Micarta Fingerboards?

rick36 · Post by **rick36** » Sun Dec 11, 2005 5:32 pm

I was quite surprised to see specs for "Micarta" Fingerboards on Martin 16 series guitars. Does anyone have an opinion on the use of this composite material for quality (and relatively expensive) guitars? I know that this is not a direct Rickenbacker question, however the changing availability and cost considerations of raw materials apply to all quality instruments including Rickenbacker.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:59 pm

For what a fretboard size piece of Micarta or Garolite would cost, we could buy two or three blanks of just about any exotic wood you could think of at wholesale. It's certainly not to save cost. On the other hand, there's no selection process involved. "Wow, this sure is a pretty piece of plastic! Let me save that one for my own guitar."

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:30 pm

Industrial warmth at its best.

bbobb24 · Post by **bbobb24** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 4:07 am

If there is no cost saving on the material what would the purpose be for using it? Would you think the savings on the selection process really be enough to warrent the use of plastic instead of wood? I know nothing of the buisness end of building guitars, heck depending on who you ask I know nothing of playing them either...

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 6:20 am

It is more environmentally sensitive, although Micarta is a coal-tar derivative. No tropical trees give their lives.

Total impact on tropical tree farming (there's lots of padauk to go around, though dilbergia is highly regulated since '91): NIL.

Total impact on the good-guy image of a company that sells lots of acoustic instruments to "green" musicians: LARGE.

Nobody's a "Micarta-hugger".

And god forbid that cold, sexless plastic should ever completely take the place of real wood.

johnhall · Post by **johnhall** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 7:21 am

It is more environmentally sensitive, although Micarta is a coal-tar derivative.

If it's not renewable, it can't be very environmentally sound, can it?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 7:28 am

Should have read: "It's perceived as more environmentally-sensitive."

Funny--coal was seen as dirty and a highly-pollutive source of power, but now it seems to be looked at a second time around as oil goes nutz. But of course, it's not renewable.

squid · Post by **squid** » Wed Dec 21, 2005 8:34 am

I always assumed that Ric was quite a positive choice for us casual tree-hugger types. Maple is the wood of choice for the most part, and goodness knows we've got plenty of good, well-managed maple forests up here in Canada. Walnut is farmed responsibly -- a friend of mine actually owns a grove of "black walnut" trees -- and I think that the rosewood Ric uses comes from similar sources. I also know from John Hall's many posts on the finishing process that Ric is careful to comply with emissions and polution controls. I always thought they did pretty well. "The Corporation" they are clearly not.

rkbsound · Post by **rkbsound** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:43 am

I can't see how micarta is environmentally friendly at any level. I really wanted a Martin at the low end, which featured micarta. I was dissuaded by multiple people and one had heard a nightmare story about a micarta fingerboard. I opted for an all wood model of a more affordable brand -- one I had never heard of.