cue making, repairs and help

[Semih_Sayginer]

nice one semih

cheers mike


WRT density to weight ratio?

i took from that to mean how Dense the actual wood is, compared to its weight, in that some woods [like Lignumvitae] are so dense that they can sink under its weight, and not float compared to some lighter woods that will float.

so, for the same weight, woods have different densities.

?

[keith auld]

Hi Trevs/Mike/Semih/Qubit - Density to weight ratio : When I started cuemaking in the late 1960's early 1970's 3/4 solid butt cues didn't exist. The main cuemakers in the UK then were Burroughs & Watts, Rileys in Accrington and Thurstons, and they all made 1 piece cues. To those of you who are cuemakers you'll know that the perfect 1 pce cue should balance freely at it's splice points without any weight added or taken away (hence most cues weighed between 15 and 17 ozs). When Will Hunt introduced the original 3/4 butt jointed cue in the late 1980's, which Jimmy White made so popular, the whole weight to balance ratio went out the window because of the density of the ebony (remember that 4 splices on a 1pce cue when finished weigh considerably less than a solid turned ebony butt) and the only way of reducing the weight was to bore out the centre of the ebony or splice on lighter woods. So the search was for a wood or number of woods that would give the right balance without alteration assuming that your solid butt taper is 30mm to 26mm at the joint and 16-18" long and that would finish well without being horrendously expensive. Many of the top Rosewood genuses give this and allow the cue balance to go forward, thereby improving feel and response. Many of the top Rosewoods were origially too expensive and used only in cabinet making, ebony was cheap and plentiful in the early part of the 20th Century and the cue business was only a poor relation to the table makers. Top quality Bloodwood from some of the Spanish suppliers is also worth considering, but quality differs and it can rip quite badly when working with a hand plane. It's good to produce your own range if you can, particularly now as sceptics don't believe cuemakers are making their own cues any longer and just buying blanks from factories and finishing them. Another good idea is to lengthen you splice points to show that your cues really are individual and can't be catagorised as factory made.

[trevs1]

Hi Keith, thanks for your input.

The term 'density to weight ratio' still confuses me sorry, and, if I'm going to be completely truthful, doesn't quite make sense.

To clarify what I mean by that:

The term 'density' when referring to an object or substance could be defined as the unit of mass per unit of volume of that object or substance, and while mass is not an entirely easy entity to explain, it could be considered as 'weight'.

So, if you had a piece of timber that was a one metre long by one metre thick and one metre wide, the density of that piece of wood is going to be it's mass (or weight) in ratio to its overall size.

I think an easier way to clarify this point to those who are reading here would be to use the term 'specific gravity' of the timber. Specific gravity is a term used to explain how heavy a piece of timber would be for a given size.

To make this clearer, a glass tank holding a cubic metre of water, would weigh 1000KGs (just the water, not the tank). This benchmark of one cubic metre of water is used to measure specific gravity, with water given a specific gravity of 1.0

When we relate specific gravity to timber, we would measure how much any given species of timber would weigh in relation to water for a piece measuring one cubic metre. So, for a timber like ebony, the specific gravity of it would be in a range from about 0.90 to 1.15, depending on the individual piece of timber as it does vary. This then means that ebony is sometimes heavier than water and sometimes not heavier than water, depending on the piece.

Anyway, back to the topic.
I don't think there is any such thing as a 'perfect' one piece cue, although I'd agree that cue built with no 'added' weight, would probably fall between the range you mentioned. The thing is, not ALL cues have splices of a certain length, as many old cues would have had splice tips of no more than 15" - 16" and some cues having them at above 18".

I wouldn't necessarily say that the increased weight of a solid ebony butt 3/4 cue would 'drastically' alter the balance point either. The balance of many well made 3/4 cues would be at approximately 16" - 18", keeping in mind that the joint (often 1.5 to 2.5 ounces of brass) sits at around the 16" mark.
The most noticeable difference with the modern 3/4 cue over the older traditional one piece was 'total overall weight'. This, as you say, can be reduced by coring out the butt, or, by adding lower splices of a naturally lighter timber, but ultimately, it would still be a more weighty cue when compared to a traditional one piece.

As far as I'm aware, ebony has pretty much always been the timber of choice for cue manufacture, not only due to its natural weight, but also due to its cold feel, as well as the decorative contrast it offered to the paler coloured timbers of the shafts. Why and when any search for alternatives began I don't know, though many of the rosewood species you speak of would be every bit as heavy as ebony, sometimes even heavier, and to that end, no advantage whatsoever, other than occasionally being more cost effective. These timbers wouldn't really allow for any more of a forward balance than we get from ebony. I'm completely certain that if there were a real and noticeable playable benefit in using these timbers over ebony, then they would primarily be used, but they aren't. Still, we are faced with the simple fact that people like to have ebony used in the butts of cues, almost no matter what the cost of it.

I would agree that it can be a good thing to have your own styles and designs of cues, which might go some way to setting you apart from others. The problem is with this though, is that anyone can duplicate these designs, either with the exact same timbers, or ones very comparable to them, so it offers no real guarantee of authenticity regarding the maker. Splice length is also no safeguard against copying, as anyone who knows how to build a cue well could quite easily do the same.

I can only speak for myself here, but I source and work all the timber I use in every cue I make, there are no imported bits and pieces.

Apologies if this post appears to be a little pedantic, I don't mean to be, but, I think some reading this may be interested in the points raised.

[Semih_Sayginer]

Hi Trevs/Mike/Semih/Qubit - Density to weight ratio : When I started cuemaking in the late 1960's early 1970's 3/4 solid butt cues didn't exist. The main cuemakers in the UK then were Burroughs & Watts, Rileys in Accrington and Thurstons, and they all made 1 piece cues. To those of you who are cuemakers you'll know that the perfect 1 pce cue should balance freely at it's splice points without any weight added or taken away (hence most cues weighed between 15 and 17 ozs). When Will Hunt introduced the original 3/4 butt jointed cue in the late 1980's, which Jimmy White made so popular, the whole weight to balance ratio went out the window because of the density of the ebony (remember that 4 splices on a 1pce cue when finished weigh considerably less than a solid turned ebony butt) and the only way of reducing the weight was to bore out the centre of the ebony or splice on lighter woods. So the search was for a wood or number of woods that would give the right balance without alteration assuming that your solid butt taper is 30mm to 26mm at the joint and 16-18" long and that would finish well without being horrendously expensive. Many of the top Rosewood genuses give this and allow the cue balance to go forward, thereby improving feel and response. Many of the top Rosewoods were origially too expensive and used only in cabinet making, ebony was cheap and plentiful in the early part of the 20th Century and the cue business was only a poor relation to the table makers. Top quality Bloodwood from some of the Spanish suppliers is also worth considering, but quality differs and it can rip quite badly when working with a hand plane. It's good to produce your own range if you can, particularly now as sceptics don't believe cuemakers are making their own cues any longer and just buying blanks from factories and finishing them. Another good idea is to lengthen you splice points to show that your cues really are individual and can't be catagorised as factory made.

cheers for that keith. pleasure to read.

[keith auld]

Hi Trevs - very interesting, and it's good to know that your approach is so measured and thoughtful. I wouldn't disagree with anything you've said and whilst I don't know your age ( I'm nearly 60 now ), I hope, when retirement beckons for you, as it has for me, you'll also want to pass on your experience to the next generation of cuemakers and not be secretive like so many have been in the past. Perhaps when the next masterclass takes place in Hampshire next year, if the interest is great enough, I could persuade you along with Will Hunt, Robert Osborne, Mike Wooldrige and others to appear and give some of your experiece and methods to budding cuemakers.
With regard to the density to weight ratio and specific gravity question - suffice to say that we will all have our views and debate is always healthy. With regard to the ebony question - I trained as a cabinet maker, so tended to be involved more at that stage with the highly figured, very expensive rosewood and walnut woods than most and used ebony maily for inlay and stringing - ebony was so plentiful then that in places in Africa they used it for railway sleepers - personally I like using ebony, it's close grained, easy to work and finish. My original point was that it's good to experiment and not assume that there is only one ideal wood for use in cuemaking, as you say there are varieties of rosewood that are heavier than ebony, there are weight and density variations in all timbers ( even ash varies from piece to piece ), but whilst we tend to be primarily ash minded for cue shafts in this country, the Americans prefer maple and years ago Hickory was also popular; so really the only way forward in anything is trial and error, it's what keeps you fresh and interested in your work

[cocked hat]

cue making

Hi Mike/Trevs/Keith/folk
Interesting thread this,I was already past the point of no return making my new cue before I had the advantage of this advice.
I chose to use Purpleheart as my contrasting timber.I put a largish splice in the butt,and paired two short splices with ebony in the shaft.
I didn't know how the weight would work out,so decided to adjust with a weight at a later stage.that stage has now arrived and I find the almost finished weight to be 504g about171/2 ozs.It seems that the Purple heart is as dense as the ebony,and nice to work too.Out of interest,the other measurements are about standard,ie,16 in to joint,57in,30mm butt.
Keep the advice coming folks,it is appreciated.Quick thankyou to Bitter while i'm on,he has been very helpful to me. Regards Tony.

[Watford]

My cue is a 1pc, 58", 29mm butt, 9.25mm tip, 16¾oz, the tops of the splices are at 18" th balance was there but I've had a little extea weight in it and it's at 17.5" now, the fingers of the splices are 7.5" I think.
Macasser ebony butt, maple; it's very nice!
Made by Trevs!
Your cue seems to reasonably normal in dimention!

