FWW going downhill

I'll chip...

Christopher Fitch @ Memphis

>my 2 cents in...

I have said this before..and I'll repeat it now...

Currently, for my money, the most valuable magazine I receive is Popular Woodworking.

FWW has dropped off some in my opinion... I have read the letters section in recent issues and there have been some critical of FWW and then some who defend FWW.

PW could be better by having yet more handtool items...

On a side note I also like shop notes... it's simple, and often redundant but they stick to their style.

A newbie's challenge (very long pseudo-rant)

Justin W in Ann Arbor, MI

>As a newcomer to this (for me) hobby, I missed out on the glory days of Fine Woodworking magazine. However, over the last three years or so, I have read every magazine and book I could find time for.

My underlying question is this: Aside from new tool reviews/announcements is there really that much for magazines to write about that hasn't already been written?

What would the ideal magazine publish?

My sense is that if there's one interesting article in a magazine then it's been a success - otherwise I buy a magazine for the pretty pictures and the hope that I'll be inspired. I'm not really interested in making a "Tribal" coffee table (Woodwork, June 2004) or working with MDF (FWW, June 2004). And I think it's weird that FWW spent 4 pages writing about a tool, the uses of which they summarized in 1/3rd of a page (Sliding Bevels, FWW June 2004).

But at the same time, I thought the waxing article from FWW was kind of neat - and I hadn't noticed that technique in either of the finishing books I have. Is it a new technique? I highly doubt it. But it entered my consciousness this month. Three months, three years or ten years from now, when FWW or PW or Woodwork runs the same article about waxing I'll probably throw up my hands in disgust. But this time it was new to me.

Frankly, I was disappointed that it took me about 10 minutes to get through the June FWW. But I wonder how much of that is due to the possibility that right now I've learned all I can from reading - I just need to get more time in the shop instead.

This is not meant as a challenge to the general consensus that FWW has lost its way. Perhaps it is because the editors are seeking the broadest possible leadership - or perhaps they're bored. But when I read suggestions about putting the "Fine" back in Fine Woodworking, I just wonder: How?

Are there articles about furniture construction techniques to be written that don't exist in books already? Is there more to say about sharpening or dovetailing or finishing? We're an opinionated bunch. For example: I don't like belt sanders; I don't think biscuits belong anywhere but breakfast; I think loose tenons are fine for production furniture (I didn't actually say that, did I?); I cut tails first (despite Klausz, et al); and so on. But haven't those subjects already been thoroughly discussed in the magazines?

If we all could sit in on an editorial meeting with the staff of FWW, PW, Woodwork, etc., what would we tell them to write about? I'm too much of a novice to be of much use, but perhaps instead of telling the magazines how far they've fallen we could, as their customers, let the magazines know what we affirmatively want.

I really like Bill Houghton's idea of sending FWW a letter. But maybe the letter could contain a list of article ideas that we come up with here.

For those who have let their subscriptions to FWW lapse, what kinds of captions on the cover would make you say go to the newsstand and say, "I'm going to pay $8.00 for that magazine?"

Sorry for the rant, and I hope not to have offended anybody. But as somebody who is looking forward to making a mess of perfectly good wood for many years to come, it's in my interest to see that the magazines take some lessons from the collective wisdom of the community.

- Justin W. in Ann Arbor, MI

Agreed

Ryan Stagg -- Cincinnati

>For years FWW has strived to be an archival or journal-type of magazine. Since there was and is an excess of more mainstream WW mags, I thought this was a noble endeavor.

But lately, the articles have been repetitive, simplisitic, and too 'trendy' if that makes any sense. I can go get the most updated info possible on how well the new WoodGizmo works from Amazon or WC, why do I need to pay $5 a magazine to do so? I want big projects, techniques, and interviews. I want a magazine full of masters classes, not one that barely makes room at the back of the magazine for one token single page article.

Off and on I've been buying a magazine I think is simply called 'Woodworking' at the local Borders; I might subscribe. They remind me very much of how my back issues of FWW. Some of the interviews with masters -- Becksvoort comes to mind -- provide info you just can't pickup anywhere else. Some of it's high falutin, but I can put up with that more easily than what I'm seeing in FWW.

That being said, I have to say I look forward to the Reader's Gallery in FWW every month; I don't see an equivalent in any other rags. The addition of the Tools and Shops issue has been good, too, except for the tool reviews!

