Knew Concepts with Adam Savage [Archive]

lightwood

24th August 2013, 03:51 PM

code4pay

24th August 2013, 08:24 PM

:~:~:~

Now, let me mount my hobby-horse...

What I want to see is MYTHBUSTERS do a test on what actually happens when someone gets that exited about the look of something, the cost of it (reading the wine label) and how that influences the taste/use of the tool. Not only the perception, but the ACTUAL experience and result. It's my experience that if you are struggling or failing with one tool, sometimes just picking up another tool, no better and sometimes a worse one you can improve your result. People do it all the time. (Even when reviewing new hand tools) There is nothing like putting a $500 saw or a $5000.00 plane in somebody's hands to make them saw or plane with extra care, and attention to the work at hand.
What annoys me is the folk who market and promote this either know it, or aren't prepared to accept it. They want you to spend significant cash to get a result that will supposedly require less skill...INSTEAD of getting more skill with traditional tools.

Unfortunately this happens with every activity, golf , fishing. bicycle riding and yoga. Yes yoga! I was talking about how they manage to make every endevour expensive to my freind who does Yoga, and he said yeah yoga's the same you have to have the "special" yoga matt and Yoga clothes and Yoga music etc etc.. I have made a consious effort to keep with second hand traditional hand tools but it can some times take alot of effort not to get wrapped up and want to buy the new fangled stuff.

Simplicity

24th August 2013, 08:38 PM

Doggie

25th August 2013, 12:45 AM

[QUOTE=Simplicity;1688347]To become good at any thing hand skills included
U need to practices letting go
a tool does not should not end at your hand it should end at a level of sub conciounies

Become one with the tool don't fight a tool
/QUOTE]

Holy saw frames. Where are we here?? Luke Skywalker meets Tool Time. Karate Kid does woodworking class.

The video is SELLING SOMETHING people. Plain and simple. As Lightwood's hobby horse suggests, the new fancy titanium "Story Bridge" style saw won't make up for 35 years of experience when you cut something with it. What it will do, is make you briefly feel real good about buying it. Those little endomorphins trump the pleasure of a perfect cut hands down, every time. You buy the perceived best, get the hit and then it looks "GREAT in the rack" thereafter, performance optional. Remember that! ( G I T R ). It's what it's all about hey - Hokey Pokey all round. I wouldn't mind one though!!!

behai

25th August 2013, 01:09 AM

Good morning,

:) :)

...
"Story Bridge" style saw won't make up for 35 years of experience when you cut something with it. What it will do, is make you briefly feel real good about buying it. Those little endomorphins trump the pleasure of a perfect cut hands down, every time. You buy the perceived best, get the hit and then it looks "GREAT in the rack" thereafter, performance optional. Remember that! ( G I T R ). It's what it's all about hey - Hokey Pokey all round. I wouldn't mind one though!!!

In total, I guess I have at most 72 hours of using this type of saw, mine is Eclipse Sheffield England, plastic handle from Bunnings, $12.00, the frame is very strong though.

35 years of experience is very hard to come by :) :) I will get never get there :)

Regards,

...behai.

Berlin

25th August 2013, 01:10 AM

I'll take some enodomorphins with my innate objects... but I'll stick to my found on the footpath coping saw.

jimbur

25th August 2013, 08:52 AM

i still can't get over an early review (a year or so back) that suggested the colour red was an aid for concentration.

derekcohen

25th August 2013, 08:34 PM

i still can't get over an early review (a year or so back) that suggested the colour red was an aid for concentration.

Hi Jim

That's not correct. The maker of the fretsaws - which started as saws for jewellers - believed that red stimulated creativity.

Oh, and that review was mine: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/KnewConceptsFretsaw.html

Peter, I know this is your hobby horse, but I think that you need to control yourself. You are a professional jeweller, and if I had your years of experience I might feel the same way about something that comes intuitively to you now. However it took many, many years to develop the skill, and you worked at it full time.

When you say that the saw is a fake and just a monetary racket, you are calling me a fraud. I am the reason for the start of the KC saw getting off the ground in a sense, because I "discovered" the saws and helped design the version for woodworking. And you know what, there are a great number of woodworkers around the globe who agree with me that this saw is a revelation for woodworking. If you don't need one because your hand skills are so developed, then good for you. But do not deprive others here of the opportunity to try one guilt-free. Most forum members look up to you (and, for the most part, so do I). Let them make up their own minds. Hey, I have NIL financial interest in these (or any other) tools. But I will not stand around and see a company whom I believe are the Good Guys bad mouthed by you, and repeatedly at every opportunity. Give it a break. The saws are fantastic compared to the spaghetti available most places.

Regards from Perth

Derek

jimbur

25th August 2013, 09:02 PM

I stand corrected Derek.

Doggie

25th August 2013, 10:41 PM

I stand corrected Derek.

I'm out too. I'll poke a stick at a dragon but I won't poke a stick up a dragon's bum.

lightwood

27th August 2013, 10:59 AM

Hi Jim

That's not correct. The maker of the fretsaws - which started as saws for jewellers - believed that red stimulated creativity.

Oh, and that review was mine: http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/KnewConceptsFretsaw.html

Peter, I know this is your hobby horse, but I think that you need to control yourself. You are a professional jeweller, and if I had your years of experience I might feel the same way about something that comes intuitively to you now. However it took many, many years to develop the skill, and you worked at it full time.

When you say that the saw is a fake and just a monetary racket, you are calling me a fraud. I am the reason for the start of the KC saw getting off the ground in a sense, because I "discovered" the saws and helped design the version for woodworking. And you know what, there are a great number of woodworkers around the globe who agree with me that this saw is a revelation for woodworking. If you don't need one because your hand skills are so developed, then good for you. But do not deprive others here of the opportunity to try one guilt-free. Most forum members look up to you (and, for the most part, so do I). Let them make up their own minds. Hey, I have NIL financial interest in these (or any other) tools. But I will not stand around and see a company whom I believe are the Good Guys bad mouthed by you, and repeatedly at every opportunity. Give it a break. The saws are fantastic compared to the spaghetti available most places.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Derek,
this is a woodwork FORUM, not the Derek Cohen Show.

That video above is an 'Infomercial"
That is my OPINION.

You blanket post on internet woodworking forums worldwide...from The UK to the Ukraine...concerning new tool makers and sellers, and lead people away from forums to your own webpages.

It is well known tool makers send you per-production and sample products for your assessment, and even above you claim "I am the reason for the start of the KC saw getting off the ground...."

So what you write MUST be seen through that filter. (another of my opinions)

It is just a fact that you write infomercial type reviews about tools that you are involved in designing. (http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/index.html)

(Your review of the red saw included the comments made by the maker of the saw about the colour encouraging creativity, without comment about the absurdity of the claim. You weasel out of that by saying it wasn't your comment....please... My OPINION is that you either agree and include it, or reject it and don't include it. Better still, comment on its validity in the review....but you disown it now....why?)

What is your issue with people holding a light up to where you have placed yourself in the woodwork tool-making Industry?

TV infomercial channels are dedicated to it, celebrities endorse products, even footballers claim to have invented things and had input into designs. (tomato sauce plastic bottle :doh:)
If folk like me were the norm, those things (and spam also) would disappear overnight, but they don't because some people BELIEVE what they hear and read, and in my OPINION spend their money foolishly.

You and a couple of others are the "Go To Men" for tool "reviews".
It seems to me there is a saturation of woodwork forums all over the globe with back slapping and bonhomie.

I just don't agree with some of the things you hold as truths, and the way you promote them.
I am very much against the 'Celebrity woodworker review" that has permeated the woodwork forums. Commercial enterprises seem to want to encourage discussions about their NEW products, and place their mouthpieces in a place where they will get maximum exposure. I believe they should pay for their advertising....
That is another of my OPINIONS!

