or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Sartorial mythbusting
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sartorial mythbusting - Page 2

post #16 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post
I find Sator to be even handed

You have got to be kidding.

jeffrey, does anyone really claim that an angled shoulder seam increases elasticity? What I have read, and had explained to me by tailors, is that the angle (caused by the small backneck measurement) moves the neckpoint back and down in such a way is to increase the collar's ability to stay on the neck. Also, it allows for extra fullness over the blades, which helps the coat move more freely.

Both of these observations are true to my experience. Every coat on which I have had problems with the collar not sticking to the neck have been ones with straighter shoulder seams. All of the coats that I have had with angled seams (and small backnecks) -- whether from London, Italy, or New York -- have stayed glued to the neck at all times.
post #17 of 1680
Ultimately, as I suspected, for those who have taken the leap of faith, A&S are beyond criticism. Anyone who does is automatically villainised. Even if you can show that A&S are making correctable mistakes catalogued in classic 1930s tailoring literature on how to troubleshoot problems that arise in cutting with drape, there is virtually no point. It's just regarded as a form of swearing even if not a single four letter word is uttered, though you can be sure that you will get a flood of them coming back at you.
post #18 of 1680
I thought that I would post now just so that my words were adjacent to the previous two posts.

It's a social technique that really works.


- B
post #19 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Satan View Post
Ultimately, as I suspected, for those who have taken the leap of faith, A&S are beyond criticism. Anyone who does is automatically villainised. Even if you can show that A&S are making correctable mistakes catalogued in classic 1930s tailoring literature on how to troubleshoot problems that arise in cutting with drape, there is virtually no point. It's just regarded as a form of swearing even if not a single four letter word is uttered, though you can be sure that you will get a flood of them coming back at you.

My question above was not rhetorical, although I'm on the hook whether A&S = or A&S = .

My fitting seemed to go well, anyway.

Sorry about the snark, it's become automatic. If you like, you can call me RJmoran or whatever the going epithet for me is over at the advanced forum.
post #20 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post
You have got to be kidding. jeffrey, does anyone really claim that an angled shoulder seam increases elasticity? What I have read, and had explained to me by tailors, is that the angle (caused by the small backneck measurement) moves the neckpoint back and down in such a way is to increase the collar's ability to stay on the neck. Also, it allows for extra fullness over the blades, which helps the coat move more freely. Both of these observations are true to my experience. Every coat on which I have had problems with the collar not sticking to the neck have been ones with straighter shoulder seams. All of the coats that I have had with angled seams (and small backnecks) -- whether from London, Italy, or New York -- have stayed glued to the neck at all times.
I think it was in one of Alden's videos that JH made the claim. Anyway, it wasn't the first time. I have my own opinions about the story about extra fullness and that neck measure, which I will get to in time; tailors say silly things sometimes. I should know. I don't rule out the possibility that I am wrong so I intend to do more testing (I already have done some) but I intend to address one thing at a time. My knee-jerk reaction to these stories is that it is rot and my mind shuts down there. I now think there are other elements of the A&S coat which might let the collar sit without moving which would make a lot more sense. I finally got my hands on an A&S (thank you, Simon) and it's been a fantastic learning experience.
post #21 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sator View Post
Ultimately, as I suspected, for those who have taken the leap of faith, A&S are beyond criticism. Anyone who does is automatically villainised. Even if you can show that A&S are making correctable mistakes catalogued in classic 1930s tailoring literature on how to troubleshoot problems that arise in cutting with drape, there is virtually no point. It's just regarded as a form of swearing even if not a single four letter word is uttered, though you can be sure that you will get a flood of them coming back at you.

Sator, the thread under discussion at your forum is embarassing. Even jeffreyd -- who is not a fan of A&S and who is never shy about saying something is incorrect -- has said so, in direct language.

It is a shame that you all (and you especially) are behaving this way. You have a lot to offer. I think many people -- me included -- would listen to you more if you weren't so shrill and dogmatic. You didn't used to be like this. You used to have a sense of humor. It's plainly gone. I hope you find a way to get it back.
post #22 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by jefferyd View Post
I think it was in one of Alden's videos that JH made the claim. Anyway, it wasn't the first time.

I have my own opinions about the story about extra fullness and that neck measure, which I will get to in time. I don't rule out the possibility that I am wrong so I intend to do more testing (I already have done some) but I intend to address one thing at a time. My knee-jerk reaction to these stories is that it is rot and my mind shuts down there. I now think there are other elements of the A&S coat which might let the collar sit without moving which would make a lot more sense. I finally got my hands on an A&S (thank you, Simon) and it's been a fantastic learning experience.

I first heard this long before Alden made a video, or even before there was Style Forum. And it is not unique to A&S. Like I said, I have coats from various sources that have this feature, and a small number that do not. The ones that do stay on my neck better and allow my arms to move better. Now, that could be simply that my particular posture requires a small backneck, but other people don't. Or it could be that the good effects have another cause, unrelated to the backneck.

But I know what I have been told by those who cut this way, and it fits my experience exactly. So, I tend to believe it.
post #23 of 1680
John Hitchcock showed me the stretchiness of the A&S jackets. It looked real to me. My Rubinacci jackets do not stretch like that. Maybe the lapped seams are to blame?
post #24 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post
I first heard this long before Alden made a video, or even before there was Style Forum. And it is not unique to A&S. Like I said, I have coats from various sources that have this feature, and a small number that do not. The ones that do stay on my neck better and allow my arms to move better. Now, that could be simply that my particular posture requires a small backneck, but other people don't. Or it could be that the good effects have another cause, unrelated to the backneck.

But I know what I have been told by those who cut this way, and it fits my experience exactly. So, I tend to believe it.

People who cut this way are usually cutting on an old system. CPG comes to mind. Part and parcel are the small neck, the backward seam,but also a particular cut of sleeve. This kind of sleeve (as well as back drape) would allow a great deal more movement but they are not as clean as modern sleeves. I don't know if you will ever see a sleeve come out of A&S whose pitch could be deemed "correct" by your standards (nor mine) but I have made my peace with the fact that you could flap your arms around in them and the collar won't budge.

I'll get to the mechanics of the backward seam in another post. I know Chris tested it out and came to the conclusion that a small back neck was a bad thing.
post #25 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post
John Hitchcock showed me the stretchiness of the A&S jackets. It looked real to me. My Rubinacci jackets do not stretch like that. Maybe the lapped seams are to blame?

Were they tacked in yet or just basted? It makes a big difference.
post #26 of 1680
To me, correct pitch simply means that the sleeve follows the natural curve of the arm when the arms are at rest at the wearers sides. The sleeve does not buckle or crumple anywhere. Width and fullness has nothing to do with it. Is that wrong?

Anyway, A&S sleeves are wide (as are Solito's and Rubinacci's) but the pitch is correct insofar as they follow the arm in smooth, unbroken curves.

Frank Shattuck used to rave about "piped" sleeves, by which he meant very, very narrow. He cajoled me into doing it on one suit, and I relented, provided he leave a lot of inlay in case I didn't like it. Well, they were pitched fine, but I felt straight-jacketed in them. Thanks to the inlay, he was able to widen them.
post #27 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by jefferyd View Post
Were they tacked in yet or just basted? It makes a big difference.

Not basted.

I was there with foof when Hitchcock was showing off this special thread he uses to do the shoulder seam and to set the sleeves. I think it was silk. It was almost wiry and sort of kinky, yet also stretchy. You could tug and tug at it, and it would not break. Cotton thread, on the other hand, breaks just like that.

He was definitely able to manipulate the two panels of cloth on either side of the shoulder seam back and forth like tectonic plates, and they always snapped back to normal without any sign of wear or damage.
post #28 of 1680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post
To me, correct pitch simply means that the sleeve follows the natural curve of the arm when the arms are at rest at the wearers sides. The sleeve does not buckle or crumple anywhere. Width and fullness has nothing to do with it. Is that wrong?

Anyway, A&S sleeves are wide (as are Solito's and Rubinacci's) but the pitch is correct insofar as they follow the arm in smooth, unbroken curves.

Frank Shattuck used to rave about "piped" sleeves, by which he meant very, very narrow. He cajoled me into doing it on one suit, and I relented, provided he leave a lot of inlay in case I didn't like it. Well, they were pitched fine, but I felt straight-jacketed in them. Thanks to the inlay, he was able to widen them.

I have never seen an A&S sleeve that I liked, all but the meatiest cloth buckle and distort in ways that I don't like, some obvious and others more subtle. But I am beginning to see a consistency in the buckling, mostly due to an overly long underarm. Nothing to due with the pitch or the width but the shape of the run of the undersleeve. To me, it looks like crap, but it would allow TONS of movement. Again, another blog posting. I have spoken with Frank about his sleeves and how he drafts them. I happen to like that kind of sleeve but am the first to admit that it's not something to conduct a symphony in.
post #29 of 1680
Jefferyd,

It would help [me] to define "shoulder seam stretch" in terms of anatomical planes . . .



Your video shows stretching along the coronal plane.

Unless one is a crab, I have always thought that the planes involved in shoulder movements were the sagittal and transverse [a.k.a. axial] planes, and not along the coronal plane.

That is, the shoulders move in and out of the coronal plane. Would it not be more valid to stretch those shoulders in such a way? Even then, how much "movement" is clinically significant?

It is telling that the symbolic story for the tailoring field is "The Emperor's New Clothes." Even then, it is fascinating what you do, applying science to art [yap, yap, yap]. I am thankful.

- M
post #30 of 1680
This thread is nerd. For real....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Sartorial mythbusting