# Torrefaction - interview w/ D. Bourgeois



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

Good interview with Dana Bourgeois and very interesting on the mechanics and strategies of roasting the woods and comparisons to vintage acoustics .

Are Torrefied Tops the New Industry Standard? Dana Bourgeois Weighs In


----------



## Moot (Feb 15, 2009)

Very good info. I'm glad to see the industry adopt new methods if they produce a good result.
Thanks for that, Alex!


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Theres a lot of talk about the torrefication process over at the Martin guitar forum. Known as VTS over there. There seems to be more players over there that avoid it then like it. Many of the complaints are directed at the appearance that results from the top being cooked. Most torrefied tops have stripes of dark color running through it, nicknamed "racing stripes". I have one guitar with a torrefied top and one with out. The racing stripes don't really bother me.
The one thing that does bother me is something I heard this past weekend while picking up my newest guitar at Folkway music.
I got in to a conversation with Mark and he mentioned that it was not recommended to use hot hide glue when making repairs. That is one of the features of the Martin Authentic lines and some of the traditional built guitars of Collings, Bourgeois and other small builders. 
So if I were getting a neck reset I'd sure want HHG to be used to glue it back on as Folkway does.
However in the conversation I was told that its recommended not to use HHG when making repairs. Now when I first heard this it was a bit disturbing but then I thought it must be just when making repairs to the top. A neck reset would have nothing to do with the torrefied top. The reason for this is that a torrefied top has basically had all the moisture cooked out of it making it resistant to water. Which is good for high humidity weather where an un torrefied top would absorb the water, the torrefied top not so much. Where this is bad is that HHG is water based and when making repairs there is a high probability that the repair may fail.
I never thought to ask but I take it the only time it might matter is if you had to take the top off and reglue it back on and maybe when repairing cracks. My knowledge of crack repairs is nil so I have no idea if it includes glue or not.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

I've heard other concerns, like how will it age, cracking concerns, etc. Dana talks about some of his early failures.

Torrefying wood isn't that new, it's just new to the guitar business. I've played a couple - in particular a real nice Huss&Dalton with torrified Adi and old Belize sinkerwood mahogany - and they do sound very good. But I also know a brand new Adi top will sound better in the next 5 to 10 years than it does now. Will the terrified top get better, stay the same, or (heaven forbid) age less than well? Lots of ????? for such a significant purchase.

But Recording King is bringing it into the realm of inexpensive guitars. So if a bunch of those get sold and used, that could help populate the database with what we don't know yet.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

High/Deaf said:


> I've heard other concerns, like how will it age, cracking concerns, etc. Dana talks about some of his early failures.
> 
> Torrefying wood isn't that new, it's just new to the guitar business. I've played a couple - in particular a real nice Huss&Dalton with torrified Adi and old Belize sinkerwood mahogany - and they do sound very good. But I also know a brand new Adi top will sound better in the next 5 to 10 years than it does now. Will the terrified top get better, stay the same, or (heaven forbid) age less than well? Lots of ????? for such a significant purchase.
> 
> But Recording King is bringing it into the realm of inexpensive guitars. So if a bunch of those get sold and used, that could help populate the database with what we don't know yet.


Of the two guitars I own both Martin Authentics, the torrefied topped guitar seems to reverberate through my body when I play it. I can feel every note hit me. With the non cooked top, although I can feel the notes not to the degree of the other one. Now I have no idea if it has anything to do with the torrefied top or not. The 2 are different guitars, one being a D-18 the other a D-28, I have no way of knowing. The torrefied guitar is brand new and the non VTS is a little over 3 years old. 
As far as whether the adi topped torrefied guitar will stay the same or get better with time, well thats not even a consideration when I buy a guitar. I kind of laugh when I see people who buy guitars that they hope will sound better in a few years. I buy a guitar that sounds good now. If it sounds better with time, well thats a bonus and sure in most cases its expected. All I know is that my D-28 Authentic 1941 with the VTS top knocks my socks off now as does my D-18 Authentic 1939 non VTS. And thats all that matters is now.
Reading an article like in the OP I have to think these small builders such as Bourgoeis and Collings as well as Martin must know what they're doing. Some have expressed a theory that as these torrefied tops are possibly aged to about a 200 to 300 year old peice of wood does that mean that in 30 to 40 years they'll turn to dust? Personally I don't think so, like I said to a point these builders must know what they're doing. That being said I won't be around to see if it happens and am not concerned if my guitars will last 80 years like the original vintage.
Some like to avoid torrefication if they can for this reason and others. I think possibly they're maybe limiting themselves from great guitars. I never set out to obtain a Martin guitar with a VTS top it just worked out that way. Just like I never sought to avoid VTS in my latest aquisition, it just worked out this way.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

guitarman2 said:


> Of the two guitars I own both Martin Authentics, the torrefied topped guitar seems to reverberate through my body when I play it. I can feel every note hit me. With the non cooked top, although I can feel the notes not to the degree of the other one. Now I have no idea if it has anything to do with the torrefied top or not. The 2 are different guitars, one being a D-18 the other a D-28, I have no way of knowing. The torrefied guitar is brand new and the non VTS is a little over 3 years old.


That's part of the problem. I can't isolate the torrified top from the body wood. How much did the 100 year old sinker hog have to do with it? The other one was EIR, so a totally different guitar - but they both sounded good (they should for that kinda money).



> As far as whether the adi topped torrefied guitar will stay the same or get better with time, well thats not even a consideration when I buy a guitar. I kind of laugh when I see people who buy guitars that they hope will sound better in a few years. I buy a guitar that sounds good now. If it sounds better with time, well thats a bonus and sure in most cases its expected. All I know is that my D-28 Authentic 1941 with the VTS top knocks my socks off now as does my D-18 Authentic 1939 non VTS. And thats all that matters is now.


It sure does to me. All other things being equal, if one guitar will *definitely* get better with time and the other one *might* get better with time, then that is a factor in my decision. How it sounds now is paramount, but there's a reason people pay ridiculous money for 80 yo guitars - they got better with time.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

High/Deaf said:


> It sure does to me. All other things being equal, if one guitar will *definitely* get better with time and the other one *might* get better with time, then that is a factor in my decision. How it sounds now is paramount, but there's a reason people pay ridiculous money for 80 yo guitars - they got better with time.


How can you possibly forecast how a guitar will turn out a few years down the road? If it does indeed change how do you know that it won't change for the worst? 
If it sounds great now and completely amazes you why does it matter that it doesn't improve from that in a few years? I paid about 8k on a higher end audiophile stereo. It sounds really good now. I don't care if it still only sounds really good in a few years.
The vintage market is one of those industrys that at times is more fluff than fact.
There are some amazing sounding vintage guitars and a lot real bad ones. The same goes for newer guitars.
A few years ago I went on a search for a vintage Maritin D-28 as I though that was what I wanted. I figured I'd never be able to afford anything older than about a 1957. I played many later 50's and early 60's D-28s and not a one sounded as good as my HD-28V that I always took along for a baseline. Some were absolute dogs. I almost always had the retailer or seller put new strings on. 
The best sounding vintage that I ever had in my hands was a 1953 D-28 mystery top that I played at Folkway music a few weeks ago. I completely blew me away. It was a players guitar as it was in pretty rough aesthetic condition although very structurally sound. It was going for $7,500 US and I seriously considered it but decided to go the authentic route, which in my opinion has gotten me quite close to what its like to own a vintage instrument as far as tone. 
I also played a 1935 D-28 Martin a couple times that Folkway music has right now. Played it the first day it came in a couple weeks ago. The strings were quite dead but it was nice. On Saturday when I was in to pick up my D-18 Authentic Mark offered to put new strings on it so I could play it again, which I thought was a great gesture even though he knew I had no means to buy it. Even with brand new strings on it, it didn't come close ot that 53 Mystery top for me. Make no mistake though the 35 D-28 was nice but didn't blow my socks off. It was in collector condition though and I think thats where the value for that lies. 
The 53 will probably haunt me for a long time and I probably should have bought it.
But I guess the point I'm trying to make is out of all the vintage guitars I played none but one or 2 I'd take home if I could afford them. Where as with modern guitars there have been many I would have loved to take home. My opinion and it may be a rare opinion is that we are in a great age of guitar making and I think there is more consistency than in the original golden era.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

Agreed there. Far more consistency/science now than 50 years ago.



guitarman2 said:


> How can you possibly forecast how a guitar will turn out a few years down the road? If it does indeed change how do you know that it won't change for the worst?


The generally consensus is new Adi opens up and sounds better after 5, 10 or more years. You don't have to believe it, but you'd be in the minority.

And of course, all of this is what _you_ hear. I have yet to hear a D18 that I like, including the GE I played recently. I love 28's and 35's but never warmed to an 18. Thought I didn't like mahogany until I played a few higher end hog guitars. Now I know I can like them, when they are done a certain way. But everyone doesn't hear things as I do either.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

High/Deaf said:


> The generally consensus is new Adi opens up and sounds better after 5, 10 or more years. You don't have to believe it, but you'd be in the minority.
> 
> And of course, all of this is what _you_ hear. I have yet to hear a D18 that I like, including the GE I played recently. I love 28's and 35's but never warmed to an 18. Thought I didn't like mahogany until I played a few higher end hog guitars. Now I know I can like them, when they are done a certain way. But everyone doesn't hear things as I do either.


You sound like a good candidate to try the the D-18 Authentic 1939. I've been a rosewood lover all my life never wandering in to the mahogany camp. I decided to wander in to the D-18 camp finally to give my self a different pallet of tones acoustically. I really did like the D-18Ge but it was a much different sound. Much drier and more direct focused sound. None of the overtones and complexity you might get from rosewood. However the biggest down fall for me with the D-18GE was the neck and the wider string spacing. I just didn't get along with it.
I've loved the D-18A 1939 evfer since I first tried one. Its got a nice full neck narrower nut width and string spacing. The neck fits my hand perfectly. But the biggest seller for me is the tone. Its got just enough of that mahogany character that a D-18 is known for but tone wise does it ever fall in to the rosewood sounding category. Nice and full sounding, complex, etc. I come to find that a lot of players consider it the perfect D-18 for rosewood lovers. I tend to agree that it really shares a common sound with my Rosewood guitar but it is different enough. Very hard to describe. You really have to try it.


----------



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> It was a players guitar as it was in pretty rough aesthetic condition although very structurally sound. .


My experience with acoustics is the more it was played, the better it is - the better including resonance and overall vibe. I played a late 70's Gibson Jumbo at the 12th Fret that was beat up but played and sounded superb. It had gathered a lot of attention but no one wanted to spend the $970 (10 years ago). I put an offer based on the opinion of one the 12th Fret reps. and the owner of the guitar apparently came in and essentially took it back and stormed out. I'd like to take that opportunity back!

below is an excerpt from an interview with Steve Howe and Gibson. Quite interesting.

*You’ve talked elsewhere about how you play the ES-175 for about 20 minutes to “warm it up.” Can you elaborate?*

That’s from an article I read in _Science Today_, or _New Scientist_ or something. Apparently some tests were done on guitars in Japan, where they found that until it’s been played for about 20 minutes, it’s not fully resonant and fully responsive. That’s especially true if it’s been sitting in a case, where it hasn’t been played for months. But in a larger sense, if you haven’t played a guitar a lot, then you’re not going to get a lot out of it. You have to put something in to get something out. That’s what I discovered with the 175. After putting five or six years into it I had a fantastic guitar. Whenever I let someone play it--and there were only about three people who were allowed (laughs)--they went, “This is an amazing guitar to play!” Partly it was because of the strings I use, the gauges, but also it was because I had played it so much. I only had it re-fretted after having played it for about 45 years. That’s another amazing aspect.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Alex said:


> My experience with acoustics is the more it was played, the better it is - the better including resonance and overall vibe. I played a late 70's Gibson Jumbo at the 12th Fret that was beat up but played and sounded superb. It had gathered a lot of attention but no one wanted to spend the $970 (10 years ago). I put an offer based on the opinion of one the 12th Fret reps. and the owner of the guitar apparently came in and essentially took it back and stormed out. I'd like to take that opportunity back!
> 
> below is an excerpt from an interview with Steve Howe and Gibson. Quite interesting.
> 
> ...


I have heard many arguments, especially with acoustic guitar that the guitar needs to be played for 20 minutes before it starts sounding good. I tend to mostly disagree with this. The same musicians that say this also will reiterate that 95% of the tone is in the fingers. So my opinion and keeping with the opinion of tone in the fingers, is that its not the guitar warming up but the player. I do noticed that after 15 to 20 minutes of playing things are sounding better. Of course my fingers are stretched and warmed up and I'm playing cleaner and more smooth and fluid as well I'm getting in to it. Some days when I just don't feel in to it even after 30 minutes it doesn't sound better. 
I remember a famous quote of a scenario involving Chet Atkins. Someone came up to him after a performance and stated "Your guitar sounds amazing". So Chet replied "Really". He sets it down on the guitar stand and replys "How does it sound now"?
Someone here mentioned that they wouldn't buy a guitar if it didn't have the potential to improve with sound if the theory that torrefied tops was true that they'll sound the best out of the box and may not improve.
So I guess this person wouldn't buy a 1940's vintage guitar (assuming he could afford it) as its most likely matured to its peak potential already.
This is basically what the VTS topped 40's recreation Martins are. Its the closest thing you can get to buying a vintage instrument without mortgaging the house to buy a real one. Not exact, but as close as whats being currently produced.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

guitarman2 said:


> You sound like a good candidate to try the the D-18 Authentic 1939. I've been a rosewood lover all my life never wandering in to the mahogany camp. I decided to wander in to the D-18 camp finally to give my self a different pallet of tones acoustically. I really did like the D-18Ge but it was a much different sound. Much drier and more direct focused sound. None of the overtones and complexity you might get from rosewood. However the biggest down fall for me with the D-18GE was the neck and the wider string spacing. I just didn't get along with it.
> I've loved the D-18A 1939 evfer since I first tried one. Its got a nice full neck narrower nut width and string spacing. The neck fits my hand perfectly. But the biggest seller for me is the tone. Its got just enough of that mahogany character that a D-18 is known for but tone wise does it ever fall in to the rosewood sounding category. Nice and full sounding, complex, etc. I come to find that a lot of players consider it the perfect D-18 for rosewood lovers. I tend to agree that it really shares a common sound with my Rosewood guitar but it is different enough. Very hard to describe. You really have to try it.


I've been trying to but haven't found one in stock yet. I've played a few nice Martins, but don't know if they were torrified. I didn't know they had a unique buzz-code for torrification.



> Someone here mentioned that they wouldn't buy a guitar if it didn't have the potential to improve with sound if the theory that torrefied tops was true that they'll sound the best out of the box and may not improve.
> So I guess this person wouldn't buy a 1940's vintage guitar (assuming he could afford it) as its most likely matured to its peak potential already.
> This is basically what the VTS topped 40's recreation Martins are. Its the closest thing you can get to buying a vintage instrument without mortgaging the house to buy a real one. Not exact, but as close as whats being currently produced.


Being as there are only 4 people in this string, I have to assume you are referring to me. That is complete bullshit, and something I never came close to saying. I understand why you didn't actually quote me. It is a complete fabrication on your part. Feel free to go back, read and actually understand what I wrote, if you want to be accurate.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

High/Deaf said:


> Being as there are only 4 people in this string, I have to assume you are referring to me. That is complete bullshit, and something I never came close to saying. I understand why you didn't actually quote me. It is a complete fabrication on your part. Feel free to go back, read and actually understand what I wrote, if you want to be accurate.


Well I looked back and couldn't really find anything of yours to quote so I guess I wasn't talking about you and may have been thinking of another thread or even something someone said in another forum as this subject is quite widespread. So before you get your panties in a knot don't be so defensive about something you didn't say. Or perhaps you feel guilty for secretly holding that opinion. All I could really find is a quip about your uncanny talent to read the future:



> It sure does to me. All other things being equal, if one guitar will *definitely* get better with time and the other one *might* get better with time, then that is a factor in my decision.


And to discuss what you said about not really liking any D-18 you have played including a D-18GE I kind of agree with you there. Although there were things I liked about the D-18GE I had it didn't knock me over with joy. The new authentic however does.
To me it doesn't really sound like any D-18 I have ever played, including many vintage 60's D-18's. I haven't had much chance to play 50's or 40's D-18s.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

Yes, I have been looking for one to play. They aren't nearly as common as GE's or regular Martins. I've always been a D35 fan and would love to try a high-end version of that one, too, not just the fancier herringbone version.



guitarman2 said:


> Someone here mentioned


Ahhh, when you said 'here' I assumed you meant 'here in this string'. Ya, coulda been 'here in this subforum' or 'here on this site'. 

Anyways, not me. I will buy what I like the sound of but will be considering the materials used to get there. If it sounds good now, it isn't critical that it gets better. Some tonewoods do have a reputation for doing that, though. And all other things being equal ................


----------

