TomD
""If the equipment cost of getting an acceptable surface is hundreds or thousands of dollars (cost of fancy plane) for the pragmatic woodworker a $250 tear-out free air driven random orbital sander will be the path taken, or even a $1000 ($500 used) drum sander."

Even small luthier shops have taken to the drum sander and not just for surface quality, of course, but to thickness fairly thin stock. Many still use planes, but drum sanders are frequently seen nowadays."

And the other reason there is that traditionally american luthiers were not woodworkers. I'm talking traditionally post 1970, not in Martin's day. So they are all about jigs, and since the price has come down, they like machines. A lot of what people use in woodworking is what they think is required in order to fit in. They are just copying what they see. And also the initial point of attraction was say when they saw a Roubo bench. So self-selection occurs.

""Hence, if this rediscovery proves efficacious in the hands of what I will call "pragmatic woodworkers" this is where the benefit will be most important, not with the persons that already have high end skills and equipment."

Absolutely. There will always be those who will find special reasons to own high-end planes, whether it be performance or even fetishism, and I certainly don't begrudge them that, nor do I begrudge artisans with the admirable skills to make such planes. I also doubt this fanfare for the common plane will have much effect on owners or makers of hand crafted planes."

It's always a moving target. When I started out in the late 70s, the planes of the day were not for real. I remember getting a block plane home from LV, I think it was a record, and finding the adjustable mouth was not machined correctly it took a huge dive across it's range. The plane was not usable, and back then we just ate it. So today we have planes like those chinese ones RC is selling. He had a video out on one of those (not sure the CB settings) taking a fantastic shaving. So what is a cheap plane today? One thing I used to rage on about here, in the past, was how planes should be like any other woodworking tool, the money should go into the blade, and the budget for the rest does not need to be any higher than the budget for the handle on a chisel. I am making several planes at the moment for specialty uses related to making bamboo fly rods. I also have some ideas for a Morgan Mill like device. The specialty planes are going to use tool bits, and the total all up cost for these pretty sophisticated tools will be about 6 bucks each.

"Is period and historical authenticity important to me? Do I want to wear breeches and puffy-sleeved shirts? Then I'm going to be attracted to wooden replicas of early planes. Do I just want to make nice stuff? Then I can get by for less. Again, clearer understanding has refined our decisions, which is what really matters, what's really been gained."

I'd say that is a false choice. For a long time what it meant to use western planes was that you made your own like Cecil Pierce, or you used reconditioned ones as promoted by Mile Dunbar in his various tool books starting back in the 70s. For the most part I didn't have much success finding good enough old tools, so I made mine. It was only recently with C&W that this became regarded as a high end thing. Wood is certainly arguably better than metal, and one of those benefits can be lower cost.

When you look at woodworking tools as a business, it is mostly about stuffing tools in the stockings of newbies. People spend when they are new to an activity. And it is probably also a reality that most of those newbies don't have that long to live. But tools shouldn't be solely measured but that yardstick. Occasionally