[Watford]

What do you cue makers think is the best wood for the shaft then!

What does every body like and for what reason.

Why do you not see much Hickory, hornbeam or pearwood now?
Can't oak be used too?

I've got maple because I don't like grain and like the smooth feel. I really like the look of pear wood or Steamed pearwood but never played with. I've only seen Dragon cues making pearwood now and they don't advirtise it any more.
Oh no ADR147 had a Master cue one once to.

If I come into money how much extra would it cost to get a pearwood remake of my cue for spare?
Are they to whippy to play with?

I nearly bought a hornbeam burwat champion once from ebay but didn't risk it!

[trevs1]

The reason ash and maple are mainly used is because of their relative availability in good consistent size and quality compared to the others you speak of.

There would be absolutely no advantage to having a cue with a hornbeam or steamed pear shaft, any difference would be aesthetic and nothing more really. Hickory is not really that much of a viable option, as it's so heavy in comparison to ash and maple.

To be honest, any timber which has similar characteristics to ash or maple could be used effectively in a cue shaft. If it is of the right weight, has shock resistance and is pretty stable in use, then it would do the job.

In reality though, there's not much that is commercially available to compete with these timbers, that's why they are predominantly used for this purpose.

[trevs1]

One more thing on this just for interest.

I remember years ago Dave Brown at Craftsman cues in Leeds, making a cue with an ebony shaft. This cue weighed about 27oz's if I remember correctly.

He said it played really well......though I'd have thought you'd need a sit down after every ten minutes to get your strength back.

[keith auld]

Glad to be of help - that was the purpose of my joining the forum and it's certainly stimulated some debate - I've also heard from a lad in Finland and will be talking him through the cue making process from step 1- so it looks like the internet can also be used for educational purposes - good luck with the cue - hope it turns out well and will be the catalyst for many more

[Qubit]

I have a question - is there any mileage in using different material for the ferrule? (such as some type of plastic, or even a harder wood)

[trevs1]

Hi Keith,

To answer your earlier question, I'm 41 years old.

I think that maybe when I'm at the point where I no longer build cues day in day out, I could give consideration to helping others do it. Unfortunately until then, I wouldn't want to give it too much thought. I quite regularly get people mailing me asking for advice or technical information on cue making, which I just can't give the necessary time to. The main problem as I see it is that cue making is clearly a tacit skill, one that you'd need to see demonstated, done practically and fully experienced to achieve any great degree of success. To attempt to convey the skills via remote methods could prove quite challenging, so if you're doing that, good luck to you with it, I hope it works for those you help and that you enjoy it yourself.

I think there are numerous reasons why those who build cues keep their techniques to themselves, and, I also think that's totally justifiable. As mike Wooldridge said in another post, it's taken him years to attain the knowledge he has, so to offer that up on a plate could be considered foolish. As I know you'll be aware, not all of us makers do all things in the same ways, so to divulge anything of our methods, could possibly lead to those methods being utilised by other makers. It makes sense to keep it to ourselves, and that I believe, is why it is.

On the subject of the course or demonstration you are looking to do next year, I might well come along to that, it would be interesting to see what goes on there. I don't know if I'd want to get involved in any way, as it would be your stage, but I'd consider giving some views if I was welcome.

[MikeWooldridge]

I could persuade you along with Will Hunt, Robert Osborne, Mike Wooldrige and others to appear and give some of your experiece and methods to budding cuemakers.

no way!

have you heard of industrial espionage? knowledge and innovation are coveted the world over which is why large companies go to great lengths to keep their own 'secrets' thereby keeping them at the top of their business.

so i think i'll keep mine. but maybe i'll come along in disguise and watch you, and any others to see if i can learn anything

actually, on a serious note, it's really good what you're doing. i'm sure you will create much interest and your course will be of great value to many interested parties.

however, it saddens me to say that i don't really believe there will necessarily be a next generation of cue makers in this country. the far east manufacturers have upped their stakes considerably and there are several who already make good serviceable cues.

add that to the ludicrously low labour costs and they are able to produce good cues at a price that no uk cuemaker can compete with. which is why very few cues are now made in this country now.

take cheap imports, add it to ebay (the devil's b*****d son!), and you're not looking at a particularly viable business option for someone new coming into the game.

so i don't see a next generation of cue makers, moreover yet another art that sadly disappears.

but there will always be a need for cue repairs etc., and i'm sure there will always be people who will take their time to learn aspects of this work. maybe even find time/money to dedicate years of learning to produce the finest cues.

so i think your course is a great idea and i wish you the best of luck with it

but it's possible we are in the age of the last 'great' cuemakers. so dare i say, make the most of us folks, cos when we're gone you may just realise what the fuss was all about.

[Wity]

Mike/Trevor.. Do you forsee yourselves talking on an apprentice at some stage?