Rosewood for guitars - where does it come from?

AndrewD

With all the hype about Madagascar and it's depleting rosewood forests, I've become quite interested as to where big companies like Fender and Gibson get their rosewood supplies from and how do they go about getting it. Google is not helping me much. So does anyone have any light to shed on the situation?

Tonedef

I take it you read the Wikipedia rosewood article?

I found this enlightening... I wonder if they knew at all?

Madagascar rosewood logging controversy

In 2009 controversy arose surrounding the intensification of rosewood logging in Madagascar's national parks.[1] Logging was linked to criminal syndicates that laundered rosewood logs through Reunion and Mauritius before transporting timber to China for processing.[2] Finished wood and furniture was then shipped to Europe and the United States. In November 2009 Gibson Guitar Corporation in Nashville was raided by federal authorities for its alleged use of illegally sourced rosewood.[3] The investigation is ongoing as of January 2010. In March 2010 the Malagasy government finally announced a ban of the rosewood export for a period between 2 and 5 years.

AndrewD

Tonedef wrote: I take it you read the Wikipedia rosewood article?

I found this enlightening... I wonder if they knew at all?

Madagascar rosewood logging controversy

In 2009 controversy arose surrounding the intensification of rosewood logging in Madagascar's national parks.[1] Logging was linked to criminal syndicates that laundered rosewood logs through Reunion and Mauritius before transporting timber to China for processing.[2] Finished wood and furniture was then shipped to Europe and the United States. In November 2009 Gibson Guitar Corporation in Nashville was raided by federal authorities for its alleged use of illegally sourced rosewood.[3] The investigation is ongoing as of January 2010. In March 2010 the Malagasy government finally announced a ban of the rosewood export for a period between 2 and 5 years.

Yeah I saw that article but I can't find a follow up to it - were they doing it illegally? did they know?

AlanRatcliffe

India has been the main source of rw for decades.

singemonkey

AndrewD wrote: Yeah I saw that article but I can't find a follow up to it - were they doing it illegally? did they know?

Oh you betcha - hence "raid" rather than "inquiry."

But I can't be too smug since I have no idea where any of the other companies get their stuff. They might all be in on it, for all I know. It's a real issue. But on the flipside, I doubt guitar companies are the biggest culprits of deforestation. I'm not justifying it. Just saying that we don't have too much reason to lose sleep. It's the furniture industry that's really denuding Africa's forest with the cooperation of gutless corrupt leaders.

AndrewD

So ethically the age old question of "Fender vs Gibson?" has a clear cut answer then it seems...

Bob-Dubery

There is not one single "rosewood". It's loose term referring to a family of trees (Dalbergia).

The one-time favourite and still, so legend has it, the rosewood that surpasses all others is Brazilian rosewood. That's very strictly controlled these days and since the cutting and trading is so tightly controlled the wood is scarce and expensive (but not ipso facto illegal - there is legal Brazilian rosewood). More common these days is East Indian or just "Indian" Rosewood. This is far more plentiful, looks and sounds a little different (it's related to Brazilian but is not the same tree) and there are properly managed, renewable sources for this wood.

And so it goes... there are several rosewoods, and much of the rosewood used in the musical instrument business is legal and from sustainable sources. There are other Dalbergias that are used in guitar making but are not referred to as "rosewood" Eg Palo Escrito, Camatillo and Cocobolo.

singemonkey

Yeah. I think the Brazilian thing is bollocks. Just like Honduras Mahogany (there's good, light Honduras, and not so good Honduras so using that stuff doesn't mean much by itself except image). Rosewood was originally just a cheap substitute for Ebony anyway the way I understand it.

As for the Gibson vs. Fender story. You can bet Gibson has been ultra compliant since getting busted. So I doubt buying one of their instruments now is killing lemurs.

Tonedef

Found the following topic on Gibson's forum:

http://4henry.gibson.com/index.php?/topic/91-wood-investigation/

Which contains the following post by one of Gibson's legal dudes.

Good question,

You are correct that in late 2009, Gibson facilities in Nashville were investigated by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for allegedly violating the Lacey Act, a law requiring that all wood products and plants imported into the United States come from legal sources. On site, officials found rosewood from Madagascar- while acknowledging that we had in fact bought wood from Madagascar, Gibson absolutely and adamantly denies that it was illegal wood, as Gibson takes great pride in its conservation and wood sustainability efforts.

Gibson affirmatively believes that any wood we have obtained from Madagascar is in fact from legal sourcing. Gibson’s primary suppliers of rosewood and ebony provided assurances that what they sold to Gibson was legally harvested, obtained and sold to Gibson. The supplier of the wood is one of the largest wood suppliers in the world for instrument making and Gibson’s relationship with this supplier goes back many years and has a very firm foundation of trust and legitimacy.

