Short Splice vs. Half Splice

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fred Agnir
  • Start date Start date
F

Fred Agnir

Guest
I know this is the "Ask the Cuemaker" section, but I'm not really asking. I'm making a statement based on my meager studies of the history of cuemaking.

I read on many forums, and I've heard from many cuemakers that I've interviewed using the term "short splice" and "half splice" almost interchangably. I do not think this is the correct.

In Burton Spain's "Making Blanks," he clearly calls the V-groove inlay technique that the majority of "spliced blank" cuemakers perform as the "half splice." It sort of makes sense since it's sort of a splice... semi splice... half splice.

Burton's "short blanks" were full spliced blanks using the finger splice technique, but it was shorter. It was 18" rather than 29". The purpose was for cuemakers to be able to balance the ebony short blanks rather than have a tremendously butt heavy cue.

So, when I read and write the term "short splice," I'm specifically talking about a short full-splilced blank. When I write "half-spliced," I'm specifically talking about the V-grooved angled inlay technique using separate pieces for each prong. It is what Burton refered to as "half-splice" and that has come to be the standard pointed forearm.

I suppose one could write "short full-splice" and "short half-splice," but there really isn't a "long half-spliced." So, IMO there's no such thing as "short half-splice."

I suppose this is the point I should ask for feedback. As an author, rather than a cuemaker, I'm more interested in keeping the history of the terminology consistent. Maybe this helps both cuemakers and collectors on the same page.

Fred
 
Fred Agnir said:
I know this is the "Ask the Cuemaker" section, but I'm not really asking. I'm making a statement based on my meager studies of the history of cuemaking.

I read on many forums, and I've heard from many cuemakers that I've interviewed using the term "short splice" and "half splice" almost interchangably. I do not think this is the correct.

In Burton Spain's "Making Blanks," he clearly calls the V-groove inlay technique that the majority of "spliced blank" cuemakers perform as the "half splice." It sort of makes sense since it's sort of a splice... semi splice... half splice.

Burton's "short blanks" were full spliced blanks using the finger splice technique, but it was shorter. It was 18" rather than 29". The purpose was for cuemakers to be able to balance the ebony short blanks rather than have a tremendously butt heavy cue.

So, when I read and write the term "short splice," I'm specifically talking about a short full-splilced blank. When I write "half-spliced," I'm specifically talking about the V-grooved angled inlay technique using separate pieces for each prong. It is what Burton refered to as "half-splice" and that has come to be the standard pointed forearm.

I suppose one could write "short full-splice" and "short half-splice," but there really isn't a "long half-spliced." So, IMO there's no such thing as "short half-splice."

I suppose this is the point I should ask for feedback. As an author, rather than a cuemaker, I'm more interested in keeping the history of the terminology consistent. Maybe this helps both cuemakers and collectors on the same page.

Fred
Click to expand...

Fred,

I think I like your idea of "short full splice" terminology, because today the "short splice" terminology is widely accepted as referring to milled V points. The other thing is, the ways these milled points are made, there is really no "splice", just the appearance of one, since a splice is a joint.

Chris
 
Last edited:
Here are some pictures of a short splice cue I have here waiting for some work:

Short_Splice_2.JPG




Short_Splice_1.JPG
 
Fred Agnir said:
In Burton Spain's "Making Blanks," he clearly calls the V-groove inlay technique that the majority of "spliced blank" cuemakers perform as the "half splice." It sort of makes sense since it's sort of a splice... semi splice... half splice.

Burton's "short blanks" were full spliced blanks using the finger splice technique, but it was shorter. It was 18" rather than 29". The purpose was for cuemakers to be able to balance the ebony short blanks rather than have a tremendously butt heavy cue.
Click to expand...
Fred,
Here is a LINK to an old post with a photo of a short spliced blank. I agree with your interpretation of the terminology.

Tracy
 
Fred Agnir said:
So, when I read and write the term "short splice," I'm specifically talking about a short full-splilced blank. When I write "half-spliced," I'm specifically talking about the V-grooved angled inlay technique using separate pieces for each prong. It is what Burton refered to as "half-splice" and that has come to be the standard pointed forearm.

I suppose one could write "short full-splice" and "short half-splice," but there really isn't a "long half-spliced." So, IMO there's no such thing as "short half-splice."

I suppose this is the point I should ask for feedback. As an author, rather than a cuemaker, I'm more interested in keeping the history of the terminology consistent. Maybe this helps both cuemakers and collectors on the same page.

Fred
Click to expand...

Fred,

Just doing a little research, this is going to be one big uphill battle because the Blue Book refers to every half-splice as a "short splice". Since it's so common a reference, I think it's permanent.

It would be easier to rename the short full-splice, "short full splice" which is not found these days except on old cues.

The term half-splice is not accurate anyway, since there technically is no splice joint.

Chris
 
short splice vs half splice

Joel Hercek, who took over Burton Spain's business, makes full spliced & 1/2 spliced Qs...JER
 
BLACKHEARTCUES said:
Joel Hercek, who took over Burton Spain's business, makes full spliced & 1/2 spliced Qs...JER
Click to expand...

Jer,

Do you mean full spliced and short spliced?

Fred, see what I mean? I think it's hopeless to try to change the definition at this point.

Chris
 
Last edited:
TATE said:
Jer,

Do you mean full spliced and short spliced?

