Chess_Jerk
Registered
Might be a dumb question. What are the pros and cons to old growth wooden shaft vs standard wood. Thanks for your time.
Old growth shafts
- Thread starter Chess_Jerk
- Start date
There may also be four rings.
Older wood should have a stiffer, more solid hit. I think the general thoughts is that the new production cue shafts are not as good as the older shafts that were being made 10+ years ago due to them using younger trees. Many people go after the special shafts, old bowling lane wood, old house wood, there is even the "lake wood" that is just about petrified wood that was brought up from the great lakes.
I'd like the tone you get from a quality older guitar, almost all players would say that a well taken care of and aged guitar is a lot better than a new one due to the wood and components settling in and "moving" just right.
I had an early 90s Joss that everyone that tried it though hit better than every other Joss that they tried, it had a very nice shaft on it, I'm sure the feel of it was mostly due to the shaft. All the really sweet feeling shafts I've tried were a bit darker and had tight grain, lots of the new shafts, especially the cheap ones, are very light with wide grain.
Last edited:
Old growth merely means the wood came from a tree that was 150yrs. or older. That's it. If it has tight enough grain rings & was a healthy tree, then it 'may' be stiffer, but that depends on many, many other variables. I have cut trees thatr were 60yrs old (very young for maple) and trees in the 300yr range, and everything in between. I have found that age plays almost no role at all in the quality of the wood.
Old growth
Old growth maple shafts .
If it has a nice solid hit, doesn't warp or crack, and doesn't make odd or funny sounds then I really don't care what its made of.
I don't want a tree trunk to play with.
And I do expect the shaft to last 20 or 30 years and stay straight.
Not all shafts are equal, and not all cue makers know how to make a shaft.
Me being one of those guys. :sorry:
I own a few cues and most all of them have old growth maple shafts that the wood was salvage from a bowling alley lane.
Over all I have no complaints, but I also have some snow white maple shafts that I like too.
I got deep pockets if some of you guys think you can tell the difference between a old growth shaft and a snow white maple shaft blind folded. :grin:
And then you got the guys that could play well with a plastic broom handle.
Old growth maple shafts .
If it has a nice solid hit, doesn't warp or crack, and doesn't make odd or funny sounds then I really don't care what its made of.
I don't want a tree trunk to play with.
And I do expect the shaft to last 20 or 30 years and stay straight.
Not all shafts are equal, and not all cue makers know how to make a shaft.
Me being one of those guys. :sorry:
I own a few cues and most all of them have old growth maple shafts that the wood was salvage from a bowling alley lane.
Over all I have no complaints, but I also have some snow white maple shafts that I like too.
I got deep pockets if some of you guys think you can tell the difference between a old growth shaft and a snow white maple shaft blind folded. :grin:
And then you got the guys that could play well with a plastic broom handle.
Last edited:
Great, so you're saying that older shafts being better is in the same "myth" range as pre-flag Masters chalk?
What do you look for in shaft wood? Grain patterns? Some other tests? Just proper aging and turning the top thing?
I think these two things are quite different. There are quite a few more variables that influence shaftwood differences than there are for comparing pre-flag vs. flag.
This is an interesting subject though, and Eric has a wealth of knowledge in this area.
Last edited:
Well, if you believe some master cue maker's claim, they have ZERO deflection.
They are denser/heavier and stiffer.
How many world titles have been won on old growth shafts the last 30 years???
Probably zero.
They are interesting to have though. I have an old growth maple and sycamore now.
Old growth maple would be great for coring dowels.
There are plenty of tight and heavy shafts that are not lake-salvaged maple though.
They are denser/heavier and stiffer.
How many world titles have been won on old growth shafts the last 30 years???
Probably zero.
They are interesting to have though. I have an old growth maple and sycamore now.
Old growth maple would be great for coring dowels.
There are plenty of tight and heavy shafts that are not lake-salvaged maple though.
Folks are free to call lumber whatever they like, but old growth maple should mean lumber that was taken from trees that grew in old growth forests. Very few of these old growth forests exist in the lower 48, so it is a moot point. Unless you are getting reclaimed wood (no, not that Great Lakes stuff) from the 1800s, the chances of anybody selling you true old growth maple are slim to none.
Old growth forests are dominated by trees that began life in heavy competition for sunlight. They grew straight toward the available light before they began spreading out branches, so the wood contained in them will generally be a lot straighter and have few or no knots in the main trunk. It will have very tightly space growth rings, but it may or may not be denser or stronger that wood obtained from newer stands of trees. Density and strength in sugar maple has as much to do with genetics as any other factor.
