or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - Page 1209

post #18121 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalTex View Post


damn, the cap on the Park Avenues looks really small. confused.gif

Yeah, it is. No arguing against it. But they look pretty good despite. It's obvious compared to the better proportioned Strands. Remove the Strands and it's less so. I believe all these shoes are 9D.

post #18122 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmdsimpson View Post


There is a very simple reason why the PA and the Leeds are the most recommended shoes: they are the most conservative and fit into most of the rules for wearing with a suit and in any business situation.

The PA is actually the "safest" shoe, as it is a balmoral (closed lacing) and does not have any brogueing or medallions. This is considered proper business style and is the "no brainer" formal office shoe.

The Leeds is a blucher (open lacing), which technically is not supposed to be worn with a suit. But in the US style culture, it is broadly acceptable. And again, no other adornments, which makes it the safest of the bluchers.

While these are traditional styles, I don't think they belong to categorization as "old habit" or "nostalgia". They are rather more "proper". And the complaints with the PA are precisely because it is a the go-to shoe, and so people want it to be perfect. And yet, despite its flaws, it is still AE's best selling shoe.

You are certainly free to have your own opinions and choice of style, but the shoes you cite and the reasons you cite are ones that most would say should not be worn in a formal business envrionment.

Going back to your post, you mention "sleek, pseudo-fashion forward" as your preference, and "rounded" as a flaw with the PA. But most people would pick rounded over pseudo-fashion forward for the office. In other words, not everyone has drunk the StyleForum Kool-Aid!

 

Interestingly, as I alluded to in my initial post on this subject, I rather like the PA, - I stated it was too round and has an unacceptable cap toe in the context of highlighting WHAT OTHERS perceive as its flaws.  Thats not my opinion of the shoe at all.  But it simply doesnt pass the muster, once people start doling out constructive criticism.  If a shoe has that many perceived flaws (to OTHER PEOPLE, not to myself), it doesnt make sense for it to still be the number one option when there are other choices out there that fill the exact same niche with apparently better execution.  The Harrison or a Black Rutledge, could very well be a more modern, stylized version of the Park Avenue, with an emphasis on addressing the concerns people seem to have about the PA.  But neither ever seem to be recommended as a conservative dress shoe.  And if the reason is because they wouldnt square with a formal business environment, well then that would mean that the PA's flaws arent really flaws at all...but rather the shoe is exactly what it should be. 

post #18123 of 50912

My only question regarding the PA is did it used to have a different cap design? it seems from some ebay pictures of vintage models to be different and extends further back.

post #18124 of 50912
Walnut Shell Strands for Easter Sunday. Natural sunlight shot.

post #18125 of 50912
Ahhh casual Monday with a pair of Elgins.

post #18126 of 50912
Ahhh casual Monday with a pair of Elgins.

post #18127 of 50912
Is anyone else super disappointed to see that the new Nicklaus golf shoes are made in the Dominican Republic? I get that they're trying to hit a price point, but it cheapens the brand for me.
post #18128 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by harlequin782 View Post

Interestingly, as I alluded to in my initial post on this subject, I rather like the PA, - I stated it was too round and has an unacceptable cap toe in the context of highlighting WHAT OTHERS perceive as its flaws.  Thats not my opinion of the shoe at all.  But it simply doesnt pass the muster, once people start doling out constructive criticism.  If a shoe has that many perceived flaws (to OTHER PEOPLE, not to myself), it doesnt make sense for it to still be the number one option when there are other choices out there that fill the exact same niche with apparently better execution.  The Harrison or a Black Rutledge, could very well be a more modern, stylized version of the Park Avenue, with an emphasis on addressing the concerns people seem to have about the PA.  But neither ever seem to be recommended as a conservative dress shoe.  And if the reason is because they wouldnt square with a formal business environment, well then that would mean that the PA's flaws arent really flaws at all...but rather the shoe is exactly what it should be. 

I see what you're saying. And I wholeheartedly agree with your final statement. Maybe it's not exactly what it should be, but it's close enough.

I think it's fair to say that despite its flaw, the PA is still the accepted "proper", "safe", "normal" style for the office overall. Some people here (myself included) complain about the cap toe being too short. But the alternatives with AE are to go to something that has too much of a square or tapered toe or that is a blucher. So which one do you settle for, if you want the classic American cap toe as your starting point? I myself would not wear any of the other shoes you cite with a conservative suit (e.g.: job interview), except for maybe the Rutledge - and it has the same short cap toe. So no options, except to change brands, which I have in this case.

And also, I think there are a lot of people who don't care about the cap toe. They want to follow the "rules" and don't get invested in the details of how the shoe looks. And actually, if you were someone young just starting out needing a pair of interview or law office shoes, I would heartily recommend the PA over the others, if only because other people who are less fashion inclined but in superior roles at work will think the PA is more proper.

As I write this it occurs to me that the PA really is a special shoe, because of the role it plays. And AE has this market locked up, so unfortunately they are unlikely to change it or to come out with an alternative.
post #18129 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by debitcard View Post

Answer please.

Here are some options in a similar price range, but each with differences and/or disadvantages from the AE. This assumes you live in the US?

