or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Viberg Boots
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Viberg Boots - Page 357

post #5341 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcibiades View Post

To me, any shoes that make sense with wool pants and a sportcoat/blazer qualifies as a "dress shoe" or "dress boot" (it may not be a "formal shoe", but that's a different concept). That means that Alden cordovan boots (especially plaza or grant last but really even barrie last), the myriad of style of E&G, G&G, Vass, etc boots, etc are all dress boots. I haven't seen a Viberg boot I would wear with wool pants and a sportcoat.

I always lumped dress and formal together. That is an interesting concept, though. My basic distinction is Oxford or Derby. Dress and casual respectively.
post #5342 of 7229
As a few people mentioned, it isn't a binary choice. I've started calling most of my boots (including all Vibergs and shell cordovan) "rough boots." They are of the style and design that is good for roughing it. I wouldn't wear them on a construction job, but I wouldn't wear them with a suit, or even with a blazer. I would wear them in situations where they might get muddy or wet, like today. They can be worn casually, as street wear, or brushed off and to an office.

Price has nothing to do with it, but material and style does. So W1K's, Most Aldens, Vibergs, etc. are all rough boots, especially when done in CXL, rough out, or shell cordovan.
post #5343 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcibiades View Post


To me, any shoes that make sense with wool pants and a sportcoat/blazer qualifies as a "dress shoe" or "dress boot" (it may not be a "formal shoe", but that's a different concept). That means that Alden cordovan boots (especially plaza or grant last but really even barrie last), the myriad of style of E&G, G&G, Vass, etc boots, etc are all dress boots. I haven't seen a Viberg boot I would wear with wool pants and a sportcoat.

EDIT - The shell Viberg 2030 boots aren't dress boots by this definition. The last is too clunky, the welts and triple stitching is too pronounced, the antique edging is too prominent, etc. They are obviously incredible boots but they would look pretty goofy with a "dress" outfit.

Exactly.

 

These happen to be one of my favorite pair of boots. They're Walnut shell boots, but I certainly wouldn't call them dress boots.

 

 

post #5344 of 7229
^^ Good points, wbahab. Although I would wear my Alden #8 straight tip shell boots and my dark oak Galways with a blazer. I would not wear anything else including those Brandy shell Vibergs with a blazer.
post #5345 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post

^^ Good points, wbahab. Although I would wear my Alden #8 straight tip shell boots and my dark oak Galways with a blazer. I would not wear anything else including those Brandy shell Vibergs with a blazer.

 

And yet, many others would wear the dressier Vibergs with blazers or suits, including this dude, who is way more fashionable than me...  You may not like this style, but it shows that the nature of style is not an objective question, and again for some (I would say lots of) people these are clearly dress boots.

 

post #5346 of 7229
More gemming arguments.....yawn. undeniably it is a more cost effect manner to produce shoes/boots. I know one particular gentleman who stills wears his 25 year old egs. My current provider has advised me that he is the oldest eg retailer in the country(not verified by me). He could not recall one instance of the gemming failing. So my question is what does it truly matter. The materials, lasts, and finishing are all superb. Why can't EG and Viberg both be considered great? Two completely different aesthetics. We become some focused om defining "the best" and infer that if something is not deemed the best it must be trash
post #5347 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by bespoken pa View Post

More gemming arguments.....yawn. undeniably it is a more cost effect manner to produce shoes/boots. I know one particular gentleman who stills wears his 25 year old egs. My current provider has advised me that he is the oldest eg retailer in the country(not verified by me). He could not recall one instance of the gemming failing. So my question is what does it truly matter. The materials, lasts, and finishing are all superb. Why can't EG and Viberg both be considered great? Two completely different aesthetics. We become some focused om defining "the best" and infer that if something is not deemed the best it must be trash


Actually it's these differences that drive me to buy them in the first place. I certainly would agree they are both great products, I certainly wouldn't buy anything that I thought was trash.

post #5348 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by linafelt View Post

And yet, many others would wear the dressier Vibergs with blazers or suits, including this dude, who is way more fashionable than me...  You may not like this style, but it shows that the nature of style is not an objective question, and again for some (I would say lots of) people these are clearly dress boots.



Are those Vibergs? Those look like balmoral shoes to me. A Viberg boot would look clunkier than those particular shoes under that suit.

And FWIW, that suit is being worn casually. I wouldn't wear that get up to a business meeting on a casual Friday (particularly the trendy all the way buttoned with no-tie look). To me, that's a Saturday night at the club look (which I guess could be called "dressy")
post #5349 of 7229
They look like oxford shoes to me as well. Looks like a "casual balmoral"...so probably AE. I see your point, though.
post #5350 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcibiades View Post


Are those Vibergs? Those look like balmoral shoes to me. A Viberg boot would look clunkier than those particular shoes under that suit.

And FWIW, that suit is being worn casually. I wouldn't wear that get up to a business meeting on a casual Friday (particularly the trendy all the way buttoned with no-tie look). To me, that's a Saturday night at the club look (which I guess could be called "dressy")



They were listed on Reddit as cigar shell cordovan Viberg boots, and this fashionable guy is wearing them with a suit, all I know.  Anyway, my main point is just that we all have our own particular ideas or even "rules" for style - but that's the thing, they are our own.  For some of us, these newer Vibergs are dress boots, no doubt about it, while I can see for others they are not.

 

I confess to not being fashionable, nor very up on fashion, so I will stick with the Mark Trail rule.  If Mark would wear them on a daily basis they are "workboots"; if he would wear them on the rare occasion he puts on a forester style smoking jacket, then they are "dress" boots.

post #5351 of 7229

Sartorially speaking...

 

I would consider this a dress boot (regardless of the fact that it is shell), and would wear them with a suit.

http://www.skoaktiebolaget.se/collections/carmina/products/carmina-cognac-cordovan-bal-boots

 

These I would not consider dress boots, but they would be fine with a blazer and casual trousers/chinos, even a tweed or wool).

http://www.skoaktiebolaget.se/collections/carmina/products/carmina-jumper-boot

I would consider the EG Galway in the same style genre as the boot above.

 

Realistically speaking...

The Vibergs on 2030 are not a true work boot per se, but I bet they would fare pretty well in a work environment.

They are definitely more sleek than some of the other last boots from Viberg.

If comparing Viberg boots and the like (Nicks, Whites, etc), the 2030 lasted boots appear to be the most sleek/dressy out of the bunch.

To call them a dress boot in their own genre is not unacceptable.

However, if comparing to some of the more formal boots (such as the Carmina Bal above), they are not true dress boots.

post #5352 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by linafelt View Post
 



They were listed on Reddit as cigar shell cordovan Viberg boots, and this fashionable guy is wearing them with a suit, all I know.  Anyway, my main point is just that we all have our own particular ideas or even "rules" for style - but that's the thing, they are our own.  For some of us, these newer Vibergs are dress boots, no doubt about it, while I can see for others they are not.

 

I confess to not being fashionable, nor very up on fashion, so I will stick with the Mark Trail rule.  If Mark would wear them on a daily basis they are "workboots"; if he would wear them on the rare occasion he puts on a forester style smoking jacket, then they are "dress" boots.


It was rather confusing, as they certainly didn't look anything like Viberg boots once you took a closer look.

 

Disagreements like these seem to always come up in forums such as these. Whether this boot or this watch could be considered a dress item or not and what if anything actually determines whether it is or not. Although you'll never get a complete consensus I still think that if you stick with the classic definitions of what is and what is not you can't go wrong, because when you do then most people will agree.


Edited by dddrees - 6/10/14 at 7:06am
post #5353 of 7229
Viberg capitalized on a need for higher-end boots in the streetwear crowd. SF members have been wanting a service boot-like form with better quality control and custom options for a long time. So it's sensible there's disagreement over what "dress boot" is, especially in the USA where 99.9% of people only understand business casual vs. formal. More subtle distinctions are long gone.

Ironically, given the popularity of their pricey boots with a collapsed toe and sleeker form, I think Viberg's best makes are the work boots. The sleeker models always look too "dressy" for me. nest.gif
post #5354 of 7229

Quote:

Originally Posted by dddrees View Post
 


For example even though I would have no problem wearing a submariner, or a nautilus with a suit I wouldn't consider either a dress watch.

 

This is now officially above my pay grade.  (Literally, way above my pay grade..!)

post #5355 of 7229
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post


It was rather confusing, as they certainly didn't look anything like Viberg boots once you took a closer look.

Disagreements like these seem to always come up in forums such as these. Whether this boot or this watch could be considered a dress item or not and what if anything actually determines whether it is or not. Although you'll never get a complete consensus I still think that if you stick with the classic definitions of what is and what is not you can't go wrong..  For example even though I would have no problem wearing a submariner, or a nautilus with a suit I wouldn't consider either a dress watch.

+1 "Tool", casual items that you can dress up. Just like boots.

I used my Submariner diving and I wore it with a suit on my wedding day. Didn't look out of place at any of those occasions.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Viberg Boots