These are my OPINIONS, and its clear you don't share them with me.

Since you don't agree with me, and don't like the fact I very OCCASIONALLY write on the subject of hand tool use and my attitudes towards it (not at every opportunity...if I did I could do nothing else....I don't know where you find the time to cut and paste so much into so many forums), I would encourage you to add me to you "ignore list"

If I occasionally counter your breathtaking enthusiasm for any new product coming down the line with an OPINION of my own, don't think you can just come along and demand I shut-up!

Peter McBride

derekcohen

27th August 2013, 11:21 AM

Doggie

27th August 2013, 12:44 PM

[quote=derekcohen;1689447

that is not debate or an opening for discussion.

[/quote]

fight! Fight! Fight!

lightwood

27th August 2013, 12:54 PM

fight! Fight! Fight!
I think Derek would join me in thinking that is a pretty disappointing post.
Regards,
Peter

derekcohen

27th August 2013, 01:14 PM

I think Derek would join me in thinking that is a pretty disappointing post.
Regards,
Peter

Absolutely Peter. Regardless of the emotions raised in our exchange here, I have respect for your knowledge, and no desire for further heat. I am interested to hear more about how you see the dynamics working in fretsaws.

Regards from Perth

Derek

RayG

27th August 2013, 08:15 PM

I think this discussion runs deeper than the relative design merits of the knew concepts jewellers saw. I've got both ( a knew concepts saw, and several normal jewellers saws) and use both at different times, and I can break blades with either :)

I generally liked the video with Adam Savage, I'm a bit of a Mythbusters fan, but couldn't help cringing when he was getting told by Brian Meek that you have to have "one of these saws to cut accurate dovetails" I'd argue that is bad advice.

Good luck to the guy for promoting his product and innovative design, but it's not the best choice for cutting dovetails, and it's debatable whether it's an improvement over the traditional Jewellers saw.

Adam says at one point "there's no better saw that's ever been made" ... ok, ok, I understand that it's just over the top marketting hype, but some poor sucker is going to see that video and believe it..

Regards
Ray

derekcohen

27th August 2013, 09:07 PM

Hi Ray

I take videos like that with a pinch of salt. I really do not consider either of these individuals expert in dovetailing, or even woodworking. It is quite likely that Brian does not even do woodworking at all. Brian is not Knew Concepts. He works with Lee Marshall, who is Knew Concepts, and Lee is not a woodworker. Lee is not a jeweller either. He is an inventor of a jewellery saw.

The other thing that we in Oz need to accept is that the Americans sell themselves very differently than we tend to do. Perhaps this is a grand overgeneralisation - no doubt - but in the US it is all bright lights, fireworks, and backslapping. The video is like that - statements that declare extremes: "we're the best", "you have to have one ..", "you can't do without". So it rubs us up the wrong way.

I have come to know Lee Marshall as a very genuine fellow, generous and unassuming. I cannot imagine him as Brash Brian or Hyperactive Adam. He has always had a product to sell, but the demand is larger now since woodworkers became involved. I also have warned Lee that his saws are priced in the range of a premium dovetail saw, and pitched at those interested in such tools and that, as a result, these woodworkers will place demands upon their aesthetics as much as their performance. I believe that the saws are really good, but that the culture has bestowed upon them cult status because that is how it is in the States. The point is that one should not equate the sales pitch with the product.

I also have ideas about the dynamics of using a fretsaw - which is my real interest here - and will share these in another post. Hopefully Peter will post his thoughts in this regard too. Perhaps you will too.

Regards from Perth

Derek

lightwood

27th August 2013, 11:02 PM

Peter, it is not that you disagree - everyone is entitled to an opinion. I am on record saying this, and your link takes the reader to this comment.

It is how you go about disagreeing, which is generally with derision and ridicule. That is not debate or an opening for discussion.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Oh Derek,
I see it more as clever, lighthearted and entertaining.:;

As RayG said, there is something here that runs deeper than that saw. I tried to outline it very succinctly in my previous post.

Regards,
Peter

pmcgee

28th August 2013, 12:28 AM

Well well ... post a video ... BOOOOOM!!!

It's like high-school chemistry all over again. :)

(I wonder how many classrooms still have gas outlets piped to the benches?)

Thinking only of the problem of removing the waste from dovetails ... you can plunge-cut with a chainsaw ...

so when can we expect the 'jewellers chainsaw' ... 6mm wide ... kevlar strand coated in CBN ... ???

I'd buy that for a dollar ... :D

Paul

Ball Peen

28th August 2013, 01:27 AM

I'm almost tempted to watch the vid.:) I save my broadband for other things.

fineboxes

28th August 2013, 03:29 PM

To become good at any thing hand skills included
U need to practices letting go
a tool does not should not end at your hand it should end at a level of sub conciounies
With out sounding corny
Become one with the tool don't fight a tool
If a tool is not behaving don't blame a tool it's just an innate object(a bit of metal wood plastic)
Blame the the person using or who chose the particular tool.

Could not agree more.

It's not the tool in the hand, but the mind behind the hand that holds the tool.
There ya go I said it!

Be prepared to do it wrong long enough to get it right, then only practice the right way.

Cheers

Steve

Blue-deviled

28th August 2013, 09:01 PM

I stand corrected Derek.

And all these years I'd been told that red was for speed:U

Damienol

28th August 2013, 09:53 PM

What's wrong with a router and a jig?

i am new to woodworking and have been lead to believe that the best results are achieved with a router

ian

28th August 2013, 10:17 PM

What's wrong with a router and a jig?

i am new to woodworking and have been lead to believe that the best results are achieved with a routertakes far too long to set up if there's only a few corners to do

Ball Peen

29th August 2013, 08:52 AM

takes far too long to set up if there's only a few corners to do

The only reason I hand cut dovetails is to show off! They're aestheticly more pleasing and expected on something fine. The pins must be smaller than the smallest dt router bit so people will know it is hand work. Crazy times! I'm sure the long gone old timers have a good chuckle about this.

fineboxes

29th August 2013, 01:07 PM

The only reason I hand cut dovetails is to show off! They're aestheticly more pleasing and expected on something fine. The pins must be smaller than the smallest dt router bit so people will know it is hand work. Crazy times! I'm sure the long gone old timers have a good chuckle about this.

The only reason I cut them is because I charge an hourly rate and it's worth more.:U

Not to mention a chisels is quieter that and rotating chip maker:C

Cheers

Steve

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 01:37 AM

:~:~:~
if only Adam had picked up a TRADITIONAL (cheap $15.00) jeweller's saw-frame and wobbled it sideways, like he did with the red thing. He would have seen it was at least 2 times and nearer 3...yes three times more rigid than the comparable red thing...what a joke. And once a blade is mounted and tensioned correctly, and the saw is used properly by cutting on the pull stroke, the handle is connected to the blade and the tension along the blade is more or less irrelevant. The sideways flex is the thing that lets you wander off line and break blades easily.

I did the test. I put them in the vice and hung weights on them "MYTHBUSTER - STYLE" and confirmed what I felt.
And that fancy pansy adjuster saves you pushing the saw with your chest (or shoulder or tummy for the women) against the bench to set the blade...what a saving that is!

Now, let me mount my hobby-horse...

What I want to see is MYTHBUSTERS do a test on what actually happens when someone gets that exited about the look of something, the cost of it (reading the wine label) and how that influences the taste/use of the tool. Not only the perception, but the ACTUAL experience and result. It's my experience that if you are struggling or failing with one tool, sometimes just picking up another tool, no better and sometimes a worse one you can improve your result. People do it all the time. (Even when reviewing new hand tools) There is nothing like putting a $500 saw or a $5000.00 plane in somebody's hands to make them saw or plane with extra care, and attention to the work at hand.
What annoys me is the folk who market and promote this either know it, or aren't prepared to accept it. They want you to spend significant cash to get a result that will supposedly require less skill...INSTEAD of getting more skill with traditional tools.

I get told all the time about easier ways to do things, and to spend plenty of money that will help to do things without having to concentrate on improving or maintaining the skill. Those fine motor skills are honed buy use, not by finding ways to use them less.

Regards,
Peter...using....and teaching the use of these things for more than 35 years.
Peter McBride Goldsmith / Jeweller (http://www.petermcbride.com/)

Perhaps it is time to get a real world look at fretsawing dovetails, and the forum can decide whether Peter's version is representative or not. I said not before, but am open to changing my view if there is objective reason. I spent a little time in the workshop taking a few photos ...

Peter's argument is that the "The sideways flex is the thing that lets you wander off line and break blades easily."

So here we have the set up. First the Knew Concepts saw. Indeed, when you twist the frame, it does so ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/1_zps07734873.jpg

... and does so more than a traditional Jeweller's saw (mine is a vintage, a good one ...) ..

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/2_zpsf7d84ba8.jpg

BUT this is not where a fretsaw undergoes tension! Look at each of these in real use ...

When one saws, the tension will be exerted in such a way as to bend the frame inward, not downward or upward (which is how Peter made his tests) ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/4_zpsff62e1d3.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/3_zps7d7783a6.jpg

I rigged up a simple experiment: The two saws were set up with the same blade and with as much tension as I could create. The knobs were tight (in the case of the vintage thumb screws I used a pair of pliers). The aim was then to apply as much pressure at the centre of the blade until it snapped or came loose.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/5_zps249f4dd3.jpg

The blade deflected 5mm before popping off.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/6_zps6bf426a4.jpg

Note that the blade on the KC fretsaw was determined to be tighter to start as it twanged with a higher note. In other words, pressing the blade against the block applied a higher stress than if it began with a lower blade tension.

The blade of the vintage fretsaw was taut as possible, and the frame could not cope with more. It flexed considerably - 14mm in all ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/7_zpsa138896c.jpg

You can see the frame has bent inward here ..

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/7a_zps5476dea9.jpg

... before popping off ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/8_zpsbea5cd12.jpg

Note that both saws cut on the pull. This places the frame in tension in a linear fashion, not vertical as Peter is asserting.

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 01:38 AM

Think of it this way ..

... a Japanese saw cuts on the pull. This tensions the blade in a linear manner. It does not require any reinforcement at the spine to prevent lateral twist ..

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/9_zps1940f7c6.jpg

On the other hand, a Western backsaw cuts on the push. This loads up the saw and applies tension differently. Now a spine is required to avoid the blade twisting ...

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Derek50/saws/Knew%20Concepts/10_zps36515164.jpg

In short, the strength of the Knew Concepts fretsaw lies with its ability to prevent the blade losing tension. This prevents the blade moving around. That is what increases control. There is no doubt that the vintage design can do a fine job - I used this one for several years very happily - however, emotions aside, it is just not as controllable as the KC fretsaw.

Your opinions?

Regards from Perth

Derek

IanW

1st September 2013, 09:48 AM

Hmm, this thread has kind of taken flight, hasn't it?

My summing-up after reading through it is that both camps have valid points, and both have attitudes that are unlikely to change, because it's true that the subjective element can't be removed from an assessment of any tool, no matter how objective any assessor thinks they are being. I put the Knew Concepts saw in the same category as very expensive planes. They have some superior qualities, but the law of diminishing returns means you spend an awful lot of $$s to have them. However, it's an individual's choice to spend their money how they choose. I admire the quality & engineering of things like high-tech saw frames, but being an old carmudgeon, and a thrifty one to boot, I think I'll see my time out with the frame I've used for 30-something years...

While good tools help a little, the only way to true skill is via long practice. Using fine blades in either jewellers' or fret saws is definitely an acquired art, and most beginners will break a large number of blades prematurely before they get the hang of it. Your average person these days is definitely not used to using saws of any type, and time & again I see people forcing them along, as if they expect the speed of a powered tool! I confess that I break plenty of blades in my jewellers' saw, as you do, but mostly it's because I often (mis)-use it as a parting tool for small objects in my metal lathe. The little blades just aren't meant for that sort of work, & they get hot & expand & become slack enough to catch easily. (Gives a nice neat edge that tales little cleaning-up, though. :U)

It's an interesting question to me just how taut a blade needs to be for woodworking. When I remove the bulk of the waste from dovetails, I use either my small 10" bowsaw or this little bowsaw made for coping-saw blades:

283350

The tautness of the blade depends on the tension you apply to the cord, of course. You can apply a fair amount of tension, perhaps similar to that of a metal frame, but the elasticity of the cord means there is a bit more give in these saws than with the metal frame. I break far fewer blades with this saw than I ever did with the metal-framed versions I used for 20 or 30 years. Some of that is due to practice, and some due to my habit now, of sharpening new blades before I use them (they are disgustingly dull as-bought!), and some because the saw is nicer to use (an entirely subjective assessment! :;)

Cheers,

Ball Peen

1st September 2013, 10:44 AM

My only use for a coping saw these days is to cut f holes. It's a pain because the hole is enclosed and after carving, the top is very thin with a lot of flex. My method is to just hold the blade in my paw ( no frame ) and saw down the middle. I open the hole and finish with a knife and chisel. I hold the work over the very end opening of my tail vise.

jimbur

1st September 2013, 11:16 AM

Ian has covered most of the points I was going to make. While it is fair enough to test the engineering of a product, the first thing one learns about any saw is to let the teeth do the work - don't force it. The only true comparison of tools are when they are all used in the manner for which they are designed. We don't test paring chisels by seeing how well they work at levering waste out of mortises.
Advertising hyperbole has had its effect too, ever since Disston added the intangible word beauty to the more easily tested word utility. Of course you need the quality to maintain sales beyond a certain point but most advertising just tells you to buy it and you'll feel good besides becoming an instant craftsman.
I think I'll save my money and stick to my cheap one for now and wait for the test of time.

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 11:58 AM

Hi Jim

I am not suggesting using the saws with excessive force. Here I exceeded this in order to demonstrate where the stresses are on the frames, that these lie in the horizontal and not the vertical.

There are other factors involved. The saw is guided by a hand, and hands differ. Some move the saw back-and-forth without twisting the blade. Others do not - and it is this group I imagine that are likely to break blades since this will stress it. This is more easily done if the frame lets the blade move (i.e. less tension). Blades also get pretty warm ... hot ... in wood, and this may be another factor. Does working in metal act as a natural heatsink?

Lastly, the comparison here was of a 5" vs a 3" frame, which favours the latter. I only have the 5" version but recommend getting the 3" size when asked about this. With the adjustable blade angle option, there is no need for a wider frame, and the rigidity of the frame goes up significantly.

Regards from Perth

Derek

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 12:13 PM

My summing-up after reading through it is that both camps have valid points, and both have attitudes that are unlikely to change, because it's true that the subjective element can't be removed from an assessment of any tool, no matter how objective any assessor thinks they are being. I put the Knew Concepts saw in the same category as very expensive planes. They have some superior qualities, but the law of diminishing returns means you spend an awful lot of $$s to have them. However, it's an individual's choice to spend their money how they choose. I admire the quality & engineering of things like high-tech saw frames, but being an old carmudgeon, and a thrifty one to boot, I think I'll see my time out with the frame I've used for 30-something years...

