Inlays.......What The Heck Are They?

Bavafongoul

Bavafongoul

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
There's a discussion taking place in the Main Forum about inlays........cue are rated by Level and the number of inlays determines the rating level.......but there's some disagreement about what rates as an inlay.

I thought this is the best section to present the above question.

What is an inlay or better yet, what isn't an inlay? Are boxed veneers an inlay? Are veneers over points in the forearm inlays? Are rings inlays?
The list can get pretty long so rather than embark upon a series of questions about what it and what isn't an inlay, are there any guidelines for categorizing whether something is an inlay?

There really needs to be some set ground rules otherwise the ranking and rating of cue designs is much more haphazard than it already is. As cue-makers, what do you consider an inlay.
How do you define an inlay and are there any gray areas? If there can't be a consensus of opinions among cue-making professionals as to what an inlay actually is and actually isn't,
then the rating of cue designs becomes undermined.

Thank you for helping us lay folks better understand the nature and artistry of cue-making which is a fascinating subject and business enterprise.

Matt B.
 
I'll jump in and say everything that has been added to a hole made by a cnc machine can be considered inlay. I am sure i am wrong but that sounds just right to me...
Points, cnc'ed ...maybe...I don't know...

Chris@2015


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Hey Matt, hope you don't mind me posting your original definition from the other thread here. I appreciate your desire to come to a consensus on objective terms regarding cue building techniques and components. However, I do disagree with some parts of your definitions (highlighted below in bold).



"Originally Posted by Bavafongoul View Post
Tony C.

This is a tar baby issue since there's widespread disagreement among cue owners as to what constitutes an inlay. I think the cue-makers section is the ideal forum to have this debate but regardless, I'll toss in my opinion to get things started.

Inlays.....what the heck are they? Personally, I do not consider veneers.......in the forearm or sleeve, boxed or otherwise, to be inlays.

A lot of cue owners will disagree, usually those that don't have dozens of other actual inlays in their cues. And then the debate becomes is a boxed veneer 1 inlay since it was pre-assembled outside of the cue and subsequently added as a single inlay or do you count every veneer on each side of the box.....which seems absolutely silly and also would be wrong.

I consider the veneers to be part of the wood work inherent to the construction of the cue's design in many instances. Inlays are those foreign materials actually laid into the wood penetrating the surface which are rendered perfectly smooth and flush with the cue's final finish. I do not think round rings which are added as a component during assembly of the cue count as inlays....that's why full splice cues don't have them.....but if the rings were stitched, i.e, segmented or broken, ivory or nickel like on Prewitt & Szamboti cues where each one had to be laid into the cue, that counts as inlays. And all of the Pau Lau abalone dots & diamonds between the stitched rings are inlays........

Let's see what the rest of the Forum has to say about this. It was discussed a couple of years ago on the Forum and some cue owners that had player cue designs were lobbying for veneers to count as inlays but it didn't go over. I submit that wood does not count as a inlay regardless where it was added.........please don't tell Messrs. Wayne or Black what I wrote because both of make stupendous designs with elaborate wood patterns, almost mosaic, which is startling to behold.

I've attached two pictures....... let's see if we can get common agreement on what constitutes an inlay.


Matt B."
 
Tony C....

Not at all......my intent is to come to a common understanding....agreement........as to what is an inlay.
My affinity towards veneers not being an inlay is from my experience over the years buying/selling cues and speaking with cue-makers.
The fact is any time you cut a pool cue and drop something inside the forearm or sleeve, that kinda by itself meets the basic guise of an inlay.

So post away...it's cool......the more the merrier.......maybe something good might come from this.

Matt B.
 
Any milled and filled pocket that is placed on a cue after it has been tapered to slightly over sized, or in some cases has been added to a finished cue. Rings and veneers, and traditionally made points would not count IMO. A floating point would be an inlay.

Alan

Phelps Custom Cues
 
I look at it this way.

Anything that is put into the cue during the construction of the actual cue itself, meaning spliced points, most veneers, most slotted or stitch type rings, are not inlays.

Any solid piece that's put into a pocket or hole that's been cut into the assembled cue, is an inlay. It doesn't matter how the hole was made, CNC, Pantograph, chisel, etc. I put the part about it being a solid because I don't think some engraving's which are filled just with dye's or colors are inlays. A perfect example of that is true real scrimshaw. I don't call scrimshaw an inlay. Personally, I think it deserves it's own class.

