Re: skews
Lyn J. Mangiameli
>I like this post, as it brings up the perenial issue of what does it mean when an individuals experience differs from the technique and choices of the "experts."
One of the things I try to do in every review I write is to not only give my experience/appraisal of the tool, but give enough objective information about the tool that others can begin to assess it for themselves. You have just done that in your post, even though it was presented as a question.
I'm very impressed with Alan's video, and his obvious skills. I imagine he does quite well with almost any skew put in his hands, but it is also clear that he has refined not only his techniques, but his entire (forgive me) sensory/motor system for the characteristics of the skews he prefers. Like an automobile fine tuned for a specific altitude/air temperature/gasoline, he performs best when the conditions are most closely replicated. So for all who comment on tools, one has to be careful to differentiate between the inherent characteristics of the tool, vs the interaction of that tool with ones idiosynctratic techniques and projects. You have done a good job of describing how the oval skew matches well with you.
When one looks at the "experts" one quickly finds there are two general approaches to their discussion of tools and/or technique. There are those, Mike Darlow is a good example, who through thoughtful analysis, have come to believe there is a best way to do things, and the turners will benefit from moving beyond their idiosyncracies to aligning their technique with the optimal physical principles. There are others, and I think Del Stubbs was a nice example of this who just encourage turners to experiment to find what feels the best for them.
As I see it, Alan tends to fall a bit more in the first group, perhaps because he must condense down a lot of experience to simple principles that his students can grasp. Yet on the other side, are folks like Dell who would pull out a hachet head and turn a small fine goblet. I bet he could have done the same with a sharpened table knife. Raffan comes to mind in the same way, and look at how his typical tool choice differs from Alan's.
Russ has commented along these same lines before, talking about how one develops a system of techniques and tools that are effective, but that does not preclude another from developing a different system of techniques and tools that are effective. Indeed, what is so often the case is that folks can't duplicate their level of success outside the same system. It has come up before how Joe Fleming and I both have a fondness for cutting hollowing tools that are very close in general principle of operation and in manufacture. I have great success with the Proformes, Joe with the Exocet, yet neither of us can achieve the same level of performance with the opposite tool. I think both of us agree that from an engineering perspective, neither tool overall is inherently superior, but rather it is our idiosyncratic interaction with the tool that leads to our different experiences, and even results in our failure to modify our technique to pick up the technique best suited for the other tool. These sorts of things get played out in so many different areas of turner/tool interaction, such as was recently discussed with respect to flute shape of bowl gouges.
So I'm sorry if you were looking for some very specific comments on the thick wide skews, as I have surely strayed from that. I will comment quickly on that specific point that I have been using a P&N skew that closely matches a lot of Alan's criteria (and was designed and offered that way long before Alan promoted such a design), and I like it a lot. I have over a half dozen differnent skews, about half of them with radiused grinds, most of them Glaser, and have never found any that clearly stood out as my favorite, though I appreciated the Glasers for their edge retention. Since obtaining the thick, wide, P&N, I do find myself gravitating more to it. At this point I can't say for sure if that is because it is just new and interesting or if it really serves me better.
Anyway, I'll stop know as I'm afraid the length of this has already become tedious to read