What is missing in Cuemaking

classiccues · Sep 28, 2010

A church gets built..

They still use stained glass windows... they COULD have holograms of Jesus, Paul, John, Mary etc.. seemingly coming off the walls.

Jesus still hangs on the cross.... James Cameron could make Jesus talk to you, interact with you and even give you 3-D glasses so it'll feel like you just took communion from Jesus....

You have a confesional area.. you could just tweet your confession to Father Jack...

They still use an organ... you could have surround sound

They still use a paper bible... you could have an Iphone app that takes you to where the lesson is today... you know an I-sermon..

Fact is there are still places where technology does not necessarily make things better.

Some will like tradition, some will like the newer art cues.... to each his own.

Never forget where you came from.

JV

Spimp13 · Sep 28, 2010

qbilder said:
My thoughts as well. A very talented cuemaker may be artistically challenged while a superb artist may have difficulties building a cue that players can relate to & enjoy. We see it all across the board.

Art is timeless, not new nor old. As mentioned, human kind has been doing it since before history. Only the finest art is appreciated by the masses. Even the greatest artists often fail. They build their reputations on a fraction of their pieces. Those few pieces grab the attention & intrigue of people & provoke emotions from deep inside them. That's why they are appreciated. Not everybody can create that, and even the best of those who can most often fail. Cue building is in it's golden years right now. We are appreciating cues for more than just a tool to play a game and people are being inspired to try their hand at this functional canvas to express themselves. Most fail. Few succeed. It's not unlike musicians. Every human has the emotions & the drive to express them, but only a tiny percentage have the capability & God given talent to forcefully grab the attention of others & strike a cord with their emotions, too. While I agree with the subject of this thread, I am realistic enough to see it's a pipe dream. Yes, a few are capable of such changes. But most are not.

Have cuemakers ever thought of doing a joint effort on a cue with what you are saying? If one does really well on the artistic side, but is soso on the cuemaking aspect of it, and the other does really well on the cue making but isn't very creative from an artistic standpoint?? Or is that a bad idea? Do egos get in the way of wanting to be in control of the whole build/design process, or are there problems deciding on how to split the money etc?

Koop · Sep 28, 2010

I guess I just don't get why it's not a, "to each your own", and it has to looked at negatively?
You choose to incorporate art into your cues, very well I might add, and others choose to put all their time and effort into other things. Not good or bad, right or wrong, just different, IMO.

bstroud · Sep 28, 2010

Spimp13 said:
Have cuemakers ever thought of doing a joint effort on a cue with what you are saying? If one is does really well on the artistic side, but is soso on the cuemaking aspect of it, and the other does really well on the cue making but isn't very creative from an artistic standpoint?? Or is that a bad idea? Do egos get in the way of wanting to be in control of the whole build/design process, or are there problems deciding on how to split the money etc?

Paul,

You have brought up an interesting subject. I have tried many times to get other cuemakers to do a joint effort cue. Never had much luck.

Many cues that are scrimshawed could or perhaps should be considered a joint effort. Who will get the credit for the cue. Who is the cuemaker?
Would the cue be nothing but a blank canvas if it was not scrimshawed?
I never see the manufacturer of the canvas considered the artist?

Had this very discussion with Will Prout last knight.

Interesting question.

Bill Stroud

KD Cues · Sep 28, 2010

What is not missing

Sometimes it helps to look at what is not missing. Let's take a second to give credit to those who are thinking outside the box: Mr. Mitchel Thomas (hope I spelled that one right), for one. Nice job taking traditional woodworking skills and putting them into cues! This gentleman could give most woodworkers the 6 out! How about Mr. Paul Drexler for about 1,000 years (sorry Paul)! Take a look at his "Lord of the Rings" cue. Where are acolytes for that cue? I feel much better applauding what is there, rather than what is not. I feel lucky to have received words of encouragement from many well known cue makers and they have all driven me to press the envelope of my skill and ability. I will continue to do so until I meet my maker! A special thanks to you, Scott, for your words of encouragement (photo for you)! All my best to the cue fanatics of this world, Kent.

bstroud · Sep 28, 2010

Roger Long said:
Bill,

This is a great subject.

I, too, am one who has grown bored with what the "traditional" look has now become. It seems that the values placed on today's cues are determined only by what will sell; and buyers of these cues base their decisions on only a few things: Does the cue have veneered points? Are they perfectly even? Are the glue lines visible? Does it have ring work? Do the rings line up? And, is the finish thick, glossy, and flawless?