I think this question is completely separate from the whole CNC versus Hand Made issue.

Spliced points can be cut manually with mills, or routers or tablesaws even. And of course, they can be cut with CNC and still be spliced points. The method to cut them doesn't change what they are.

The same goes for inlays. If a pocket is cut with a pantograph, it's still a pocket cut with a small round milling tool. It's exactly the same with a CNC machine. The pocket is cut with a small round milling tool. The only difference is how it's moved and controlled.


Just my thoughts!

Royce
 
Royce,

Thanks for your post which was not only significant and pertinent but also succinct and very well articulated.

Matt B.
 
The whole "cue level" based on the "number of inlays" is outdate with today's cues. IMHO!

I don't think most cue makers today can tell you how the high end makers build their decorations into their cues. I can look at most T.W. , Richard Black or PFD cues and can't even guess at how they are done. Conversely, I could put thousands of inlays, by whatever definition you chose, in a cue. If it doesn't flow well. It's still a turd level cue.

Larry
 
"There's a discussion taking place in the Main Forum about inlays........cue are rated by Level and the number of inlays determines the rating level....."
Being rated for What???? Their artistic merit? To the best of my knowledge, inlays have nothing to do with the playing quality of a cue. Neither do points nor rings.
So I'm wondering what they are rated for.
Art critics don't rate paintings by the number of brush strokes - seems like a reasonable apples to apples comparison.
Flame on!
Gary
 
RBC said:
I look at it this way.

Any solid piece that's put into a pocket or hole that's been cut into the assembled cue, is an inlay. It doesn't matter how the hole was made, CNC, Pantograph, chisel, etc. I put the part about it being a solid because I don't think some engraving's which are filled just with dye's or colors are inlays. A perfect example of that is true real scrimshaw. I don't call scrimshaw an inlay. Personally, I think it deserves it's own class.

The same goes for inlays. If a pocket is cut with a pantograph, it's still a pocket cut with a small round milling tool. It's exactly the same with a CNC machine. The pocket is cut with a small round milling tool. The only difference is how it's moved and controlled.


Just my thoughts!

Royce
Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing this one up Royce. I like the addendum you put on this definition. Filling a hole with dyed resin doesn't really count as an inlay, as it's only half the job really. Any solid material cut to match a pocket, when glued in to the space should be considered an inlay. A maple box on an ebony buttsleeve is still an inlay, even if it's not ivory, abalone, etc.... Wood can be used as an inlay material, and does not contradict the core definition. I feel like the OP is picking and choosing his definition from a preferential perspective.

The Owen cue in the link below has 16 pieces of ivory and pink ivory inlaid into each star (from my count looking at the buttsleeve). Half are wood and half are ivory. By the Bava's definition (which excludes wood from meeting the criteria of what an inlay is), each star would only have 8 inlays, not 16...... Does this make any sense to anyone??

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=405054

Again, to Matt, I respect your interest in coming to a consensus on this definition, but you have to see that your logic is flawed. If you're right, and I'm wrong, then the Hagan and Kersebrock I posted in the other main forum thread are merry widow/plain jane cues...
 
Justin.....I am not insisting nor promoting that wood by itself becomes disqualified as a inlay.
From everything I have read and learned is cue designs are generally classified into Levels.

The Level of Intricacy Grading System (Levels 1 - 8) was developed to assist evaluating cue values.
It's by no means the last word but 'til something better comes along, it's the only methodology around.

This system works best on simple cue designs & becomes more difficult as cues progress in complexity.
It becomes more difficult to determine values as the Level of Intricacy increases, especially past Level 4.
At this point, many different inlays & point designs can get used incorporating exotic woods & other stuff.

I think Royce's explanation sounded logical and therefore made sense after reading it but that does not
mean I endorse it. I've heard differing opinions from others in the past but Royce's background brings
some added meaning to his statements. I've got a couple of cues underway right now and the next time
I have reason to speak with my cue-makers, I'll ask them for their thoughts. I can tell you now ratings
probably don't mean squat to either of them versus the artistry involved completing the design.

I am willing to conform to whatever is universally accepted but frankly, it seems there may not be such a thing.

Matt B.
 
