Finishing cabinet question wood vs veener

[bldozier]

Hi im interested in the wood effect over the mdf, I have choosen aromatic eastern red cedar.
However, with using the paper or wood backed veener the application of paste or gel contact cement, seems messy
Would I see any benefit from using the 1/8 or 1/4" thick red cedar with 45 degree miter cuts over a veener,
Any pro an cons 1 vs the other thanks. I will anticipate your responses
Brian.

[Ed Zeppeli]

Hi im interested in the wood effect over the mdf, I have choosen aromatic eastern red cedar.
However, with using the paper or wood backed veener the application of paste or gel contact cement, seems messy
Would I see any benefit from using the 1/8 or 1/4" thick red cedar with 45 degree miter cuts over a veener,
Any pro an cons 1 vs the other thanks. I will anticipate your responses
Brian.

I just used wood glue and a roller for my veneer. It wasn't too messy at all.

[gasfan]

Cedar is awfully soft. Especially applied to heavy cabs. It will be a feat to prevent damage. I would highly recommend a hardwood veneer regardless how thick. If you insist on cedar, go with thicker than veneer for sure.

[quindecima]

As per Gasfan cedar would be my last choice. I just got done using paper backed Walnut veneer on my cabs with Gel coat contact adhesive and it was very easy.

[bldozier]

Maybe after the surge of variations of temp and humidity, the veener would be a optimal choice, these cabinets are sitting very close to my not so tight closing living roo windows, I also allow a breeze to airrate my space all year, rain, snow, 80 degree plus weather.
The airomatic red is 1/8 or 1/4 inch, the place would allow me a 45 degree miter cut on the required parts, backs excluded.
So if I were to yeld the cedar wood in favor of a more ridgidity inclined wood, any pros and cons. Other then as mentioned its overall composition I strength

[bldozier]

On a note I guess if separation occurred in the time span of the model,
They could be brought into a carpenter or woodworking professional for
Expert joinery, after the fact. But I guess without plausible information
In degradation, before hand its trial an error. But again why is veener any better then using
Its thicker all wood counterpart

[Wagner]

Maybe after the surge of variations of temp and humidity, the veener would be a optimal choice, these cabinets are sitting very close to my not so tight closing living roo windows, I also allow a breeze to airrate my space all year, rain, snow, 80 degree plus weather.
The airomatic red is 1/8 or 1/4 inch, the place would allow me a 45 degree miter cut on the required parts, backs excluded.
So if I were to yeld the cedar wood in favor of a more ridgidity inclined wood, any pros and cons. Other then as mentioned its overall composition I strength
:blink:

[Ed Zeppeli]

But again why is veener any better then using
Its thicker all wood counterpart

It's cheaper. Also, I would submit less susceptible to warping due to expansion and contraction as it absorbs and releases humidity.

The upside might be that you could re-finish them later as there would be enough 'meat' to sand them down.

[Wagner]

On a note I guess if separation occurred in the time span of the model,
They could be brought into a carpenter or woodworking professional for
Expert joinery, after the fact. But I guess without plausible information
In degradation, before hand its trial an error. But again why is veener any better then using
Its thicker all wood counterpart
Because you can "book match"
Because you will never achieve a degree of "it looks like it grew there" with the 1/4" you suggest with the skills you have (or better, don't)
Because it's lighter
Because it's easier to work with
Because the 1/8" or 1/4" cuts will never conform to the surface irregularities of your cabs unless you possess some really nice planers
Because the thicker the (finish) wood, the more susceptible it will be to possible splitting, checking, warping and separations from the substrate just to mention a few
Because even if you managed to pull it off in a way that it looked decent, it's overkill and you haven't accomplished anything except making your cabs heavier and a little bigger than they were; of all the veneers available, I cannot imagine anyone wanting to use Cedar on a pair of speakers? But to each his own I guess as far as aesthetic matters go (I'm just not a fan of the Cedar blanket chest look on anything)
With all the natural knots and the like in it, can you even get it in a traditional veneer?

Most importantly, because you do not have the skills or the tools to pull this off in a professional looking manner using 1/8" or 1/4" sheets. I say this because you came here to ask the question, if you had any real advanced wood working skill and knowledge that would not be the case, you'd be able to decide for yourself.

NOT intended to insult you, just telling it like it is, don't spend a lot of money and just wind up with a big mess on your hands

Best of luck with your project whatever you decide,
Thomas Wagner

[Wagner]

Cedar is awfully soft. Especially applied to heavy cabs. It will be a feat to prevent damage. I would highly recommend a hardwood veneer regardless how thick. If you insist on cedar, go with thicker than veneer for sure.
Depends on the variety, whether he uses heartwood or sap wood and how it is prepared
Has the POTENTIAL of being incredibly strong and durable
Still wouldn't choose it for what this OP suggests

[DavidF]

Using thicker wood-over-mdf is an issue related different expansion rates. The bond between the types of material is subject to breakup. The discussion above hints that this may be problem and you mention the environment is rather stable as to temp and humidity. I am not so sure that even in a stable climate this is the best idea.

[bldozier]

Environmentally this is where the two differ, the expansion and contraction of the substrate is my doom, however would metal hardware dissipate this movement along with added bracing?
I was not planning on using any I the construction of the cabinets just wood glue.

Trying to get the kit on the road, im not wainting to be an authorized retal center just looking for superb
Quality, I spoke with the custom miller and 1/4 sheets cut with a 45 degree bias would be no problem.
The choice of red cedsr however is, since sheets do not come in a thickness of over 9 inches if I remeber, but other variations are available in that width. This leaves joinery between the substrate and medium, being a wood working glue,contact cement, or if allowable a industrial type adhesive.

Can any recommend an industrial application that would allow for minimal separation in different weather environments, please school me.

[bldozier]

What about somthing lieka jb wood weld epoxy?

[dprice]

What it the worst that can happen if the cedar splits due to expansion/contraction? The speaker still works (assuming the MDF inner cabinet stays intact) and you have a cosmetic issue to obsess over or ignore. Is a crack a flaw or a feature? Using tongue & grove planks to allow for expansion would be easy but probably not the look you want.

Ignoring the veneer option, and recognizing that cross-grain expansion is generally greater than along the grain, I would try to anchor the cedar along the front edge of the cabinet and allow the rest to float so that the rear edge can move. Obviously this reduces the cedar to a decorative facade that you could rip off the cabinet relatively easily. I would also seal (polyurethane?) both sides (and all edges) of the cedar to try to minimize the effect of humidity changes.

A layer of 2-part epoxy between the MDF and cedar would probably immobilize the cedar...but that sounds like really messy job that water won't clean up.

[Ed Zeppeli]

This leaves joinery between the substrate and medium, being a wood working glue,contact cement, or if allowable a industrial type adhesive.

Can any recommend an industrial application that would allow for minimal separation in different weather environments, please school me.

I was always taught that a properly glued joint is stronger than the wood. I don't think adhesion will be your problem, if any.

Just go for it! Maybe make sure that the cedar you are using is properly dried and then seal it when you have the finish on. That should help eliminate the transfer of moisture.

[gasfan]

I can't see mdf having anywhere near enough movement. On the contrary, it would serve to prevent cedar or any other wood from cracking due to these issues. It only adds stability.

[Wagner]

Much has been written, debated and discussed about which is "better" when gluing wood, epoxy or traditional "carpenter's glue" like Titebond

Both can work very well, but it all depends on application, surface prep, "flatness" as well as type of the joint and the materials being bonded.

A couple years back I restored an original Thonet No. 18 which still retained it's original pressed (form AND pattern) seat bottom, but you guessed it, the bottom was split right down the middle due to the all too common screw up: someone had used the chair at some point in it's life as a step ladder

The chair had also been painted at least a half a dozen times during it's life and in as many colors. (it spent a couple of decades of it's life living as a hippie in Berkeley, Kalifornia) Think Peter Max inspired decor
It was extremely labor intensive to strip off all of those layers of ancient oil based paint. Heavy and caustic strippers had to be used as well as petroleum products for clean up, further drying the thin wood bottom. Once I finally had it cleaned up, I was ready to focus on repairing/reinforcing that split in the bottom (with the grain and running from seat back to front) Couldn't have been in a worse place.

I decided to use wood paint stirrers (about 1/2 the thickness of the veneer being discussed here), cut to size and laminated one along the entire length of the wound as well as laminating two reinforcing strips at 90 degree angles, across the grain at the seat bottom's center for additional reinforcement. I chose the stirrers as they were/are extremely strong but flexible enough to withstand the bending and fairly extreme clamping required to follow the form of the seat bottom and at the same time give them good contact while gluing them up, hopefully effecting a successful repair with minimal bastardization of the original bottom

I felt all of this was necessary as the original seat bottom was on the light side of 1/4 inch, was a plywood "like" piece and more than 100 years old (extremely dehydrated and brittle after all those years) There just wasn't enough surface area along the split to rely on any adhesive alone

After all of my labor, I did NOT want it breaking again (especially after it was finished! As in stained and oiled) and again, I also wanted to retain the original bottom (few survive intact on Thonets found out in the wild, ie: thrift shops etc) Wasn't crazy about the idea of having to use the laminated strips but saw no other viable option except for the possibility of cutting a second "sub-bottom" but abandoned that idea as I would never be able to replicate the pressed shape of the original as Thonet had made it (I would have big voids between the two, even with multiple clamps) That would have been effectively exactly what you are hoping to accomplish, joining a flat piece with another flat piece, but unfortunately for me that wasn't the case.

If it had been, I'd have had NO dilemma, I would have used a quality carpenter's glue and light clamping or weights. And I would have preferred using wood glue due to it's superior penetration and subsequent joint strength

BUT, even using the smaller "strips approach" I could see their would be those voids occurring at a few spots during the bend. It was unavoidable. I needed not only a strong adhesive but a good (strong) filler material as well

So, what does this have to do with putting Cedar veneer on JBL clones? I agonized long and hard over which adhesive type to use. I thought about all of my anecdotal experiences over the years with both materials, epoxies and "carpenter's glues", I also turned to research. I read truly scientific studies (mainly regarding shear and breaking forces), application guides, studies on various joint types and their strengths and weaknesses, DIYer youtube videos, manufacturers' claims, pitch and spec sheets and countless posts at wood workers' forums along with the expected "my glue is better than your glue" noise

I finally settled on epoxy for my repair for several reasons. The main one being that the epoxy had great void filling capabilities and could give me a continuous film between wood on wood areas right on through those voids that were inevitable due to the requisite bending to form; in other words, a continuous, equally strong, film of adhesive. It still concerned me as epoxy, by nature, is a much more topical adhesive than is "wood glue", it just does not penetrate like a good carpenter's glue does, but with this particular repair, visible (and reinforcing) squeeze out was not an issue as it was all going to be happening in a place that would not be seen once the piece was in use.

The one real advantage to using epoxy being that the much more viscous material could still provide a good film even under fairly heavy clamping, where had I used a wood glue it would have for all practical purpose squeezed out too much where I need the material the most, the areas of best contact. This was after all a mechanical/structural repair with more variables/"problems" at work than simply a lamination job

The trick to achieving the "stronger than the wood" bond with products like Titebond and Elmer's is to have excellent and complete surface contact and to NOT OVER CLAMP, which WOULD be the case (hopefully) with a cosmetic veneer/lamination job over MDF as all of your pieces/surfaces will be nice and flat
Using an epoxy would be overkill in this instance and maybe not even a superior bond in any way, for a number of reasons

The working time with traditional wood glues is also greater, which allows for more penetration (and the resulting greater strength of the joint) Anyone who as ever done any doweling work knows this: you drill and cut all your holes and dowels, dry fit everything and then once the glue is applied you wind up having to practically pound them in, due to the excellent penetration properties if you tarry a bit too long

