Bear Claw or Antarctic Toothfish? I need help.

llwalsh

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2022
Messages
128
Reaction score
150
Location
San Antonio, Texas, USA
As I’ve been re-submerging myself into ukedom after ten plus years i find myself more interested in vintage ukes but am still looking for a new one made by an independent maker. I have my sights narrowing down now to a few, but as I’ve been looking at different makers and woods i keep seeing “bear claw” mentioned. I figured it was something to do with the overall design but never could figure it out intuitively and finally looked it up. So i see now it has to do with growth irregularities in the wood and the marks from it, as if a bear scratched up the tree (but not really). This leaves me wondering if calling it bear claw is similar to rebranding Antartic Toothfish into Chilean Sea Bass, in other words taking an inferior cut of wood and making it sound desirable. Can anyone shed light on this? Is bear claw wood purely an aesthetic choice or does it make a tonal difference? Should you be paying more or less for it?
Thanks!

🧸🌴🦞
 
I'm not a wood expert but I do know that straight grained Spruce has a desirable tone quality but not much for looks. Enter Bear Claw spruce with it unique markings gives spruce some character. Does it sound different... not sure but it looks cool. So if looks are a part of what you like in your uke then you pay for it. Kind of like straight grained koa and curly... does one sound better, not sure but I can tell you which looks best (and I like looks when it isn't at the expense of sound). Give me bear claw and curly koa any day!
 
Nah, I think it's just a description of the markings. Some people like it and some people don't, but it's not inferior.
 
As I’ve been re-submerging myself into ukedom after ten plus years i find myself more interested in vintage ukes but am still looking for a new one made by an independent maker. I have my sights narrowing down now to a few, as I’ve been looking at different makers and woods i keep seeing “bear claw” mentioned. I figured it was something to do with the overall design but never could figure it out intuitively and finally looked it up. So i see now it has to do with growth irregularities in the wood and the marks from it, as if a bear scratched up the tree (but not really). This leaves me wondering if calling it bear claw is similar to rebranding Antartic Toothfish into Chilean Sea Bass, in other words taking an inferior cut of wood and making it sound desirable. Can anyone shed light on this? Is bear claw wood purely an aesthetic choice or does it make a tonal difference? Should you be paying more or less for it?
Thanks!

🧸🌴🦞
A yearling newbie myself and no luthier, I am intrigued by tonewoods and have been looking up and learning about the different types we often see in ukuleles and guitars. I believe bearclaw sitka spruce is one of the finer spruces
 
The prices of wood are market driven. The concept of "should you be paying more for it" is a human response which has few objective parameters.

If you want to compare straight grained spruce with bearclaw for tone, it is not really rocket science. You do need to do some intellectual work to learn the parameters and what makes spruce work as a tone wood.

It is said that Spruce is a good tone wood because of its stiffness to weigh ratio. So what does that mean?

This is a link to a wood Database: https://www.wood-database.com/sitka-spruce/

You will notice that it does not have a parameter for stiffness. It does have a number for "Average Dry Weight" and its unit is Kg per cubic metre. The stiffness is measured using the Elastic Modulus and its units are Mega Pascals or Giga Pascals, its the amount of pressure needed to bend or snap a test piece, so it could be masure of stiffness? So these are the numbers which indicate stiffness and weight, which is what is supposed to drive one of the ability of a wood that makes it a good tonewood. For a way to get a better understanding of the relative benefits of Sitka Spruce, make a table showing all these number and units for tonewoods, koa, Tasmanian blackwood, Engellman spruce, mahagany(s), ebony, rosewood and so on and compare all the numbers. It is not rocket science, although there is some work in decoding the parameters and units.

If you can find he numbers for straight sitka spruce and bearclaw, you can scientifically pick if there is any difference.

However, I can't find those numbers. Maybe someone else will? Given the commercial interest in separating Bearclaw from straight sitka, it is very unlikely that no tests have ever been done. So I suspect that the test results don't show any marked difference, otherwise we would see comments like "BearClaw has a higher stiffness to weight ratio compared to Straight Sitka, here are the results to prove it". Instead we see comments which are closer to marketing hype than actual scientifically proven statements. Here are some links to commercial sellers pages:


For further study look at each parameter in the ToneWood data base. Read about it and learn how the tests are done to get the numbers and what it means for wood that is used to make a musical instrument. Most of the information is not rocket science, it just has some unfamiliar terminology. When you start to pick up the information, you also need to read all the posts and pages where this stuff is discussed and work out that sometimes it is best to just keep it for personal use and avoid getting into inane arguments on social media.

As was pointed out recently, I do delete my posts after a while. They are never intended to be long term informative posts to be used into the future as references. You need to find the credible resources like scientific papers and databases to explore this topic, not rely on anonymous posts on social media. You can even buy a nice hard copy book, the wood has not changed over the last 100 years.
That’s a lot of Rocket Science for this brain sturgeon! 🧠🐟
I absolutely appreciate the references and links, I’m asking this as some who still seeks to learn and going to the appropriate sources for links such as these. I hope you don’t delete this post, it has helpful information.
 
I'm not a wood expert but I do know that straight grained Spruce has a desirable tone quality but not much for looks. Enter Bear Claw spruce with it unique markings gives spruce some character. Does it sound different... not sure but it looks cool. So if looks are a part of what you like in your uke then you pay for it. Kind of like straight grained koa and curly... does one sound better, not sure but I can tell you which looks best (and I like looks when it isn't at the expense of sound). Give me bear claw and curly koa any day!
I do absolutely love the look of curly koa!
 
As for bear claw, I've heard both over the years - bear claw has better tonal properties, a dense straight grain has better tonal properties. It would be interesting to get some of the luthiers' opinions here. I like the look of bear claw very much. I have a spruce topped Taylor guitar that I've had for 30 years or so, that sounded much richer to me than the other ones the shop had of the same model when I was trying them out. It has a bear claw top, and I love it for that.
 
Good info on bear claw. I like his bottom line: "the reason to consider... is the looks".

I suspect that any difference in sound is miniscule if it exists... meaning IF you could play one with and one without from the same luthier made exactly the same (which is never the case), you might have a slight preference if you could tell a difference. But then, the person next to you would prefer the other. The manufacturer's skills and design would be the largest influence.

Same with straight grain versus highly figured wood. Chuck Moore says that "plain, non-figured wood with straight grain... will almost always be a better choice for an instrument", but many people listen with their eyes. The appearance matters (and sells).

Same if you look at Kanile'a ukuleles. Their top end (and most expensive) ukuleles are made with the wood that is highly figured (grade 5A koa). You pay more for more figured wood because it looks better, not because it sounds better. When they build their best ones, they also use their best or most innovative building techniques as well and so who knows if there is a noticeable difference in sound if they used a straight grain.

So, seems to not be inferior or superior as a wood choice. I would not be surprised if you pay more for the bear claw due to the cost of the wood but it may not be so. If you are shopping vintage ukuleles, seems to be a nonfactor on your decision.
 
To augment Bill's info, all of the tonewood information for stiffness and densities and so forth are averages or general numbers.
They change with specific trees, cuts, seasoning, and they can vary within the same tree.

In spruce tops, in general, a tighter straight grain is preferred over one that is wider spaced. It is usually older and more mature growth and denser and stiffer. Thus producing a "better" sound.

Yet, the spruce can look rather featureless and sometimes called boring looking. Enter Bear Claw Spruce. It adds something that breaks up the monotony of the large surface of very regular grain and is more visually appealing to many people. (Myself included.) I have not found that the striations degrade the sound in any way. (I haven't done any testing to verify that opinion.) It looks nice.

All of this is akin to the sound characteristics of various tonewoods. Koa and Mahogany is warm. Maple and Myrtle are bright. These are all very general classifications. That can vary greatly with each cut of wood. It gives you a rough starting point. There are all kinds of examples of woods defying the generally accepted views of the sound of a particular species of wood.

PS: Ilwalsh, I always thought the rebranding of Antartic Toothfish into Chilean Sea Bass to be one of the great, if somewhat misleading, marketing strategies ever.
 
Last edited:
To augment Bill's info, all of the tonewood information for stiffness and densities and so forth are averages or general numbers.
They change with specific trees, cuts, seasoning, and they can vary within the same tree.

In spruce tops, in general, a tighter straight grain is preferred over one that is wider spaced. It is usually older and more mature growth and denser and stiffer. Thus producing a "better" sound.

Yet, the spruce can look rather featureless and sometimes called boring looking. Enter Bear Claw Spruce. It adds something that breaks up the monotony of the large surface of very regular grain and is more visually appealing to many people. (Myself included.) I have not found that the striations degrade the sound in any way. (I haven't done any testing to verify that opinion.) It looks nice.

All of this is akin to the sound characteristics of various tonewoods. Koa and Mahogany is warm. Maple and Myrtle are bright. These are all very general classifications. That can vary greatly with each cut of wood. It gives you a rough starting point. There are all kinds of examples of woods defying the generally accepted views of the sound of a particular species of wood.

PS: Ilwalsh, I always thought the rebranding of Antartic Toothfish into Chilean Sea Bass to be one of the great, if somewhat misleading, marketing strategies ever.
Thanks for clarifying this in your reply, it makes much more sense now. I appreciate your input.

Yeah, right? Brilliant!
who wants to go get some tasty toothfish?!? Yum yum!
 
Top Bottom