Last edited:
GBCues said:
"There's a discussion taking place in the Main Forum about inlays........cue are rated by Level and the number of inlays determines the rating level....."
Being rated for What???? Their artistic merit? To the best of my knowledge, inlays have nothing to do with the playing quality of a cue. Neither do points nor rings.
So I'm wondering what they are rated for.
Art critics don't rate paintings by the number of brush strokes - seems like a reasonable apples to apples comparison.
Flame on!
Gary
Click to expand...

Being rated for the price you sell a pool cue. Do you sell a merry widow for the same price as your 4 point cue with 4 veneers and decorations in the butt cap ? Would you sell a cue you had 40 hours invested into for the same price as one you made in half the time. More elaborate cues with more extensive labor hours generally sell for more than plain janes. The Blue Book of Pool Cues uses these rating systems to give an idea of a cues pecking order as related to time and material. A five hundred thousand dollar house does not sleep any nicer than a 2 hundred thousand dollar house. One costs more do to time and material.
 
Bavafongoul said:
Justin.....I am not insisting nor promoting that wood by itself becomes disqualified as a inlay.
From everything I have read and learned is cue designs are generally classified into Levels.

The Level of Intricacy Grading System (Levels 1 - 8) was developed to assist evaluating cue values.
It's by no means the last word but 'til something better comes along, it's the only methodology around.

This system works best on simple cue designs & becomes more difficult as cues progress in complexity.
It becomes more difficult to determine values as the Level of Intricacy increases, especially past Level 4.
At this point, many different inlays & point designs can get used incorporating exotic woods & other stuff.

I think Royce's explanation sounded logical and therefore made sense after reading it but that does not
mean I endorse it. I've heard differing opinions from others in the past but Royce's background brings
some added meaning to his statements. I've got a couple of cues underway right now and the next time
I have reason to speak with my cue-makers, I'll ask them for their thoughts. I can tell you now ratings
probably don't mean squat to either of them versus the artistry involved completing the design.

I am willing to conform to whatever is universally accepted but frankly, it seems there may not be such a thing.

Matt B.
Click to expand...



Matt

I understand what you're saying. I think the Blue Book was the first time I'd seen a rating system for cue values based on many factors, one of which was the number of inlays in the cue.

In my opinion, cue valuation is very very subjective. In reality, pricing for cues is really no different than pricing for anything. In most cases it's simply supply and demand. In some cases the "Prestige Product" concept comes in to play.

In all cases, it's market driven.

As for the original question, I answered it based on the face value of the question which was basically, what is the definition of an inlay.

Royce
 
I think anything cut into a pocket whether diamond shaped parts, slots in butt sleeves, floating points, or stitch rings are all technically inlays. But I also think that pricing a cue according to the number of inlays is no good. The reason is a large floating point certainly counts for more money than a small diamond shaped inlay. So forget the complexity or price of the cue being judged on the number of inlays and just let the overall design set the price and forget trying to get this down to a science. On my site I let you pick each inlay going into the cue by price per inlay and you will notice they vary according to size and material.
 
Last edited:
The "level system" in general is useless if used as a standard to compare ALL cues. If it is used as a basis of the amount of "work" in a cue from each individual maker, you'd have to have knowledge of every piece of work that maker has done. For instance maybe a "level 3" Kersenbrock may be a 6 pointer with no veneers but ringwork in all positions with no pocketed inlay work, level 4 may add veneers and so on. In comparison a Gina level 3, which by comparison has a greater range of design elements than Kersenbrock, may be a "Rasputin" which by comparison to the Kersenbrock is way more visually elaborate. Both the same "level" but possibly valued differently. Then of course as others have mentioned, it's the maker who determines "value". You can have a level 8 "?" and it won't be anywhere near comparable in value to a level 1 from another cue maker. The best way is the old way of just saying what maker cue you have which determines immediate value "range" then describing the detail in the cue to get a good idea of maket value.
 
Say what you will about cue designs and values but the bottom-line is there should be....there has to be....standards...norms....for grading the design of a cue in order to establish order & logic.....some structure.....to the universe of sales........otherwise there really is nothing that can be measured and essentially, esoteric salesmanship will ultimately assign the value of a cue, i.e., what you'll pay.

Everything has a way of being rated objectively...........measured, compared & contrasted with some industry assigned benchmark.....a scale if you will. Absent anything like that and cue values/prices become largely a measure of sales and marketing rather than design intricacy which is a very important factor......IMO.

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