There's nothing wrong with any of that, except that it lumps everybody into one category. What I mean by that is; how does your cue LOOK? With the exception of one cue builder (which shall remain nameless), no one orders a cue strictly by how it plays, anymore. But back in the day when the "traditional" cues first started, they were ordered from one cue maker or the other because of how they played.

My cue building has always been very simplistic because my budget has been very limited. I simply have not been able to afford expensive CNC machinery, and it's that type of machinery that one must have in order to enter the "me too" cue building market. So for me, I focused on building simple looking, but good hitting cues. And for years, I chased one hit in particular. Not too long ago, I finally found it! But I decided that such a great hitting cue deserved better than a simple look, so I took it to an associate of mine who is a master wood worker, and does great wood carvings. I asked him to put a few simple carvings into my cue, just to make it look "different." What I got back was an intricately carved work of art. (You can see a picture of the butt end of it in my avatar.)

Now we've decided to do more hand carved cues. We currently have four more designs in the works, but each one is being built to play as great as that first one. And here's the good part: we don't care if we never sell any of them! As a matter of fact, the first cues of any design are not for sale at all. People can order a duplicate of any design we have (if they choose to do so); but we aren't going to push our cues on anybody, and we definitely want to keep the first cues for ourselves. We appreciate our hand built, hand carved, great playing cues; and we're not going to concern ourselves with whether or not anyone else shares that same appreciation.

Now tell me if my thinking is "out of the box," or if I'm just out of my mind. :grin-square:

Roger

Roger,

I personally think you are on the right track. What you are doing is attractive, unique, and original. I can only wish that other cuemakers had the courage to try something this different.

The well known cuemakers do not make the rules on what is acceptable or what is art. The may be commercially successful but that is not all there is to it. A lot of it is how you sleep at night. Are you doing your best work? Could I have done better? Am I really reaching my potential? What do I do next?

These are questions that I struggle with every day. I only hope that many of the other cuemakers are haunted by the same thoughts. It may keep me up at night but it keeps me going.

Bill Stroud

Spimp13 · Sep 28, 2010

bstroud said:
Paul,

You have brought up an interesting subject. I have tried many times to get other cuemakers to do a joint effort cue. Never had much luck.

Many cues that are scrimshawed could or perhaps should be considered a joint effort. Who will get the credit for the cue. Who is the cuemaker?
Would the cue be nothing but a blank canvas if it was not scrimshawed?
I never see the manufacturer of the canvas considered the artist?

Had this very discussion with Will Prout last knight.

Interesting question.

Bill Stroud

If two people are willing to split the money received accordingly (which could be tough to determine and even harder to agree on), both be considered the cuemaker (either include both signatures or a logo that incorporates both people), then it might possibly work. From a $ viewpoint that might be the toughest obstacle outside of the willingness to do it to overcome. I think it might be a big challenge that very few cuemakers want to do which is understandable....possibly two really good friends that do it as a hobby, and not to support a family might be candidates.

bstroud · Sep 28, 2010

mia said:
Interesting point. Still, one has to keep in mind that while mankind has seen fit to decorate their tools of war, it was not done out of necessity, nor was it a requirement. Man CHOSE to do this to suit his own needs. Other men chose to simply make something that kills... no frills added. It all boils down to who is making the weapon. The choice to decorate it is up to that man. Even then, if he chooses to decorate it in a manner that has been done many times over, he has every right to do so. There is no pre-requisite that says every craftsman must be an artist as well. There never has been nor should there be.

While many of these historic weapons/tools/objects very well may be considered fine art, you once again delve into the realm of personal preference. When it comes to art, it is 100% subjective. Show me the man who thinks Jackson Pollack was a true artistic genious and I'll show you just as many who saw splatter and chaos with little to no 'art' behind it. What makes one man's opinion right and the other man's wrong? Nothing. Its all personal preference.

Because you choose to add your artistic flair/intepretations into each cue you crafted doesn't mean that all cuemakers are obligated to do the same. It was a choice you made. It was something you felt YOU needed to do. Others see sheer beautfy in a nod to the classic, traditional look. Others still choose to showcase the beauty of the natural elements of the cue, like wood choice.

I think the real issue here is the way in which people view cuemaking. You view it (as do others) as an art form. Others view it as a craft through which they can express themselves artistically if they so desire.

Mia,

You present powerful arguments, no question.