At my old place I had two huge sugar maples that were probably well over 150 years old. They were over 100' tall, almost 5' across at chest height, and had enormous and majestic crowns that were probably 75' across. But since they were out in the open (farmland), they were so branched out that the wood probably wouldn't have been good for much more than bowls or firewood.
Old growth forests are dominated by trees that began life in heavy competition for sunlight. They grew straight toward the available light before they began spreading out branches, so the wood contained in them will generally be a lot straighter and have few or no knots in the main trunk. It will have very tightly space growth rings, but it may or may not be denser or stronger that wood obtained from newer stands of trees. Density and strength in sugar maple has as much to do with genetics as any other factor.
At my old place I had two huge sugar maples that were probably well over 150 years old. They were over 100' tall, almost 5' across at chest height, and had enormous and majestic crowns that were probably 75' across. But since they were out in the open (farmland), they were so branched out that the wood probably wouldn't have been good for much more than bowls or firewood.
Shaft wood
Ahh...this question revisited. This was a subject that used to be very near and dear to my heart. This is what I believe: 1. color of the maple makes no difference what so ever. The tree it comes from is called Acer Saccharum....Sugar Maple. What happens to sugar as it's heated say, like in a kiln? It gets darker which is how a lot of shaftwood get's that way...it's dried at too high a temp, too quickly. 2. Number of growth rings has little to nothing to do with density/shaft weight/flexibility or any other factor. I've machined tons and played with even more tons of shafts that had few growth rings and weighed more than a tighter ringed piece of identical dimensions to .0005" (1/2 of a thousandth of an inch.) The Modulus of Elasticity and Modulus of Rupture (Mechanical Properties of Wood) is what ends up being the determining factor....again...in my opinion. 3. Here's an odd one. There are two types of moisture in a piece of wood. Bound water and free water. Free water is what's dried out of the wood if it's kiln dried properly. Bound water is that which makes up the cell walls. If the heat is too high as in a lot of stuff that comes out of China (even Home Depot lumber) the cells rupture and you've rendered the piece of wood incapable of giving off or taking on moisture WHICH......it MUST do. Otherwise the cue feels like you're hitting with a 2x4. The sound, the feel, everything...sucks. Eddie Felson wasn't wrong when he said the cue is alive. That piece of wood if prepared properly, will for it's lifetime continue to take on and give off moisture. Typically it's some 13 (or was it 17?) times faster through the end grain vs. the side grain. The issue is old wood vs. new. If the old wasn't properly prepared, stored, endgrain sealed, etc etc.....you've got shit. It's as simple as that I think.........just one guy's opinion.
Ahh...this question revisited. This was a subject that used to be very near and dear to my heart. This is what I believe: 1. color of the maple makes no difference what so ever. The tree it comes from is called Acer Saccharum....Sugar Maple. What happens to sugar as it's heated say, like in a kiln? It gets darker which is how a lot of shaftwood get's that way...it's dried at too high a temp, too quickly. 2. Number of growth rings has little to nothing to do with density/shaft weight/flexibility or any other factor. I've machined tons and played with even more tons of shafts that had few growth rings and weighed more than a tighter ringed piece of identical dimensions to .0005" (1/2 of a thousandth of an inch.) The Modulus of Elasticity and Modulus of Rupture (Mechanical Properties of Wood) is what ends up being the determining factor....again...in my opinion. 3. Here's an odd one. There are two types of moisture in a piece of wood. Bound water and free water. Free water is what's dried out of the wood if it's kiln dried properly. Bound water is that which makes up the cell walls. If the heat is too high as in a lot of stuff that comes out of China (even Home Depot lumber) the cells rupture and you've rendered the piece of wood incapable of giving off or taking on moisture WHICH......it MUST do. Otherwise the cue feels like you're hitting with a 2x4. The sound, the feel, everything...sucks. Eddie Felson wasn't wrong when he said the cue is alive. That piece of wood if prepared properly, will for it's lifetime continue to take on and give off moisture. Typically it's some 13 (or was it 17?) times faster through the end grain vs. the side grain. The issue is old wood vs. new. If the old wasn't properly prepared, stored, endgrain sealed, etc etc.....you've got shit. It's as simple as that I think.........just one guy's opinion.
Some other fuel to add to the debate: The old masters who made violins and archtop guitars etc. used to "tune" the wood. Meaning they would plane down the soundboard by hand so the result would produce a specific resonant frequency. That would result in virtually identical sounding instruments but dramatically thicker/thinner materials from one instrument to the other. Cuemakers are doing the polar opposite. They're machining pieces to identical dimensions hoping to maintain a resonant frequency (for lack of a better phrase.) It simply won't happen. What I personally think happens with differently weighted shafts is not so much the difference in weight as it is the distribution of that weight. Remove 1/2 ounce from the shaft because it's simply a lighter (weightwise) piece of wood shifts the distribution a given percentage and the hit will be affected. However, if you move you back hand back a tad...does that counterbalance the missing front weight? I would venture a guess to say........Hell if I know. There are just so many variables involved that would make it impossible to say old growth is better than new or vice versa.
Interesting perspectives, some true & some only half true. I can only speak from my own experience and education, so somebody who knows more about it may think I'm only half true as well.
You must first consider genetics, and/or species. Hard maple encompasses a few trees, mostly of which is sugar maple. Black maple is nearly identical as a tree, and virtually identical as lumber. The trees are so similar that they naturally hybridize. However, the catch is that red maple (soft) and black maple also hybridize, but red maple & sugar maple do not. The hybrids of either can & do mix with others, either way, though. As much as I know about each tree, I even get confused when walking in a mixed maple forest as a tree may be on the softer side but exhibit leaves & bark that more resemble a hard maple. So basically, you just don't know until the tree is cut, milled, and dried. If it's hard enough for cues, then it's good. If not, then it's a waste.
Drying the lumber is another issue, as stated by Vince. I personally prefer to dry maple at low temp, then heat it after the fact with steam to relieve drying stresses. My lumber begins it's kiln drying the same day the tree is cut, usually within a couple hours. The dried wood will be the same color as it was when cut. Older trees with almost no sap wood will produce brown wood, not to be confused with lumber that was overheated in the early stages of kiln drying, or from logs that sat around too long before milling & drying. Younger, healthy trees produce the bright white wood, but that wood can be dried improperly & turn brown. Drying is as important as choosing the correct tree.
Old growth technically means the wood came from a 150+yr old tree. That's not old for maple. Most trees I cut are in the 80-100yr range, with 150+ not being uncommon, depending on the tract I'm cutting from. What many folks think is old growth is the stuff being pulled up from the great lakes. Unless the guy is there to count grain lines on the log, there's no way to know if it's old growth or not, regardless where it came from. Brown wood doesn't mean old growth, either. In fact, only the 250+yr old trees I have ever cut produce a majority of brown wood. As the tree grows, it's only the outer layers (sap wood) that are alive, and growth comes from an extra layer each year. The wood in the center is dead (heart wood), and with time will turn brown. I have cut numerous old growth trees that had tiny hearts, meaning lots of white wood. You can't tell in shaft form.
Things I consider when choosing shafts include hardness, stiffness, uniformity of color, weight, and most importantly tonal characteristics. There's a happy medium of each factor that creates as perfect of shaft as can be had. Each taper & dimension will require a different specification to be optimum, so it's up to the individual builder to find what works best for his cues. What works on my cues might not be any good for Joey's cues, simply because our taper shape & dimensions are different. Chances are pretty good that a piece of wood that's good for me, would work on anybody's cues with satisfactory results. But it's likely not the best, unless their taper is exactly the same as mine. And then you must mate the shaft with the butt. Each cue butt will have its own tonal personality & you must know how to match a shaft to it to achieve optimum performance. It's a delicate balancing act, a science for sure. That's not to say a guy can't build any ol' butt & use any ol' shaft and produce a fairly nice playing cue. It can & does happen. I'm just saying that it coulda been better if he'd have taken the time & matched his woods.
So in the end, I guess old growth doesn't matter. Each tree, like each person, is completely different. Some old guys are wise & have priceless lessons to pass on to us. Some old guys are idiots. Trees are no different. Judge each shaft individually, regardless of how it's labeled. I can show you a shaft with a zillion grain lines & brown color that came from an adolescent tree, and another shaft with white color & 6 grain lines that came from an old growth tree. It all depends on a mix of genetics, history, and growing conditions, then how long the log sat before being milled, how it was stored during, and the manner in which it was dried. There are too many variables to consider. It's easier to just know how to pick a shaft for it's quality rather than some special label you can stick to it.
