Not to distract from the subject or derail the thread, but I do want to dispel the general notion that a blade that features multiple pieces of wood in the core is necessarily inferior.
I make multi-ply blades which have both one piece cores, and multi-piece cores, and to suggest one or the other is inferior due to its build, just isn't true. Wood density generally differs a lot across a tree's cross section, so it's entirely possible (and frequently the case) to have a core made from one piece of wood, that is inherently weaker and softer on one side, due to simple and natural density shifts from sapwood to Heartwood.
If you use a piece of wood like this to make a blade, it won't flex or bounce right, and is far more likely to warp, because one side of the core is inherently weak.
If however you cut the weak section out, and then book match and butt-glue the two remaining pieces together, you can get a far superior core with even density, and consistent strength, grain, bounce and flex under load, and the butt glued section is actually far stronger than the rest of the wood would normally be.
It is frankly irrelevant if the core is made from one piece of wood, or multiple pieces. What matters is quality of material, quality workmanship, and consistent mechanical properties right across the end result. Good wood is always good wood, bad wood is always bad wood, and whether it's in one piece or several just doesn't matter.
It's actually very hard to make a bad blade from good wood (you've really got to stuff up badly to manage it), whereas it often doesn't matter how much you try to compensate for bad quality wood with extra craft, at the end of the day you're still trying to polish a turd, and you still get a shitty blade at the end of it.
