BarenbruggeCues said:
I always knew you were a little sharper than a butter knife, Dave.
New thread coming as soon as I get pics done...please excuse my rambling, Koop.
JWP
(...will trade leather for ringwork lessons)
Linen vs. All other wraps
- Thread starter Koop
- Start date
I always knew you were a little sharper than a butter knife, Dave.
New thread coming as soon as I get pics done...please excuse my rambling, Koop.
JWP
(...will trade leather for ringwork lessons)
JW....you know....
I don't proclaim to be the sharpest tool in the shed..........but at least I'm in the shed!
I don't proclaim to be the sharpest tool in the shed..........but at least I'm in the shed!
BarenbruggeCues said:
Back in school... I was the smartest kid in the dumb row. I know what you mean.
Oh boy........it figures.....I reply to the one thread that's a joke!
Good one Koop...........like I said .......I'm in the shed!
Good one Koop...........like I said .......I'm in the shed!
Koop said:
I don't even think the statement is worthy of a response, but it's getting some, huh?
There are many falsehoods in this world, carried over from so called "common sense" and basic wives' tales mongering. There is absolutely no quantifiable evidence whatsoever that a Irish Linen wrap cue cause a player to be less accurate.
Futhermore, there is no quantifiable proof whatsoever that a one-piece cue is "better." I believe this to be a misconception based on early joint designs and the crappy sound/feel they may have produced.
A good analogy would be anything in the structural wood industry where beams and such are engineered, laminated, etc. from pieces of wood in an effort to make something that surpasses a single piece of wood in various quantifiable parameters. And it's obviously successful. Wood in of itself isn't homogenous, and is bound to have structural flaws. I believe that was Wood Technology 101, junior year.
Fred
As you all know, a conversation can be started and discussed about anything, it's just not safe to wear white socks while discussing them.
Mike I didnt know you guys down there knew what shoe's were never mind socks.
Plus dont you need to keep your toe's out in the open so you can count?
Plus dont you need to keep your toe's out in the open so you can count?
Dave in Boston said:
It use to work that way but with friends like you the SHIT is just to deep so for now on, dark colored socks and half boots. My best to Liz.
This thread went way off on a tangent..
________
________
Last edited:
You know when Mosconi missed that 527th ball, he muttered, " goddang linen wrap!".Craig Fales said:This thread went way off on a tangent..
Fred-Cornerman said:
Reading your posts is usually insightful, and I think that you steer people in a good direction. I don't quite get this one though...
Vibratory physics: A pool cue reacts similiarly to a musical instrument in that after contact, a wood body resonates producing vibration. (an instrument uses these vibrations to create sound in a hollow body) The frequency at which this cue resonates largely determines the "hit" of the cue. The "feedback" that you hear experienced players referring to is actually the attenuation of the sin wave that bounces across the length of the cue. Putting a piece of metal in the middle of a wooden rod will ultimately dampen the resonance by forcing the sin wave to attenuate more quickly.
In this way, a one-piece cue is "better" or more ideal, just not as practical! I haven't seen full sized hard cases for quite some time...
Not to mention it's more prone to buzzing.class act said:
Any added weight to the cue lowers the reasonance. Specially the ones at the bottom of the cue.Koop said:
In fact taking 10 thousandths of an inch in the joint area affects the feel of the cue.
I did an experiment on a sneaky blank.
Started at .865" at the joint, then down to .855".
The cue felt different with that change.
Put some weight at the bottom, that too changed the feel of the cue.
In fact it wasn't even close to the feel before the weight change.
Not even close.
If wood joint threads were feasible, I'd use them. But, they just have too many downfall imo.
Joining forearms to the handle without metal is not rocket science but it's not quite as easy as using 3/8" studs.
I'm not gonna argue what "hit" is.
Some people equate it to cueball action, some people equate to cue feel.
I'm just talking the cue's reasonance which you feel w/your grip hand.
That feel where you know if you punched the ball or lagged it or stunned it or whatever you call them different strokes.
The worst cues imo are those you can't feel how you stroked the ball b/c they give you no feel/feedback.
Last edited:
I think if you reread your post, you'll see the non-analogy and proof of what I said. Music and specifically sound, by definition is the resonance frequency. The "hit" of a cue that people are reporting is simply vibration feedback in their hand and their ears. But the cue and tip have long separated while the person is still feeling/hearing these vibations.class act said:
Pool is about contact, energy transfer, speed, and torque. Notice that resonance and frequency are not listed anywhere. If anyone can reasonably equate or correlate resonance frequency with any of the physical parameters above, then I'm all ears. If not, then strength and stability in the wood must be the most important inherent properties in the cue itself.
Parameters like balance, taper, and resonance are all personal preference. That's why some people love muted hits, while other love more twang.
If you have a violin, one will sound better than the other. But, if you hit someone on the head with either, it's going to hurt the same regardless of which one sounds better.
And BTW, there aren't many musical instruments that are made with one piece.
Fred