endangered species being further depleted, the course of action CITES decided on was to place restrictions on ALL rosewood types rather than the species most at risk in SEA, because of...well, one would presume various reasons, but it is abundantly clear that CITES has not adequately communicated these reasons nor their ramifications to anyone in the guitar industry. Placing restrictions on all species is a surer way of safeguarding the specific ones at risk, since relying upon customs officials to differentiate between them is optimistic at best. Obviously a ban like that has worked to some extent over the past few decades with Brazilian rosewood, but they're being much more aggressive here, presumably because the rate at which China is depleting the rosewood is a cause for concern. (Haven't looked into it too much, but it seems wealthy Chinese are basically furnishing their houses wall-to-wall with the stuff...massive beds, doors, tables, chairs, flooring...and any single piece of furniture would use as much rosewood as dozens or hundreds of fretboards). 

Anyway, what it comes down to is that, so far, it does not seem that guitar manufacturers had a role to play in instigating this crackdown. Consequently, we shouldn't assume that Fender, Gibson, et. al. have wiped out rosewood and are setting their sights on their next target. Whether or not the industry at large will have a noticeable impact on the trade of another wood will depend entirely on what that wood is...something like maple? Not a chance. 

It will be interesting to see what comes of this. Planning for NAMM is basically a clusterfvck right now, and just about every guitar owner and his dog is waiting to see if their guitar will require a transport permit. The only good news is that it doesn't seem like guitars (or musical instruments generally) are the targets here. One would hope that's reflected in the penning of the actual restrictions, but who knows. Just because we're not part of the problem (or at least not the chief cause of it) doesn't mean we don't get hit with the same blanket restrictions anyway.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 7, 2016)

I don't mind moving onto maple and phenolic/manmade fretboards.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 7, 2016)

Sermo Lupi said:


> No. At least not as a direct result of guitar manufacturers using those woods as replacements.
> 
> After reading a dozen or so articles about this, it seems the deciding factor in the ban was a booming luxury furniture industry in China that was depleting rosewood species native to South-East Asia. Unlike the ebony trade, which was substantially affected by the production of musical instruments (there's a great video out there of Bob Taylor talking about that), it seems it was less of a factor here. In fact, Indian rosewood, which is the type you'll see used most often in mass-produced guitars like PRS or EBMM, is not endangered at all to my knowledge. I even saw a few people complaining about this in their statements to the news outlets, since various subtypes of Dalbergia (official classification of what we popularly call 'rosewood') are in vastly different states of endangerment.
> 
> ...



To be fair, it's not JUST China. The luxury furniture industry serves the US and Europe with Rosewood furniture just as much as China, and this is basically why Brazilian Rosewood has been restricted for quite a while now.


----------



## narad (Dec 7, 2016)

Honestly I don't see the big deal. My elephant tusk fretboard guitars play just fine.


----------



## ThePIGI King (Dec 7, 2016)

narad said:


> Honestly I don't see the big deal. My elephant tusk fretboard guitars play just fine.



PIGI Likes This


----------



## Nag (Dec 8, 2016)

technomancer said:


> Hate to say it guys but if you look at CITES pretty much everything but ash, alder, maple, koa, and pau ferro that are commonly used in electric guitars are going to be restricted. Most species of rosewood, ebony, and mahogany are going to be on the list and require proof of provenance and permits to ship internationally.




Well yeah. You have an entire industry that decided to only use certain types of wood. So it's gonna overuse those few, when instead it could have just used more diverse woods. Then of course, every species they overuse that doesn't grow fast enough is gonna be endangered at some point.

This is something that could SO easily have been anticipated. By _everyone_.


----------



## blacai (Dec 8, 2016)

We should move to a more expanded synthetic materials industry.

I will miss the tonewood posts


----------



## Fathand (Dec 8, 2016)

Do you really believe that Fender, Gibson, Ibanez, ESP, or even PRS have any trouble obtaining the required CITES -documents? They have the means ($$$) to do so. Us (the consumers) will most likely pay more as a result, but rosewood fb'd strats / teles aren't going nowhere. 

Most affected will be smaller luthiers that have piles on older undocumented wood, they're pretty much in the mercy of their local officials.


----------



## pondman (Dec 8, 2016)

It should go right across the board ( no pun intended ). There are hundreds of luthier collective type sites on Face book that are flooded with individuals posting up pictures of freshly cut exotic and rare timber for sale. I saw one where a guy was stood next to a huge tree he'd cut down. I asked him if he had permission to harvest timber and he told me to mind my own business.

I got banned from that page for pointing it out. I've been banned from three other pages for exactly the same thing. 
I love exotic woods but not at the cost of the planet. All timber should be harvested from sustainable resources.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Dec 8, 2016)

I didn't see the list, but what about granadillo? I know gibson used it for a while when their wood supply was ....ed. I'm not too worried, depending on the production model price increase. Never cared to buy or sell internationally.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Dec 8, 2016)

narad said:


> Honestly I don't see the big deal. My elephant tusk fretboard guitars play just fine.


----------



## Boojakki (Dec 8, 2016)

pondman said:


> I love exotic woods but not at the cost of the planet. All timber should be harvested from sustainable resources.




Exactly my thoughts!
Again, I miss the LIKE button so much...


----------



## Wildebeest (Dec 8, 2016)

Blood Tempest said:


> Personally, I'm hoping this results in more maple boarded guitars across the board


Me too! Personally, I think most guitars with rosewood boards would look way better with a maple board.


----------



## Rawkmann (Dec 8, 2016)

I like rosewood boards


----------



## bostjan (Dec 8, 2016)

I'm with everybody else saying that the production of guitars, 99% of them with rosewood fretboards, was unsustainable anyway.

This goes back decades, though. I don't see it reshaping the industry too much. If Fender decides to use pau ferro in 99% of their guitars, everyone else will follow suit, and we'll have the same problem with that wood in a few years. The key is to spread out. To me, it's like eating the same thing for supper every night. If you start doing it, and everyone else starts doing it just because you are, then whatever it is everyone is eating is going to face a shortage, plus everyone will get sick of it. If you eat something different every night, then everyone will be happier with the variety, including suppliers and mother Earth.

The "Asian Market" (i.e. China) has this one track mind. If they make something, they make a lot of it, and they don't vary it at all, usually. If everyone turns to maple boards, I wouldn't be too surprised to see a maple shortage in ten years.


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Dec 8, 2016)

technomancer said:


> To be fair, it's not JUST China. The luxury furniture industry serves the US and Europe with Rosewood furniture just as much as China, and this is basically why Brazilian Rosewood has been restricted for quite a while now.



Figured this response was coming. To be clear, I think it is (somewhat) unfair China has become such a boogeyman these days, particularly with respect to environmental issues. But in this particular instance, yes, it is China that's the source of the problem, not Europe or North America. Do you have any sources for the claim that it's the furniture industries of the USA and Europe that are driving the rate of depletion? Specifically the claim that they're 'just as much' responsible as China is? I hate asking that because it always sounds so confrontational, but it's honestly not something I've seen in my reading so far. 

I've asked you for sources, so I'll provide mine. The best source is the actual CITES document itself, which I'll get to in a second, but The Guardian also wrote an article on the rosewood restrictions and China's role in all of it. Here's a link to the article, but I'll quote some relevant bits to save you the click:



> Governments have launched a crackdown on the rampant billion-dollar trade in rosewood timber that is plundering forests across the planet to feed a booming luxury furniture market in China[...]With a beautiful deep red glow, it is the traditional wood used for elite, classic-style &#8220;hongmu&#8221; furniture in China: one huge carved bed was on sale recently for $1m. *But due to explosive demand from China&#8217;s fast-growing middle class, the rosewood trade has soared since 2005, multiplying 65 times in value and now worth $2.2bn a year*. As a result, the forests of south-east Asia have been rapidly emptying, peaking in 2014. Traffickers are now targeting more than 80 other countries across the tropics where rosewoods grow, particularly in west Africa but also central America. China&#8217;s rosewood imports from Africa soared sevenfold between 2010 and 2014, according to a report from Forest Trends, with $216m of west African rosewood imported in the first half of 2016 alone. (my emphasis)





> China imported 2m cubic metres of logs and wood in 2014, according to the EIA. This is equivalent to millions of rosewood trees as only the dark, dense heartwood is used: 70-80% of the tree is often wasted.



There was also specific complaints by African CITES delegates reported in that article, and they name China/Asia as the source of the problem, specifically. 

Niger:



> The devastated forests left behind also no longer provide the charcoal and traditional medicines used by indigenous communities. &#8220;It is at the heart of our rural communities,&#8221; said Niger&#8217;s Cites delegate. &#8220;The demand from Asia threatens directly threatens their livelihoods.&#8221;



Benin: 



> The Cites summit also applied new protection to an African rosewood from another genus, known as Kosso, which grows in the dry forests of west Africa. It was barely exported in 2009 but exploitation has since soared and it is now is now the main rosewood timber imported by China. &#8220;The forests have been emptied,&#8221; said Benin&#8217;s delegate to Cites.



But there may be some bias by the article writer, so I read the relevant sections of the CITES document (available here) from their conference in South Africa in September/October. It names China at least 29 times (by name--grabbing figures here by ctrl-F), whilst USA/Europe are practically not named at all (tried several names for the US and also searching the names of various countries in the EU). In fact, the document seems to suggest the opposite of what you are claiming: as far as Africa goes, NA/Europe are not significant traders of African rosewood (section 7.2 'International', p.12): 



> Imports to the USA, European Union and Australia are subject to national legislation in those jurisdictions prohibiting the import and/or sale of wood which was illegally sourced in the country of origin (Hoare, 2015). *However, little or no African rosewood is traded to these countries.* (my emphasis)



Meanwhile, the document focuses very squarely on China as the primary importer of both legally and illegally procured rosewood (see sections 6.2 and 6.4). Some statements that stand out: 



> Until recently, wood of Pterocarpus erinaceus was virtually unknown in commerce outside of its native range (Winrock, 1999). However, in recent years there has been a dramatic increase in trade of the species to Asia for rosewood furniture manufacturing. The species is formally recognised as one of the thirty three &#8220;Hongmu&#8221; (literally &#8220;red wood&#8221; in Chinese) species included in China&#8217;s National Hongmu Standard (2010), and from 2010 onwards, the high prices and limited supplies of more traditional Southeast Asian rosewood species led to dramatic growth in imports of rosewood from West Africa (Forest Trends, 2013). In 2015, Africa was the first source region of &#8220;Hongmu&#8221; species in logs for China, in volume, accounting for 64% of all &#8220;Hongmu&#8221; imports. West Africa alone accounted, the same year, for 84% of Chinese import of &#8220;Hongmu&#8221; from Africa, in volume, becoming the principal source sub-region in the world (Figure 2). While South-Eastern countries have some of the rarer and therefore more valuable &#8220;Hongmu&#8221; species, Africa is now playing a preeminent role in the international trade.
> 
> [...]
> 
> The importance taken by West Africa as source sub-region is the result of a steady growth over the past six years (Figure 4). *Between the third quarter 2009 and the third quarter 2015, Chinese imports of Hongmu logs from West Africa increased by more than 2,000 times in volume.* In 2015, China alone imported more than 387 mille cubic meter of &#8220;Hongmu&#8221; logs from West Africa, for a total of approximately $269 million US dollars. The annual result of the previous year were even more impressive: in 2014 China alone imported more than 830 mille cubic meter of Hongmu logs from West Africa, for a total of approximately $496 million US dollars. As a result, sparsely forested West Africa now exports more timber to China than the densely-forested Congo Basin (Lawson, 2015). (my emphasis)



And as for illegal trade: 



> Information from a number of range states suggests that a large percentage of the Pterocarpus erinaceus timber being exported to China and elsewhere is illegally harvested and/or illegally exported (Forest Trends, 2015). The recent seizure of more than $216 million US dollars in illegally harvested rosewood principally Pterocarpus erinaceus, and other timber species, which took place in Benin nine West African countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Cote d&#8217;Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Mali, Mauritania, Senegal and Togo) demonstrates the regional scale of the issue.



That's from section 6.4. Keep reading, and it outlines how China is largely the one importing the illegally logged woods from these countries. For example, in Gambia, *"During 2010-14 China reported importing over 360,000 cubic metres of rosewood logs from Gambia. It is estimated that 99% of these rosewood logs actually originated in Senegalese forests and are illegal re-exports (all log exports from Senegal are prohibited)."* 

Anyway, there's not much point in continuing. I think CITES made it perfectly clear that China was the problem here, and that it is mostly their furniture industry that is to blame for the depletion of rosewood species in south-east Asia, which has consequently led to illegal exports from Africa because SEA has been so depleted. Moreover, I think you'd be hardpressed to find an explanation for the severity of these restrictions and their swift implementation, other than the fact that Chinese imports of West African rosewood increased 2000-fold between 2009 and 2015 after SEA was no longer a viable source of timber. It's that insane and recent demand that's led to these restrictions...regardless of the merit of their research/claims (which I'm in no position to dispute), it would seem that it's CITES belief that China is the problem. 

However, if you just meant that, historically, we saw a similar trend with the USA/Europe and Brazilian rosewood many decades ago, fair enough. But the statement that 'To be fair, it's not JUST China. The luxury furniture industry serves the US and Europe with Rosewood furniture just as much as China' is not fair at all--in fact, it's patently false. I'm not an expert here, but even a cursory review of the sources reveals that it's China that instigated all of this, at least principally if not solely.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Dec 8, 2016)

Maple is quickly growing and is sustainable. I like the look of maple boards. Currently i have 2 guitars with rosewood and 6 with maple boards. Rosewood looks and feels kinda cheap to me.


----------



## budda (Dec 8, 2016)

What does CITES mean for those of us who cross boarders to play music?


----------



## A-Branger (Dec 8, 2016)

I dont see the problem with composites fretboards like richilite. Finally we can get a nice deep black looking board without paying the $$$ for an ebony one like that


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Dec 8, 2016)

budda said:


> What does CITES mean for those of us who cross boarders to play music?



It's an initialism: (C)onvention on (I)nternational (T)rade in (E)ndangered (S)pecies of Wild Fauna and Flora. 

They have more info on exactly what they're about on their website, which you can find here.


----------



## ramses (Dec 8, 2016)

Sermo Lupi said:


> Meanwhile, the document focuses very squarely on China as the primary importer of both legally and illegally procured rosewood (see sections 6.2 and 6.4). Some statements that stand out:
> 
> 
> 
> And as for illegal trade:



Excellent post. Very informative.

I can add to it that obscene shipments of Cocobolo&#8212;another Dalbergia&#8212;leave Mexico and Central America all the time, with China as a destination.

This is due to the rampant corruption in these countries. They have good laws to protect cocobolo, but no-one cares.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Dec 8, 2016)

well .... guess I better start hoarding cocobolo and ziricote for when they ban those too


----------



## feraledge (Dec 9, 2016)

pondman said:


> I love exotic woods but not at the cost of the planet. All timber should be harvested from sustainable resources.


----------



## Vrollin (Dec 9, 2016)

Fathand said:


> Do you really believe that Fender, Gibson, Ibanez, ESP, or even PRS have any trouble obtaining the required CITES -documents? They have the means ($$$) to do so. Us (the consumers) will most likely pay more as a result, but rosewood fb'd strats / teles aren't going nowhere.
> 
> Most affected will be smaller luthiers that have piles on older undocumented wood, they're pretty much in the mercy of their local officials.



I guess the smaller luthiers will just then have to use those woodstocks for sales within their country, or if the customer is willing then they pay the export fee....?
It doesn't stop the trade of it within the country of origin does it?


----------



## Vrollin (Dec 9, 2016)

narad said:


> This is going to kill guys like Vik that use really nice exotic woods with no documentation, and keep the prices generally sane. A lot of the euro builders -- huber, harting, teuffel -- already ship everything with CITES documentation, so in some circles, no difference. But I think the option for a braz board on my hartung was like $900.



Vik killed guys like Vik....


----------



## Fathand (Dec 9, 2016)

Vrollin said:


> I guess the smaller luthiers will just then have to use those woodstocks for sales within their country, or if the customer is willing then they pay the export fee....?
> It doesn't stop the trade of it within the country of origin does it?



Could be. What this means for the EU (or our customs union), for example, I have no clue. Can I, for example, order a guitar from Poland (like Ran or Skervesen) with a nice Indian Rosewood board and not worry about any documents?

...but on another thought, think about guys like Joe Bonamassa who tours with a vaultload of highly expensive vintage instruments (which many have rosewood boards). I think we could see a "Bonamassa - Maple & Ebony tour"


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 9, 2016)

Ebony trade has been restricted for a long time and we can still ship and buy guitars with ebony boards without hassle, so I don't see customs going berserk when you buy a used fender from a dud on a forum.
I do wish this was a good incentive to develop carbon fiber and other alternative materials though. When you think about it, still using wood is pretty retarded, *but* if those composite materials require burning oil to create they're not much better.


----------



## Vrollin (Dec 9, 2016)

I don't understand the logic of adding fees to items already made and purchased prior to these new rules kicking in. Why should a touring musician have to pay extra just because the instrument contains banned wood that was completely fine prior???
If they add more woods to this list is it likely that the fees will be accumulative? Mahogany guitar, plus rosewood board, double tap??


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 9, 2016)

Likely because the office issuing the certificate will be given to some political buddy to give him a salary and that one must be paid.


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Dec 9, 2016)

Andromalia said:


> Ebony trade has been restricted for a long time and we can still ship and buy guitars with ebony boards without hassle, so I don't see customs going berserk when you buy a used fender from a dud on a forum.
> I do wish this was a good incentive to develop carbon fiber and other alternative materials though. When you think about it, still using wood is pretty retarded, *but* if those composite materials require burning oil to create they're not much better.



I'd have to do some digging, but I don't believe ebony is restricted in the same way. There's protections in place for specific species, but you could always freely trade certain types of ebony whilst others were endangered and trade-prohibited. I've mentioned it already, but I'll link the Bob Taylor (of Taylor guitars) video at the end of this post since it's a decent intro to the topic. What's maybe counterintuitive is that ebony might actually be worse off than rosewood on the whole as far as endangerment goes, but the listing of all rosewood species as CITES Appendix 2 (which is basically 'not necessarily endangered, but requiring lots of paperwork to trade in, since it stands to become endangered, or could be confused with an endangered species') protects all species of rosewood without discrimination. Ebony, on the other hand, is mostly coming from Cameroon these days (and 75% of Cameroon ebony through Taylor, because they now own those reserves), whilst ebony from (for example) Madagascar or Gabon is protected. I have no idea of the legal precedent here, specifically whether CITES has done this in the past or plans to do this with other types of wood in the future, but certainly the restrictions placed on rosewood (i.e. ALL species) are more severe than any other popular wood I'm aware of. See my previous post as to the likely reason why the restrictions are so severe and far-reaching...in a nutshell, China is importing rosewood both legally and illegally at alarming volumes, and is quickly emptying forests in south-east Asia and now Western Africa. Speaking of which, re: Vrollin




> I don't understand the logic of adding fees to items already made and purchased prior to these new rules kicking in. Why should a touring musician have to pay extra just because the instrument contains banned wood that was completely fine prior???
> If they add more woods to this list is it likely that the fees will be accumulative? Mahogany guitar, plus rosewood board, double tap??



Why do we restrict (or prohibit) the trade of all ivory, even if we know a substantial proportion of traded ivory was harvested whilst it was legal to do so? It's to protect living elephants, obviously, because we can't always be sure when or where your ivory goods were harvested. The fact of the matter is that unilaterally banning or restricting trade of all types of a good (i.e. Ivory from African vs. Indian elephants, or rosewood from Madagascar vs. South-east Asia) protects the subtypes/species most at risk because false customs declarations and other such illegal trade tactics are no longer possible, which can be used to disguise illegal goods for legal ones. It's not about the fees, it's about the paperwork (which you have to pay people to fill out, thus fees), since--barring straight up illegal activity like smuggling--this paperwork allows officials to ensure all rosewood in circulation is coming from legitimate, non-endangered sources. 

What's weird about the rosewood situation is that it's really quite a common wood as far as 'exotic' species go, and it is probably THE most popular wood for guitar fretboards (historically that claim might belong to ebony, but in recent decades rosewood might be more popular). But the problem is that specific species are at risk, and thanks to illegal imports, those species are being further depleted by governments who are disguising illegally traded species for legal ones, and at a rate which is alarming enough that CITES had to schedule rosewood for Appendix 2 classification to protect it. It sucks, but it's the best shot we've got right now for saving at-risk species. 

My hope is just that the guitar industry doesn't get too crippled by overbroad restrictions/legislation, because from what I've seen so far, we are not part of the problem. Particularly in the west, we're getting most of our rosewood from places like India where logging is done sustainably. Seems trite to use the popular phrase 'a bad apple ruins the bunch', but that's pretty much what this is.


----------



## technomancer (Dec 9, 2016)

KnightBrolaire said:


> well .... guess I better start hoarding cocobolo and ziricote for when they ban those too



Don't know about Ziricote but IIRC Cocobolo is on the list...


----------



## Andromalia (Dec 9, 2016)

The thing is, with the rampant worldwide deforestation, it is likely that at some point all wood will be out on that list. Wood doesn't grow on trees. Er...ok it does but you get the idea


----------



## narad (Dec 9, 2016)

^^ Yea, ebony is not treated the same. When dealing with Matt Artinger we went with ebony instead of BRW because we knew we'd be shipping it overseas, and didn't want the hassle.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Dec 9, 2016)

Sooo... Baked Maple for everyone, then?

In all seriousness, though, I'm less sad about what this means for rosewood fingerboards, and more excited to see how companies work around this. Are we going to get more maple fingerboards, is this going to kick off a boom for composites, or will they try to find other dark woods? 

Next few NAMM shows might be interesting...


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Dec 9, 2016)

Science_Penguin said:


> Sooo... Baked Maple for everyone, then?
> 
> In all seriousness, though, I'm less sad about what this means for rosewood fingerboards, and more excited to see how companies work around this. Are we going to get more maple fingerboards, is this going to kick off a boom for composites, or will they try to find other dark woods?
> 
> Next few NAMM shows might be interesting...