I view cuemaking as both an art form and a craft. If all one wanted is function there are many cheap imported cues to choose from. Buying a custom cue is a more personal experience than that for most people. I often have long conversations with my customers to determine what it is they really want. If it is only function, I ask them to go elsewhere because I do not represent good value for their money.

I personally think custom cuemaking is more than just function. It is an attempt on the cuemakers part to assist and fulfill the customers expectations on a higher level. To me a good playing functional cue is a given. I could build that in my sleep. The real challenge is to produce a combination of function/craft/art that exceeds the customers expectation.
To that end I spend hours of design time trying to find the perfect balance between materials, design and price. Many times the price simply doesn't matter. I would rather complete the cue at the agreed on price than compromise the design. I know this is a luxury that I have and others do not.

What I am trying to accomplish with this thread is to wake up some of the cuemakers and let them realize that they can do more. The public will respond positively. Give them a chance. Try something new. If it fails, try something else.

Cuemakers can not just sit on their hands thinking that what they are currently doing is enough. It's time to move beyond the relative safety of "traditional" and think "what's next".

Bill Stroud

Scott Lee · Sep 28, 2010

Bill...Kent Davis has done something along the lines of what you're talking about...pushing the envelope...although it's more in construction than design perse. The way his cues are constructed is unique, and I haven't seen ANY other cuemakers attempting to copy it (maybe they don't know about it...maybe it's difficult).

Thanks Kent! My cue is looking GOOD! I'll be in touch this week!

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

KD Cues said:
Sometimes it helps to look at what is not missing. Let's take a second to give credit to those who are thinking outside the box: Mr. Mitchel Thomas (hope I spelled that one right), for one. Nice job taking traditional woodworking skills and putting them into cues! This gentleman could give most woodworkers the 6 out! How about Mr. Paul Drexler for about 1,000 years (sorry Paul)! Take a look at his "Lord of the Rings" cue. Where are acolytes for that cue? I feel much better applauding what is there, rather than what is not. I feel lucky to have received words of encouragement from many well known cue makers and they have all driven me to press the envelope of my skill and ability. I will continue to do so until I meet my maker! A special thanks to you, Scott, for your words of encouragement (photo for you)! All my best to the cue fanatics of this world, Kent.

Winston846 · Sep 28, 2010

cheapcues.com said:
LOL Clearly you're not a golfer or a bowler!

I promise you there is absolutely no risk of someone developing a cue that will pocket balls on its own.

LOL!!!! FYI, the "846" in my screen name just happens to be my hi 3 game series in bowling (267 - 279 - 300 = 846). I have 17 sanctioned 300 games and 5 sanctioned 800 series.

Also, I have been golfing for 25 years. In my mid 20s, I hit an officially recorded drive of 396 yards (in a long drive contest). Thanks to today's equipment, I can still drive the ball well over 300 yards even in my mid 40s and with a bum left knee.

Edit: And even though I obviously know that no cue will ever pocket balls on it's own, there have been technological advances in shafts to minimize deflection and squirt. That's kind of akin to a larger sweet spot on a golf club because it gives you a greater margin for error.

Worminator · Sep 28, 2010

Winston846 said:
Also, I have been golfing for 25 years. In my mid 20s, I hit an officially recorded drive of 396 yards (in a long drive contest). Thanks to today's equipment, I can still drive the ball well over 300 yards even in my mid 40s and with a bum left knee.

But did it lower your handicap? :wink:

LGSM3 · Sep 28, 2010

qbilder said:
My thoughts as well. A very talented cuemaker may be artistically challenged while a superb artist may have difficulties building a cue that players can relate to & enjoy. We see it all across the board.

Art is timeless, not new nor old. As mentioned, human kind has been doing it since before history. Only the finest art is appreciated by the masses. Even the greatest artists often fail. They build their reputations on a fraction of their pieces. Those few pieces grab the attention & intrigue of people & provoke emotions from deep inside them. That's why they are appreciated. Not everybody can create that, and even the best of those who can most often fail. Cue building is in it's golden years right now. We are appreciating cues for more than just a tool to play a game and people are being inspired to try their hand at this functional canvas to express themselves. Most fail. Few succeed. It's not unlike musicians. Every human has the emotions & the drive to express them, but only a tiny percentage have the capability & God given talent to forcefully grab the attention of others & strike a cord with their emotions, too. While I agree with the subject of this thread, I am realistic enough to see it's a pipe dream. Yes, a few are capable of such changes. But most are not.

To provoke emotion...thats all anything boils down too. end of story.

cheapcues.com · Sep 28, 2010

Winston846 said:
LOL!!!! FYI, the "846" in my screen name just happens to be my hi 3 game series in bowling (267 - 279 - 300 = 846). I have 17 sanctioned 300 games and 5 sanctioned 800 series.

Also, I have been golfing for 25 years. In my mid 20s, I hit an officially recorded drive of 396 yards (in a long drive contest). Thanks to today's equipment, I can still drive the ball well over 300 yards even in my mid 40s and with a bum left knee.

Edit: And even though I obviously know that no cue will ever pocket balls on it's own, there have been technological advances in shafts to minimize deflection and squirt. That's kind of akin to a larger sweet spot on a golf club because it gives you a greater margin for error.

Sounds like you are quite a gifted athlete! There is no doubt technological advancements have helped in golf (I'm not much of a bowler so I'll stay out of that one- although I wonder why if all you have to do is roll the ball down the alley you don't roll a 300 every game?).

However re: golf, yes people can hit the ball farther (about 20 yards on average compared to say the 80's), but you have to hit it straight as well, and then you still have a ton of work to do from there. Despite the advances in technology, average scores on the PGA tour (other than Tiger) haven't really changed.

I don't want to get into a huge debate about it especially since it's off topic, but I just found your hyperbole to be rather comical. None of these games are easy, despite new technologies.

-Mike

Rak9up · Sep 28, 2010

Functionality not art

I realize there are two kinds of people buying cues.

80% buy a cue for funtionality and a cue to play with.

20% are collectors buying to put it in a case to look at or sale it later for profit.

If you don't think functionality is the most important factor ask yourself why Predator/OB combined have made millions. Players want an edge and will pay to get it.

I for one am very disapointed that so many cuemakers worry about art at all.

When golf came out with titanium drivers golf courses fought and banned them. Because they had to fork out money and redesign their courses
due to the improved Clubs and balls. But golf took its lumps and evolved.

So what happened in pool....cuemakers started developing better jump and break cues using pholics and improving the equipment. What happened they started getting banned because it cost money to improve the felt or pool balls and don't want to fork out the money and I say let our sport evolve also.

I for one would rather see you spend more time sleeping and building better
funtional cues.

My playing cue has a zero taper in the wrap area. It's a diameter I like and no matter where I hold its always the same (muscle memory thingy).
Ask me how many cuemakers turned down unique ideas for cue improvements based strictly on functionality.

I applaud you on wanting out of the box thinking. But it should be for fuctional improvements not art ones.

At the end of the day it comes down to this.....

Stadivarius violins are pretty...but bottom line which is more imortant how it looks or how it plays.

Josswest cues are pretty...but bottom line which is more important how it looks or how it plays.

Saying both is just a cop out

RRfireblade · Sep 28, 2010

bstroud said:
I you are only making cues because "that's what sells" you might try some other line of work before you go crazy.

Bill Stroud

Actually at least a few of my designs were for your show , working on 2 in fact as I type this. (I know , running out of time) BUT , you cannot survive on show cues alone , if you can't stay in business with your bread and butter stuff , you can't afford to try anything "new".

BLACKHEARTCUES · Sep 28, 2010

Hi Bill; Thanks for encouraging cuemakers to go out of the box. I agree with your proposal, that cuemaking is both art & craft. I have always taken to heart a few simple statements an art teacher told me. (1) "In all designs, you need something large, medium & small". (2) " Every design should have something light, medium & dark". I have used these in my business as a sign painter, as well as my 24 years of cuemaking. In designing a simple cue I try to incorporate at least 3 colors. Picking a handle wood or wrap is actually part of the artistic design. People don't realize all of the hats a cuemaker wears, just to produce a simple low end cue...JER

brandonspitler · Sep 28, 2010

bstroud said:
Cuemaking is a hybrid of sorts. It is a combination of art and craft.

The craft side has evolved to the point that perfection in construction and execution is possible.

The art side seems to be stuck in the past. How many more cues with points or boxes and inlayed with diamonds and dots will be made. Sure there is a place for cues like this. It's called a MUSEUM.

Why don't more cuemakers try something new and different? The apparent reason is that most, if not all, lack any formal art training.

I am approached frequently by people wanting to become cuemakers. They want to know about machines and software. I tell them all the same thing. Go to art school. Learn to design properly. Then become a cuemaker. That is what the industry needs.

I know that I along with a few other cuemakers have struggled long and hard to become better designers. It's not easy. I takes lots of time. The results are worth it.

It saddens me to see so many cuemakers with obvious talent succumb to cliches like "I like traditional cues". What they are really saying is either "I am afraid to try something new" or I'm doing just fine making what I am".

Either way it is a cop out.

Can the situation be changed for the better? Perhaps. The collectors' show that I started is one way and it is having a positive effect. More artistic cues are created every day just for that show.

The main way however is for you ( the buying public) to demand more of your cuemaker. Push on them for something new and different. Get them out of their comfort zone.They WILL respond with something special!

Sincerely,

Bill Stroud

I find your statements quite interesting, and I have only the MOST respect in the world for your cuemaking and art. (although ive never been able to afford it lol)
but do you not think that perhaps by using these age-old shapes and designs, that it is easier to make a cue look uniform? i mean, i love classic and traditional cues, but the reason the great ones are great (new or old) is the combination of great artwork, great playability, and some organization of this artwork, so that it doesnt look like a mess.
i mean...id MUCH rather see a uniform looking cue, than a piece of abstract art. just my opinion...and kind of a question i guess?

perhaps...should we as cue-buyers start taking more control by designing and mapping out something different? then asking our favorite cuemakers to bring it to life? but then, arent we already attracted to the cues of certain cuemakers BECAUSE of what we have already seen them make?

hmm.

just some thoughts,
Brandon Lee Spitler.

bstroud · Sep 28, 2010

Rak9up said:
I realize there are two kinds of people buying cues.

80% buy a cue for funtionality and a cue to play with.

20% are collectors buying to put it in a case to look at or sale it later for profit.

If you don't think functionality is the most important factor ask yourself why Predator/OB combined have made millions. Players want an edge and will pay to get it.

I for one am very disapointed that so many cuemakers worry about art at all.

When golf came out with titanium drivers golf courses fought and banned them. Because they had to fork out money and redesign their courses
due to the improved Clubs and balls. But golf took its lumps and evolved.

So what happened in pool....cuemakers started developing better jump and break cues using pholics and improving the equipment. What happened they started getting banned because it cost money to improve the felt or pool balls and don't want to fork out the money and I say let our sport evolve also.

I for one would rather see you spend more time sleeping and building better
funtional cues.

My playing cue has a zero taper in the wrap area. It's a diameter I like and no matter where I hold its always the same (muscle memory thingy).
Ask me how many cuemakers turned down unique ideas for cue improvements based strictly on functionality.

I applaud you on wanting out of the box thinking. But it should be for fuctional improvements not art ones.

At the end of the day it comes down to this.....

Stadivarius violins are pretty...but bottom line which is more imortant how it looks or how it plays.

Josswest cues are pretty...but bottom line which is more important how it looks or how it plays.

Saying both is just a cop out

Just in case you don't know.

I spend just as much time thinking about playability as I do about design.

In 1968 Danny and I were the first to core a cue. Coring produces a stronger, straighter more consistent playing cue. It is the standard today and most cuemakers core their cues.

In the early eighties Dan and I were the first cuemakers to use CNC. It may surprise you to know that CNC is used to turn cues and parts of cues to produce a more consistent and better playing cue. It not just for inlays and art work.

I developed the 3/8-10, the Unilok and the Radial pins that are the industry standards. I gave them their names.

I was the first cuemaker to use piezo electric damping to eliminate vibration and produce a better playing cue. I also developed the Smartshaft.

The list of innovation in cuemaking runs to 2 pages so I will not post anymore here.

I work every day to find new engineering techniques to inprove the way cues play. I also play pretty well and can evaluate any cue myself but I personally think cues are more than just how they play.

You are entitled to you opinion but next time try to get your facts straight.

Bill Stroud

Winston846 · Sep 28, 2010

Worminator said:
But did it lower your handicap? :wink:

Never really kept an "official" handicap. At my best, I could shoot in the mid-upper 70s at most of the local courses in my area.

But like most bombers, my short game/putting left a little to be desired.

jgpool · Sep 28, 2010

Thank you Bill

I would just like to thank you for this piece of art. I should have elected to take your design suggestions in to account.

But I love this cue, the way it plays and looks.

What is missing in Cuemaking

Don't hashtag your broke friends

O8 Specialist

AzB Silver Member

Deceased

AzB Silver Member

Attachments

Deceased

O8 Specialist

Deceased

AzB Silver Member

Aspiring 14.1 Player

AzB Gold Member

Jake<built cues for fun

Cue Dealer

AzB Silver Member

Grammer Are For Stupids

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Deceased

Aspiring 14.1 Player

Cue ball draw with this?

Attachments