So, after all of this ramble, for the purposes of this question, how to attach Cedar panels to MDF, I would tell you to use a traditional wood glue and NOT epoxy for the following reasons:
1. It will penetrate better than epoxy
2. On two smooth, flat surfaces it will provide a stronger bond than the epoxy using manual clamping tools and techniques due to that superior penetration
3. You have no real voids to fill
4. Easier to apply, flows better and has some self leveling properties (easier to work with/apply than epoxy)
5. A much greater working time, allowing for corrections and adjustments
6. Is more flexible and with proper glue up, in bands, (since you are essentially applying Cedar paneling and not veneer) and will allow for any of your concerns regarding expansion and contraction of the very dissimilar materials (which by the way I don't think you need to worry about)
7. It is readily available in formulations, that once cured are both WATERPROOF and resistant to heat as well as being
reasonably sandable and stainable
8. Easier clean up
9. Much much cheaper and will do a better job (for this application)

Contact cement is a viable alternative but requires that everything be absolutely perfect with the first fit, NO room for error and it may also, possibly, leave an unsightly seam that can be hard to deal with

I would strongly suggest you use a good quality waterproof, sandable carpenters glue for your proposed project

[DavidF]

I can't see mdf having anywhere near enough movement. On the contrary, it would serve to prevent cedar or any other wood from cracking due to these issues. It only adds stability.

You may be right but for my own project I would have a concern. The issue is how much differently the materials that are bonded together will expand or contract. MDF does absorb moisture, perhaps more than cedar/redwood does. That's one reason I paint the inside of the mdf enclosure, to help mitigate the absorption potential. Carpenters for quality furniture will apply veneer to both sides of larger panels for the purpose of stabilizing the expansion properties of the core material. You can see this in many large vintage speaker enclosures back when there was not a prevalent use extensive bracing.

So, just concerned about laminated panels working loose on the enclosure. You know they will be buzzing if something does work loose. Best thing I can think of is an enclosure within an enclosure separated by some kind of pliant membrane.

[Wagner]

So what you need to worry about, or not, can vary greatly

Today's "MDF" (too generic a term in the first place) is light years ahead of what was once used in vintage cabinets like the C40 and kin

That stuff was more like particle board and I agree, very susceptible to moisture absorption and resulting deformation and all sorts of other (potential) problems if used in the wrong environment, or just age (look at the seams on many speakers like the L100, including those lovingly kept in a "smoke free, pet free, child free" home by the original owner. MANY times you will note a crack in the front baffle's black paint that corresponds with where the side and top panels join up with it (I asked another question here about this being a possibility for the L100s as they frequently appear having both routed and smooth front baffles at that joint) The asymmetrical L100s and L100As
Look at the crummy finish on a typical L100 cabinet where the woofer's basket edge and O-ring rests on the cab's cutout (and is supposed to seal)...................that stuff is primitive compared to what we have today

We won't even get started on that era of MDF's crumbling and inability to hold a wood screw for long or more than a couple "in and outs"!

Today's "MDF", especially that of building or structural grade, is an entirely different story

For starters, the bonding agents and resins used to hold all the wood product materials together is far far advanced and resistant to moisture (if you buy the right board)
The pressures used to manufacture the stuff are extremely high, resulting in an extremely dense, and heavy, water resistant building material

I purchased a pre-cut kitchen shelf to use to build a suspended turntable shelf. It was unfinished and I left it as such (for it's intended purpose it would have in all likelihood received some shelf paper). It was banded on the front edge with some fake plastic veneer. Used it like that for 12 years and then we moved (and I set up my table in a different manner) That shelf just live in the garage for about 5 years until I got into Victrolas and other old phonographs. I needed an "engine stand" for holding talking machine motors in place so I could wind them up and work on them so I assembled one.
I used that shelf, with a large hole cut in it, for the top plate. This time, I did spray it with some ACE white appliance lacquer, not because of moisture but to be able to wipe the grease off of it from the old motors. It still lives out in the garage when not in use and is just fine, hasn't changed a bit and is just as flat as it was the first day I had/bought) it.
All because this door was cut from a sheet of the appropriate TYPE of MDF

