new cuemaker inquiry
- Thread starter lilbukka
- Start date
F
Fred Agnir
Guest
lilbukka said:
Way too many to list. Any thing else you'd like to add?
Fred
matthew staton
Banned
lilbukka said:
I would say Kenny murrell. He makes a awsome hitting cue. He also does awsome points and rings and wraps. Get one while there still afordable because they won't be for long.Just my opinion, There are a lot of good makers but nothing hitts as good as a kenny Murrell, hit with one and ya see how smooth they play.
Last edited:
Don't tell him Murrell, tell him one of the guys he has on his to be completed list or you know what... Now you'll see Murrell added to that listlilbukka said:
Wassup Bukka!!
cantando
without a doubt art cantando,cues play like a undisturbed dream!and they keep going up in price! great cuelilbukka said:
I would have to agree with Fred on this one, because there really are WAY too many cuemakers out there that due what you are asking. I say this because I love this exact style of cue. I am constantly looking at different cuemaker's to see how they make this style/type of cue. As far as the 10 year part goes, I have no idea. Here a few to give you an idea:
-Chris Nitti (absolutely stunning traditional work!)
-Andy Gilbert ('Nuff said...)
-Coker cues (my personal favorite...)
-Barry Szamboti (high end but well worth it...)
Most cuemakers, I feel, can do this traditional looking style of cue; however, I think that some can pull it off better than others.
-Chris Nitti (absolutely stunning traditional work!)
-Andy Gilbert ('Nuff said...)
-Coker cues (my personal favorite...
)-Barry Szamboti (high end but well worth it...)
Most cuemakers, I feel, can do this traditional looking style of cue; however, I think that some can pull it off better than others.
To me, classic-looking cues are defined by 2 key components: very deep-cut V-points and sharp, seamless inlays. If a 4-point cue has large gaps between each point, it loses any sense of classic style for me.
That said, I think the best choice for your criteria is Skip Weston, and the bonus there is you'll be getting perfect hardwood veneers (alas, slightly longer than 10 years, but close enough). The other choice imho would be James White, who along with PM executes the best traditional veneered points in the business (also imo).
-Roger
That said, I think the best choice for your criteria is Skip Weston, and the bonus there is you'll be getting perfect hardwood veneers (alas, slightly longer than 10 years, but close enough). The other choice imho would be James White, who along with PM executes the best traditional veneered points in the business (also imo).
-Roger
james white or art cantando
lilbukka said:
ED YOUNG from Chicago. He is working with DPK.
pharaoh68
Banned
buddha162 said:
Ah!!! Time for another dispute! This time, with my friend and not my foe. James White is the choice without any shadow of a doubt. He makes a beautiful classic-looking cue that plays like a fantasy. I'll agree with that pick Roger. But Skip Weston? I owned one and have played with others. The one that I owned, I couldn't wait to get rid of and others I played with, well, lets just say I'm glad I don't own them.
Now, some are good! I'll admit that! You're Skip Weston cue is a great playing and great looking, classic-style cue. But the way I see it is this: all cuemakers make duds. But Skip makes more than someone of his experience should. (Plus, Skip's been making cues for more than 10 years so technically, he wouldn't even qualify for this list!)
And Jimbo, I gotta admit, that was funny as hell!
Jimbo, are you being sarcastic?
pharaoh68 said:
Ah...you're going cyber with this argument!
Now, the criteria is simply aesthetic, for a modern cue with a "classic" look. Playability is A.) entirely subjective, and B.) irrelevant to this discussion!
But to address the "hit" of the one Skip you owned: the cue was made a decade ago. I'm not sure if Skip's process changed much over the years, but I would think cuemaking---for anyone---is a learning curve. Take his hardwood veneers for instance: they looked very very good 8 years ago, but they are perfect now. I would assume that his general construction evolved in a similar way.
You're making a blanket statement based on one of his early cues. It would be as if someone picked up Mottey's 20th cue and said "That Mottey, I've seen some nice ones but most have horrible inlay work with gluelines everywhere!"
I agree that the oldest Skips I've played with are really hit and miss. But take any cue Skip made in '94 and compare it side by side with a cue from '04, and there will be a significant difference in the workmanship and playability. That will probably be the case for the majority of cuemakers.
-Roger
