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 2982  

post #44716 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacafotos View Post


Agree, except I feel an X factor bal like the Strand can be made more casual with some colored laces. Not sure that's as doable with just any bal.

 

I would wear walnut strands with something similar to Luv2B's fit, but do not think colored laces are needed.  For me, the scale of the brogueing on the Strands and the light color makes them more casual, even if they are a balmoral.  I find my Strands, balmoral or not, are too casual for a suit, but fit pretty well in the jacket/no tie context.

post #44717 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedBird View Post

Hello Gents! I need some help IDing the leather on this pair of MacNeils I picked up today. It is a pebble grain, but is extremely supple, much more so than the regular pebble grain I have owned from AE. Any thoughts on what it may be? Thanks!

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)






 

 

Are they a brown color? As its looks a lot like the color of my dark brown Long Branches will also have really supple pebble grain leather. I tried the black promontory point grain boots and was surprised at how stiff that leather was compared to the dark brown. 

 

Those look great though. Would def. have a pair. 

post #44718 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by csmitty View Post


Are they a brown color? As its looks a lot like the color of my dark brown Long Branches will also have really supple pebble grain leather. I tried the black promontory point grain boots and was surprised at how stiff that leather was compared to the dark brown. 

Those look great though. Would def. have a pair. 

No they are not that leather. Way more supple, I was hoping someone had seen something similar in some swatches for a MTO piece. I had never seen this specific leather on a production AE.
post #44719 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedBird View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by csmitty View Post


Are they a brown color? As its looks a lot like the color of my dark brown Long Branches will also have really supple pebble grain leather. I tried the black promontory point grain boots and was surprised at how stiff that leather was compared to the dark brown. 

Those look great though. Would def. have a pair. 

No they are not that leather. Way more supple, I was hoping someone had seen something similar in some swatches for a MTO piece. I had never seen this specific leather on a production AE.

Do you have some of those long branches? It looks the same to me. I'll take a pic tomorrow. They're really soft.
post #44720 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by csmitty View Post

Do you have some of those long branches? It looks the same to me. I'll take a pic tomorrow. They're really soft.

Yeah I own a pair of the dark brown long branches and this is a different leather.
post #44721 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedBird View Post

Hello Gents! I need some help IDing the leather on this pair of MacNeils I picked up today. It is a pebble grain, but is extremely supple, much more so than the regular pebble grain I have owned from AE. Any thoughts on what it may be? Thanks!


Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)






Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedBird View Post

Hello Gents! I need some help IDing the leather on this pair of MacNeils I picked up today. It is a pebble grain, but is extremely supple, much more so than the regular pebble grain I have owned from AE. Any thoughts on what it may be? Thanks!


Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)







That looks like the brown leather they used on the San Marcos.

Chris
post #44722 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedBird View Post

Hello Gents! I need some help IDing the leather on this pair of MacNeils I picked up today. It is a pebble grain, but is extremely supple, much more so than the regular pebble grain I have owned from AE. Any thoughts on what it may be? Thanks!


Size?!

I've been looking for a darker brown blucher and coming up dry. These look great.
post #44723 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by hohneokc View Post


That looks like the brown leather they used on the San Marcos.

Chris

Potentially I haven't gotten my hands on a pair of those yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeviMay View Post

Size?!

I've been looking for a darker brown blucher and coming up dry. These look great.

10.5D, PM me if you are interested.
post #44724 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeviMay View Post
 
 
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedBird View Post

Hello Gents! I need some help IDing the leather on this pair of MacNeils I picked up today. It is a pebble grain, but is extremely supple, much more so than the regular pebble grain I have owned from AE. Any thoughts on what it may be? Thanks!


Size?!


I've been looking for a darker brown blucher and coming up dry.

 

I just did these brown CXL MacNeils as an MTO and can recommend them very highly:

 

post #44725 of 70737
Is CXL considered more weather resistant than other casual leathers? If not, what would be? Dublin?
post #44726 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by peppercorn78 View Post

Is CXL considered more weather resistant than other casual leathers? If not, what would be? Dublin?

 

While I do not have anything concrete to back this up other than owning CXL it would seem very weather resistant to me, my CXL Sebago's have gotten drenched and look perfectly fine...compared to other casuals can not be sure. My McTavish is a rough leather and I treated it with Aussie Balm and it has suffered a pop up rain storm with zero issues.

post #44727 of 70737
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by submatrix View Post


Love the explanations, really helps me learn the thinking process for matching. Keep them coming! :nodding:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by peppercorn78 View Post


[/SPOILER]

Excellent outfit, luv2b. I noticed it in the other thread as well. I think you were right in guessing the tie color is a tad close to your shoes/belt, but it still works. Really nice trousers. Are they a tad right in the thigh/seat, or is that just the pose?

Nice to see a fit from you, as I always enjoy your perspectives.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacktasticGDogg View Post


Nice outfit. Great to learn about your thought process on how everything fits together. I think if I was wearing a similar outfit, I would also likely end up deciding on some monk straps or bluchers in the tan family. I personally wouldn't have an issue going with some tan balmorals though, and I have a pair of tan/snuff suede spectator wingtip balmorals that I would wear with that outfit during the weekend.

For the sake of possible discussion, a non-obvious color I would wear with those light grey pants would be navy colored shoes (I own a pair of navy/midght-blue single monks that I usually wear with grey or tan pants). What are you thoughts regarding that combination?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sacafotos View Post


Agree, except I feel an X factor bal like the Strand can be made more casual with some colored laces. Not sure that's as doable with just any bal.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Shoes1 View Post

 

I would wear walnut strands with something similar to Luv2B's fit, but do not think colored laces are needed. For me, the scale of the brogueing on the Strands and the light color makes them more casual, even if they are a balmoral. I find my Strands, balmoral or not, are too casual for a suit, but fit pretty well in the jacket/no tie context.

 

Thanks for the feedback and discussion, fellas. I will certainly keep posting my shoe selection and thought process here after receiving such a good response!

 

Trousers are indeed a tad snug here. That said, when I am about 5 lbs lighter they are some of my best fitting pants. :)

 

On the alternative shoe discussion, I think a plain snuff suede shoe would be great here as well. I have a pair, but they're bals, and you know how I feel about that! :P

A tan/snuff spec sounds interesing and would probably work well here also.

 

Navy is a color I have a hard time with. I really like it in theory. It is pretty decidely s/s. Given it's a nontraditional color it typically works best in a casual shoe, I'm thinking loafers and monks here. That said there is also a scale of formality based on darkness or lightness. Lighter shoes are typically less formal than darker shoes. This is where I have trouble with navy. It's informal everywhere except it's shade or tone. That said, this light/dark precedence is fairly low on my scale of rules. I have plenty of casual dark shoes, I just find them a bit harder use/ not quite as versatile. In this particular application I have two thoughts that contradict each other, so I would need to see the navy shoes to know for sure. First, I think navy shoes are too dark here given how light the trousers are. I think the contrast would be similar to dark brown shoes and imagine it would be too jarring. Conversely, the jacket is navy, so the palette really isn't getting any more complex. It might in fact look good to echo the jacket's color here in the bottom block. How's that for a non-answer?

 

In regards to the walnut strand discussion, I don't really like that shoe and I'll say why. Everywhere you guys are advocating wearing it I think a walnut monk or derby (franciscan/delray) does better. Additionally it breaks less "rules". I don't think this is a coincidence. Additionally as you guys said, walnut strand feels too casual for a suit. So what good is it? I think it is the best shoe for casual suits that are lighter than navy or charcoal. Pretty much I think it works best in light gray suits and suits that are like Air Force blue. That's about it. I continues to baffle me why this shoe is so recommended and encouraged.

 

That said, I could see it being recommended to somebody who could only afford a few pairs of shoes. It can sort of masquerade a lot of roles decently and that has value for some people. I think it's rarely the BEST choice (those times listed above), but I do think that it is often a fair choice, which may speak to it's popularity.

 

I do not like contrast laces very much. That said, I do have a box of laces with many different colors. I think if you are going to do color laces the rest of the outfit needs to be similarly . . . "festive"? Otherwise, too much attention is drawn to the shoes and takes away from the overall coherence of the outfit. That said I think if you wore something like red chinos, a white open necked ocbd, a navy jacket with a somewhat colorful pocket square and then threw RED laces on your shoes, you might just pull them off well. I certainly wouldn't just slap them on a walnut strand and assume that made them more casual. I just think it makes THAT shoe more incoherent. Maybe you have just given me an idea for my next outfit to try . . .

post #44728 of 70737
^luv2breformed

Amazing contribution. The thought process behind the writing is very detailed and informative. Please do share more as it bring another dynamic to this thread.
post #44729 of 70737
New drinking game! Take one every time 'luv2b' says "that said,..."
post #44730 of 70737
Quote:

Originally Posted by luv2breformed View Post
 

In regards to the walnut strand discussion, I don't really like that shoe and I'll say why. Everywhere you guys are advocating wearing it I think a walnut monk or derby (franciscan/delray) does better. Additionally it breaks less "rules". I don't think this is a coincidence. Additionally as you guys said, walnut strand feels too casual for a suit. So what good is it? I think it is the best shoe for casual suits that are lighter than navy or charcoal. Pretty much I think it works best in light gray suits and suits that are like Air Force blue. That's about it. I continues to baffle me why this shoe is so recommended and encouraged.

 

That said, I could see it being recommended to somebody who could only afford a few pairs of shoes. It can sort of masquerade a lot of roles decently and that has value for some people. I think it's rarely the BEST choice (those times listed above), but I do think that it is often a fair choice, which may speak to it's popularity.

 

I do not like contrast laces very much. That said, I do have a box of laces with many different colors. I think if you are going to do color laces the rest of the outfit needs to be similarly . . . "festive"? Otherwise, too much attention is drawn to the shoes and takes away from the overall coherence of the outfit. That said I think if you wore something like red chinos, a white open necked ocbd, a navy jacket with a somewhat colorful pocket square and then threw RED laces on your shoes, you might just pull them off well. I certainly wouldn't just slap them on a walnut strand and assume that made them more casual. I just think it makes THAT shoe more incoherent. Maybe you have just given me an idea for my next outfit to try . . .

Well said on both points (in bold)... couldn't agree more.  I purchased a pair of Walnut strands a little more than year ago thinking they would be a regular part of my rotation.  I have worn them 2-3 times.  They are a great looking shoe, but the bal-walnut combination complicates execution as you described.

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...