As we look forward to a resoltion, Gibson continues to dilligently cooperate with the Department of Jusice on the investigation all the while strengthening our efforts of conversation and wood sustainably. Beginning with our support of the Rainforest Alliance in 1995, Gibson has been a corporate and music industry pioneer, championing environmental causes for over 15 years. In addition, our foundation, The Gibson Foundation, expanded its efforts in 2006, and has provided over $2 million in cash and product to environmental causes, reaching millions of people throughout the world.

Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to address this question.

Best,

Bruce Mitchell
General Counsel
Gibson Guitar Corp.

The thread is full of other vitriol, read as you please.

Bob-Dubery

singemonkey wrote: Yeah. I think the Brazilian thing is bollocks.

Who knows really? I have read some luthiers say that Brazilian still surpasses all other tonewoods. Others say that Indian is just as good. Others still say that they both sound good - just not the same.

It depends on the agenda I think. Some people are now punting African blackwood which is also a Dalbergia. They will tell you how wonderful that sounds. From time to time various things get punted as the "new Brazilian".

My experience and insights really relate to acoustic guitars. The back and sides are hardwoods - mostly rosewood or mahogany.

IMO the truth is that the various rosewoods sound different from each other - not better or worse, just different - but sound more like each other than they do mahoganies. The mahoganies also tend to be shades of the same thing and any mahogany is quite different from any rosewood. Blah blah blah

AndrewD

Interestingly Les Paul died in August 2009 just before the poo hit the fan with Gibson, perhaps the new chief had less moral convictions?

Bob-Dubery

Gibson aren't going to Madagascar to buy wood. Very few luthiers go out and pick the individual raw logs that they want, and at the sort of quantities they produce there's no way that Gibson could do that.

Best they can do is contact the suppliers and ask for so many cubes of WhateverWood grade ABC. They may make stipulations about source, but they have to trust their suppliers. That supplier, in turn, has to trust other folks and there's a longish chain between Gibson and the guy who felled the log in Madagascar. Gibson may well have bought that wood believing that it was legal in every way.

And Les Paul wasn't the boss at Gibson. If he ever was it would have been a long time ago.

singemonkey

X-rated Bob wrote: And Les Paul wasn't the boss at Gibson. If he ever was it would have been a long time ago.

He never was. It's also a myth that he designed the Les Paul. Apparently his decisions involved making it gold (to look expensive) and suggesting that it have a mahogany top and a maple back - which would have made them weigh about 15kg. The genius behind the Gibson electric guitars was Ted McCarty. All of the classic Gibson electrics we know came into existence under his leadership - The Les Paul (both Standard and Custom), the 335, the V, the Explorer, the SG, and the Firebird. It's his example that makes the current CEO look so pitiful.

Oh yes. Also under his leadership they invented both the P90 pickup and the Humbucker.

AndrewD

This past December (2010) newly filed court documents are expecting to result in criminal indictments against Gibson Guitar and its key staff. Gibson has been accused by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Middle Tennessee of illegally harvesting Madagascar rosewood and ebony.
The head of the Gibson Guitar Corporation, Henry Juszkiewicz has temporarily stepped down from his position on the board of The Rainforest Alliance. Gibson issued a press release stating they are fully cooperating with agents of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Pretty sure they knew it was illegal.

X-rated Bob wrote:

And Les Paul wasn't the boss at Gibson. If he ever was it would have been a long time ago.

Sorry yeah - I didn't word that very well at all.

I'm sure he would have had some say in the company though? I mean he was very strict about his work - i.e the SG not having his name on it...
(just taking wild guesses here though)

Bob-Dubery

I can imagine the collector's market heating up, with prices of "pre-bust" Les Paul's going up.

singemonkey

AndrewD wrote: I'm sure he would have had some say in the company though? I mean he was very strict about his work - i.e the SG not having his name on it...
(just taking wild guesses here though)

The SG story was about his endorsement deal with the company. He said, "I hate this guitar and I won't allow you to put my name on it." Pretty much like Michael Jordan could do with a pair of sneakers. That was really all there was to it. In fact, I'm guessing that if demand for LPs hadn't soared as a result of the blues boom - pushing them back into production - that would probably have been the end of the deal. As it is, Les must have made buckets of cash of the most popular signature guitar of all time. But he had no say in the company or its operations.

Now you have signature models of that signature model ?

Tonedef

X-rated Bob wrote: I can imagine the collector's market heating up, with prices of "pre-bust" Les Paul's going up.

OR, having a Les Paul with Madagascar Rosewood and Lemus blood inlays!

*rimshot*

AndrewD

I decided to write a blog about it as this one of the few times I could incorporate guitars and my day job ? - http://bit.ly/fJ7nkR