I've been reading a lot of online articles etc. recently and it's become apparent that (like many things) there's a different culture to woodworking in the states. The big thing I've noticed is an almost total disconnect between ordinary commercial woodworking (Carpentry, Timber Framing and Joinery) and hobby woodworking and the woodworking press... When refering to professionals, the US woodworking media is almost invariably refering to things like bespoke cabinetry, which being artisans serving a specialized market, don't reflect the true nature of the industry.
What brought it home to me was a post on FWW which declared the Radial Arm Saw to be dead, and stated that in all the commercial environments that the author had visited, none of the 'shops' used one... What followed in the comments, (mixed in with a lot of highly enthusiastic people who'd been using RAS's since the dawn of time, and quite a lot of disinformation and vitriol from people who'd clearly either never used, or never been trained properly before using one) was a number of people employed in Framing or as "General Contractors" stating that they were reliant on their large RAS's, because of the sizes of the timber they work with and the kinds of joints they needed to cut accurately and repetitively (like birdsmouths)...
It also reflects the love affair that America has with both power tools and extreme polarisation of ideas, in that rarely is it ever discussed how to make a sensible choice between a machine vs hand tool approach, something which is essential to efficient, profitable working speeds. Either you cut it all on your table saw and with your router table or you delve into the cultish world of hand tool only work... By comparison, I frequently see posters of some considerable experience on here advising the use of both in the same job, attempting to recommend the easiest, quickest approach (the thread on cutting a chamfer ending in larks' tongues was a good example, with everything from jigs to drawknives suggested, including my personally favored idea of routing out the chamfer, stopping short of the mark, and forming the larks' tongues with a chisel or spokeshave).
Anyway, what do you think? Have you noticed a difference, or am I seeing things that aren't there?
What brought it home to me was a post on FWW which declared the Radial Arm Saw to be dead, and stated that in all the commercial environments that the author had visited, none of the 'shops' used one... What followed in the comments, (mixed in with a lot of highly enthusiastic people who'd been using RAS's since the dawn of time, and quite a lot of disinformation and vitriol from people who'd clearly either never used, or never been trained properly before using one) was a number of people employed in Framing or as "General Contractors" stating that they were reliant on their large RAS's, because of the sizes of the timber they work with and the kinds of joints they needed to cut accurately and repetitively (like birdsmouths)...
It also reflects the love affair that America has with both power tools and extreme polarisation of ideas, in that rarely is it ever discussed how to make a sensible choice between a machine vs hand tool approach, something which is essential to efficient, profitable working speeds. Either you cut it all on your table saw and with your router table or you delve into the cultish world of hand tool only work... By comparison, I frequently see posters of some considerable experience on here advising the use of both in the same job, attempting to recommend the easiest, quickest approach (the thread on cutting a chamfer ending in larks' tongues was a good example, with everything from jigs to drawknives suggested, including my personally favored idea of routing out the chamfer, stopping short of the mark, and forming the larks' tongues with a chisel or spokeshave).
Anyway, what do you think? Have you noticed a difference, or am I seeing things that aren't there?