If I'm in the Italian section on a site, I can spot an Il Duca without looking at the write-up. I've wanted to buy a half-dozen of his pipes, but they're not cheap. There's a gorgeous smooth canted billiard on Pulver's site.
I find Gambon's finishes eye-catching but too muted, too much earth.
A lot of our ideas about what distinguishes a mid-level from a high-grade pipe make sense, but I doubt that 98% of pipe smokers can tell the difference between a tenon that has been chamfered and one that hasn't, between a pipe that has been rested and one that hasn't, between briar that has been cured for three years and that which has been cured ten.
I suppose the argument for chamfering is to reduce turbulence, but to my mind that for resting, though it points to the added element of moisture in the wood, doesn't say how the release of water vapor caused by the burning tobacco that abuts the moist briar makes a significant impact on the smoke. Most of the burning tobacco never touches the edge. If there is more vapor, a hotter smoke, but enough so that anyone without exquisite oral tissue sensitivity could tell the difference? If more vapor then the tobacco would burn more slowly, amounting to an appreciable, tastable difference?
As regards the difference between briar with different lengths of cure, makers seem to have a three year minimum. This may go by the 80/20 rule. In any case it's my feeling that very few smokers could successfully identify the briar with the longer cure.
It makes sense to chamfer, rest pipes and maximally cure, but if we can't taste and/or measure the difference that these measures effect, we might talk about them with less awe and less certainty.