Is scraping a fine flamenco or classical guitar better than sanding? I think sanding replaced scraping for many makers because of time and skill needed to thin guitar woods using a scraper. Learning how to sharpen a scraper is an art in itself taking more time away from completing the instrument.

The more I study the issue I think that scraping is superior for several reasons.

1. No fine dust is created that may get embedded in the wood pores and be difficult to remove. These particles after finishing become like a filler and have a deadening effect.

2. Sanding even done by hand does not work with the wood grain like scraping. I think scraping helps the final tone because working with the grain helps loosen it a bit.

3. Also this hands on makes a connection between the maker and the wood and the maker can develop a feel for when it is just right.

4. A skilled luthier at scraping can get a smoother final finish on the wood than can be achieved with sanding. Also I believe they can get more evenness in the thickness than with sanding.

I truly believe that the old makers that considered it disrespect and a tragic act to sand tone woods had the right idea.

Also there are health benefits for the maker, but my main point of discussion here is, do you think this makes any difference in the final outcome in tone, response, and beauty?

This would be an interesting research project, to see if the differences are detectable. One trouble with conducting an objective inquiry into something of this nature is the near impossibility to properly control the variables. It is practically impossible to make two IDENTICAL guitars. If two are built side by side, one scraped and the other sanded, too many other variables are likely to change slightly as well.

In concept, however, there are many pluses to scraping, and especially to planing, over sanding. While a sharp plane cleanly shears layers of wood from the surface, the abrasive process of sanding seriously shreds-up the fibers of the wood. The implications, especially for guitar soundboards are very serious. with so little wood left (typically well under 2.5mm in many spots) any compromised fibers result in weakening of the structure. Stiffness suffers, while the weight (of the structurally compromised wood and dust) is still there. Plus, reflective qualities of the wood can suffer too.

Think of it this way. Walk into an empty carpeted room. Notice the sound of your voice. Then, enter an empty room with hardwood floors. Which one seems more responsive and resonant? Coarse sanding is that proverbial carpet on the interior of the guitar. Exterior may not be "carpeted" since the surface is lacquered or shellac polished. However, if the soundboard was coarsely sanded, the "carpet" was still there, and was lacquered over.

Very good analogy Peter. I think the recent improvements seen on the 74 negra prove this theory somewhat. My removing the heavy finish by hand sanding the top really improved the response and tone, however after you scraped it down some more and evened it up and french polished it, more improvement was heard, especially in response and brightness of the trebles. You are right there is no way to do a scientific study. I know an old violin maker once told me that using sandpaper was masking the qualities of the wood, whereas scraping was drawing out the tone.