Hi Ian

This may be said about any tool. Why do we spend money on premier dovetail and other jonery saws, or premier hand planes, both new and vintage? Why amass a collection of infill planes? Or more than one dovetail saw? These are not all really needed to build furniture. As you say, it is a personal choice where we place our priorities. A tool may be purchased for the pleasure of its use or because it is a significant improvement of performance. I reacted to Peter writing here that this fretsaw was a sales gimmick. I viewed his reasoning about the way a fretsaw is used to be flawed. He may still be correct and I wrong. But he has to support his argument, as I have done. This keeps the discussion interesting, and civil.

Regards from Perth

Derek

lightwood

1st September 2013, 12:14 PM

Hmm, this thread has kind of taken flight, hasn't it?.....

Ian,
My problem with this is.... that is exactly what Derek wants it to do.

I will not engage with him in a discussion about any tool use or design, to do so would involve me in a process that I loath.

That demonstration of the the use of a jeweller's type saw-frame in that way is disgraceful, and irrelevant.

Derek is famous for vigorously promoting commercial enterprises on woodwork forums all over the globe, and continually refers traffic away from woodwork forums to his own webpage where new products from these commercial enterprises are featured in demonstrations, and what he call reviews.

I've spent a couple of days reading as much as I could about his MO in as many forums as I could find (even in languages other than English), and what has been written about it over the last few months. What I have found is extraordinary.
They start out with teaser posts describing pre-release prototype tools, then the manufacturer adds their imprimatur. Then on release of a new tool, blanket posting to many forums creating a "buzz" of interest. And before the tools official release date, (another tease) a report about the tool by the person with input into the design...in the style of an independent review, then on instructions from the company when to proceed, traffic is directed away from forums to a webpage where a couple of manufactures are very well represented.

Then with enthusiasm, like in this topic, an ongoing vigorous defence of the tool maker is launched against any negative reactions.
Questions about independence, and the ethics of the manufacturers accepting this kind of assistance are characterized as Trolling ( or with me above as "emotional"). These are very legitimate concerns held by reasonable people, who find themselves being unjustifiably abused and pilloried unilaterally.

I just won't help by allowing my name to be included in any way in these efforts to promote those tool makers, and to help obtain for them an avenue for the promotion of their products without cost.
It is obvious to me that the manufactures of tools that don't support this activity, and those interested in promotion of traditional tool use, are disadvantaged because they aren't able to obtain the same blanket exposure as this "Undercover Marketing" elicits.

I would encourage any like minded people, that I know have this opinion, to speak out. And for those interested to search the internet woodwork forums worldwide to actually see how pervasive this marketing has become.

Peter McBride

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 12:20 PM

Peter, try not to turn this into a personal attack. Instead focus on making good your claims early on in this thread - they were about how a fretsaw is used when cutting dovetails. This is not about any other method of using the saw, and it is not about a manufacturer. (And, incidentally, you imply I have some commercial reasons here, which I do not. All I have is enthusiasm).

Regards from Perth

Derek

IanW

1st September 2013, 12:22 PM

...... Some move the saw back-and-forth without twisting the blade. Others do not - and it is this group I imagine that are likely to break blades since this stress it. This is more easily done it the frame lets the blade move (i.e. less tension). Blades also get pretty warm ... hot ... in wood, and this may be another factor. Does working in metal act as a natural heatsink?

Derek, I think that the biggest factor in poor sawing & blade breakage would be due to not moving the saw back & forth in straight lines. I can still remember fighting a fretsaw the first few times I used one, & that was a few years ago! It's made more awkward by that long, heavy frame, so there's no doubt in my mind that having a shorter & lighter frame makes it much easier for either a beginner or practised sawyer to keep the saw straight. But it's a trade-off in other respects - being able to turn the blade helps, but there are plenty of situations where I still need throat-depth to reach into the places I need to go, so maybe your advice should be "get as deep a saw as you feel comfortable with...?"

Don't think I have experienced blades getting really hot in wood, but I don't saw thick wood with fine blades, so that probably helps. I think you are right that metal acts as a good heat-sink for manual sawing, but using them the way I sometimes do on the lathe stretches the friendship a bit too far! :U

Cheers,

IanW

1st September 2013, 12:30 PM

Brobdingnagian

1st September 2013, 02:55 PM

"imprimatur" awesome word, thanks Peter.

I took a long road trip with Ray yesterday, we got on to a topic that parallels this thread in some ways, no conclusions were reached but the miles were certainly eaten up by semantics, techniques and history.

One thing we both agreed upon is that the quality of woodworking hand tools avaliable now has never been finer, quite possibly a golden age, with the best taken from traditional design and executed with modern manufacturing techniques and materials.

I put this hand tool renaissance down to the demand from the Nouveau Gentlemen woodworker, with their eye set on a idealised goal rather than pure practicality. Much like their classical counterpart the Nouveau Gentlemen woodworkers have no need for their tools to earn a living but rather their practical craft as I see it is almost purely an aesthetic endeavour, an escape from hub bub of the day whether it be in the 1800's or 2013; a return to something that is tangible, with its merits earned from their own hands, taking responsibility for quality. Fortunately or unfortunately depending on your mood the gentleman woodworker old or new has little foundation to stand on, no tradition honing their judgment and like a house built on sand is easily swayed by a even a soft breeze of fashion, practical knowhow or integrated marketing. The only cure for a lack of clarity in this matter is experienced. The upside is that there now a market for artisans to produce tools of exquisite quality seeming unbounded by financial or practical need.

Just musing

-Josh

RayG

1st September 2013, 03:07 PM

Well, I hardly know where to start...

I can generally get more tension in the blade on a conventional Jeweller's saw, than the Knew Concepts I think the amount of deflection shown in those pictures looks more like a loose blade rather than any deflection of the frame. But all that aside, I think it's just the wrong tool for dovetails... :)

Anyway... the question Peter raises is interesting, are we being manipulated, on various Forums, in some subtle fashion by tool manufacturers.. whether it's being done deliberately or not it doesn't matter..

The answer is yes of course we are!, every maker of specialist woodworking tools knows his customer base, and knows that forums are the perfect way of getting a precisely targetted message to potential customers about new products, or the latest and greatest thing we all have to have.

Personally, I don't mind in the slightest, I like hearing about new things, and try to make up my own mind... I hope that others think the same, and make up their own minds.

Regards
Ray

pmcgee

1st September 2013, 03:24 PM

One of the things we do have differently is access to the Largest Library The World Has Ever Seen and experience and opinion and video from a multitude of sources ... so at least we can research. You could no doubt do that quite easily back then too, by talking to the local craftsmen ... but the diversity of opinion might be much narrower.
... and maybe the depth greater.

Paul
PS .. ain't no-one called me no gentleman, not no-time, not no-how.

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 03:43 PM

I can generally get more tension in the blade on a conventional Jeweller's saw, than the Knew Concepts I think the amount of deflection shown in those pictures looks more like a loose blade rather than any deflection of the frame. But all that aside, I think it's just the wrong tool for dovetails...

Hi Ray

Just to answer to this point. The deflection may look that way (loose blade), but that was the frame deflecting. I really tried to put as much tension into both blades as possible. They were maxed out. I had my spinach and I'm not that weak ..:U

So, what would you rather use for dovetails if not a fretsaw?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Mike B

1st September 2013, 03:46 PM

I've spent a couple of days reading as much as I could about his MO in as many forums as I could find (even in languages other than English), and what has been written about it over the last few months. What I have found is extraordinary.
They start out with teaser posts describing pre-release prototype tools, then the manufacturer adds their imprimatur. Then on release of a new tool, blanket posting to many forums creating a "buzz" of interest. And before the tools official release date, (another tease) a report about the tool by the person with input into the design...in the style of an independent review, then on instructions from the company when to proceed, traffic is directed away from forums to a webpage where a couple of manufactures are very well represented.

Good lord, this is so comically conspiratorial I don't know where to start. :p
Suffice to say this sort of activity goes on in forums of any and every topic. Personally I see it every week on other forums focussing on music, electronics, software development and yes woodworking. It not a bad thing for those of us able to apply critical thinking to what they read.

The distinction worth making is that where some see conspiracy (invariably a symptom of something deeper) others tend to see people that are just passionate about what they are doing.

Oh and to imply that directing traffic to other websites (at the whims of the corporate overlords or otherwise :wink:) is some sort of offence implies a lack of understanding on how the Internet actually functions.

Blue-deviled

1st September 2013, 03:52 PM

Peter, I share some of your views on very expensive tools not being necessary for craftsmanship, but I think you may be getting a bit of a conspiracy theory going here! Argument & discussion are fine, but let's not move into personal attacks or impuning a person's motives.
I think you are drawing a very long bow to suggest that tool reviewers are all working for tool companies.
Cheers,

I don't think that Peter was saying that all reviewers are working for tool companies.

Either way, does this mean that reviews can be classed into three categories? Company/industry/journal or magazine related (ie. advertising/work-based/making a crust), altruistic activity, or ego driven?

Christopher Schwarz has been most entertaining with full disclosure (quite understandable given some of the stuff he's had thrown at him) over paying full-price for stuff. Maybe this will catch on?

Cheers,
B-D.

Blue-deviled

1st September 2013, 03:59 PM

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 04:08 PM

One thing we both agreed upon is that the quality of woodworking hand tools avaliable now has never been finer, quite possibly a golden age, with the best taken from traditional design and executed with modern manufacturing techniques and materials.

Hi Josh

No argument from me.

I put this hand tool renaissance down to the demand from the Nouveau Gentlemen woodworker, with their eye set on a idealised goal that rather than pure practicality. Much like their classical counterpart the Nouveau Gentlemen woodworkers have no need for their tools to earn a living but rather their practical craft as I see it is almost purely an aesthetic endeavour, an escape from hub bub of the day whether it be in the 1800's or 2013; a return to something that is tangible, with its merits earned from their own hands, taking responsibility for quality.

Yes and no.

Some of the finest furniture today is being built by amateurs, not pros. Take away the pressure exerted by time constraints, and put tools into the hands of some talented individuals, and there are no boundaries. Jim Krenov pointed this out frequently, and called himself an amateur.

On the other hand, there is no doubt that there are many who do not have lofty ambitions and just enjoy mucking about in the shed. The insinuation is that the "hand tool renaissance" has the more affluent of these people in mind, and also the intention to sway the others in that direction. I think that this is an exaggeration of what is taking place.

Firstly, while there must be a demand and a market in order for tool companies to get off the ground and prosper, equally they would not last long if their products were not genuine advances over the past - there are simply too many vintage tools lying about. In this age of instant intercontinental communication deception would be rapidly discovered. The question is, if the buying public are so gullible, what is to stop them buying the crappy tools as much as the "good" ones? Whom are they to believe if advertising is biased? I believe woodworkers are becoming more sophisticated about hand tools as their interest in this area increases (and whether this is a fad is not the issue).

Secondly, many of the tasks that were completed 100 years ago by hand are no longer done so that way today. For a good reason - inefficiency and increasing demands for higher standards - while expecting lower costs! What I am getting at is that progress in hand tools has come about in response to public demand but offers technology and materials that were not available until recently.

None of this detracts from the truth that hand tools require hand skills, and that a skilled worker can make anything work.

Regards from Perth

Derek

IanW

1st September 2013, 04:10 PM

......So, what would you rather use for dovetails if not a fretsaw?....

Don't know about Ray, but this is my favourite weapon for hogging out waste: -

283427

I made it a 10 inch, 15 thou thick (so it slips into the finest saw kerf) x 5mm wide blade, & gave it 15 tpi. Won't turn as sharply as a fret saw, so requires two cuts:

283428 283429

The bowsaw cuts much faster than any fret or coping saw blade I've met.. I aim to leave just enough wood so that two hits with the chisel from each side finishes the job. One cut just in front of the scribe line to remove the bulk, and another with the chisel inserted in the scribe line:

283430

Flip the piece; repeat; done. The old cabinetmaker who showed me this way insisted it was the 'only' way to do it. It isn't, of course, but after some lots of practice, it works well enough for me... :U

Cheers,

derekcohen

1st September 2013, 04:23 PM

Christopher Schwarz has been most entertaining with full disclosure (quite understandable given some of the stuff he's had thrown at him) over paying full-price for stuff. Maybe this will catch on?

Hi BD

There is a similar statement on my website.

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/Statement.html

Keep in mind that Chris writes quite different reviews to my own. His are a quick look. Mine are investigative and long (obsessionally so in an effort to achieve objectivity). They are intended as information where I expect readers to make up their own minds.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Edited as someone took a rhetorical statement literally!

pmcgee

1st September 2013, 05:00 PM

Should I stop writing them ?
Please yourself is always best, I think.
Paul

RayG

1st September 2013, 06:03 PM

Hi Ray

Just to answer to this point. The deflection may look that way (loose blade), but that was the frame deflecting. I really tried to put as much tension into both blades as possible. They were maxed out. I had my spinach and I'm not that weak ..:U

So, what would you rather use for dovetails if not a fretsaw?

Regards from Perth

Derek

Hi Derek,

I have an eclipse coping saw that seems to do the job, although I've done precious little for a while now, ever since I got seduced by the even darker side of metal working. :)

Josh did say something about vanishingly small pins, that is where the pins are just the width of the saw kerf. My objection to the use of a jewellers saw ( I'm not calling it a fretsaw ) is the blades are so fine that they tend to break too easily when cutting 1/2" timber. Although I did notice the blades you are using seem a lot heavier, almost like a coping saw blade.

I might be obsessive, but I sharpen the eclipse coping saw blades you can buy at bunnies.. they are so badly punched that they are borderline unusable...., a light touch up and they are ok.. however there's no way I could sharpen a 50 tpi vallorbe...

Regards
Ray

hiroller

1st September 2013, 10:47 PM

pmcgee

2nd September 2013, 01:26 AM

Yes ... Is there a modern bit-brace?
Paul

jimbur

2nd September 2013, 12:58 PM

Hi Derek, I'm not sure I can agree with you about gullibility. Most of us are gullible to some extent. There can't be many who can go to the bottom of their toolboxes and don't find some impulse buy that is either useless or unnecessary. The very fact that brands like Stanley have managed to survive their hopeless quality years argues the case of advertising success.
So many tools nowadays have safety warnings enjoining us to wear safety goggles etc. Perhaps there should also be a warning advising that the purchase of a tool will not guarantee skill in its use without practice.:D
As far as fretsaws go I notice that in most cases the interface between wood and worker is still an eclipse blade!
On the subject of reviews - I believe the success or otherwise of a review is demonstrated by the response, heated or otherwise, to it. This thread is now on its fourth page so it can't be bad can it?

Blue-deviled

2nd September 2013, 05:10 PM

Hi BD

There is a similar statement on my website.

http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/Statement.html

Keep in mind that Chris writes quite different reviews to my own. His are a quick look. Mine are investigative and long (obsessionally so in an effort to achieve objectivity). They are intended as information where I expect readers to make up their own minds.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Edited as someone took a rhetorical statement literally!

I was meaning that for a while Chris was stating on pretty well every post which involved new items, that he pays for everything himself, and at a full market price. I suppose that in such a situation, the only impartiality that one could be accused of after spending some hard-earned cash, is having a certain allegiance to its worth - and hence, being disgruntled or otherwise (gruntled?) if whatever purchased isn't up to the standard or function expected:U

derekcohen

2nd September 2013, 05:37 PM

I was meaning that for a while Chris was stating on pretty well every post which involved new items, that he pays for everything himself, and at a full market price. I suppose that in such a situation, the only impartiality that one could be accused of after spending some hard-earned cash, is having a certain allegiance to its worth - and hence, being disgruntled or otherwise (gruntled?) if whatever purchased isn't up to the standard or function expected:U

Hi BD

I would disagree with the payment = impartiality equation. It is not about payment for a tool; it is about demonstrating objectivity when evaluating the tool in question. I explained this in the statement (http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/Statement.html) on my website. Unfortunately, this is not universally understood. Secondly, Chris does not do comparative testing, and this does make a difference since he then does not have to reach a conclusion regarding differences and preferences. And thirdly, I do not receive tools for reviews, and I do not take on tools for reviewing. With Lee Valley they arrive for pre-production or pre-release feedback. Chris is similarly involved with LN.

It is quite likely that I shall stop writing further reviews. They are simply take too much time and energy (I would have spent about 30+ hours preparing the recent article on the Veritas Shooting Plane), and while they seem to provide many with the information they want to make choices and decisions, and others with education, there is fallout from the one or two trolls that decide they have a bone to pick with me over them. What happens then is that the toolmakers and the forums become innocent victims. The reason that Chris has a warning is for the same reason - he does them with the same intention as I do, that is, to disseminate information about something we are privileged to know about. But there are too many green-eyed monsters out there. I would not be surprised if Chris packs it in as well. It's just too hard. Read about it in the magazines from now on.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Colin62

2nd September 2013, 07:09 PM

I've been following this thread, but haven't chipped in till now, as I haven't wanted to get embroiled in an argument that seemed to be brewing.

Derek, I for one will miss your reviews if you were to stop doing them. I enjoy reading your comments and like the fact that you try to understand the tools you are using at a deeper level than most. Personally I don't care if someone is given a tool to review or if they paid for it, as long as the reader realises that at the end of the day, any review is just one person's opinion.

If I can draw a comparison to motor journalism, the accepted norm is that the manufacturer provides a car for testing. The novelty of Jeremy Clarkson and his Top Gear team was that they were as outspoken as possible when reviewing cars, and were prepared to source cars at their own expense to test. That system works to a point, but even though they claim to be totally impartial, they have their own bias, and their tests could hardly be described as completely objective.

Very few of us will spend hard earned cash on something we haven't tried for ourselves, and if we do, it won't be based on only one review. Anyone who rushes out and blows money based only on internet hype is likely to disappointed from time to time, and no doubt will learn their lesson sooner or later.

Mike B

2nd September 2013, 07:17 PM

Hi Derek,

Genuinely sorry to hear you are considering this.

I'd hate to think the dribble from a small number of conspiracy trolls could get so much traction - particularly considering the body of work you've created so far. Without exception, every time I've read someone try and play the man - as it were - they invariably descend into behaviour that undermines their own argument and exposes their motivation.

Of course if the enjoyment you get out of preparing and sharing your observations is outweighed by the envious rants of a few small men well then that's entirely your call! It has to be fun and there are plenty of other things to write about.

I_wanna_Shed

2nd September 2013, 08:07 PM

Derek,

I will miss reading your reviews if you decide to stop them. Any review takes an amount of time which everyone is becoming short of. Thanks for the mass of time, effort and money you have put into them.

Generally, I love reading reviews and yes, even any 'propaganda' distributed by manufacturers or people who are paid by or obviously linked to manufacturers. Not that I am implying that your reviews are linked to these.

Buyer beware - that's what my dad told me when I cycled off to my first garage sale when I was about 8.

I'll finish with this: if only the biggest problem I had in my life was worrying about if someone received a free festool bumper sticker for reviewing a domino for example, my wife and I would be much less stressed! Seriousness of life makes me chuckle....

Nathan.

behai

3rd September 2013, 01:00 AM

Good evening Derek,

I would really miss your reviews too. As a beginner, I found them very informative and educational. I have read a few of yours and a few of Chris'. I could actually see the difference in the structure of Chris and yours -- as you have pointed out.

Thank you for all of your works. I am sure I will come back to them from times to times.

Best regards.

...behai.

Blue-deviled

3rd September 2013, 06:17 PM

[QUOTE=derekcohen;1692017]Hi BD

I would disagree with the payment = impartiality equation. It is not about payment for a tool; it is about demonstrating objectivity when evaluating the tool in question. I explained this in the statement (http://www.inthewoodshop.com/ToolReviews/Statement.html) on my website. Unfortunately, this is not universally understood.

Hey Derek,

I don't agree with it either, but this is about what is perceived to be impartial, rather than the reviewer's standards. Personally, if there's a statement at the start of a review stating any link or otherwise to a reviewed product, and then the review, no reasonable person could complain. However, if, for example a policeman accepted a free cup of coffee from a shop, I'm sure that it wouldn't impair their judgement or their quality of work. It's just that the act can be percieved to be less than ideal.

It is quite likely that I shall stop writing further reviews. They are simply take too much time and energy (I would have spent about 30+ hours preparing the recent article on the Veritas Shooting Plane), and while they seem to provide many with the information they want to make choices and decisions, and others with education, there is fallout from the one or two trolls that decide they have a bone to pick with me over them.

30+ hours! Ruddy heck! That's an awful amount of time you could have spent making furniture, cakes etc. Nobody could accuse you of trying to fudge the results if it took that long:U I say ignore these trolls, and enjoy yourself.

Cheers,
B-D.

derekcohen

3rd September 2013, 06:26 PM

Dear friends

I deeply appreciate your messages of support. I shall explain the context as briefly as I can as I do not want this thread to be about me. It is intended to be about sharing information, and how to evaluate its worth.

The timing of Peter's remarks about my reviews along with the comment by BD about Chris Schwarz' declaration had a lot to do with my earlier comment regarding the writing, or not, of future reviews. I've been writing reviews and posting them here for over 10 years. When I began contributing to some of the US forums, several years ago, I came in for a lambasting from the trolls. It was a case of either give it up or fight back. I decided that I would not allow these louts to win, and just became even more bloody-minded than ever. Over time the trollish behaviour lessened, however it never went away. I just had to learn to stand up for myself when it did occur. Over the years I have received a large amount of messages urging me to ignore the trolls and keep writing.

Last week I posted a review of the Veritas shooting plane. The article had a good reception on several forums because it contained the type of information that I knew many readers wanted to hear about. On Wood Central one troll - well known for his ultimate trollishness - literally took over the forum for two days with the most insulting comments. One might argue that you should not feed a troll, but this troll is bright enough to make comments that demand a response. He had everyone, including Rob Lee, hopping for days. He tried this on Saw Mill Creek as well. SMC simply banned him. Finally WC banned him as well. However he surfaced under a second name. This was discovered, he was again disconnected .... and he returned once more! He had the chutzpah to maintain his email address alongside this alias! Clearly, he was throwing down the gauntlet. He's gone .. for a time. No doubt he will again return.

Here is the link (a number of posts of his were removed, but there is still a lot): The Veritas Shooting Plane - Reviewed (http://www.woodcentral.com/woodworking/forum/handtools.pl/page/1/md/read/id/469361/sbj/the-veritas-shooting-plane-reviewed/) (look for Charles, or Charles Stanford). It would be amusing it it were not so irritating.

At the end of all this, which coincided with this thread, it had been pressing on me that it is all very well that I can deal with the nonsense of such trolls, however it is not just about what I am prepared to do - there is a outfall on the forum management, the forum members, and the tool companies involved. That is the last thing I would want. I just cannot in good conscience subject others to these conflicts anymore. So at this stage I am undecided whether to write more reviews at all, whether I do but simply do not post them to forums, or whether the show should go on as before.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Berlin

3rd September 2013, 09:37 PM

I read the first half dozen posts of this thread and then left it, I don't enjoy the argy-bargy. I only looked in now because the thread seemed to be wracking up more posts than it deserved, frankly.

Derek, I hope you do keep up your reviews, I think they're great even though I don't own anything you've covered. I can see though from the shooting plane BS that the grief you get might not be worth it. It would completely suck the fun out of it for me!

But hey, 'haters gonna hate', just keep in mind that a troll is a badge of honour for bloggers.

:) Matt

artme

3rd September 2013, 11:01 PM

Troll = supercilious smart ar5e. Right?

Nuff said.

Derek your reviews are always more than what they appear to be at face value.

I would love to have a collection of fine hand tools but I can neither afford them nor really need them.

It is a bit like looking for a new house, or car. You choose the best you can afford. However,
the reviews and research you do will inform your choice.

This is why I really appreciate your reviews. They inform me about more than the tool being reviewed
and they do it extremely well.

artme

3rd September 2013, 11:17 PM

I'll take some enodomorphins with my innate objects... but I'll stick to my found on the footpath coping saw.

Brilliant comment Berlin!!:clap::clap::clap:

yowie

4th September 2013, 04:46 PM

I agree with the last few posts, I would miss your reviews as I learn from them, whether or not I am going to buy said tool.

Most people can see a troll for what they are and ignore them. A troll would not diminish my view of a company, forum or reviewer. I can make up my own mind.

Sincerely,
Yowie.

camoz

4th September 2013, 06:35 PM

So at this stage I am undecided whether to write more reviews at all, whether I do but simply do not post them to forums, or whether the show should go on as before.

Derek,

To be honest I wasn't certain if the above was written to encourage a response, or simply a statement, but I figured if you didn't want any input then you would simply have waited, made your decision, and then perhaps listed your reasons for your decision, so I will assume you are OK with responses.

Hopefully this doesn't come through as too harsh, but I personally think you need to use the fact that you are a psychologist to take a step back, remove the emotion and analyse what is going on and why. This may help you to make the decision, and perhaps help you to decide if changes are needed. I think you are experiencing "trolling", but I also think you may have some people raising some legitimate concerns. You need to realize that you have reached a position that means that you can influence people, and so people will want to understand your motives and make sure you are not taking advantage of people on the forum. The fact that after talking to Lee, Knew Concepts would go to the effort of sending you a prototype titanium saw of your suggested design is evidence enough that you have influence, or at least that they think you have influence.

You have already stated that it takes about 30hrs to do a review, which is a substantial amount of effort and time. Naturally anyone reading a review is going to ask themselves the question, what's in it for him. Now hopefully it is because you love what you do, it’s a hobby in itself, and you want to share with others what you get excited about, but you of all people (given you are a psychologist), know that people will wonder if there are ulterior motives. Is this person doing this because he gets free tools, because reps take him out to lunch, dinner, to the footy, pay for trips and or accommodation to events, pay him money, or to get traffic to his personal website for present and/or future benefit (e.g. AdSense), etc., etc. Unfortunately it certainly wouldn’t be the first time this happened.

Do you partake in any or the above....you have stated you get free tools and that is the extent of it, so hopefully that is the case. Is it wrong to do so, if you disclose it...well that is open to opinion. The problem is it's all a grey area and opinions vary on what is acceptable and what isn't. Personally I would say being given the tool is probably OK, but then if you start giving bad reviews, how long would it be before parcels stop showing up at your door (you have to remember at the end of the day you are getting these items from a company, and it's right that they do what is in their best interest, and bad reviews are not good business). Does this affect your review...hopefully not, but people will naturally question if it does.

Some would say it is OK to get some footy tickets, because after all you are going to be discussing what new products are coming up at the game, right. Some would say it's right that I have my own website, and that I get paid if someone comes to my website and then clicks on a link that takes them to someone else's website (after all it costs money to run a website). You see how this can become a very slippery slope.

I have worked in retail for many years, and you will be surprised how many things people will justify to themselves as not being underhanded, even failing to disclose gifts, because in their head it isn't money, so it doesn't need to be disclosed.

Again, I want to be careful to ensure that I make it clear that I am not accusing you of doing anything underhanded, but I do hope it gives you a chance to see things from the other side of the fence, and perhaps help you understand some questions that have been raised in the past.

The problem is you have done reviews now for 10 years, and you have clearly built up a reputation, and the longer you do it, the more people will want to investigate into how impartial your opinions actually are, and of cause you will attract more idiots who are just "trolling", that is just the nature of the beast I am afraid.

Hope this helps, and I don't get labelled as a "troll":U.

Cheers,

Camo

Mr Brush

4th September 2013, 06:51 PM

Gosh - and to think I bought one of these saws mainly because it was red.....:no:

Old gunnie

4th September 2013, 10:21 PM

I like what Mr Brush said - he bought it because it was red. I'd buy one because it's teknicool lookin', but I'd justify the purchase by saying it's a better tool that will help my limited skills do a better job (rightly or wrongly being somewhat immaterial).

In a previous job, for a while we mostly only used snapon tools, and we bought a LOT of snapon tools (think thousands of techos). The reasoning was a better tool is easier to use, less likely to fail and less likely to damage equipment, and in my experience this was quite true. The counter argument though was the up-front and replacement cost (lots got stolen).

I've got a number of Carter planes I'm rehabing (and Falcon/Pope) - flatten and square, new blade, clean up frog and other bearing surfaces. First one has come up nice and works fine, BUT, when working I always reach for the bedrocks or the lie-nielson, 'cause they just seem to be a bit nicer to use and work a bit better.

We each have our preferences and limitations. My choice of tools - both as purchases and for use - reflects this. (I've bought expensive tools I don't use at all, and others I cannot live without).

I've read most of Dereks reviews, and care if he continues doing them. If he gets to keep some of the reviewed tools, or some other benefit, so be it. So long as I'm aware of the possibility of bias I can factor for it - I do so every day in adds all over the place. (and for the record, I've not seen any particular bias myself, though I recognise the possibility of it being there.)

Oh, and I like Chris Vesper tools, and I'd LOVE a Marcou plane. So there!

Cheers
OG

camoz

5th September 2013, 04:15 PM

Derek,

I wanted to add further to this question of impartiality in relation to reviews, and how it is not only important to try to be as impartial as possible, but also often to be seen as impartial, due to the fact that readers are inherently suspicious (or at least should be), as to the motives of the author, when reading a review.

I want to bring it up here, as I think your review of the Knew Concept Fretsaw could be a good case study of were the line is and perhaps areas were people looking to review tools need to be careful, and IMO avoid. Again I apologise if you take this as a personal attack, and I must agree (given that I am using your review as a case study), it could be perceived that way, but I figure if you were concerned about people discussing your perception of impartiality, you certainly would not have placed a link suggesting people go to another forum to look at the recent criticism you had received relating to your Veritas Shooting Plane review. I also feel you did open a door when you linked to your website your "statements about reviews", as it definitely gives your side as far your perception of how impartial your reviews are, and of cause as you added a link to your very review I wish to discuss.

To be honest I think you may have crossed the line with this review, particularly when you received the new and improved fret saw, based on your design criteria, and then commented on its performance under the heading of a “review”, but again it is in that grey area were opinions will differ, and it depends heavily on what ones definition is of a “review”. Personally I see a review as nothing more than an opinion, but unfortunately in your “statements about reviews” (on your website), I think you set your own bar too high when you say things like “setting up a research design that creates a level playing field”, you push the definition further towards a scientific definition (which of cause is only natural given the fact that you are a psychologist), but in doing so people will naturally want to shine the light a little brighter at you, and IMO given this, they have a right to.

As you know ideally to draw scientific conclusions it is best to lead a double blind experiment (the double blind meaning neither the subject nor the persons administering the experiment know the critical aspects of the experiment) with a control, but in the case of a review of a tool, we all know this would be virtually impossible, so we compromise on scientific principles from the very beginning.

So when I am looking at someone’s review, what am I hoping that they will do, to try to remain as impartial as possible? Well I think you said it best “‘are you aware of your bias?’ and ‘what do you do to control your bias?”. You definitely realise that being given the tool for free could potentially have an impact, who isn’t going to get excited about getting a free tool, especially when it comes to you in the mail, and it’s just like Christmas as you unwrap the present (I’m sure as a psychologist you would be very aware of how powerful this alone could be), but I worry that based on your Fretsaw review, that there are some influences that you may not be seeing that could be dramatically affecting your impartiality. Unfortunately in my opinion disclosure just isn’t enough, people who do reviews (especially people who do a lot), need to constantly take a long hard look at themselves and honestly ask the question, am I being influenced, and if so, how and what am I going to do, to either avoid that influence, or make sure it doesn’t impact on my reviews.

I think your biggest problem with the Fretsaw “review” is you didn’t start out with a product to review. You were searching for something to do a job, as you go through you are influenced by different factors, until eventually you had become so involved (as opposed to impartial) that you actually started designing your own solutions (which couldn’t be any less biased). It would have made a great forum post, but you were the last person that should have been reviewing it, and so it was a terrible review. I think you just got way too involved, and needed to go back and read your own statement about reviews again (as you know a good scientist will always check his experiment before releasing his results).

Derek, some may say I am being really harsh in my assessment, but I am doing this for 4 main reasons. Firstly you are at a crossroads, and you have said you may stop doing reviews or “continue on as before”, if you do continue on, I hope you will see this as constructive criticism and your reviews will benefit from it. Secondly you have been doing reviews for 10 years, and so you need to be held to a higher standard (just as a cabinet maker would receive more criticism for listing a video showing unsafe work practices, than someone new to woodworking). Thirdly you are a psychologist so I know you will take the time to recognise your error, and why it is important to be impartial. And lastly because I fear that some of these people that you refer to as “Trolls” are being incorrectly portrayed as such (don’t get me wrong I think you have been a victim of “Trolling”), but I think you might be so conditioned to defend yourself that you have written them off without investigating their concerns.

Cheers,

Camo

derekcohen

5th September 2013, 05:34 PM

Hoo Boy! Camoz, the reason I did not reply to your first post was that I did not wish to make this thread one about defending my review or my name. I thought that I had done enough of that already, and it was time to either move on or return the topic to that of fretsaws. You are persistent, very persistent, and I do view you crossing the line into trolling.

Your comments/observations go beyond the reasonable to the extreme, such as they are not just an exaggeration of my intentions, but make my efforts look inadequate. For example, "As you know ideally to draw scientific conclusions it is best to lead a double blind experiment (the double blind meaning neither the subject nor the persons administering the experiment know the critical aspects of the experiment) with a control, but in the case of a review of a tool, we all know this would be virtually impossible, so we compromise on scientific principles from the very beginning."

The following comment is just utter nonsense as it twists and disregards anything I stated. "So when I am looking at someone’s review, what am I hoping that they will do, to try to remain as impartial as possible? Well I think you said it best “‘are you aware of your bias?’ and ‘what do you do to control your bias?”. You definitely realise that being given the tool for free could potentially have an impact, who isn’t going to get excited about getting a free tool, especially when it comes to you in the mail, and it’s just like Christmas as you unwrap the present (I’m sure as a psychologist you would be very aware of how powerful this alone could be), but I worry that based on your Fretsaw review, that there are some influences that you may not be seeing that could be dramatically affecting your impartiality."

This is trolling pure-and-simple. Nevertheless I shall make these points in answer to you:

1. The reviews you refer to (Knew Concepts and Veritas Shooting Plane) contain the most clearcut statements from me about my involvement with their companies. If you can be more explicit than I have been I would dearly love to know how! I leave the reader with absolutely no doubt that my involvement with the tools were part of their development in some way. Good grief!

2. My link to the "statement" on my website is to emphasise the above - this is really for those readers that have not had much, or any, contact with me on the forums. Many (most?) readers have a decent appreciation for the fact that I have some involvement with the design/production process of some tools, and how I am connected. I say so all the time. For those that do not get this, there is the statement on my website.

3. I make every effort to rise above my bias - which of course I admit to having - and do so in a way that demonstrates to the reader exactly what I see and experience with a tool by sharing the microscope (i.e. photos) with everyone. Indeed, I go to extreme lengths in this regard, to the point of being pedantically obsessional! Double blind experiments! Get real! :U
The scientific process does not mean rigidly following experimental methodology that exists in a science laboratory. It means following a methodology that facilitates a level playing field (aka objectivity), where others can repeat what you have done and thereby check what you have done. Double-blind indeed!

4. You wrote, "You definitely realise that being given the tool for free could potentially have an impact, who isn’t going to get excited about getting a free tool, especially when it comes to you in the mail, and it’s just like Christmas as you unwrap the present". Not only is this likely to be a projection of how you would react, but it contains an untruth in your implication that I receive free tools from companies. I do not receive "Christmas presents". The tools are working tools, used for feedback. Some are pre-production and some are seconds with cosmetic flaws. Some start as plastic from a printer.

5. I am no longer at the crossroads. My concern was for the impact of trolls on the management of forums and the tool companies. I have spoken with a few - spoke yesterday with - corresponded with forums such as Wood Central, and companies such a Lee Valley. All were adamant that they were not inconvenienced. Therefore I will continue writing reviews. The messages of support I received here - and private emails - also strengthened my resolve to continue ... because there are readers who appreciate the information and are capable of making up their own minds.

6. Lastly, you need to understand why I do the reviews (which make up a tiny proportion of my writings): One of my strong interests is design, both of furniture and of tools. My website reflects this. I have always thought how fortunate I am, and my unique position, by having access to so many special tools. My only interest is to share my experiences and knowledge with others.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Mike B

5th September 2013, 06:25 PM

...And lastly because I fear that some of these people that you refer to as “Trolls” are being incorrectly portrayed as such (don’t get me wrong I think you have been a victim of “Trolling”), but I think you might be so conditioned to defend yourself that you have written them off without investigating their concerns.

Camo

No, there's no worthwhile matter of opinion about this. What/who you are trying to defend is absolutely trolling. The intent, content and context of these recent posts all fall under the current classification.

That so much of this was set off because of a little video really demonstrates how insidious something like envy can be - it doesn't go away unless you face it head-on. I have no issue with the thread running on.

As for the rest that wall of text, Derek has pretty much shot that lot down IMHO....

FenceFurniture

5th September 2013, 06:55 PM

Chrissakes, it's only a $200 saw isn't it? I do NOT understand what all the fuss is about.

Anyone aware of the hourly rate for medical professionals would realise that this is but a storm in a teacup.

As for some of the ascerbic remarks made all I can say is that there are those who need to learn the polite way of disagreeing, and get over being grumpy. If you think there is a better or just as good tool for less dough then fine - use it, but don't get all over someone about such a pissant little thing as this $200 saw. I remember a discussion in a not dissimilar vein (although there was no personal attack involved) about a $3 plane blade cover. THREE MISERABLE BUCKS!!! Is that REALLY worth going to the trouble of starting a thread about??!

The way some people carry on over such trivial matters beggars belief, and I note that there is an absentee from the current fracas (dunno why, this is very fertile ground for him and his unpleasant presence was noted on another forum in a discussion about the Shooter).

Did someone mention Adam Savage?