Woods that pair well. Or, too much; too little?

[hbmcc]

I am struggling with a species combination problem. 

We can use one. We can use two species. And, even get away with three in a piece of furniture ... but, only if the third is less than a third; like, a tiny accent. About one square inch, total, of a piece with many, many square inches. Let's not go into four and more species, because those are something completely different....

Jeez, just putting this down is a bucket of snakes, worms, and monkeys!

Okay, woods that pair well. I have a short list of: 

• walnut and maple
  
• white oak and walnut
  
• cherry and maple (Looks good, sort of... I don't have cherry.)
  
• red oak and white ash
  
• mahogany and cherry (Really? Red and red?)
  
• mahogany and curly maple
  

I want Walnut and Maple. Quilted/Curly Maple. I have all this Western Big-leaf figured stuff, and some straight hard maple legs, for the diminutive Shaker style side tables, to be parked in the living room. The subject of this post, is a little brother that is 12-inches square--the top--standing 23 to 24 inches tall. I have been all over the place with this little cuss. It needs to be fragile, like the shaker (sort of) candle stand it will replace. It will sit next to a 90-odd-year-old wing back, pink velour (dusty-rose) arm chair that really needs help. 

This design--brain stuff, right now--started with a Maple "box" perched on four Walnut spider legs. But for me crazy grain can be too much. I like crazy as a surface. One surface. So my waterfall scheme went into the Great Desert. Maybe....? My great Boeing Surplus purchase of a hunk of 2x 13+ x 27 (inches) Walnut back when there was a Surplus Store will actually be enough to include 3-inch aprons/drawer face, and the four legs I started with. There is nothing thrilling about the Walnut. Just enough to keep me out of trouble at the hardwood store.

So, I see three concerns. Will everyday Walnut pair with a 12 inch surface of boiling maple grain chatoyance? Second, will a 12-inch square of Maple be OK with a Walnut base? Third, will this be enough difference to live with 2 other side tables of same design in the same room--with boiling maple chatoyance?

Thoughts? Ridicule? It's welcome. Thanks, too. 
Bruce

[blackhat]

I think it will be fine, I like a walnut and maple combination.  Come to that I like maple walnut ice cream too.  But first blush says those aprons are too deep for the rest of the piece.

[MattP]

The color scheme of your design seems fine to me--it's maple and walnut, a classic pairing like beer and cheese. Impossible not to like, imo.

Maple, being maple, is going to look good with pretty much any wood that doesn't look like maple. I might not pair it with, say, ash, or birch (yawn) but absolutely anything mid tone to dark is gonna look fine. Maple is pretty much like a white shirt--it goes with anything; it even would go with white pants, in terms of color matching, you'd just look like John Travolta's bad decision if you wore them together.

Just today I was rummaging around in my off cuts and found a scrap of tulip wood that I might be able to get a couple block plane cheeks out of. I held it up next to the maple I have been planning for the main body, and yowsa. It's going to look really cool if the tulip wood turns out to be thick enough after dimensioning.

I wouldn't hesitate to pair maple with any of the darker woods we like--cherry, mahogany, paduak, wenge, bubinga, sapele the list goes on.

But a good pairing doesn't have to be high contrast; a good pairing can come from two woods that have a common characteristic, or a common undertone. Mahogany and Paduak look good together, and that's a pretty low contrast pairing; I have some of both I have paired up to make a plane out of (after I learn how with the maple). Mahogany and wenge look good together--wenge, IMO, is kind of the opposite of Maple; it's the basic black that matches everything (assuming, like me, you don't have an ebony budget). I have some wenge veneer I am excited about using as accents on something walnut--no firm plans, but I held them up together and swooned.

If mahogany were a woman, I'd marry her. By far, my favorite wood. But, I have to confess, if I were married to mahogany I would cheat on her with kotibe. Have you seen it? It's kind of hard to explain, and I've never actually seen the straight grain version, but I have some fiddleback kotibe veneer I am saving for my dream tool cabinet, which I'm going to make with cherry, kotibe and the rest of the imbuya veneer. Kotibe is  sort of in the cherry family of colors--a lot of red and orangey stuff happening. It'll yield be a nice low contrast pairing.

My first go at veneering (I ruined it) was a small $5 night table I got off craigs list for the purpose of learning to veneer. I paired the Kotibe with Imbuya, which some people apparently call Brazilian Walnut. So, yeah, I went there: cherry-like and walnut-like woods paired together.

Here's a picture of the botched job, just to show the woods together (although I dyed this kotibe, I tried to only highlight, not change, its tones, so this is pretty accurate):

   

I'm sort of evangelical about the idea of low contrast pairings; I don't think people do it often enough. When it's successful, it's a really sophisticated and elegant look. The Maple/Walnut light/dark pairings are a bit on the brash side. I like them, too. I just did a couple cheese boards out of that combination, because it's what I had in scrap. But a good low contrast pairing, imo, requires a subtler and more discerning eye.

[hbmcc]

This table is based on one Peckovich did for FWW. The table could go with shorter aprons. Maybe, 2.5 inch (1/8 ht.). However, I keep trying to push it deeper, 6 inches (two drawers) for more mass; like a Krenov lilliputian, which has me running away screaming. 3-inch is a nice 3rd of a 9-inch apron. And, gives me a drawer to play with. Besides, Wife will pile plenty of mass onto it. Maybe a handkerchief doily, too. 

Matt, your favorites are a morph of mahogany and walnut. Kotibe must be moisture resistant. A search yields brushes and pocket/pruning/working knives. No, I don't know Kotibe. But it carries the air of the others. You would like African mahogany, too.

I have put my interests into local species.

[Mike Brady]

Reckless pairing of woods is a common occurrence in hobbyist woodworking projects, as is the use of overly-figured woods.  I have a woodworker friend who makes every project from curly maple, whether it is Shaker. Mid-Century modern, Queen Anne, whatever.  He is quick to punish others who use straight-grain species, saying they wasted their time and skill on whatever it was they made.  Many of the most-successful career cabinet and chair makers shun fancy woods.  I heard Bryan Boggs say he talks customers off of overly figured woods because the result can actually distract from the intended expression of the piece.  Figure does have an important place in many applications: guitar making, veneering of certain period furniture styles, ray flake figure in Arts and Crafts furniture are a few examples.

When pairing is desirable, the ones you suggested are good.  Just don't go crazy and put purple heart with curly maple, for example.  Pairing of flat-sawn species such as birch and walnut can be very handsome.  Let your workmanship stand out and you won't need the distraction of curly this or that.

[Aram]

Reckless pairing of woods is a common occurrence in hobbyist woodworking projects, as is the use of overly-figured woods.  

I agree, and would add that obvious contrast is easy, and probably as a result, overused. It doesn't suit every piece. Sometimes it hurts the eyes. Finding subtler, complementary species is a lot harder.

[hbmcc]

On pairing and subtlety, I see a lot of neutral (black paint, or charcoal) supporting two contrasting surfaces; one is the accent wood. Side and hall tables are commonly done this way; I would guess to conceal the MDF base for veneers, besides cheaper timber. 

I think my proposed Walnut base serves the same purpose. It could be too much contrast. So, maybe I should use a simple burnt umber stain on the walnut, rather than a wild guitar-back formulation. The straight grain should keep the base part modest, also. The curly maple top: Water-base poly looks so anemic. For me, this is the tanned vs ghost look. The natural amber of solvent base poly gives wood life. And argument can be made for blending the two hues(?) instead of shock contrast. It also has far better shelf life than water-base poly. 

I am a polyurethane fan. There are so many ways it can be applied to wood. So many nuances. My wife doesn't like gloss clear. Neither, I. However, I tend to use the satin to fog-out underlying grain. And there is always a Gold Bond Baby Powder feel to satin poly. Use it on stair railing to understand. Curly grain needs clear finish. Rub out goes with any finish I do, glare goes and sheen develops.

Even though MattB calls it a botched job, I would think a dark, flat base paint would reverse the "botch" designation in his side piece. He's experimenting and I am too. I will use mine, or burn it.

I think the Curly top will not be too much. Any fussing is a lot for a little piece.

[Bibliophile 13]

A couple things to keep in mind here:

- Walnut gets lighter as it ages, so even if there's a very stark contrast with the maple right now, the contrast will soften somewhat over the years. (This is one reason I don't approve of the walnut / white oak combination listed in the first post. White oak darkens over time, so after a few decades, there will hardly be any contrast at all. In some cases, the contrast will reverse itself, so that the walnut will be the lighter wood and the oak the darker wood.) The base will always be darker than the top, though.

- Walnut and maple is still a pretty bold contrast. I think your proposed pairing is just fine. Putting the lighter wood on top is, I think, the right choice. Just be aware that the eye will naturally be drawn to that light top, so it has to be really well executed--nicely proportioned and all that. The darker base will draw a lot less attention to itself.