Ideas - long and ranty

Bill Houghton, Sebastopol, CA

>1. Graham Blackburn used to do a series in Woodwork, I think it was, in which he would analyze a piece of furniture he'd made, discussing all the design decisions he'd made for the final effect - width of stiles, type of edge treatment, etc. While there may be only a few makers who can articulate their reasons for decisions as well as he did and even fewer such makers who can write them clearly and entertainingly, it seems to me worth trying to find such people, even if it needs to be in a Q&A format between a good writer and a good maker.

2. FWW and others used to do profiles of some of the classic folk (Barnsleys, Stickleys, etc.) and discuss in depth the aesthetic of their work. This can be overdone, but lately it's been underdone.

3. Similarly, there are current makers producing a variety of work who deserve more than a passing reference. I vividly remember an article on Judy Kensley McKie quite some time back (I think in the very early "color" years, which means now a good 20 years back), whose early work particularly I find really inspirational; giving her several pages to spread out and talk about what she's done, how, and why has stuck with me.

4. When I could get it, I used to buy "Australian Wood Review," primarily for the furniture pictures - there's a very subtle difference in the design aesthetic that I find intriguing (is this like admitting that, as a callow youth, I read Playboy for the pictures?). In fact, I'd add that to my subscription list if it weren't so darned expensive to get it from that colony to this one. Maybe FWW could send one of the editors or a good writer on a junket every six months to a different part of the world to examine the furniture there and bring back a good article on design and construction practices (Chris Schwarz - this idea is NOT copyrighted; feel free to bring it up in your next editorial board meeting if you'd like. I'd be perfectly happy knowing I was part of getting you some travel money on the company's wallet). I recognize that this last one will increase production costs significantly, but it seems to me to have lots of potential; and it's not a new idea - they used to do it somewhat.

5. I've got at home somewhere, unless I finally tossed it out, a newspaper article on a new commercial furniture-maker in the South who was making furniture based on some of the designs of historical black cabinetmakers. The article and pictures were quite interesting, again because of subtle design creativity on existing standard furniture forms. Articles on some of the lesser-known makers in American history, or some of the regional furniture in areas besides Philadelphia, Boston, and Maryland would be very good. I read a book some years back on Texas furniture that was truly incredible - turns out that historical Texas furniture was heavily influenced by the very large German population in Texas before and after independence and assimilation into the U.S. Reading through it, you could see how the German kasts and Mexican spindles on doors both influenced Southwestern furniture. There was also one hard-to-believe-but-true fish sofa from the early 19th century that looks like one of (here comes the name again) Judy Kensley McKie's animal pieces, specifically her leopard sofa.

I also subscribe to Fine Homebuilding, and find it takes me longer to get through each issue. This may be partly because I'm spending way too much of my shop time working on the house compared to ruining innocent pieces of hardwood, or because the number of trades involved in homebuilding is larger; but it's at least partly because they've done a better job of remembering that "how to" isn't enough and that "why to" is ultimately more important - the construction matters a lot, but it's not "fine" until you're doing well on the design.

OK. I'm pirating time from my lunch hour, and anyone who's still reading has too much time on his hands anyway (what'd you think, David Barnett? Any worthwhile ideas? Mind being teased?). But these are some of my thoughts.

Another suggestion

Brad in Ottawa

>How about a profile of a piece of furniture...

I can't make it to every art gallery but last year I made it to the museum in Philly. Wow! Inspirational stuff. It would be nice to have pictures and article on some great pieces of work in our museums. An article wouldn't have to be long and would only focus on a particular piece of furniture. Heck, make it a centrefold!

Items of interest for a furniture profile could include unique materials/wood, dimensions, quick profile of the cabinetmaker/artist, and joinery information(failures, strengths etc...).

The works wouldn't necessarily be period either, they could be from a contemporary exhibit.

The purpose wouldn't be to provide the plans to build the furniture but to inspire (similar to the gallery).

I never saw the aforementioned furniture foray by FWW so I don't know if this is something they stopped.

Brad

Agree - I'll volunteer

Andrew F in Australia

>Bill,

Agree with what you're saying here, but more importantly, good suggestions on how to improve the magazine.

I hang out on the Knots forum as well and they have polls - eg: Where did you learn about woodworking??? I put that I was professionally trained and said that there wasn't really an option in their poll, closest was 'Woodworking courses'. The response from their (junior) editorial staff was: "well, if this kind of thing is beneath you, then go elsewhere." I'm going to take the magazine representative's advice and not renew.