Ditto. Lots of 'dark wood' candidates, but I'm not sure if any are plentiful enough to replace rosewood entirely. It'd be cool if we saw more diversity in marketed dark woods because of this, which for a long time has been restricted to just ebony and rosewood. 

A bunch have issues though...wenge has an open pore structure, for example, when fretboard woods are usually selected for having a closed grain structure to better deal with dirt and wear. And woods like cocobolo and African blackwood are technically Dalbergia as well, so I don't know if they'll be part of this rosewood ban (or if they'll soon follow). Someone mentioned pau ferro, which seems a likely short-term substitute for high-end guitars. Suhr has marketed it as a somewhat more 'exotic' substitute for years now.


----------



## Dabo Fett (Dec 9, 2016)

Science_Penguin said:


> Sooo... Baked Maple for everyone, then?
> 
> In all seriousness, though, I'm less sad about what this means for rosewood fingerboards, and more excited to see how companies work around this. Are we going to get more maple fingerboards, is this going to kick off a boom for composites, or will they try to find other dark woods?
> 
> Next few NAMM shows might be interesting...



Well while I'd be fine with baked maple, I've also seen the light after having my rosewood necked PRS...

That aside, we all have to understand there will be on an impact on us as consumers. Even if big companies decide to make the change from rosewood, its not going to affect their pockets. While smaller builders might bite the bullet on the extra costs, everything from a rethinking on sourcing woods to R&D on new materials and the obvious extra effort and thinking these guys are going to have to put it will end up hitting our bottom line, not theirs. And its not going to be something as simple as an upcharge for a different model, its going to end up across all instruments, probably even the ones that are unaffected. Fender isn't going to price up only a rosewood board on a strat because of the restrictions, or only price up whatever replacement it gets, they're going to price up the entire strat line to be even like they basically are now with maple or rosewood board options. 

Nothing comes without a cost guys. One way or another if this has as widespread implications as we think, it'll affect us all


----------



## marksmand (Dec 10, 2016)

This is from a new posting on the NAMM site and I have heard this elsewhere
The rosewoods that were recently added fall under this(ziricote cocobolo
east indian) So unless you have a rosewood guitar that weigh 22lbs or more
you should be fine

The rosewood listing does include some minor exemptions, including (a) non-commercial shipments (e.g.,, international travel by musicians) with a total weight of 10 kg or less, (b) parts and derivatives of Siamese (aka Thai) rosewood, and (c) all products originating and exported from Mexico.


----------



## Dabo Fett (Dec 10, 2016)

marksmand said:


> This is from a new posting on the NAMM site and I have heard this elsewhere
> The rosewoods that were recently added fall under this(ziricote cocobolo
> east indian) So unless you have a rosewood guitar that weigh 22lbs or more
> you should be fine
> ...




Some great info there. Now my only questions is on that last part. Is there Mexican rosewood, or are they including things like my Fender p bass made in Mexico with East Indian rosewood?


----------



## ramses (Dec 10, 2016)

Dabo Fett said:


> Is there Mexican rosewood [...]?



Yes, Cocobolo. Supposedly all the legal Cocobolo in USA is from Mexico.


----------



## MikeNeal (Dec 10, 2016)

marksmand said:


> This is from a new posting on the NAMM site and I have heard this elsewhere
> The rosewoods that were recently added fall under this(ziricote cocobolo
> east indian) So unless you have a rosewood guitar that weigh 22lbs or more
> you should be fine
> ...



i keep seeing it pop up, but ziricote is not a rosewood, nor is it restricted in any way afaik


----------



## ampjunkie (Jan 19, 2017)

This is a great summary of the recent CITES impact regarding all rosewoods, particularly to luthiers in Canada. 

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1193766164035260&id=198729443538942


----------



## JohnIce (Jan 20, 2017)

Having customs clog up everytime a band goes on tour over a few square inches of rosewood seems unlikely. It would certainly do nothing to save the trees nor the environment.

However, this news makes me pretty happy honestly. Yay for sustainability and looking ahead, technological advancement and whatnot. Boo for making the earth suffer just because people have to have the same "tonewood" as whatever their 70's guitar hero of choice had, on their new $500 guitar made by people who make no money in a country they can't point out on a map then shipped across four continents to arrive in your lap so you can plug it into your Spider III and pretend you're Jimmy Page for 30 minutes a week after work. All _impossible_ without the right "tonewood". Never mind that the body is made out of mostly sawdust, woodglue and human tears, maple sounds WAY different as a fingerboard. Anyone can hear that.


----------



## Forkface (Jan 23, 2017)

wait so, in a nutshell, if im travelling with my personal guitar with no commercial intentions, its exempt? 
I bought an ibanez in japan with a rosewood fb (i dont even know what kind of rosewood it is) in august, brought it to korea, and most likely i'll take it back with me when i eventually return to the states. anybody knows if i need to apply for a permit?

edit. nvm i read the cites page, in the appendix section its stated that it is indeed exempt.
https://cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php#ftnt19


----------



## ramses (Jan 23, 2017)

ampjunkie said:


> This is a great summary of the recent CITES impact regarding all rosewoods, particularly to luthiers in Canada.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1193766164035260&id=198729443538942



From the link:



> Even if you are a professional, performing musician, youre fine.
> [...]
> There is one exception to this rule; Siamese rosewood, aka Vietnamese rosewood, dalbergia cochinchinensis, requires a CITES permit in all cases.


And how is anyone supposed to prove to an airport officer in a power-trip that your rosewood fretboard is not siamese rosewood?


----------



## Petar Bogdanov (Jan 24, 2017)

It's an irritant. Not fit for the purpose.


----------



## jonsick (Jan 25, 2017)

I'll happily be the outlier, but:

- I'm not a huge fan of ebony. It's darker sounding and I like bright

- I really like rosewood. So much so I've ordered it on my custom guitar. It's brighter sounding, light and I like how it feels.

- I actually preferred the richlite board on my LP Custom to a few other LP Custom guitars I tried in store. I left with the new richlite-boarded LP.


So I guess I'm the monkey...


----------



## bostjan (Jan 25, 2017)

jonsick said:


> I'll happily be the outlier, but:
> 
> - I'm not a huge fan of ebony. It's darker sounding and I like bright
> 
> ...



Rosewood does not sound brighter than ebony.


----------



## vansinn (Jan 26, 2017)

Fathand said:


> Could be. What this means for the EU (or our customs union), for example, I have no clue. Can I, for example, order a guitar from Poland (like Ran or Skervesen) with a nice Indian Rosewood board and not worry about any documents?



No, you should check with your home country's regulative authority on the matter, and likely also with the ditto mechanism in the country from which you intend to buy from.

I only heard of the new CITES rules yesterday. The new rules are effective in the US from January 2nd, and within the EU from January 29th.

This morning I called the authorities here in Denmark, and was told that EU rules are tougher than US rules, but that rules will be implemented differently in each country. As an example, Denmark simply doesn't have resources to fully implement these rules; what this means the guy I talked to couldn't say.

What he did say was that seller is responsible for obtaining a certificate on the wood used, and buyer is responsible for obtaining permission to import the wood, or in our case, the instrument containing this wood.

He also said that unless the rosewood is Brazilian Rosewood, in the EU often called Rio Palisander, restrictions are less severe, though still requiring said certificates.
Also, selling an instrument, produced before the rules became effective, was said to even less restrictive - but regulations and certificates still applies.