- Johnston and Murphy:
Georgetown captoe $375 (made in the US; a little more $ than AE; custom made): http://www.johnstonmurphy.com/product.aspx?c=1372&sc=1372&pid=21094
Hyde Park II $275 (probably made in India): http://www.johnstonmurphy.com/product.aspx?c=1372&sc=1372&pid=22178#tabProdInfo

- Loake (made in UK, so shipping, customs, and sizing are difficult)
http://www.pediwear.co.uk/loake/1880/

- Meermin (made in China/Mallorca, Goodyear welted, shipping, customs, sizing, but good prices)
http://meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=2033

Those are what I can think of in the price range.


As for pants tailoring, you can certainly have them tapered. But you are probably better buying slimmer pants/suits to begin with.
post #18130 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimney View Post

Is anyone else super disappointed to see that the new Nicklaus golf shoes are made in the Dominican Republic? I get that they're trying to hit a price point, but it cheapens the brand for me.

Since I don't really golf, and thus have no interest in golf shoes, I'm not necessarily disappointed by the Jack Nicklaus collection. However I am a bit puzzled by AE's marketing strategy on this one. I would have thought the Jack Nicklaus collection should be their top of the line made in USA golf shoes instead of the entry level line made in DR. It would be like Nike making their Air Jordans cheaper than their other shoe lines. It doesn't quite make sense to me.
post #18131 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmdsimpson View Post


Here are some options in a similar price range, but each with differences and/or disadvantages from the AE. This assumes you live in the US?

- Johnston and Murphy:
Georgetown captoe $375 (made in the US; a little more $ than AE; custom made): http://www.johnstonmurphy.com/product.aspx?c=1372&sc=1372&pid=21094
Hyde Park II $275 (probably made in India): http://www.johnstonmurphy.com/product.aspx?c=1372&sc=1372&pid=22178#tabProdInfo

- Loake (made in UK, so shipping, customs, and sizing are difficult)
http://www.pediwear.co.uk/loake/1880/

- Meermin (made in China/Mallorca, Goodyear welted, shipping, customs, sizing, but good prices)
http://meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=2033

Those are what I can think of in the price range.


As for pants tailoring, you can certainly have them tapered. But you are probably better buying slimmer pants/suits to begin with.

 

I had been aware of J&M's Georgetown captoe just from seeing it online.  The description of it seems to put it in the same quality realm as AE or Alden (give or take).  The other day I went into a brick and mortar and asked if they had one I could look at.  The salesman just looked at me and said, "no."  Then he paused for a second and said "We may have one in the back if you want to see one."  I said I would like to see it so that I could compare it's quality to the next tier captoes (which are the Hyde Park II you mentioned above), and are always out on the sales floor, and they are definitely made in India.  The guy went back and brought out a Georgetown for me to examine.  Appearance wise, I would place it in the Alden or perhaps Crockett & Jones realm for upper and welt finishing.  The sole is still stitched-aloft rather than closed-channeled.  They had a more beveled waist, reminiscent of a fiddle-back waist seen on extremely high end shoes, but it wasn't quite there.  It pretty much looked identical to an Alden or AE sole with a sculpted waist.  The sole edge and welt was definitely cleaner than what you see on a Park Avenue.  The leather upper quality was on par with Alden or AE.  They have a half socklining just like Alden and most English made Goodyear-welted shoes. 

 

I noticed an interesting statistic on J&M's website where they say that it takes 115 steps to manufacter these shoes.  All of the other Goodyear-welted shoes claim that it takes approximately 200 steps (Allen Edmonds reports 212, John Lobb reports 190, all the others that I know of fall into this general area give or take).  I wonder how J&M is trimming off so many steps?  What are they leaving out?  Obviously these are a hollow echo of the former J&M Crown Aristocraft shoes that were made decades ago, but they seem like an ok choice for what they are. 

 

Anyway, I just found it interesting and thought I'd mention my observations for what they are worth. 

post #18132 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacktasticGDogg View Post


Since I don't really golf, and thus have no interest in golf shoes, I'm not necessarily disappointed by the Jack Nicklaus collection. However I am a bit puzzled by AE's marketing strategy on this one. I would have thought the Jack Nicklaus collection should be their top of the line made in USA golf shoes instead of the entry level line made in DR. It would be like Nike making their Air Jordans cheaper than their other shoe lines. It doesn't quite make sense to me.

 

This pretty much sums up my reaction as well.  I don't golf, so ultimately it doesn't effect me, but I was a bit surprised.  They definitely put in their time and effort in research and development.  They even seem to have some logical reasoning behind some of their choices for construction.  However, in many ways, they seem inferior to the line of golf shoes that they were already making.  They are probably trying to capture the demographic of buyers that they are also seeking to get with their for fashion forward offerings in their regular shoes.  Golf is huge right now, and more and more young people are jumping on board all the time, so the guys that like the fashion forward designs, and also play golf, will probably love them. 

post #18133 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimney View Post

Is anyone else super disappointed to see that the new Nicklaus golf shoes are made in the Dominican Republic? I get that they're trying to hit a price point, but it cheapens the brand for me.


You'd think this would be that case, wouldn't you? I really like them and would be more likely to buy a pair if they were made in the US. The less traditional golf shoes I'd expect they'd make in the DR. The more trad oxfords, I expected to be made here.

 

Besides...the type of consumer that wears AE for golf, could certainly dig further in the wallet for a pair made in the US.

post #18134 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by tampatravel View Post

Ahhh casual Monday with a pair of Elgins.

 

The Elgin is a great shoe!

post #18135 of 50912
Quote:
Originally Posted by sazon View Post

Walnut Shell Strands for Easter Sunday. Natural sunlight shot.

 

Looks great!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread