Oak vs Cherry Furniture
Gary Grathen
(which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
when making my decision?
I assume that cherry has a finer grain but is softer, and oak has a
more prominent grain but is more durable. I'd appreciate any
information you could provide which would help me to learn more about
the differences between oak and cherry (and your preference if you
have an opinion).
Thanks,
Gary Grathen
gra...@ibm.net
Steve Rehrauer
> I will be having furniture made and have a choice of oak or cherry
> (which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
> the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
> when making my decision?
I think you're right about the general qualities of the two. You're certainly
right that cherry is nigh poreless compared to oak, and can be polished smoother
for it. I find both are hard enough to hold up well under normal use.
Do you have a style in mind? I tend to think of cherry as a "formal" wood,
used in styles with thin, graceful lines. And, oak as being a more "rustic"
wood, used in chunkier, heavier styles. For instance, I wouldn't imagine a
"shaker" piece in oak, nor an "arts & crafts" piece in cherry, even though
doubtless both have happened and there's no reason it shouldn't be done other
than, well, it's a little untraditional.
Do you have any other woods (furniture? floor?) to match or contrast with?
Do you like the color of well-aged cherry? (I mean the real stuff, not the
horrible faux black paint the furniture factories inflict on us.) Or the
more mellow golden color of oiled oak? (You WILL NOT stain cherry, right?
Right?? The Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Cherry is waiting for your
answer... :-)
Does the 30% price difference matter?
Is there a SWMBO involved here? It really doesn't matter what you/I think,
if so... :-> --Steve
Kevin Yurica
In the past year, I have installed cherry flooring (Boan laminate
product) and used cherry (solid) to create a custom built-in
entertainment center in a new home. It is simply one of my favorite
woods. I also have used a lot of maple in the house. cherry and Maple
seem to go well together given similar graining. I have used these
woods in my house to create a very contemporary look, although my
grandfather also used cherry to create a very colonial look in his home
years ago.
As mentioned by the previous responder, I would let the look that you're
after guide your choice. personally, I'd probably opt for cherry...but
it's far more expensive than Oak and unless you really love it, it may
not be worth it.
-Kevin
//
Gary Grathen wrote:
>
> I will be having furniture made and have a choice of oak or cherry
> (which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
> the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
> when making my decision?
>
stkb...@my-dejanews.com
harder than oak. On a 5 point scale oak is a 2 and cherry is a 3. The
problem with cherry is it's shock resistance. Oak is twice as durable in
this area. Mark http://www.sawdustsales.com Home of the monthly woodworking
giveaway!!
In article <371262f4...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>,
gra...@ibm.net wrote:
> I will be having furniture made and have a choice of oak or cherry
> (which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
> the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
> when making my decision?
>
> I assume that cherry has a finer grain but is softer, and oak has a
> more prominent grain but is more durable. I'd appreciate any
> information you could provide which would help me to learn more about
> the differences between oak and cherry (and your preference if you
> have an opinion).
>
> Thanks,
> Gary Grathen
> gra...@ibm.net
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
steveK
>
>I will be having furniture made and have a choice of oak or cherry
>(which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
>the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
>when making my decision?
>
>I assume that cherry has a finer grain but is softer, and oak has a
>more prominent grain but is more durable. I'd appreciate any
>information you could provide which would help me to learn more about
>the differences between oak and cherry (and your preference if you
>have an opinion).
>
>Thanks,
>Gary Grathen
>gra...@ibm.net
Personally I love cherry. As you mention, it costs more. It looks
better, it has character which ripens with age, it is a step up in
class over oak. Not in a snob way, but just as a fact. It's nicer
wood. Oak is common, especially where I'm at, southern Ca. Here the
price diff is better than 30% easy. Oak is 2.60 a bf, cherry's
probably 4.50 or so.
But in fact I do like oak, I just bought a sh_tload of it. It looks good
and I don't feel a need to get real anal with it. With oak I build quick
and dirty, with good results. Just had a new daughter and I'm building
stuff for her room. Cheap, durable, clean, not too fancy.
Which to buy? Which one looks better to you? That's the one to buy.
steveK
stev_ix_netcom_com
Gary Grathen
I had to smile when I read your append because there is a SWMBO
involved and you're right about about the fact that it doesn't matter
what we think, but at least we can try :-)
The style of furniture is up to the SWMBO, who is interested in
appearance. She found an Amish furniture maker who produces good
classic pieces for a reasonable cost.
I think we'd prefer darker wood in the bedroom, which is why cherry or
a darker-stained oak would be best. We were going to stain the cherry
with a cherry stain which the furniture maker uses from Minwax. The
thought of not staining it hadn't occurred to us. We like the color
of real cherry. What should we tell the furniture maker if we decide
not to stain? Is there some other process which would be followed in
order to preserve the wood and make it look nice?
I don't have any other furniture wood to compare, and the 30% price
difference would be acceptable if cherry has more value than oak.
Thanks,
Gary Grathen
gra...@ibm.net
On Mon, 12 Apr 1999 19:16:21 -0400, Steve Rehrauer
<rehr...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote:
>Gary Grathen wrote:
>> I will be having furniture made and have a choice of oak or cherry
>> (which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
>> the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
>> when making my decision?
>
Gary Grathen
maker. I'm leaning toward cherry.
I don't understand what you meant by "shock resistance". Would you
please enlighten me?
I'll check out the web site later today.
Thanks,
Gary Grathen
gra...@ibm.net
On Tue, 13 Apr 1999 00:55:44 GMT, stkb...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>Gary, What style of furniture are you having made... Cherry is actually
>harder than oak. On a 5 point scale oak is a 2 and cherry is a 3. The
>problem with cherry is it's shock resistance. Oak is twice as durable in
>this area. Mark http://www.sawdustsales.com Home of the monthly woodworking
>giveaway!!
>
>
>In article <371262f4...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>,
> gra...@ibm.net wrote:
>> I will be having furniture made and have a choice of oak or cherry
>> (which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
>> the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
>> when making my decision?
>>
>> I assume that cherry has a finer grain but is softer, and oak has a
>> more prominent grain but is more durable. I'd appreciate any
>> information you could provide which would help me to learn more about
>> the differences between oak and cherry (and your preference if you
>> have an opinion).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gary Grathen
>> gra...@ibm.net
>>
>
Rick and Lisa Marinelli
>Gary, What style of furniture are you having made... Cherry is actually
>harder than oak. On a 5 point scale oak is a 2 and cherry is a 3. The
>problem with cherry is it's shock resistance. Oak is twice as durable in
>this area. Mark http://www.sawdustsales.com Home of the monthly woodworking
>giveaway!!
>
>
I'm curious how you define "harder." I have always considered oak
harder since cherry dents so much easier. This seems to be what you
refer to as "shock resistance." Is there an industry definition and
scale?
Rick Marinelli
rickandlisa"deletethistoemail"@erols.com
http://www.erols.com/rickandlisa
Steve Rehrauer
> I had to smile when I read your append because there is a SWMBO
> involved and you're right about about the fact that it doesn't matter
> what we think, but at least we can try :-)
Okay, now that the cold hard facts are aired, we can continue with our
purely theoretical discussion... :-)
> The
> thought of not staining it hadn't occurred to us. We like the color
> of real cherry. What should we tell the furniture maker if we decide
> not to stain? Is there some other process which would be followed in
> order to preserve the wood and make it look nice?
Others here can wax more eloquent on the topic than I. (Or flame the pants
off ya, if ya refuse to convert. :-) But I'll take a stab.
Mind, I'll preface by saying what you like is what counts (duh). If you
decide you like the color of stained cherry, then go for it. But I took
a shot in the dark that you'd never seen naturally darkened cherry. You
should at least see it before you opt to have a stain applied, IMHO.
Freshly cut cherry will be a light, salmon pink in color. I quite like the
color myself. Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to keep that color.
Cherry's a photoreactive wood. Given exposure to sunlight (UV light, I
suppose), it will darken. (I'm told that finishes with UV blockers can
slow the change. But those finishes all seem to be designed for outdoor use,
like spar varnish, and you don't want that on cherry either IMHO. Too
heavy, plastic-y looking.)
Fortunately, the color of darkened cherry is mighty fine too. It's a rich,
warm dark red that puts "cherry stain" to shame. In my experience, the color
change happens most rapidly in the first 6 months or so. My daughter has a
table I made her which has not seemed to darken further after the first year.
(Having seen some 100+ year old antiques, though, I guess the darkening does
continue over time, until it reaches a red that's almost black. However,
in practical terms, assuming you don't put a piece in direct sunlight for
12 hour/day, I'd say forget about the antique black-red.)
My understanding is that this near-black is what most cherry stains are intended
to simulate. Because, I guess the thinking goes, antiques == old == valuable ==
black-red color.
Me, I never liked "cherry" furniture until I saw the real thing. Now I love it!
Unstained, that is. A stained piece looks muddy to me, obscures the warm natural
hues. Don't like that!
The finish I like on cherry is an application of an oil finish, aka a wiping
varnish, colloquially a "tung oil". I have tried polyurethanes (forgive me,
brothers, for I have sinned). While an oil-based poly didn't look awful
(just not as good as a wiping varnish), I didn't like what a water-based poly
did to the color -- water polys impart a slight blueish color, to my eyes. Cherry
is a "warm" wood, and I didn't care for a "cool" finish on top.
If you want to hurry the darkening process, BTW, ask the cabinet maker to put the
pieces in a sheltered spot in direct sunlight for a couple days before applying the
finish.
> I don't have any other furniture wood to compare, and the 30% price
> difference would be acceptable if cherry has more value than oak.
Value? Well, cherry is tres "in" right now. Hard to say whether that will be
true years down the road.
As someone else pointed out, oak is quite lovely too.
Yadda yadda yadda, --Steve
Doug Stowe
> I think we'd prefer darker wood in the bedroom, which is why cherry or
> a darker-stained oak would be best. We were going to stain the cherry
> with a cherry stain which the furniture maker uses from Minwax. The
> thought of not staining it hadn't occurred to us. We like the color
> of real cherry. What should we tell the furniture maker if we decide
> not to stain? Is there some other process which would be followed in
> order to preserve the wood and make it look nice?
Gary, there are two reasons some furniture makers stain cherry. The first
is as Steve pointed out, that customers are not prepared for the color
change that takes place with cherry and have a strong association with
cherry being a "dark" wood. The second reason is that cherry has a
noticeable sapwood that is lighter in color and will not age to the same
color as the rest of the wood. Many amateur craftsmen and some pros take
great efforts in color and grain matching in order to construct pieces
from solid cherry, using the sapwood only in places that don't show in the
finished piece. Stain is often used by manufacturers and furniture makers
on cherry to make such extreme care in material selection unnecessary.
Special care in material selection and use is a very expensive part of the
process of building fine furniture. If you decide to go with unstained
cherry you may want to discuss this issue with the furniture maker to
avoid possible disappointment with the finished product.
I have a number of unstained cherry pieces shown in my website at
http://www.dougstowe.com/furniture/furniture.htm
Best wishes,
Doug Stowe
--
Doug Stowe Visit my website: http://www.DougStowe.com
Author of "Creating Beautiful Boxes With Inlay Techniques"
Gary Grathen
discuss it with the furniture maker to ensure that he knows how to
select wood so that the sapwood doesn't show and that he knows an
oil-based finish is preferred.
We'll take a look at the unstained furniture at your web site, Doug.
Based on that and what I've learned from you guys, (and what the
furniture maker can guarantee in terms of quality), we'll make our
decision as to whether or not to stain.
Thanks much,
Gary Grathen
On Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:57:24 -0500, dst...@arkansas.net (Doug Stowe)
wrote:
John W. Shear
>
> ...
> The finish I like on cherry is an application of an oil finish, aka a wiping
> varnish, colloquially a "tung oil". I have tried polyurethanes (forgive me,
> brothers, for I have sinned). While an oil-based poly didn't look awful
> (just not as good as a wiping varnish), I didn't like what a water-based poly
> did to the color -- water polys impart a slight blueish color, to my eyes. Cherry
> is a "warm" wood, and I didn't care for a "cool" finish on top.
I'd pretty much agree with what Steve said. An oil finish is most
appropriate on cherry. However, be aware that a Danish oil finish
is a similar option, and is different than a wiping varnish. Both
can be sold as a "tung oil finish" so it's kinda confusing til I
read Flexner's book a few times.
Watco is an example of a Danish Oil finish. Oil, resins, etc. are
mixed together in some special formula. It provides a very
attractive finish with a small amount of protection. It's well
known for enhancing the grain and figure.
A wiping varnish (Hope's wiping varnish for example) is oil, resin,
etc. heated to form a more durable finish (varnish) and thinned to
make it easier to apply. It is a little more protective, but it
takes several coats to equal one coat of un-thinned varnish.
There's guys hanging out here that know the details better than me,
so I'm sure they'll correct me if I mis-spoke.
Personally, I apply a few coats of Watco to seal the wood and bring
out the grain and figure. Then if it's subject to some wear, like
the top of a bookshelf or end table, I like to apply some wiping varnish
to add a little more protection without making it look too
plastic-like. I don't know if it's the best way, but I like the
results. I intend to experiment with shellac or laquer someday.
Btw, even on oak I like to use Watco to seal (not fill) the pores
and sometimes color he wood. I like how Watco Fruitwood colors the
wood as opposed to a pigment stain such as Minwax Fruitwood. The
only problem there, is the oil bleeding back out of the pores since
it takes a long time to cure in my environment.
--
John Shear
Chippewa Falls, WI
Shafner
> continue over time, until it reaches a red that's almost black. However,
> in practical terms, assuming you don't put a piece in direct sunlight for
> 12 hour/day, I'd say forget about the antique black-red.)
>
> My understanding is that this near-black is what most cherry stains are intended
> to simulate. Because, I guess the thinking goes, antiques == old == valuable ==
> black-red color.
My undertanding is different. Wood this dark is the shameful result of someone
using linseed oil or boiled linseed oil on the wood. And why it is OK in the
minds of some to alter the sacrosant appearance of cherry with an irrersable
treatment such as linseed oil, but not OK to do it with a nice transparent dye
stain which can be undone escapes me. But that is me.
--
Daniel Shafner
shafner at earthlink dot net
Shafner
>
> I will be having furniture made and have a choice of oak or cherry
> (which costs 30% more than oak). What are the different qualities of
> the two different types of wood which I should take into consideration
> when making my decision?
>
> I assume that cherry has a finer grain but is softer, and oak has a
> more prominent grain but is more durable. I'd appreciate any
> information you could provide which would help me to learn more about
> the differences between oak and cherry (and your preference if you
> have an opinion).
>
> Thanks,
> Gary Grathen
> gra...@ibm.net
Aesthetics aside, one consideration that I have not seen anyone mention is
that cherry is more dimensionally stabile than oak. Less swelling and
shrinking, less bowing, cupping, twisting, checking, cracking and warping.
Cherry is a better behaved wood. Think of oak as a spoiled brat kid who can
sometimes be a little on the unpredictable side. Now oak is not so wild as I
make it out to be, but compared to cherry there is a good enough difference.
This is especially important if you are not going to use a film forming finish
that will slow down the vapor exchange in and out of the wood. The wood,
whichever you use, should have a moisture content of a little more than 6% at
the time it is assembled and ready for finishing. This is according to "Wood &
Wood Products", a very highly regarded industry trade magazine.
Gary Grathen
wood is something we can specify to the furniture maker? If so, I'll
mention that along with the rest of the advice I've received regarding
how to prepare cherry so it retains it's natural beauty.
Gary Grathen
Shafner
> wood is something we can specify to the furniture maker? If so, I'll
> mention that along with the rest of the advice I've received regarding
> how to prepare cherry so it retains it's natural beauty.
>
> Gary Grathen
You really run the risk of antagonizing your cabinetmaker if you start getting
involved with issues of moisture content. A good cabinetmaker may or may not
consider this [moisture content] important parameter of woodworking, but more
important to you is the cabinetmaker's commitment to excellence in standing
behind his product for more than a year just in case there are warps, undo
swelling, checks, etc. and other seasoning issues.
Major retail mfg's DO stand behind their products on these issues instead of
pidgeonholing the end user with claims that such things are the nature of
wood. They sure are the nature of wood, but they are not acceptable on a
finished wooden project.
As a customer you ought to be more concerned with the aesthetics of your
commissioned work and the warranty that comes along with it. That is my take
as a finisher.
Duke of URLs
>> Daniel, thanks for the input. I suppose the moisture content of the
>> wood is something we can specify to the furniture maker? If so, I'll
>> mention that along with the rest of the advice I've received regarding
>> how to prepare cherry so it retains it's natural beauty.
Daniel Shafner wrote:
>You really run the risk of antagonizing your cabinetmaker if you start getting
>involved with issues of moisture content.
I don't know about this Daniel. In commercial woodworking moisture
content is always specified. Any good cabinetmaker will only work
with wood in the 6 to 8% range but what about the guy who doesn't know
of which I'll bet there are quite a few?
>A good cabinetmaker may or may not consider this [moisture content]
>important parameter of woodworking, but more important to you is the
>cabinetmaker's commitment to excellence in standing behind his product
>for more than a year just in case there are warps, undo
>swelling, checks, etc. and other seasoning issues.
Again, speaking from the commercial end, the usual warranty is a year.
This allows for a complete cycle of the seasons and does prevent the
cabinetmaker from having to be on the dime for what may seem like
forever.
>Major retail mfg's DO stand behind their products on these issues instead of
>pidgeonholing the end user with claims that such things are the nature of
>wood. They sure are the nature of wood, but they are not acceptable on a
>finished wooden project.
>As a customer you ought to be more concerned with the aesthetics of your
>commissioned work and the warranty that comes along with it. That is my take
>as a finisher.
I agree but again we (the group) don't know the particular maker and
his knowledge of wood and it's properties.
Disclaimer: I came in late and haven't followed the thread. I'm also
a great fan of Daniel Shafner and the above is not a flame.
Keith Bohn
Gary Grathen
furniture maker regarding the moisture content, although it may be
something to bring up in conversation. The furniture comes with a
lifetime guarantee, so I suppose his product is very good quality.
Thanks,
Gary
Shafner
spell it right for some reason). But what is it guaranteed against. I have
been on many service calls to make door and drawer adjustments in-home. These
are warranty repairs, yet when telling the retailer that the condition is due
to seasonal swelling or that there is a slight bow, the claim is made that
such a condition is within factory standards. So it all depends what the
guarantee says, and how serious the cabinetmaker is.
I learned a phrase many years ago [that I do not use except for emergencies]:
"It's the beauty of the wood." I know furniture service people who the first
thing they say to a customer is, "It's in the wood." "Wood is a natural
product; this is what it does." And so on...
I raised the issue early on in this thread of the the dimensional stability of
oak vs. cherry. The issue of moisture content is only part of that. The issue
of the proud grain lines and open pore texture of oak vs. the tight and
prominent graining and closed pore texture of cherry are matters of
aesthetics. Oak lends itself to a more casual look; cherry more stately and
formal. But not always. Both are good woods. Cherry has a bigger fan club and
more autograph seekers. But those are issues of taste which you should decide
based on the look that you want and the room setting the piece will be in.
--