or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc... - Page 717  

post #10741 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by OptoDoc View Post

Interesting story from this weekend...

(I'm starting to think all women in my area are completely ignorant regarding men's clothing style.)

A friend of mine that I don't know to well (met him at my running club a few weeks ago) went out this Friday and ended up picking up a couple of women and bringing them back to my place. Long story short, I ended up in my bedroom with one of the young ladies where I had my shoes laid out so that I could polish them Saturday morning. She mentioned to me that she didn't like my shoes, that they were not fashionable and 'old-mannish' and told me I should dress more like my buddy (who was wearing elongated square toed suede shoes of unknown origin, a Lacoste polo with just the front tucked in and a Kenneth Kole watch). I tried explaining to her the difference between 'fashion' and 'timeless style' to no avail. We started to have quite a heated discussion on the topic before I had enough and shut her up with other heated maneuvers. Anyway...just thought I'd share.

This reminds me of something I was pondering a couple weeks ago (below), and also leads to an interesting question: if your friend had been dressing more like you, would he have been able to bring those women back to your place in the first place? Perhaps he still would have been able to, considering your shoes did not ultimately turn off the one you...landed. But it still calls into question the motivation for dressing in a timeless style that, like it or not, is sometimes not appreciated and perhaps detrimental to some male causes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa Doble View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I know people who have custom suits and still wear square toed shoes like this:

What they don't understand is that if they wore a decent, well-fitting $250 OTR suit, but upped their shoe game, they would look much better.
This kind of brings up something I was thinking about yesterday.
Mens style blogs and SF members often claim that one of the reasons men should wear nice shoes is because women notice them. If women or people in general do notice shoes, can they recognize good shoes, or would they think the above are the same as or better than a pair of AEs? Before I got into style, I might have been able to tell the difference visually between the two, but I wouldn't have known which was nicer. In fact, I found shoes like the PA or Macneil to be very old fashioned in a bad way. The only reason my wife knows the difference is because I've essentially educated her against her will. I imagine significant others of SF members might also appreciate nice shoes, but they may not represent the norm. Thoughts?
post #10742 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigg View Post


Silly question but any idea where I could buy Neatsfoot oil in Manhattan?
Sorry, can't help you there. I bought mine on Amazon for $9.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001CS0YMI/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00
post #10743 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliebrown2 View Post

can anyone comment on the JAB shoe racks?  The consensus seems to be that when the racks are stacked together, there isn't much height space between the racks.  I'm not sure if that's the case with your typical AE shoes (strands, pa, 5a, etc.).

That is correct.  I have 5 racks and there isn't very much space, but as bucksfan said you could buy

the extenders to give more room in between the racks.

 

Here is a quick pic of 2 racks stacked together that I have for reference:

 

post #10744 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by OptoDoc View Post

Interesting story from this weekend...

(I'm starting to think all women in my area are completely ignorant regarding men's clothing style.)

A friend of mine that I don't know to well (met him at my running club a few weeks ago) went out this Friday and ended up picking up a couple of women and bringing them back to my place. Long story short, I ended up in my bedroom with one of the young ladies where I had my shoes laid out so that I could polish them Saturday morning. She mentioned to me that she didn't like my shoes, that they were not fashionable and 'old-mannish' and told me I should dress more like my buddy (who was wearing elongated square toed suede shoes of unknown origin, a Lacoste polo with just the front tucked in and a Kenneth Kole watch). I tried explaining to her the difference between 'fashion' and 'timeless style' to no avail. We started to have quite a heated discussion on the topic before I had enough and shut her up with other heated maneuvers. Anyway...just thought I'd share.

Which shoes were she referring to?
post #10745 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by OptoDoc View Post

Interesting story from this weekend...

 

(I'm starting to think all women in my area are completely ignorant regarding men's clothing style.)

 

A friend of mine that I don't know to well (met him at my running club a few weeks ago) went out this Friday and ended up picking up a couple of women and bringing them back to my place. Long story short, I ended up in my bedroom with one of the young ladies where I had my shoes laid out so that I could polish them Saturday morning. She mentioned to me that she didn't like my shoes, that they were not fashionable and 'old-mannish' and told me I should dress more like my buddy (who was wearing elongated square toed suede shoes of unknown origin, a Lacoste polo with just the front tucked in and a Kenneth Kole watch). I tried explaining to her the difference between 'fashion' and 'timeless style' to no avail. We started to have quite a heated discussion on the topic before I had enough and shut her up with other heated maneuvers. Anyway...just thought I'd share.