You must first consider genetics, and/or species. Hard maple encompasses a few trees, mostly of which is sugar maple. Black maple is nearly identical as a tree, and virtually identical as lumber. The trees are so similar that they naturally hybridize. However, the catch is that red maple (soft) and black maple also hybridize, but red maple & sugar maple do not. The hybrids of either can & do mix with others, either way, though. As much as I know about each tree, I even get confused when walking in a mixed maple forest as a tree may be on the softer side but exhibit leaves & bark that more resemble a hard maple. So basically, you just don't know until the tree is cut, milled, and dried. If it's hard enough for cues, then it's good. If not, then it's a waste.
Drying the lumber is another issue, as stated by Vince. I personally prefer to dry maple at low temp, then heat it after the fact with steam to relieve drying stresses. My lumber begins it's kiln drying the same day the tree is cut, usually within a couple hours. The dried wood will be the same color as it was when cut. Older trees with almost no sap wood will produce brown wood, not to be confused with lumber that was overheated in the early stages of kiln drying, or from logs that sat around too long before milling & drying. Younger, healthy trees produce the bright white wood, but that wood can be dried improperly & turn brown. Drying is as important as choosing the correct tree.
Old growth technically means the wood came from a 150+yr old tree. That's not old for maple. Most trees I cut are in the 80-100yr range, with 150+ not being uncommon, depending on the tract I'm cutting from. What many folks think is old growth is the stuff being pulled up from the great lakes. Unless the guy is there to count grain lines on the log, there's no way to know if it's old growth or not, regardless where it came from. Brown wood doesn't mean old growth, either. In fact, only the 250+yr old trees I have ever cut produce a majority of brown wood. As the tree grows, it's only the outer layers (sap wood) that are alive, and growth comes from an extra layer each year. The wood in the center is dead (heart wood), and with time will turn brown. I have cut numerous old growth trees that had tiny hearts, meaning lots of white wood. You can't tell in shaft form.
Things I consider when choosing shafts include hardness, stiffness, uniformity of color, weight, and most importantly tonal characteristics. There's a happy medium of each factor that creates as perfect of shaft as can be had. Each taper & dimension will require a different specification to be optimum, so it's up to the individual builder to find what works best for his cues. What works on my cues might not be any good for Joey's cues, simply because our taper shape & dimensions are different. Chances are pretty good that a piece of wood that's good for me, would work on anybody's cues with satisfactory results. But it's likely not the best, unless their taper is exactly the same as mine. And then you must mate the shaft with the butt. Each cue butt will have its own tonal personality & you must know how to match a shaft to it to achieve optimum performance. It's a delicate balancing act, a science for sure. That's not to say a guy can't build any ol' butt & use any ol' shaft and produce a fairly nice playing cue. It can & does happen. I'm just saying that it coulda been better if he'd have taken the time & matched his woods.
So in the end, I guess old growth doesn't matter. Each tree, like each person, is completely different. Some old guys are wise & have priceless lessons to pass on to us. Some old guys are idiots. Trees are no different. Judge each shaft individually, regardless of how it's labeled. I can show you a shaft with a zillion grain lines & brown color that came from an adolescent tree, and another shaft with white color & 6 grain lines that came from an old growth tree. It all depends on a mix of genetics, history, and growing conditions, then how long the log sat before being milled, how it was stored during, and the manner in which it was dried. There are too many variables to consider. It's easier to just know how to pick a shaft for it's quality rather than some special label you can stick to it.
And to all of THAT you can add the Janka scale of hardness for determining the hardness of various species. However, even that scale is an average and doesn't take into consideration all the variables Mother Nature can throw at you in any given species. I completely agree with a qbilder up there who listens to the piece of wood. Believe it or not to the trained ear that information tells the whole story. At least to me it does......
Last edited:
That's why I hate it when people caliper the buttplate and "determine" from that if the cue is " fat" or " thin" or "soft" or "stiff".
Well, duh, tell me a purpleheart handle at 1.220 bottom is softer than a 1.250 maple. A fat really hard wood handle might feel dead to some b/c it just does not vibrate much. Making it thinner without touching the forearm might make it feel much better.
Let's not even mention what the core wood is if there is one.
A friend of mine had a cue made with an old growth shaft. I had to use it one in emergency while playing for some cash. The cueball deflection and throw from that shaft was waaaay different. I had to adapt to it. I avoided spin as much as possible b/c I had no clue how the cueball reacted.
Imo, old growth shafts are fine for skinny shafts or with long barrel.
If it has some 2MM taper in 14" inches, it becomes way too stiff.
Some really white maple can be whippy even with a 2MM taper to the middle .