Originally I was going to volunteer to take the copy of AWR across to Chris if he wished, but the re-read your post. I'd find it interesting too.

Cheers,

Andrew

Re: FWW going downhill

Charles

>I agree, the article on wax finishes hit a new low. I expected something similar to Tom Wisshack's article in Woodwork a year or so ago (wax by itself as a finish) not wax over umpteen coats of poly varnish.

The sliding bevel review was silly as sh*t too.

Re: A newbie's challenge (very long pseudo-rant)

Adrian, Bavaria, Germany

>Hi Justin,

I absolutly agree with you. Like you I know FWW for about three years now and I am still thankfull, that I found this magazine. Here in Germany there is nothing comparable. Last year they started "Lignum" at 7,80 � per! And gave up after issue No. 5! The only other magazine is "dds- der deutsche Schreiner" and all you can find there is software for cnc-machines. So - from my point of the atlantic you are better off in America. When it comes to good woodworking magazines.

There are two things I cannot understand. People in America seem to love period furniture. All these "highboys" and stuff. But this is to everybodys personal liking.

The other thing is your imperial measuring! I dont understand how Americans ever reached the moon with this ridiculous measuring. I grew up with the metric system and I cant think of a more simply way of measuring. Some readings I even cannot pronounce.

Anyway, the american way of sharing is great and the FWW is very wellcome over here!

Cheers

Adrian

Re: FWW going downhill

Mike G.

>Having the about first 90 issues or so, plus about 50 more through the years up til the present, I can see the up and down trends. The trends haven't been that much up or down in my opinion. I still think it's the premier WWing mag, although Pop Wood comes in a close second.

There's one thing y'all are forgetting here, though. Some of the Fine Woodworking magazine articles are submitted by readers,( that means you amd me.), and are published along with the articles by the staff of FWW.

For Everybody's Information & A Sort of Confessio.

HC Sakman

>I am a self-thought cabinetmaker. When I bought the FWW issue #111, I was hooked! It would not be far off to say over 85~to~90% of my knowledge base is sources from FWW magazine. Nobody showed me nothing other than FWW magazine and just a couple of their other publications. (Now they've got many.) I was a beginner all-right! I had nobody closely related to woodworking in my family and circle of friends, nothing, absolutely nothing to inspire me about woodworking. No high school projects or classes NOTHING!

What I had was (and still is) the instict and urge to create something with my hands. FWW magazine issue #111 just showed me that I need to use wood for that.

The level of woodworking that FWW was promoting, was high. As a beginner I sure was struggling to comprehand the articles and anylise pictures. Many of them started to make sense to me after couple of years. As i matter of fact, I also read some other magazines containing more basic information.

FWW DOES NOT NEED TO LOWER ITS LEVEL to beginner/intermediate because there are other publications for that. If they want a market share, Taunton should start "Beginner's Woodworking" or something like that. I know for a fact that many beginners that I know bought FWW religiously. FWW was their target, goal a source of admiration and a higher level of this venture as well as mine.

It's the question of where somebody wants to take their woodworking. It's no joke that some retired people are in search of a hobby. Some treat "Fine" woodworking as a hobby only. Buying the latest and/or fanciest tool will not make them get there over couple of months. If a beginner has the desire to accomplish certain milestones and move further and further in his/her quest, that beginner WILL BUY FWW even only 10% of the woodworking in it is understandable to that person. Am I making my point here? Is it clear enough? FWW should have remained at the level as before. Since the cover background became white, the decline of FWW had begun. Thankfully it's happening very gradually but nevertheless, it's happening.

I really don't want to lose something dear to me, that's where I am coming from.

HC Sakman

Re: FWW going downhill

kees laan

>It will take just one article to take you on the right pathway of woodworking; for me it was "a plea for handtools" in fww 127 nov.1997

And we get more info from the Internet. Let's not underestimate that when measuring the quality of the magazines.

Personally I am now only interested in de cd of finewoodworkingarticles.

I stopped subscribing fww and f&cm(UK) 2 years ago because 15minutesin at the newsstand saves me a lot of money and disappointment.

It's all to glossy and on the surface. More outside than inside.

Also 4 times a year was enough for fww. and why is it 6 times? For the advertising?

Maybe the magazines help me diminishing my internet time :-)

Also the writers like Becksvoort and Dunbar etc. have another -hidden or not- agenda: they do courses!

kees (greenwoodworking)

Adrian...

HC Sakman

>Like you, I grew up with metric system. I'm not going to defend Imperial system, but it works in woodworking. For your information, now NASA is using metric as well.

I understand your frustration, but I can only understand and just suggest you to find a good conversion system.

It's much easier to divide a unit into 10 rather than 8. North American machinists use Inches divided into 10 for better accuracy. How about that for more confusion????

Anyway, as I said, once you get used to it, it's convenient in woodworking for divisions but fractions are stiil pain to add and subtract. Well, I got used to that as well.

Chico...

Woodwork

Russell Seaton

>I'm guessing you mean Woodwork when you wrote Woodworking magazine at Borders. Woodwork also has a fantastic gallery section. It does a pretty in depth articl about some professional woodworker each issue. And it always has a turning project by Chris Child too.

I think Fine Woodworking has gone more towards the other publications over the years. A home woodworking shop power tool review in each issue. A project or two. A "shop shot" or workbench article in every issue.

I don't know if that is good or bad. I suspect Taunton Press looked at all of the imported power tools being sold to all of the home woodworkers who wastch Norm every week and figured a magazine for them would make them the most money. Taunton Press is a business and their purpose in life is to make money. Catering to the largest number of potential woodworking magazine buyers is not a bad business decision in my mind.

And I like reading about all the newest tools and reviews. I would not buy the magazine for that, but its OK to look at them at the bookstore.

Re: A newbie's challenge (very long pseudo-rant)

Michael R

>Adrian, Schoen Gruesse (no umlauts on this computer)

The imperial measuring system is the secret of American success! Even though we look so provincial and barbarian to Europe, it's all a disguise. Secretly we know that anyone who can master fractions, inches and feet, not to mention a 360 degree circle and Fahrenheit temperature scale is smart enough to become the most powerful economy in the world. Just look what happened to Great Britain after they went Metric. By the way, their measurement of volume is different from ours. It takes real brains to deal with all the complexity. Everything else is easy in comparison.

Michael R

Re: A newbie's challenge (very long pseudo-rant)

Zack A.

>THATS RIGHT!!!

PREECH IT

So, I have to admit ...

Edward Damewood, Northern Alabama

>that the most recent FWW turned me off pretty badly, too. I look forward to receiving the mag, and this one is just sitting on my night-table in its cover. I've tried a couple of times to get into it, and it's just not happening. As a matter of fact, I was so disappointed with this issue that I looked to see if Mike Dunbar (my favorite contributor) was still a contributing editor. (He still is listed, but I didn't see any contributions this time.)

The bevel square article put me in a funk, for one. Unless it's a beater for the toolbox (the Craftsman), my choice in bevel squares is a century-old Stanley. That choice is cheap and has a reasonable thumb-lever. Did Latta (the author) even mention this option? I don't think so. The feel I got from the article was that the author had an assignment to write about something with which he was not even remotely familiar -- sort of like a kid in grade-school doing a science project on heat pumps or semiconductors. Now, Dunbar (e.g.) is around bevel squares all the time, since his students use them in his chairmaking classes. My guess is that he has seen most of these freakish variations and could pass reasonable judgment on them. Of course, he probably would not get mixed up in such an article...

[Fetching magazine (achoo!) and reviewing table of contents...]

Ah, I get it. The reason this issue of FWW stinks *for me* is that these are the highlights:

o Choosing, using, and tool-testing belt sanders, which are known devil-tools.

o Tool-testing massive bandsaws, for which I have no need.

o Working with MDF, a devil-material.

o Template-routing, which is more of The Norm.

o The waxing article, which others have discussed.

o The chest-of-drawers article, whose trumpeted dovetails disappoint when one sees that half the pictures include screaming finger-eaters.

o Tool-testing sliding bevels, already addressed.

o Scaling furniture from photos.

Now, I *liked* the article on deriving object dimensions (scaling furniture) from photographs using perspective drawing methods in reverse. I have tried that once or twice, with only mixed success, and now I see how it should have been done. For me, thumbs-up on that.

I basically skipped all but the reverse-engineering-perspective-drawings article. I never made it to the one about "fine-tuning your shop". Ack. There might be some good stuff there, but I haven't been able to stomach looking. Maybe I'll try again. Maybe.

So, there were eight or nine articles/topics, and I was interested in one (drawing), neutral on one (dresser), and basically uninterested in the rest. Ouch. That's not anywhere close to a passing grade.

Part of this is my anti-CNC-WW bias, but I seldom can plod my way through a tool-test, no matter the subject. Urk.