 

It took me awhile to fully realize this, but context is a big part of dressing well.  There are occasions where timeless and classic look good and there are times where something a little more contemporary may be called for.  That's not saying you should run out and buy the same things as your friend because you shouldn't.  But, perhaps, there are some situations for a young single guy like you where certain AE oxfords may not be the best choice.  For example, if you had been wearing suede chukka's or longwings with dark jeans and a casual, unstructured jacket, she probably would have complimented you.  Similarly, some of the AE rough line shoes look better with jeans and a sweater than Strands do.  Bottom line, as you develop your own style, you may find yourself reaching for certain AE's in certain contexts and other AE's (or non-AE's) in other situations.

post #10746 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Shoes1 View Post

It took me awhile to fully realize this, but context is a big part of dressing well.  There are occasions where timeless and classic look good and there are times where something a little more contemporary may be called for.  That's not saying you should run out and buy the same things as your friend because you shouldn't.  But, perhaps, there are some situations for a young single guy like you where certain AE oxfords may not be the best choice.  For example, if you had been wearing suede chukka's or longwings with dark jeans and a casual, unstructured jacket, she probably would have complimented you.  Similarly, some of the AE rough line shoes look better with jeans and a sweater than Strands do.  Bottom line, as you develop your own style, you may find yourself reaching for certain AE's in certain contexts and other AE's (or non-AE's) in other situations.

Well said.
post #10747 of 70737

I know that many of you guys have both the walnut and dark chocolate daltons.

Do you find it an overlapping boot?  I have both the dark chocolate daltons & walnut

strands but still deciding on if it would be worth picking up the walnut daltons.

 

What do you guys think?

post #10748 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by OptoDoc View Post

For those who own the Strand and Kenilworth. Do you wear the same size in both? A sales associate mentioned to me awhile back that many people go down a width in the Kenilworth from their normal 5 last size.

For me:

9D in Strand (great fit)
9D in Kenilworth (fit not as good; more snug in length and in width); ending up getting rid of them for reasons unrelated to fit.
post #10749 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliebrown2 View Post

can anyone comment on the JAB shoe racks?  The consensus seems to be that when the racks are stacked together, there isn't much height space between the racks.  I'm not sure if that's the case with your typical AE shoes (strands, pa, 5a, etc.).

There is sufficient height for all "regular" height dress shoes. Not enough height for chukkas or high boots (so just put them on the top racks). I've been using them for years. I currently have 17 said racks in use in my master closet.
post #10750 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by plei89 View Post


Which shoes were she referring to?

 

I was wearing Clark's Bushacre II chukkas, but she was referring to Walnut Hales, Walnut Strands, Burgundy Cliftons and Stafford wingtip boots.

post #10751 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenfoldtieguy View Post

There is sufficient height for all "regular" height dress shoes. Not enough height for chukkas or high boots (so just put them on the top racks). I've been using them for years. I currently have 17 said racks in use in my master closet.

You really need to take more pictures of your collection sevenfoldtieguy. Maybe you've done this in the past?
post #10752 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenfoldtieguy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by charliebrown2 View Post

can anyone comment on the JAB shoe racks?  The consensus seems to be that when the racks are stacked together, there isn't much height space between the racks.  I'm not sure if that's the case with your typical AE shoes (strands, pa, 5a, etc.).

There is sufficient height for all "regular" height dress shoes. Not enough height for chukkas or high boots (so just put them on the top racks). I've been using them for years. I currently have 17 said racks in use in my master closet.

This.

BTW I inadvertently ordered a single shoe rack on Friday, sent them an email a few minutes later explaining that I'd intended to order three to take advantage of the sale. Lo and behold, this morning the following email was in my inbox:
Quote:
Thank you for your email. We have placed two more shoe racks on this order at no charge, in honor of the promotion per your request. Please accept our apologies for any confusion this may have caused. If we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us at any time.


Sincerely,
Your Friends at JoS. A. Bank

Now that's great service!
post #10753 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmejson View Post

That is correct.  I have 5 racks and there isn't very much space, but as bucksfan said you could buy

the extenders to give more room in between the racks.

 

Here is a quick pic of 2 racks stacked together that I have for reference:

 

 

Thanks for the pic.  A bit hard to see the 2nd row/rack (maybe it's just me?)  Can you place a shoe on the 2nd row for reference?  Thanks.

post #10754 of 70737

I guess I'm the only person that still keeps Shoes in the Original Shoe boxes?

post #10755 of 70737
I thought there was a rubber soled version of the fifth street boot, did they discontinue it?

Does anyone have any recommendations for a rubber soled boot in the MC category, I do not like the long branch or eagle county. It does not have to be AE.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc...