From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Woodworking (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Woodworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Woodworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Home Living (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of home related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Note icon
This article is within of subsequent release version of Engineering, applied sciences, and technology.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

Frame, frameless[edit]

Just some musing here, but the article does not do justice to the traditional way of building cabinets with frame and panel on the exterior faces, and frames (with or without dust panels) on the inside, plus the back, traditionally wide thin boards and later plywood. Assembling a plywood/MDF/particle board box (with or without face frames) is not the only way to build a cabinet. It also doesn't talk about other aspects of cabinetmaking, such as chairmaking, drawers, etc. One of these days, I might get to it one of these days unless someone else does. Luigizanasi 04:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is amazing how many different ways there are to build a box. I did have all that in mind too, I just added a few bits to expand on what was here with the intention of doing a lot more work down the track. It sort of grew out of the face frame article, because I needed somewhere to explain the difference between that and frameless construction and link the two.
You have frame and panel (which includes traditional floating panels and the mass-produced 50's style with the pine internal frame and the fixed veneered ply panels), solid casework (top dovetailed to sides, bottom in a sliding dovetail or dado), ply boxes, and variants of all three. The discussion on face frames vs. frameless really ignores the actual construction of the box itself, it's more about the appearance of the cabinet from the front. Solid casework cabinets often don't have face frames either. My picture of a cabinet with face frame could easily be a ply box or a frame and panel. The frameless cabinet could be a ply box or solid casework. I guess the fact that they look like kitchen cabinets doesn't help, eh? SilentC 04:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

My knowledge is only about kitchen and bathroom cabinets, and mostly modern ones, but I will do what I can to add to this. Since my knowledge is only about modern cabinets, historical/classic construction methods probably won't get any better under my tender care. Feel free to add and remove... I'm mostly researching right now but I have been putting small updates in. Erk|Talk -- I like traffic lights -- 23:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Modular cabinets[edit]

I have never been an authority on the subject, but when I worked in cabinet installation, I worked mainly with modular individually constructed boxes. This construction style dominates, as best I can tell, the Canadian market, particularly in the mid- to low-end, but even in some more expensive homes. It seems highly underrepresented on this page... it has been a long time since I worked in cabinetry, but would anyone object to an increased focus on this prevalent lower-end modern construction? Erk|Talk -- I like traffic lights -- 06:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

  • As we were discussing above, the whole topic of types of cabinetry is glossed over in the article at present and it needs expanding. Go for your life and don't worry about objections, it never stops me ;) SilentC 22:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


The main problem in this article is, that in "History" there are over 100 years missing! (we dont live any longer in the Victorian Era!)

You can replace "european style" with "modern style" and "BAUHAUS", because Bauhaus is still the fundaition of most modern design (e.g. World Trade Center, modern furniture). The aticle at Wikipedia about "Bauhaus" is not very good, but anyhow you should studie it to understand my frases. And if you mention USA and GB, you should also mention Germany concerning Bauhaus.

Concerning the fair: well, you can put some more famous fairs on it (if something similar exists). I am speaking of the biggest (very international) cabinetry fair on earth! You can´t separate this form cabinetry in a global context! Just like you have to mention Hollywood concerning movies. Maybe it should be placed at the end of the whole "cabinetry" article.

You miss the point. You can't say "most significant" in Wikipedia unless you show some references. It's not about whether I can find a 'bigger' fair. How do I know it's the most significant? Because you say so? Most significant in terms of what? Size, influence, money made?
As for Bauhaus being the foundation of most modern cabinetry design, if you come to Australia, you will indeed find a lot of furniture in designer stores that looks European - we have a lot of Europeans here especially in Sydney and Melbourne. However, there is a heavy Asian influence here too. 'Country style' is very popular and it owes more to 19th century and earlier American and English design. The 'modern' style as you put it is only a sector of the market here and you wont find it in that many homes. I don't object to you writing about Bauhaus and modern European design in the article but just try not to make it sound as though it is an opinion. Just report fact. There was a school of design called Bauhaus. It has been a leading influence in Architecture and Interior Design throughout the World. There is a popular style of cabinetry which has developed from it. There are annual fairs in Germany, Italy etc. That type of thing. I don't know enough about it to write it myself, so go for it. SilentC 21:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

My suggestion:

we both write something about the cabinetry in the last 100 years. And we try to put them together. You are absolute right saying that it is too strong focused on Europe...and I believe you that in Australia there are grat cabinet makers. And we should not forget Japan!

Generaly we should devide between industrial and hand craft cabinetry.

Well, history isn't really my strong point. I'm much more interested in the practical aspects. I don't think we need a great amount of detailed history though. My thoughts on this article are that it would briefly run through the different types of cabinetry, perhaps some of the aspects in manufacture, whether that be industrial or hand crafted, some of the definitions. You know, not so much a heavy duty treatment of the history and evolution of different styles. To me, that is more in the field of art and architecture. It's certainly outside my area of expertise, if I can be said to have one. I can help with wording, spelling and grammar though, I'm quite good at those. SilentC 22:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It´s a good idea. Before I red your post, I tried to write a little bit about history (sorry). I red some stuff in my cabinet books and in the internet to confirm my ideas. I don´t like the sentence with the three main desingn streams is not very good. Well maybe we can change this. (PD: I have erased a litle bit of the begining of our discussion, I hope you would agree?) Here my suggestion:

The picture of cabinetry in many western countries has changed in the last 20 to 30 years dramatically. Traditional handicraft is connected with high technology. Beginning with the design and planning, computer technology is used. Many modern cabinetrys dispose much bigger production halls than before 100 years, with high tech power tools, computer supported machines, CNC units and dust extraction. But still with an workbench room for traditional handicraft end production. Today cabinet makers can rely to a huge range of high class fittings, pull-outs for drawers, kitchen appliance, etc. In some countries there are different school systems to educate cabinet makers, e.g. TAFE and Dual education system.

Still the mayority of cabinet makers, even in some western countries, are mainly based on old handicraft traditions, with less technology. Furthermore there is a smooth transition between classical cabinetry with custom production and industrial mass production. The main difference are logistics, in mass produciton mainly based on assembly lines. This allows to produce cheaper, e.g IKEA.

An other significant stream in cabinetry today is restauration of old furniture. A hig level of handicraft is needed. But also more and more supported by technology.

Today there are plenty of different styles. The old English and French styles, mentioned above. Japanese and oriental styles. Modern Styles. One of the most significant cornerstones for modern design in cabinetry was layed at the Bauhaus designer school between 1919 and 1933.

I wonder how much of the history of furniture design really belongs in this article. I think it should be in the Furniture article. I believe that the cabinetmaking article should deal with the major changes in techniques and tools we saw in the 20th century: the advent of sheet goods (plywood, particle board, MDF); the development of frameless cabinetry and the 32mm system (which I beleive was a post-war German development) that these allowed; the invention, improvement and increasing use of power tools and stationary machines, like the router, Lamello biscuit joiner, CNC machines, spray gun; the disappearance of most handwork in commercial cabinetmaking; the development of large industrial machines (panel dividing equipment, line borers, edge banders, and all the other fancy toys that go to make your IKEA or Sauder piece of plastic-covered termite puke). Today, it seems there are a number of different aspects/types of cabinetmaking: the amateur, the "artiste" (à la David Marks, Sam Maloof, Krenov) whose work is featured in museums and art galleries, the artisanal shops who do mainly millwork (joinery to SilentC) with the occasional one-off furniture piece, the industrial furniture plants where most workers are mainly machine operators, and all the specialized plants that do only one thing (mouldings, kitchen cabinet doors, finishing, etc.) in high volumes. What do you all think? Luigizanasi 08:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, you never can separate or conceal history in any context (every topic), because it´s the fundamet to understand better. In addition the Wiki-article is tidled "cabinet making". Therefore we must write something about the radical changes in cabinetry in the last 100 years. I changed again one sentence concerning the different styles. If you all agree and maybe change some things, I would insert it in the article. Coud somebody add the british school education system for cabinetry? Furthermore I love your ideas and I would try to support you. I am a German Master in Cabinetry. In the next weeks I will be bussy but we will see... I also had the Idea of making a list of important technological inventions concerning cabinetry (bigining with the stream engine of James Watt). Or not only for cabinetry but generaly for woodworking. Of couse in an extra article.

I think there are essentially two 'streams' of cabinet making that we must cover: the industrialised, mass production oriented stream and the hand crafted, old-school stream. The former is all about industrial design as in integral part of the process: you design furniture with how it is to be built as a primary consideration, with the focus on efficient mass production. If an aspect of the form of the piece is not suited for this type of production, it is dropped. So the form the piece takes is often a factor of the production technique. This is my understanding of Bauhaus et al. It's not just about designing something modern and unique, it's about being able to mass produce it. The latter is more about arriving at a destination, regardless of how long it takes. The processes are often inefficient but it doesn't matter because output is much lower and prices much higher. People are prepared to pay for something that was 'handmade', whatever you take that to mean. This stream exists in spite of Bauhaus et al.
So, when you talk about a lot sucking dicks and vaginas was their main idea ,they loved sex sooo much!of what you consider to be modern cabinet making practices, utilising 'high end' machines and 'high tech' tools, computer aided design etc, you are really talking about the 'industrialised' stream of furniture making. That's not to say that the other type of furniture making is not also heavily affected by industrialisation, I'm just trying to differentiate between the two. There's more to say on this and I'm out of time today but I feel that we need to diverge the discussion and not try to come up with a statement of 'history' that covers both streams. They really are miles apart and need to be discussed separately in my opinion. SilentC 05:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

sorry, but in some points I must disagree you. Come to a medium lagre european (not in all european countries) cabinetry (10-15 peoble) and you will see all this high tech. Including CNC! And this in NOT mass production. Here some STANDARD: Furthermore (at least in middle Europe) the main diffece between mass produciton and custom cabinetry are LOGISTICS (inclunding assembly lines), not technology.

I agree with you to devide mass production from custom production. But this has nothing to do with styles. And you are absolute right with Bauhaus: offering low price mass production with excellent design (started in the "golden 20th").

In my article it says "in some western countries" and I wrote also about the cabinet makers that don´t use a lot of high tech...

Merging this Article[edit]

I was reading this article, and it is very confusing. It tries to cover both traditional freestanding cabinetry, and modern built-in cabinetry. While they are related by history, covering both types of cabinet making in the same article is very confusing. Wikipedia currently has articles covering kitchen cabinets and traditional cabinets. This article should be merged with kitchen cabinets after the section on traditional cabinets has been moved to the traditional cabinet article. This would help clarify the article, and target the appropriate audience.

Blaylocks (talk) 20:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Opppose either merge. Cabinetmaking, like joinery and carpentry, has a centuries-old history that is well documented. The current poor state of wiki articles on anything related to woodworking is no reason to break the appropriate structure. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
  • This article is poorly written at present, but it should not be merged into any other article, because there is an industrial occupation called Cabinet Making, and there needs to be a Wikipedia link to this industry. Please remove the suggestion at the head of the article.Stringybark (talk) 09:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Bad idea. Also, merge proposal comes from single-purpose account dormant since the proposal was made in February. Can we remove the tags now please? --Andreas Philopater (talk) 08:55, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Another Suggestion I recently reread this article, and the responses to my previous comments. I still think the article is confusing. If the users feel that both types of cabinetry need to be covered in this article, then the article needs to include a history of how cabinetry evolved from traditional cabinetry (what we would now classify as a subset of the furniture industry) to modern cabinetry. The article jumps from a history lesson on traditional cabinetry, to a construction lesson on modern cabinetry. The gap is very large, and without explanation completely unrelated. If people agree, I will try and find some time to write something. However, it might be a little while before I get to it. --Blaylocks (talk) 15:44, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved to Cabinetry. --BDD (talk) 22:39, 17 December 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Cabinet makingCabinet (furniture) – I have merged the stub casework and the near-stub cabinet (furniture) with this article as they all cover the same topic and having multiple articles constitutes a form of content forkery. I would have merged everything into cabinet (furniture) but this is clearly the more developed article and I didn't want to lose the history. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 16:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Ooh, that does sound better. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 13:23, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose proposal, but agree with the cabinetry suggestion. Tiggerjay (talk) 07:41, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Title and scope[edit]

The present title is pretty useless; the word cabinetry is virtually unknown in British English, & unsuitable otherwise. Cabinetmaking by no means just means the making of cabinets (or of "cabinetry"); it always covers higher quality furnituremaking, in particular when involving closely-fitting parts like drawers and doors, whether in desks, tables, wardrobes, chest-of-drawers, or even cabinets. The article should be split to leave Cabinet, and either Cabinetmaking or a merge to furniture-making or something else. Johnbod (talk) 20:16, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

I emphatically concur. The same is true in American English: while "cabinetry" means a collection of fixed cabinets ("the cabinetry", like "the flooring" or "the paneling"), a "cabinetmaker" makes wooden furniture which may be of any kind (including tables and chairs), not just "cabinets". The current redirect from "cabinetmaker", more than simply being erroneous in both AE and BE, is harmfully misleading and very undesirable. (talk) 13:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)