Like "MEDEX", a very expensive water resistant type:
http://www.roseburg.com/Product/medex/

Now the cheap ass particle board type MDF work benches out there (came with the house) intended for indoor use, well that's another story. The ones with the grey metal vertical supports and the shelves are just hung on them, adjustable, like what's in the back at an auto parts store. They too are unfinished and all of the lower shelves (close to the concrete) with any weight on them now have a nice ) to them :)

I also built from one of those kits that used to be common at hardware stores, a LARGE cabinet for long term Lp storage (bulk, top drawer, new, collectible and "still sealed" stuff. I did not want ANY sort of finish or paint to come into contact with the Lp jackets. That cabinet has been holding records for me now since 1992 and I only painted the outside of the box. It is as true and square as it was the day I assembled it AND the shelves are still straight.....................so

Sure, none of it can withstand being left outside in a down pour or being immersed by a flood..........but normal changes in humidity? Once assembled into a rigid cabinet? Not a concern

Unfinished pre-cut structural MDF shelving and cabinets are common (again, for INTERIOR use). Of course any finish applied would only improve things further as for "long term" durability (but in reality, more for peace of mind, placebo), but for indoor use AND as for the interior sides of a speaker box?

Hardly a concern. MILLIONS of high performance, well regarded speaker enclosures have been built this way by numerous makers, including JBL, and they aren't all "buzzing" or loosing their outer lamination or veneers or shapeshifting

If one was still concerned about such a problem, just spray the interior of your boxes with Varathane, lacquer or any other water proof finish (what ever is cheapest) and be done with it

To ruin today's HIGH QUALITY MDF you almost have to saturate it or leave it in a state of constant exposure (like the idiots who put nice boxes out in the garage for long term storage on a bare concrete floor)

If anyone is that worried about moisture absorption then they probably shouldn't use MDF in the first place as no amount of water proofing that is practical will make it completely immune

For projects like these just choose the appropriate material and you won't have all of these issues and concerns

Unless you are going to use (and leave) your speakers out on the patio or deck, or they do double duty in a bikers' bar as tables, I don't think there is any reason for worries

If there is, pay the extra money and buy "MEDEX" or use MDO instead

Some are looking for a boogeyman under the bed and he ain't there

[gasfan]

You may be right but for my own project I would have a concern. The issue is how much differently the materials that are bonded together will expand or contract. MDF does absorb moisture, perhaps more than cedar/redwood does. That's one reason I paint the inside of the mdf enclosure, to help mitigate the absorption potential. Carpenters for quality furniture will apply veneer to both sides of larger panels for the purpose of stabilizing the expansion properties of the core material. You can see this in many large vintage speaker enclosures back when there was not a prevalent use extensive bracing.

So, just concerned about laminated panels working loose on the enclosure. You know they will be buzzing if something does work loose. Best thing I can think of is an enclosure within an enclosure separated by some kind of pliant membrane.

The reason veneer should be applied to both sides is because the glue used to bond the veneer acts as a vapor barrier preventing absorption from both sides. It's not because the veneer may change at a different rate. It is so thin it is at the mercy of the substrate. If your concern is stability of the mdf, all you need do is put a couple coats of sanding sealer on both sides before you apply veneer. It will penetrate deeply.

I should add that the glue under the veneer also does not stretch readily with the expansion of the substrate. This is probably the major factor causing warpage when one side is veneered.

[DavidF]

The reason veneer should be applied to both sides is because the glue used to bond the veneer acts as a vapor barrier preventing absorption from both sides. It's not because the veneer may change at a different rate. It is so thin it is at the mercy of the substrate. If your concern is stability of the mdf, all you need do is put a couple coats of sanding sealer on both sides before you apply veneer. It will penetrate deeply.

I should add that the glue under the veneer also does not stretch readily with the expansion of the substrate. This is probably the major factor causing warpage when one side is veneered.

Sorry, I just don't agree. Veneer can expand/contract and affect the core, either short term (moisture contained in vacuum bags expands veneer which then shrinks after removing from the bag and glue has already set) or long term. The purpose of the backing veneer is to balance the effect on both faces of the panel.

[badman]

Sorry, I just don't agree. Veneer can expand/contract and affect the core, either short term (moisture contained in vacuum bags expands veneer which then shrinks after removing from the bag and glue has already set) or long term. The purpose of the backing veneer is to balance the effect on both faces of the panel.


All well and good for something like a tabletop where the panel is large and unsupported. IME, sealing the panel is plenty for speaker cabinets with their smaller panels and bracing. In something like a Harbeth design with unsupported, thinner panels, I'd definitely match the veneering but not for a proper braced cab design.

[Wagner]

This thread is really freaking me out

[quindecima]

Thomas is correct about current MDF, the only thing I don't care for is that it is HEAVY.

[Wagner]

Sorry, I just don't agree. Veneer can expand/contract and affect the core, either short term (moisture contained in vacuum bags expands veneer which then shrinks after removing from the bag and glue has already set) or long term. The purpose of the backing veneer is to balance the effect on both faces of the panel.
The purpose of veneering MDF on BOTH sides, back in the day, was to still retain the aesthetic of quality as it was finding it's way into more and more furniture (but NOT MDF furniture like it is today at Target and Ikea) Back when people on the whole still appreciated and wanted to look at wood grain, and wood grain conveyed a sense of quality

On larger pieces, like a buffet or a china cabinet where the owner/user would be looking at interior sides frequently, the makers and the buyers wanted the interior to look like the exterior, like wood

Working people could buy an entire dinning room set for half the price or better versus hardwood and it still look (and feel) as nice

Audio uses followed a similar course, 1950s up through the late '70s until the eventual takeover by vinyl wrap on almost all audio boxes and slips shy of the very best; both plywood and MDF veneered on both sides. Through the '60s, early '70s the slips and boxes used on even the cheapest of gear was some sort of core veneered with a hardwood on both sides and this included the slips and cabinets for some REALLY low end stuff like Soundesign and Lloyd's

Now the cuts and the joinery required to build a receiver's slip or the cabinet for an "all in one" in no way involves any dimensions great enough for warping or checking to be a concern; manufacturers were simply using off the shelf material from the furniture industry (meaning from the same vendors and suppliers) to build their wares, here and in Japan

Back in the day, even the cheap stuff was well made when compared to what passes for quality today (talking the aesthetic of raw materials to build a wide variety of "wood" products, from the most utilitarian to the pieces found in living and dining rooms)

The double sided veneering practice accomplished that illusion of solid wood as well as provided a serviceable use for the less than perfect sheets of veneer that would prove unsuitable for the outer faces of cuts and boards. The flawed veneer or "seconds" will invariably be on the inside of the cab or box (assuming there are any flaws at all) You could in most instances be able to instantly identify the exterior side from the interior side of a full sheet of the stuff

As the capability to make faux wood products evolved, along with better and more convincing vinyl wraps, the practice of veneering both sides gradually faded out

Simple economics meets technology (and a little tree hugging in there too to boot)

Manufacturers, box and furniture makers (mass producers) liked it too because it was a more consistent product and didn't require planing or as much prep work, fewer tear-outs etc..........

It was all about money, from plywood to crude MDF (basically particle board) to the high quality, high density stuff we have today, which thanks to advances in resins and adhesives technology do not require a finish or top coat for many applications above or beyond simply painting or printing on a pattern or color.

And the sad part of it is, what used to be considered an "economy" material just 40 years ago is some of the most expensive to use today (think really nice void free furniture grade plywood of today) and ironically, the best of the best "MDF"s

[tjm001]

This thread is really freaking me out

That's for sure.

[bldozier]

7I like the titebond neoprene plus, originally I felt original tightbon iron on maybe the application I would choose, however after a few reads, neoprene plus seems like my best decision and its a green product from what I have noticed.
Like goldmember says " I love gold " its suppose to be excellent is this regard.