Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Alden shoe fans:  whiskey v. mahogany?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Alden shoe fans:  whiskey v. mahogany?

post #1 of 8
12/23/03 at 8:27am
Thread Starter 
I have decided to get a pair of shoes from Alden of Carmel. For those of you who wear brown shoes with navy and grey (I realize that some do not) and have seen some of the "fan" shoes in the flesh, does mahogany seem more versatile than whiskey? Is there a suit you wouldn't wear your whiskey shoes with but would the mahogany? Bic
Reply
Reply

Featured Stories on Styleforum

What is Styleforum Wearing: 5.21.2013
What Are you Wearing Today, "Streetwear" edition, pictures and discussion
Drake's London at Pitti Uomo 83
post #2 of 8
12/23/03 at 8:28pm
I think that the mahogany color is slightly more versatile. It is just a bit darker, and therefore a bit more appropriate for navy and grey suits. The whiskey color is more of a tan rather than brown. If you could only pick one, I would pick mahogany. Kai
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 8
12/24/03 at 3:04am
Quote:
I think that the mahogany color is slightly more versatile. It is just a bit darker, and therefore a bit more appropriate for navy and grey suits. The whiskey color is more of a tan rather than brown. If you could only pick one, I would pick mahogany.
Could you (or bengal-stripe, as I know that he's purchased the whiskey long wing-tip blucher) compare the mahogany and the whiskey color (and the cigar color, for that matter) to something from Edward Green or Alden's calfskin colors or something like that? It's often difficult to tell from pictures on the web. From the pictures on Alden of Carmel's website, it looks like both the whiskey and the mahogany colors have a significant red component. Is this accurate? Thanks...
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 8
12/24/03 at 7:10am
I have never seen the mahogany shell cordovan. The whiskey is a golden tan. It starts off quite yellow, to mellow to a burnished gold. For all of you who have a Russian wedding ring (Cartier or otherwise) in white-, yellow- and red-gold it is probably the latter shade. I have a pair of whiskey loafers, which is about 10 years old. Over the years the color has darkened considerably and is probably closest to Edward Green's Edwardian tan. The other pair of longwings, which I got about four month ago, is somewhat lighter. They started off rather yellow and have darkened down and, I presume, will continue to darken. But neither are brown shoes, they are tan at its most medium tan. You need quite a bit of courage to wear light shoes with a dark suit. (I do not say, you shouldn't do it.) I personally prefer with grey or navy suit a dark (bitter chocolate) brown. Another point. The longwings are made on the (not very elegant) Barry last, have double soles and an extended welt. They are not elegant shoes. I personally would not wear them with a suit, regardless of their color. But of course that is a question of choice. I feel they go better with tweed, corduroy, moleskin or denim. Contact Alden-of-Carmel and ask for some leather swatches. They should be able to provide them.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 8
12/24/03 at 8:46am
Thread Starter 
Thanks very much to Bengal-Stripe and Kai for your opinions. The Carmel page has a picture of the Whiskey and Mahogany Shell Saddle Blucher (about 18 or 19 shoes down on the "Fan page"). I compared the two colors as they appeared in the same shoe on my monitor, and gathered that mahogany was the darker. Mr. Bengal Stripe's statement that neither one is a brown shoe is quite helpful. I think in light of this, I'd prefer an oxblood (traditional cordovan) because the color would be more versatile. I had not really considered the shape of the last and whether it would go with the suits in my closet. At the risk of being accused of bad-mouthing Alden, I would agree that the Barry last is, to be most charitable, hefty. But, I am a hefty guy, and I am looking for something to counter the "Westminster" and "Pall Mall," both shown here. http://www.pediwear.co.uk/sargent.php?range_ID=77 I'll ask Alden of Carmel for a leather swatch. .
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 8
12/24/03 at 9:21am
Quote:
I had not really considered the shape of the last and whether it would go with the suits in my closet.  At the risk of being accused of bad-mouthing Alden, I would agree that the Barry last is, to be most charitable, hefty.  But, I am a hefty guy, and I am looking for something to counter the "Westminster" and "Pall Mall," both shown here.
Does that mean you own the two Sargent shoes?? If so, how do you like them? I've been toying with the idea of ordering a pair of "Shaftesbury" for a while now.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 8
12/24/03 at 11:41am
Thread Starter 
Mr. Harris: A belated thanks for the tip on the reverse calf Polsen Skone Dunhill shoes on e-Bay a few days ago.  I entered a half-hearted bid, but didn't win. I own several pair of Sargents, but I hesitate to recommend them (not because I dislike them, but because I don't really have the vocabulary or experience to describe them accurately, especially to someone who has researched shoes as much as you have.) That being said, I have the Westminster, Shafstbury, PallMall and Burlington, and they are easily my favorite, highest quality shoes.  (I must confess, however, that in terms of color, the Shaftsbury is my least favorite.) I have several other lower end Sargent shoes, and can qualifiedly recommend them at their price points, but in terms of fit and comfort, the Premier Range is by far the best, head and shoulders above anything else that Sargent has. I don't have too many other high end shoes, so it is difficult for me to provide objective comment.  I have Trickers' Harrow and Grenson's Felstead.   I like the Sargent's black polished sole and the trimmed edged much better than the Trickers.   The Sargents are a little heavier than the Felstead, but not by much.  I also believe the Sargent's are fully leather lined, while the Felstead has a suede lined heel. The Sargent's in chestnut (Westminster) and black (Pall Mall) both polished up very nicely. Please let me know if you have any specific questions, as I send you a picture (albeit taken from with my cellphone) and do my best to answer them for you. Bic Pentameter
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 8
12/25/03 at 2:20pm
I have placed Alden-of-Carmel Cordovan Mahogany and Whiskey shoes next to each other with an Edward Green Antique Chestnut.  All are basically the same.  But If you want to be a splitter rather hen a lumper: The Mahogany is the darkest, the Whiskey the lightest, and the Chestnut in the middle. However, after wear, polishing, and the development of the patina, they will all be basically the same. The polish used will also effect the patina. The Alden Cordovans will of course take a high shine. The Mahogany has a slightly more red tone therefore appears darker then the Whiskey. But again with wear and aging the Whiskey gets antiqued (ie darker). If I could only do one Alden Fan Cordovan the choice would be based on prefered style, as the Mahogany and Whiskey are not drastically different. Again the Mahagany is darker with red and probably dressier. The Whiskey Cordovan is made-up in less bussiness type shoes. Note the saddle shoe, which has both color skins. Check with Adam at Alden-of-Carmel. If you find both in your size great, but you may not have a choice. If you can advise on how to post a picture from my C drive into a reply I will provide a picture.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear

Featured Stories on Styleforum

What is Styleforum Wearing: 5.21.2013
What Are you Wearing Today, "Streetwear" edition, pictures and discussion
Drake's London at Pitti Uomo 83
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Alden shoe fans:  whiskey v. mahogany?