It's a copy not a tribute ~ Can we be honest?

Ken_4fun

Ken_4fun

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I guess I am getting tired of the term tribute. I am not trying to turn into Jimbo, but maybe I just took a few years to fully comprehend what he was saying long ago. The cues that are being called tributes are just copies. Exactly how do they tribute anything? Can't we just call them a copy?
 
Last edited:
I would call anything that miss-represents the original, so not being made by the original maker , is effectively a fake. It does not matter who makes the fake in my view. Calling something a tribute is just being pc about a fake item.
There are many fake items being made, and sometimes the fakes are better made than the original and command a higher price.
 
I've played in a couple of "tribute" bands. The goal is to sound exactly like the original artist.

In this case, you only do it because of intense admiration for the artist's work; playing songs exactly the same as the original -- night after night -- isn't enjoyable, unless you really respect the artist.

As someone mentioned earlier, it all depends on who's doing it. If the builder has built many of his own original designs, I think it's cool to "go back in history" and do a tribute cue. If he's just copying the design because he can't think of anything original that's a different story.
 
I remember when the shift happened with cars...a GTO clone became a tribute and the price tag jumped significantly. WTF?
Karl (not a fan of "tributes")
 
conetip said:
I would call anything that miss-represents the original, so not being made by the original maker , is effectively a fake. It does not matter who makes the fake in my view. Calling something a tribute is just being pc about a fake item.
There are many fake items being made, and sometimes the fakes are better made than the original and command a higher price.
Click to expand...

A fake is a cue made by one maker and selling it as the original makers work. Copy would be the correct term. Ken is correct.
 
Fake, Copy and tribute are not synonyms and they mean different things.

Fake =replica or meant to pass as the original. IE, if a southwest style cue is signed by the actual maker as their own work it is not a fake. It is a tribute or a copy.

The difference is a copy is meant to look exactly like the original (yet not passed as the original) while a tribute is an homage to the original but not an exact copy and perhaps containing some interpretation.

These words have an actual meaning regardless of how you may interpret them. Really, a little understanding of the english language is all it takes.

Other real world examples: Cooking

You don't think other chefs make beef Wellington? Most make their tribute or their version of the dish. (Tribute)

Others will say using Charlie Trotter's old recipe (copy)

it would be a fake if they said "this was cooked by Charlie Trotter (Fake)

See the difference?

Ken, don't get your panties in a twist.
 
Last edited:
conetip said:
I would call anything that miss-represents the original, so not being made by the original maker , is effectively a fake. It does not matter who makes the fake in my view. Calling something a tribute is just being pc about a fake item.
There are many fake items being made, and sometimes the fakes are better made than the original and command a higher price.
Click to expand...

No, not correct at all. Fake is a term that can only be applied to something that is being passed off as something it is not. An Onley southwest style cue is not a fake southwest is it? No of course not. It is a real onley cue made in the SW style - a tribute or copy, yes. Fake. No!
 
To me a good tribute cue wouldn't be an exact duplicate but a creation reminiscent of a previous cue with the new cuemakers own personal touch or style on it.
 
prewarhero said:
Fake, Copy and tribute are not synonyms and they mean different things.

Fake =replica or meant to pass as the original. IE, if a southwest style cue is signed by the actual maker as their own work it is not a fake. It is a tribute or a copy.

The difference is a copy is meant to look exactly like the original (yet not passed as the original) while a tribute is an homage to the original but not an exact copy and perhaps containing some interpretation.

These words have an actual meaning regardless of how you may interpret them. Really, a little understanding of the english language is all it takes......

See the difference?

Ken, don't get your panties in a twist.
Click to expand...

Nice post, I agree. Sometimes these terms are not used correctly.
 
prewarhero said:
Ken, don't get your panties in a twist.
Click to expand...

Good one!..:D


If you look at the Cue Gallery, they are posting EXACTLY the copy of the Mosconi Balabushka, and calling it a tribute.

Whilst I untwist my panties....tell me if you make an exact copy of a famous Mosconi Balabushka, how can you call that tribute and not a copy.

Hell, they are arguing on which one copied it the closest.

I tried to slip in a post on several "tribute" threads, if they like the cue, why don't they just buy the original?

Ken
 
I have seen about a dozen Mona Lisa's hanging in offices, next time I am at my Dr's I'll ask him why he doesn't own the original.

JV

Ken_4fun said:
Good one!..:D


If you look at the Cue Gallery, they are posting EXACTLY the copy of the Mosconi Balabushka, and calling it a tribute.

Whilst I untwist my panties....tell me if you make an exact copy of a famous Mosconi Balabushka, how can you call that tribute and not a copy.

Hell, they are arguing on which one copied it the closest.

I tried to slip in a post on several "tribute" threads, if they like the cue, why don't they just buy the original?

Ken
Click to expand...
 
Ken_4fun said:
Good one!..:D


If you look at the Cue Gallery, they are posting EXACTLY the copy of the Mosconi Balabushka, and calling it a tribute.

Whilst I untwist my panties....tell me if you make an exact copy of a famous Mosconi Balabushka, how can you call that tribute and not a copy.

Hell, they are arguing on which one copied it the closest.

I tried to slip in a post on several "tribute" threads, if they like the cue, why don't they just buy the original?

Ken
Click to expand...

Good question. I haven't read the tread but if it is an exact copy it is not a tribute. It is a copy. If the maker tries to push it off as a real bushka or Mosconi's real cue then it is a fake. Otherwise it is simply a copy.
 
Ken_4fun said:
Good one!..:D


If you look at the Cue Gallery, they are posting EXACTLY the copy of the Mosconi Balabushka, and calling it a tribute.

Whilst I untwist my panties....tell me if you make an exact copy of a famous Mosconi Balabushka, how can you call that tribute and not a copy.

Hell, they are arguing on which one copied it the closest.

I tried to slip in a post on several "tribute" threads, if they like the cue, why don't they just buy the original?

Ken
Click to expand...

Being a fan of both George and Willie I would love to have a tribute of that cue... A tribute would be something I could likely afford where I could never even hope to own the original.... I see no harm in people doing tribute cues as they satisfy a niche in the market and I don't see them impacting the value of the originals.... I'm sure just because someone made copies, Willie's Bushka hasn't lost a penny of worth over it......

Now making a copy and trying to pass it off as the real deal is counterfeiting... That's where I would call something a fake.....

A copy made and labeled as such is a clone or tribute... I have zero problem with clones or tributes as they offer the working man the chance to own something similar to items well beyond their means......

Just my .02

Chris
 
IMO a tribute is a ONE TIME deal with the original makers permission..If the maker has past away, then still one and done....more than one and they are copies...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top