As said, this is what I was told; he sounded quite well into the topic, but nevertheless couldn't say what would happen if I sell a non-certified instrument within the EU - other than I really ought to obtain the certificate when selling, and that buyer is responsible for obtaining import clearance.

That I am just a mere private guitar player about to sell two instrument makes no difference at all 

Here's a fairly good article on which species are covered:
https://reverb.com/news/new-cites-regulations-for-all-rosewood-species

Couple of quotes:


> It does not apply to instruments shipped within the borders of your country or instruments carried for personal use while traveling internationally [unless they contain more than 22 lbs. (10 kg) of the regulated woods].





> The Convention of International Trade of Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES) held a conference from September 24 - October 4 this year in Johannesburg, South Africa where it was decided that all species of rosewood under the genus Dalbergia and three bubinga species (Guibourtia demeusei, Guibourtia pellegriniana, and Guibourtia tessmannii) will be protected under CITES Appendix II.
> 
> Kosso - sometimes called African rosewood (Pterocarpus erinaceus) - will also be protected.
> 
> ...



And here the CITES list of authorities per country:
https://cites.org/eng/cms/index.php/component/cp


----------



## jonsick (Jan 27, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Rosewood does not sound brighter than ebony.



I would politely disagree. But regardless, I still generally prefer a rosewood board and happy to be in that minority.


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Jan 29, 2017)

Hoping to get input on this and w/o starting a pointless new thread... figured this was a reasonable place to ask... 

I've been looking at an out of stock guitar on Sweetwater for a while now. It shows a status of "more back in stock in a couple weeks...". This guitar has a rosewood board and it's been prob 3+ weeks that I've been waiting for it to show back up on their site. 

Any idea if large retailers like Sweetwater, simply aren't going to get any rosewood spec'd guitars back in stock? I was going to ask them but I figured I might get more accurate info here on sso. Fwiw I'm in the US and this guitar is I'm guessing Korean or Indonesian made.


----------



## JSanta (Jan 29, 2017)

High Plains Drifter said:


> Hoping to get input on this and w/o starting a pointless new thread... figured this was a reasonable place to ask...
> 
> I've been looking at an out of stock guitar on Sweetwater for a while now. It shows a status of "more back in stock in a couple weeks...". This guitar has a rosewood board and it's been prob 3+ weeks that I've been waiting for it to show back up on their site.
> 
> Any idea if large retailers like Sweetwater, simply aren't going to get any rosewood spec'd guitars back in stock? I was going to ask them but I figured I might get more accurate info here on sso. Fwiw I'm in the US and this guitar is I'm guessing Korean or Indonesian made.



My suspicion is that most of these companies, should they decide to continue to ship guitars for commercial purposes overseas, will comply with the CITES regulations and produce the appropriate documentation.


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Jan 29, 2017)

JSanta said:


> My suspicion is that most of these companies, should they decide to continue to ship guitars for commercial purposes overseas, will comply with the CITES regulations and produce the appropriate documentation.



Thanks so much. I'll admit that I haven't read everything out there regarding the restrictions but I did look through the news pages of Sweetwater as well as the manufacturer and didn't see anything. Will prob contact Sweetwater later today and see if these guitars are still scheduled to be back in stock. Again.. thanks for the input.


----------



## JSanta (Jan 29, 2017)

High Plains Drifter said:


> Thanks so much. I'll admit that I haven't read everything out there regarding the restrictions but I did look through the news pages of Sweetwater as well as the manufacturer and didn't see anything. Will prob contact Sweetwater later today and see if these guitars are still scheduled to be back in stock. Again.. thanks for the input.



I'd also state that CITES regulations are nothing new; many of the products that these companies ship already have to comply. The additions this year mean more diligence on the part of the manufacturer.


----------



## gabsonuro (Jan 29, 2017)

I chatted with a few of the big guitar retailers in the US and all of them have barely been complying with the CITES rules.

apparently no one is checking any guitars coming over borders, a lot of them said they have been sending plenty of guitars with rosewood internationally without papers since jan 2nd and none of them have had anything come back.


----------



## vansinn (Jan 29, 2017)

^ as someone wrote earlier, the CITES rules likely have been implemented to deal with industries far more consuming than the guitar industry, and, as I wrote, referring my phone call to DK authorities, many countries have varying implementations and may not even have the resources to implement and do the checking (which is the case here in DK).

In any event, it looks to me like at least we privateers may not need to worry too much when buying/selling instruments across borders.
That is, with one noticeable exception: For an instrument with Brazilian Rosewood (Rio Palisander) in it, I would think about permits..


----------



## Wolfos (Jan 29, 2017)

What happens if a private seller doesn't know about the CITES documentation and ships it over boarders? A big fine?


----------



## raytsh (Mar 13, 2017)

I would also like to know what happens in such a case. I guess the customs office will confiscate the guitar or something?!


----------



## mnemonic (Mar 13, 2017)

I bought a guitar a few weeks ago (after this CITES thing came into place) from Australia shipped to the UK, from a private seller off ebay. 

We didn't do any cites paperwork, and it wasn't stopped, just the normal customs fees. It has a rosewood fretboard. They would have to crack open the package to have even found out (wouldn't have been easy as it was packed very well) and even then, they would also need someone there who could identify the wood. 

This is just my feeling so don't hold me to it, but enough packages go through customs every day that I don't imagine they have the spare time to worry about it unless they think they have good cause to search a package. For example, if they think it contains weapons or drugs after x-ray, or if its a bunch of furniture or large wood they suspect may be a banned wood. 

If someone asks, I would just say its Grenadillo or baked maple or something. Those woods are so close in appearance to random species of rosewood that you probably couldn't conclusively say its one or the other, especially not random customs guy. What are they really gonna do, dig up a back catalog and look up the guitar?


----------



## Possessed (Mar 16, 2017)

Is this CITES thing only for US?


----------



## technomancer (Mar 16, 2017)

Possessed said:


> Is this CITES thing only for US?



CITES is a huge international treaty 

https://www.cites.org/eng/disc/parties/index.php


----------



## beerandbeards (Mar 17, 2017)

My Warwick (shipping from Germany) has been pushed back another couple months because of CITES. Won't get it until May I guess


----------



## Malkav (Apr 12, 2017)

So CITES have straight up banned rosewood all together now, so going forward once the various brands have used their stock that'll be the end of rosewood on mass manufactured guitars for a while.

So prepare to see more Pau Ferro and Ebony going forward


----------



## olejason (Apr 12, 2017)

Pau Ferro usually looks like crap on guitars. I'm skeptical that we'll see more ebony just because it tends to be a little more expensive. Though I think the industry has done a great job making cheaper ebony with lots of streaking more appealing to guitarists. I think Kiesel calls it 'royal ebony' or something goofy.

I think there will be renewed interest in richlite, ebanol, and other things like that.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 12, 2017)

olejason said:


> Pau Ferro usually looks like crap on guitars.













My first pau ferro fretboard guitar, I'll admit, looked...different. The body was kind of a dark grey metallic, and the fretboard was extra reddish. It looks way better on natural finish guitars.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 12, 2017)

It'll be interesting to see what happens.

I'd like to see more composites, just cause I find them intriguing, but I don't see many companies REALLY pushing that any time soon. More likely, they'll just go looking for similar dark woods.

So, like I said earlier in the thread, maybe prepare to see some more baked maple.


----------



## MikeNeal (Apr 12, 2017)

thats pau ferro, looks pretty good to me


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 12, 2017)

Forget the fingerboard, I'm more concerned about why a guitar neck appearing in front of my face while I'm lying on someone's front porch! And why it doesn't appear to be effected by the environmental lighting...


----------



## bostjan (Apr 12, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Forget the fingerboard, I'm more concerned about why a guitar neck appearing in front of my face while I'm lying on someone's front porch! And why it doesn't appear to be effected by the environmental lighting...



It appears to be placed atop some partially reflective material. The light on the neck is really bright.

For fretboard materials, you really need something super durable, first and foremost. Pau ferro fits the description quite nicely, probably a little better than Indian Rosewood, even.

Composite materials can be weird. Parker uses a carbon/fiberglass/resin composite that, IMO, sounds brighter than ebony. Remember Switch Guitars? They used some sort of cellulose/resin composite, and it had a sort of darker rosewood-like tone, despite looking pretty much like highly polished ebony. I think maple looks great and sounds great, but we all know that once the finish wears off, it starts to turn a sort of ugly brownish grey. I think a lot of people don't care for that. I have yet to see baked maple age. Of course, pau ferro tends to lose some of its redness, but then it's still a nice kind of chocolate-y brown once it's aged, which works for me.

In the world of composite materials, there are so many options, but manufacturing the material itself can be expensive, then machining the material into a proper fretboard can be a nightmare. Maybe tangless frets and direct fabrication can solve some of those issues.

In the mean time, it seems Rosewood fretboards are still way easier to obtain than pretty much any other alternative. It'll be interesting to see how long that takes to change.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 12, 2017)

bostjan said:


> It appears to be placed atop some partially reflective material. The light on the neck is really bright.
> 
> For fretboard materials, you really need something super durable, first and foremost. Pau ferro fits the description quite nicely, probably a little better than Indian Rosewood, even.
> 
> ...



I dunno, personally, I'm in the camp that ascribes most of tone to the pickups and the overall construction of the instrument rather than the materials, so I'd say the brightness has more to do with the way Parkers are built. I don't necessarily believe taking a composite and slapping it on, say, a Gibson is going to do much.

But, like you said, manufacturing with that stuff is certainly going to be a challenge. Especially if you've been working with wood for so many years.

I'm probably still gonna stick to maple, myself. By the time it ages to the point of looking terrible, I'll more than likely have swapped the neck out anyway (going for bolt-on). Or maybe I'll keep it, I've seen some aged maple that looks okay...


----------



## mnemonic (Apr 12, 2017)

Gibson used baked maple on some guitars a few years back and they were pretty dark in color, they had the aesthetic of rosewood unless you look close at the grain, so as far as the dark fretboard look, I don't think we'll be lacking it in the future. 






They've also used Granadillo wood for fretboards. Similar look again.


----------



## MikeNeal (Apr 12, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Forget the fingerboard, I'm more concerned about why a guitar neck appearing in front of my face while I'm lying on someone's front porch! And why it doesn't appear to be effected by the environmental lighting...



if talking about the picture i posted, it was on the hood of my car in the front yard.


----------



## tedtan (Apr 12, 2017)

I've played the baked maple Gibsons and like the fingerboard just fine. No issues there.

Also, maple fingerboards can be refinished pretty easily if you wear through the original finish, so no need for a replacement neck or a new guitar in order to keep a clean look.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 12, 2017)

MikeNeal said:


> if talking about the picture i posted, it was on the hood of my car in the front yard.



Ohhhhh, okay, that explains it...

I thought it was a weird photoshop thing.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 12, 2017)

mnemonic said:


> They've also used Granadillo wood for fretboards. Similar look again.


Granadillo is actually banned by CITES, too. FYI


----------



## wannabguitarist (Apr 12, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Ohhhhh, okay, that explains it...
> 
> I thought it was a weird photoshop thing.



The windshield washer sprayers kind of give it away


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 12, 2017)

wannabguitarist said:


> The windshield washer sprayers kind of give it away



I honestly couldn't even tell what those were. They just kind of looked like floating dots.


----------



## Andromalia (Apr 12, 2017)

mnemonic said:


> Gibson used baked maple on some guitars a few years back and they were pretty dark in color, they had the aesthetic of rosewood unless you look close at the grain, so as far as the dark fretboard look, I don't think we'll be lacking it in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have one of those baked maple LP Tributes and I like it better than poor entry level rosewood, grain is tight, color is fine, solid choice. (I don't buy the "your fingers don't touch the board', if they don't you obviously don't bend enough  )


----------



## eightsixboy (Apr 12, 2017)

Honestly I think this is a good thing for the guitar industry and the environment ( more importantly). 


I personally am sick of rosewood on everything. I seriously don't get why people want bland looking brown fingerboards anyway. Same with Ebony, I don't get why people want plain black, looks soooooooo boring. 


I'm hoping brands start using streaked ebony or other woods now, should make for an interesting 2018 catalogue anyway.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 12, 2017)

eightsixboy said:


> I don't get why people want plain black, looks soooooooo boring.



But it's striking, it's bold! It's like... how much more black could it be? And the answer is... none! None more black!


----------



## Werecow (Apr 12, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> But it's striking, it's bold! It's like... how much more black could it be? And the answer is... none! None more black!



I own five guitars and they're all black. I've ordered another one and that's black too


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 12, 2017)

for all of those who still believe a fretboard makes a difference in sound






Me Im happy to not see rosewood light brown anymore, but Im sure the industry would change to baked mapple to make it look the same because "tradition". I know Ebony wont be the answer as its already hard to get. But I do would love to see more stuff like richlite. And yes, I like black plain fretboards. Gives a nice look to the guitar, specially wiht dark themed colors. Nothing more horrible than a "black" guitar with a light brown fretboard. Even with light colors it helps to contrast the look.

I also like light natural mapple (not the stupid yellow stuff of fenders)

if not a lot of the cheap guitars out there that currently use rosewood as an alternative of ebony because price. If those came with black richlite, I would be more than happy to buy those in a snap. Like for example I wouldnt mind to own a Gretsch, I think they are beautiful. I wont be giving it much use so a cheap entry level is great, but how much better these would look with a black richlite board instead of the cheap rosewood they use. Like I know their high end stuff use ebony, but Im not expecting ebony at that price range made in china. But with rosewood the look is not there, it doesnt looks right.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 13, 2017)

This is kind of why I want Gibson to bring back their baked maple fretboards, but not tell anyone. Just call it "Rosweood" if you have to. See if anyone can tell the difference.

Blind tests are the ultimate method to prove and disprove the intricacies of tone-chasing.


----------



## iamaom (Apr 13, 2017)

A-Branger said:


> if not a lot of the cheap guitars out there that currently use rosewood as an alternative of ebony because price. If those came with black richlite, I would be more than happy to buy those in a snap.


I have a curbow that uses luthite for the body and fretboard and it's pretty nice. If they could make it strong enough to have the neck I'd buy a whole luthite bass/guitar in a heartbeat.

Or easier yet just use a common wood type (maple, alder, whatever) and just paint it black! With today's modern paint technology I'm surprised there aren't more painted boards, not only would it hide meh quality wood (that 99% of people wouldn't notice or care about on a sub $1000 guitar anyways) you could also paint on the inlays which would be even less work (keep the same price, but shift the labor to better set-ups/fretwork). Musicians are just going to have to progress with the rest of the world, current wood trends are just unsustainable.


----------



## JSanta (Apr 13, 2017)

iamaom said:


> I have a curbow that uses luthite for the body and fretboard and it's pretty nice. If they could make it strong enough to have the neck I'd buy a whole luthite bass/guitar in a heartbeat.
> 
> Or easier yet just use a common wood type (maple, alder, whatever) and just paint it black! With today's modern paint technology I'm surprised there aren't more painted boards, not only would it hide meh quality wood (that 99% of people wouldn't notice or care about on a sub $1000 guitar anyways) you could also paint on the inlays which would be even less work (keep the same price, but shift the labor to better set-ups/fretwork). Musicians are just going to have to progress with the rest of the world, current wood trends are just unsustainable.



One thing I've always loved about Parkers was the innovative use of materials. In my hands, nothing feels or plays better than a Fly. There are much prettier guitars for sure, but I think what Aristides, Parker, and a few others are doing is great for the guitar industry.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 14, 2017)

Didn't Parker at one point make the entire neck out of composite? I'm not up on my history with those guys, but I swear I played a used Fly once that had a neck made entirely out of carbon graphite, or whatever it is they use...


----------



## JSanta (Apr 14, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Didn't Parker at one point make the entire neck out of composite? I'm not up on my history with those guys, but I swear I played a used Fly once that had a neck made entirely out of carbon graphite, or whatever it is they use...



The necks still had a core wood, but the back was the carbon fiber and the fingerboard was the glass/carbon epoxy. 

I don't recall them ever having a neck that was completely out of composite materials. The wood basically has an exoskeleton, but there was still wood there.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 14, 2017)

JSanta said:


> The necks still had a core wood, but the back was the carbon fiber and the fingerboard was the glass/carbon epoxy.
> 
> I don't recall them ever having a neck that was completely out of composite materials. The wood basically has an exoskeleton, but there was still wood there.



Ah, that would explain it. The one I played was solid black and kinda glossy like a Modulus neck. I just assumed it was all composite.

Not sure I understand the purpose of that... Does it maybe make it lighter?


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 14, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Ah, that would explain it. The one I played was solid black and kinda glossy like a Modulus neck. I just assumed it was all composite.
> 
> Not sure I understand the purpose of that... Does it maybe make it lighter?



I think the idea is like having carbon fibber rods inside the neck, but instead is on the outside. Its jsut to add stability so you can create a thiner neck


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 15, 2017)

A-Branger said:


> I think the idea is like having carbon fibber rods inside the neck, but instead is on the outside. Its jsut to add stability so you can create a thiner neck



Guess that makes sense. Still, I'd personally just make the whole thing composite... But, that's probably why I'm not a luthier... 

...That's not true. The real reason I'm not a luthier is cause I can't be trusted with a saw...


----------



## technomancer (Apr 15, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Guess that makes sense. Still, I'd personally just make the whole thing composite... But, that's probably why I'm not a luthier...
> 
> ...That's not true. The real reason I'm not a luthier is cause I can't be trusted with a saw...



I think you were thinking of Steinberger, they did graphite necks.


----------



## Sermo Lupi (Apr 17, 2017)

A-Branger said:


> for all of those who still believe a fretboard makes a difference in sound




I was on your side going into this: I typically don't think a fretboard makes one iota of a difference when it comes to the overall sound of a guitar. But I did notice a difference in that video  The all-maple neck was quite a bit brighter. 

I still think there's a lot of superstition in the tonewood discussion, but maybe I shouldn't be so sceptical. Could you really not tell a difference in that video? The guy even says in the conclusion that there's a subtle difference in tone between the maple and rosewood fretboards.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 17, 2017)

Sermo Lupi said:


> I was on your side going into this: I typically don't think a fretboard makes one iota of a difference when it comes to the overall sound of a guitar. But I did notice a difference in that video  The all-maple neck was quite a bit brighter.
> 
> I still think there's a lot of superstition in the tonewood discussion, but maybe I shouldn't be so sceptical. Could you really not tell a difference in that video? The guy even says in the conclusion that there's a subtle difference in tone between the maple and rosewood fretboards.



yes theres a difference, a tinny little itty bitty small difference. Out of the 3 clips, the first one was barely, the second one was none, and the third was the one who had a bigger difference.

Yet this is a extra small difference that I could attribute it more to a difference in playing than the fretboard itself. A new set of strings, nut, frets, pickups, even a difference material pick can make bigger differences than what you saw. ITs not going to be 100% equal on both, I dont think it would be even if he had compared two exact material necks either.

Poaint being, the minute difference between the two (if any really), is not enough to justify the whole debate that a differnce piece of fretboard has a huge impact in tone like many are lead to believe. You know "mapple is brighter snappier same as ebony, yet rosewood is warmer/rounder" blah blah crap.

At the end of the day, those materials are being used for their ease to use, price, looks, but more importantly because of "tradition", everyone is still drooling over 50's-60's guitars for some reason, so everything still NEEDs to resemble that. And the good old "if they did it that way, then we just keep doing it this way then", "thats the standard", "works for them works for me", "thats what people wants", ect ect ect

there is no reason on why keep using one material over another for fretboards. Ebony because its the tradition on orchesta instruments, plus the tight almost non grain helps for these fretless instruments, also being black gives a nice colro scheme to the guitar, Mapple can be justified more as a "its the same material as the neck" so looks better, and rosewood because........?.....its "brown"??....I guess?.... because is easy to work with and has tight grain, and still a fair bit hard to retain shape??..... Any other material its "too exotic"?, or hard to find in large quantities at a cheap price?, or to have a more consistent look?, or the grain is too wide? or soft? wrong color?....... Donno, but one thing for sure its NOT about the tone


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 17, 2017)

And, as I've frequently had to remind myself: average listeners don't care about the subtleties of your tone.

When someone listens to a composition, they're usually taking in the big picture, and if there's any subtleties they can discern, it's usually on the level of the difference between a clean electric vs a real acoustic, at most.

More subtle things like what kind of pickup you're using (and I mean like Humbucker vs Single Coil, not which specific model), what kind of amp you're plugged into, how the knobs were set, where the mic was placed (if at all) during recording, how the guitars were mixed on the album, all that's getting a bit too microscopic for most people. Granted, they're important factors, and they add up to the sum people will end up hearing, but the untrained ear isn't going to be able to articulate much more than "I just like/don't like the way the guitars sound on this album."

The difference your fingerboard wood makes is so subtle, so easily corrected by any number of other factors (especially the ones mentioned above), and so molecular in the scheme of things, it's REALLY not worth worrying about.


----------



## JSanta (Apr 17, 2017)

technomancer said:


> I think you were thinking of Steinberger, they did graphite necks.



I believe that Moses has made graphite necks too, as well as RainSong and Emerald. 

In relation to all of the tonal differences, I think that there certainly differences, but we notice it more because of how connected to tones many of us are. 

My wife for instance, cannot for the life of her tell the difference between my guitars, and none of them have the same construction. To her, the blue guitar is best because it looks the nicest to her. 

Most of us are probably being too nit-picky. As composites become the new normal, people picking up guitars in a hundred years may think instruments made of wood are archaic. Who knows.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 17, 2017)

JSanta said:


> I believe that Moses has made graphite necks too, as well as RainSong and Emerald.
> 
> In relation to all of the tonal differences, I think that there certainly differences, but we notice it more because of how connected to tones many of us are.
> 
> ...



Nit picking is the name of the game...but I reserve the right to nit pick every detail if I'm spending money on something.

I'm not a fan of Les Paul guitars. But if Les Paul, the guitarist, wanted to play Les Paul, the guitar, then perfect - he sounded great playing them. But when I get ready to shell out cash on a new instrument, then I want to know what every little thing is and whence it came.

Your guitar: "That fretboard looks cool"
My guitar: "This fretboard came from the west-facing side of a trunk of a tree in the backyard of a carpenter in Honduras."


----------



## JSanta (Apr 17, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Nit picking is the name of the game...but I reserve the right to nit pick every detail if I'm spending money on something.
> 
> I'm not a fan of Les Paul guitars. But if Les Paul, the guitarist, wanted to play Les Paul, the guitar, then perfect - he sounded great playing them. But when I get ready to shell out cash on a new instrument, then I want to know what every little thing is and whence it came.
> 
> ...



Again, totally your right to do so. The bottom line is wood, at least how we know it today is going to change, and we're going to have to adapt to it. 

In 100 years, your grandchildren may be asking where the glue in the carbon fiber was mixed because of the superior tonal qualities of the Idaho epoxy versus that made in Florida.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 17, 2017)

Pfft, 100 years from now? I already want to know details like that. The carbon fiber in my Oni CF8 was manufactured using a low viscosity vacuum setting resin. My Parkers make use of a higher viscosity thermosetting epoxy. The thermosetting epoxy is slightly glassier (more stiff and brittle), which makes a slightly brighter tone.


----------



## JSanta (Apr 17, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Pfft, 100 years from now? I already want to know details like that. The carbon fiber in my Oni CF8 was manufactured using a low viscosity vacuum setting resin. My Parkers make use of a higher viscosity thermosetting epoxy. The thermosetting epoxy is slightly glassier (more stiff and brittle), which makes a slightly brighter tone.



You've taken my point to an extreme. I was suggesting that the way we talk about rosewood/maple/mahogany/whatever may very well change to resins and man-made materials in the future as the "normal" of instruments change.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 17, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Pfft, 100 years from now? I already want to know details like that. The carbon fiber in my Oni CF8 was manufactured using a low viscosity vacuum setting resin. My Parkers make use of a higher viscosity thermosetting epoxy. The thermosetting epoxy is slightly glassier (more stiff and brittle), which makes a slightly brighter tone.



See, if we can take this kind of thinking and use it to find sustainable manmade alternatives that capture the alleged tonal characteristics of real wood, or at least create enough of a variety of different resins to rival the number of different available woods... that's nitpicking I might be able to get behind...


----------



## bostjan (Apr 18, 2017)

JSanta said:


> You've taken my point to an extreme. I was suggesting that the way we talk about rosewood/maple/mahogany/whatever may very well change to resins and man-made materials in the future as the "normal" of instruments change.



I know. I was trying to be funny, which translates poorly over the internet, making a more ironic humour...

I don't think we will ever get to a point where a certain combination of materials sounds "just like maple" or "just like rosewood" beyond the point where some people will argue that none of the materials make any difference anyway. Personally, I prefer the tone of some composites to real wood. I halfway agree with folks who say it doesn't matter. I think, as long as you stay within a certain range of materials and consistent quality control, that the difference in tone is not going to ever be a make-or-break issue.

Anyway, that's totally off topic. It seems that pretty much all manufacturers are still using rosewood.


----------



## will_shred (Apr 18, 2017)

Maybe it will get to the point where most guitars are made from composite materials and real wood guitars are all vintage relics and highly sought after. Well, not like there will be any shortage of exotic wood guitars with Kiesel et al churning them out like there's no tomorrow.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (May 5, 2017)

I saw this on an Ibanez FB group. Looks like this is causing major disruption.



> For those of you waiting for your new guitar, here is an explanation from Rich at Ibanezrules.com. The delay isn't just Ibanez, it's every maker of every wooden instrument from guitars to violins and it's not the fault of your dealer or sales rep. CITES rosewood ban has created an absolute mess at the ports. Also, here is a pic of my new Passion &#128540;
> CITES Delays File
> With so many question about the same delays Im prompted to write a file to explain.
> If it wasnt in stock at HUSA (Hoshino USA is where all Ibanez guitars go when they arrive in the USA before they are sent to the dealers) before the rosewood ban went into effect on 1/2/17, nothing more has come in. Not a single container has cleared the ports. I am told all the permitting is finalized but the ports are strangled with 1000s of held containers and the ports are now the logjam. Which will quickly turn into the distributor being jammed when they get 4 months worth of shipments all at once. Then every dealer will be the backlogged when they dump 4 months worth of inventory in our laps basically all at once.
> There is no point asking for an ETA, HUSA has zero idea when the ports will release, they have no idea when Fish and Wildlife will streamline the permitting process so clearance doesnt take 4 months, basically, nobody knows anything.


----------



## eelblack2 (May 5, 2017)

Right now, because country of origin vs. country of import has pretty much zero standardization, inspection practices, hell, even precedent, 2017 is going to be one seriously delayed cluster-F. I just received Ibanez, from several different Euro countries, purchased in January, and this is May now....


----------



## A-Branger (May 5, 2017)

this was the latest update on the Ormsby run about it



> Goliath update:
> Not the best I'm afraid.
> The new CITES Rosewood restrictions (https://reverb.com/&#8230;/new-cites-regulations-for-all-rosewood&#8230; is the best article, but the announcement dates was actually dec 10th or there abouts) has caused delays for all orders at WMI and from my sources, all other similar manufacturers.
> Unfortunately a number of containers worth of ebony and rosewood have been halted due to not arriving before paperwork could be acquired. I know in the USA and Australia, this paperwork, required from jan 2nd 2017 for all imports of any deliveries including any rosewood pieces, takes approx 90 days to process (which is around now, but with everyone filing for this new paperwork, who knows).
> ...



Basically everything on the WMI factory in Korea has been affected by the CITES regulations. They seem to have bunch of guitars ready to ship waiting for paperwork, which is taking storage space in order to get more done or import more materials (plus I assume that the factory cant really invoice for these guitars as they havent been able to ship out, which creates a money problem too). Also all the wood containers, which they are a mix of woods, so as long as it has one slab of rosewood the whole container gets delayed for paperwork which takes 90 days to process. 

so every brand that uses that factory has been affected, some more than others. And although brands like Ormsby and Chapman who dont use rosewood (or any other guitar model too), are not affected directly, they still are, due to other guitars not being shipped out of the factory and wood containers not arriving to be used to build, and everyones build spot gets delayed and pushed back


----------



## LeviathanKiller (May 10, 2017)

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Aristides guitars since they're all composite


----------



## charlessalvacion (May 11, 2017)

Having trouble buying in Ishibashi Japan going to Singapore because of the CITES issue. :|


----------



## Science_Penguin (May 11, 2017)

LeviathanKiller said:


> I'm surprised no one has mentioned Aristides guitars since they're all composite



I always told myself I'd never spend anywhere close to 3k on a single instrument cause I'd never want to take it out of the house. Aristides seems like they might be resilient enough to be worth it.


----------



## SnowfaLL (May 12, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> I always told myself I'd never spend anywhere close to 3k on a single instrument cause I'd never want to take it out of the house. Aristides seems like they might be resilient enough to be worth it.



I live in a very messed up climate (Nova Scotia) where it can be 20cm of snow one day and +20 sunny the next.. It snowed multiple times in April even, and I swear by composites/carbon fiber now. I leave my Emerald acoustic on my couch or bed year round and it feels the exact same everytime I pick it up. Only had the Aristides for a month so far but its on a stand and I don't feel nervous at all with it being out of the case, yet even my Carvins/Schecters being locked in the cases need adjustments when taking them out (or major fret sprout ugh)


----------