Fred, see what I mean? I think it's hopeless to try to change the definition at this point.
Click to expand...
Speaking of hopeless, it makes far more sense to measure balance point from the business end, than from the butt. I gave up on trying to convince people of this a long time ago. I think, Dennis Dieckman is the only other proponent, of doing it this way. Sometimes it is better to be in the majority, than it is to be right.

Tracy
 
Half splice should just be called V-points. If you are going to SPLICE something it should be 2 pieces fitted together.
 
I have always thought a good way to look at it was like this:

Full splice- if all the points are a single piece of wood and all connected, thus truly splicing two pieces of wood together. Whether this splice goes all the way to the butt or is cut shorter (though still below the point where all the points converge keeping it still a single piece of wood) and attached to the handle, it is still considered a full splice because all of the point wood is a single piece of wood still.

In my opinion, everything else is not really a splice. Even if points have a V-groove bottom, if they are installed one point at a time and not a single piece of wood with prongs being spliced to a forearm...I think they should be called inlaid points because that is essentially what they are. These types of points, whether flat-bottomed or V-grooved have no particular benefit to the construction of the cue. Basically, if it is not a full splice, the points are not really spliced at all.

Deno Andrews
 
Deno J. Andrews said:
I believe that Joel Hercek cues are all full splice cues.
Deno Andrews
Click to expand...
They better be.
Spain despised short-spliced forearm.
If he saw shortspliced now where they insert metal stud inside the forearm so it can be joined to the handle, he'd prolly cringe.
 
Sheldon said:
Half splice should just be called V-points. If you are going to SPLICE something it should be 2 pieces fitted together.
Click to expand...



You may could even call them laminated v-points, as opposed to spliced v-points also, but then again could be considered inlayed v-points LOL. Actually a true splice sort of reminds of a tree being grafted, except there are only 2 points with that, and the tree is alive, so grows together. I like the sound of a cue that's grafted, and comes alive during play, grows with you & the level of your game. May be a sales pitch in there somewhere huh.:D As if a spliced cue needs one. They sell theirselves.
 
Cue Crazy said:
I like the sound of a cue that's grafted, and comes alive during play, grows with you & the level of your game. May be a sales pitch in there somewhere huh.:D As if a spliced cue needs one. They sell theirselves.
Click to expand...

HA! You might be onto something there..... better patent it, QUICK! :D
 
Sheldon said:
HA! You might be onto something there..... better patent it, QUICK! :D
Click to expand...


LOL, I just did, the poor man's AZB patent :D Want to purchase the rights from Me? ;) :p make ya a good deal.
 
Fred Agnir said:
-snipped-
In Burton Spain's "Making Blanks," he clearly calls the V-groove inlay technique that the majority of "spliced blank" cuemakers perform as the "half splice."

Burton's "short blanks" were full spliced blanks using the finger splice technique, but it was shorter. It was 18" rather than 29".

So, when I read and write the term "short splice," I'm specifically talking about a short full-splilced blank.

When I write "half-spliced," I'm specifically talking about the V-grooved angled inlay technique using separate pieces for each prong. It is what Burton refered to as "half-splice" and that has come to be the standard pointed forearm.
Fred
Click to expand...

Fred,

I agree with your interpretation of the terminology but, unfortunately, I think you're waging an uphill battle. Many people still fail to recognize the distinction between "squirt" & "deflection" despite years of arguing the difference.

That said, the posted picture of the "short, full-spliced blank" reminds me of a question I've often pondered:

If the purpose of the full-splice joint is primarily to provide structural integrity (eliminating "buzzing") when joining the forearm & the handle, isn't that benefit lost when there is a standard tenoned & bolted joint only a few inches below it? Why take such pains to eliminate a source of "buzzing" if you are going to introduce another source so closely?

Just one in a series of random thoughts I am plagued with.

And since links are posted to show full-spliced joints, I'll take this opportunity to post self-serving links showing a little about V-groove point construction:

http://www.dzcues.com/point_blanks.htm

http://www.dzcues.com/veneers.htm
 
short splice vs half splice

Deno J. Andrews said:
I believe that Joel Hercek cues are all full splice cues.
Deno Andrews
Click to expand...
I meant to say SHORT SPLICE & FULL SPLICE. I bought a SHORT SPLICE blank from Joel, many years ago, along with some FULL SPLICE blanks. I don't know if he still makes both or not...JER
P.S. I still have 2 of the full spliced blanks.
 
Deno J. Andrews said:
I believe that Joel Hercek cues are all full splice cues.
Deno Andrews
Click to expand...

That's what I thought, too. He makes both full length and shorty's.

Fred
 
dzcues said:
Fred,


That said, the posted picture of the "short, full-spliced blank" reminds me of a question I've often pondered:

If the purpose of the full-splice joint is primarily to provide structural integrity (eliminating "buzzing") when joining the forearm & the handle, isn't that benefit lost when there is a standard tenoned & bolted joint only a few inches below it? Why take such pains to eliminate a source of "buzzing" if you are going to introduce another source so closely?
Click to expand...

This was a concern of Balabushka as well. Ebony-pointed full-splice cues were just too butt heavy, and heavy overall, so he had to use the shorty to make what he deemed a properly balance ebony pointed cue. That's why he placed the buzz ring at the A-joint... to reduce or eliminate the possibility of joint failure, or at the very least mask any joint failure. He also purposefully did not cut the through the splice as some of his contemporaries were doing, but rather put the A-joint under the wrap, utilizing the complete full-splice. That's why early Bushka's using Titlist or Spain full-splice blanks didn't have a decorative ring above the wrap. He didn't want to cut the splice there.

Fred
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top