Well! Better luck next time. FWW, please, oh please, don't go the way of American Woodworking.

Edward Damewood, disgruntled Alabaman, who does realize that it's not *all* about him.

Re: A newbie's challenge (very long pseudo-rant)

Don Thompson, Cutler Ridge, South of Miami FL

>I liked the old UK money system.

Pounds, shillings, pence, groats, guineas, tuppence, crowns, half-pennies, tanners, bobs, florins, farthings, thru-pennies, sixpence...

Your review was on the money

Bob Hackett

>It seems that FWW is just trying to fill pages,at least fill those that aren`t already filled with advertising.

It used to be(I have all the old issues)that when you picked up a copy of FWW you were going somewhere with a friend.You got together and traveled to new places and saw new things.The emphasis seemed to be on discovery,as in let`s go see what this guy`s doing.Alot of the early articles featured interesting people who were out on the fringes,something you don`t find by sitting behind a desk studying specs.

Another feature of FWW that I used to enjoy was the problem solving approaches that the early WWers took.Back then it was build a tool or jig or even a machine to make what you have in mind.

Now the answer to all problems seems to be to go out and buy yet another finger eater(usually at a cost of $500 or more)or buy some specialized hardware,like a router lift(at $500+)to accessorize the machines you already have spent way too much for.

Seems like Precision Woodworking or High Tech WWing would be a more appropriate title.I understand that in order to keep the high dollar advertisers coming you have to push thier goods.Just because I understand it doesn`t mean I like it.

The old FWW made it seem as though finely crafted furniture was within anyone`s grasp.We got to see WWers with a whole lot of skill and maybe not so much money at work(people turning out fantastic work from chicken coops and rough framed sheds),It had the starving artist feel to it.

The FWW I`m picking up lately seems to target retired gentlemen with deep pockets and a large breaker box feeding the shop.I`m wondering where the old gaurd went and why the focus changed(I`m guessing it was $$$)

I find myself looking forward to the next issue of Woodwork,I know I`m going to buy it(I should subscribe).I find my self putting FWW back 50% of the time.Woodwork gets me thinking like the old FWW used to.Even if the story of a top WWer leaving the trade to become an OR nurse or why there are WWing communities in Japan won`t improve my abilities,it still makes me think,and wonder why.

There are a whole fleet of mags doing tool reviews,as a matter of fact there are mags just devoted to nothing but tool reviews.Does FWW think that they are the only legit source of comparison?We all know LN tools are great.Most of us also know that a passable bevel gage can be made from an old hacksaw blade and some suitable scraps.(They were good enough for the men planking the ships that helped get us here)There`s enough info out there that anyone who wants to buy a new tool can find thier own way and decide what`s best for them.

I have a fairly large library and am a member of more than one local WWing organization.Both these things,plus the net, feed the day to day info I need to help me improve my skills.I look to the newstands for something different.Lately all I find myself bringing home is Woodwork,unless a picture in another mag catches my eye.

Mainely,Bob

Re: Your review was on the money

Charles

>Well said; I only wish the FWW editors would read this thread.

Yep, that's the one

Ryan Stagg -- Cincinnati

>Thanks for the correction.

I wish they would all name themselves a little more creatively; I guess they have to be descript enought in their titles to grab the newsstand-peruser's attention. I liked "Lignum", the British mag someone mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but I guess Joe Sixpack would think that's some sort of science magazine. ;-)

Exactly!

Greg B�tit

>I was a charter FWW subscriber, but ended my subscription in the late '80's. I started subscribing again a couple years ago. This last issue reminds me of the issues that caused me to decide to let my subscription lapse.

Greg

Info on Woodwork?

Brent Langdon, Sterling VA

>I have seen this magazine mentioned a number of times, so I guess I should check it out. I looked around on the web and I could not find a web site for the magazine. It appears to be published by Ross Perodicals but I could not track down a site for them either. Is this magazine stocked by Barnes and Noble and/or Borders?

- Brent

Re: Info on Woodwork?

Russell Seaton

>Borders carries Woodwork. Barnes & Noble does not. At least in my town. Your B and B&N might stock different magazines. I could not find any website for them. Woodwork does not go in for all of this high tech fancy dandy stuff like the internet and email. Thus its not as popular as other magazines. Its not modern enough for the woodworker on the go. The movers and shakers of the woodworking world.

Re: Info on Woodwork?

John, NY

>I can get it from both B&N and Borders...