or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Your thoughts on the Ventess Tux...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Your thoughts on the Ventess Tux...

post #1 of 62
Thread Starter 
I was on Savile Row last week receiving some schooling in bespoke from the gents at Chester Barrie and then Richard James, and when the subject came to ventless coats (for a tux) in both cases the word “American” was spat at me.

It seems that to the traditionalists of the row the vents on a coat are a functional addition, allowing movement and comfort. Removing them is an exercise in vanity that allows for a closer cut at the seat than normal, but at the expense of movement.

I was instructed that should I advise a customer to commission a ventless coat I would suffer a pain worse than death.

I’d love to hear thoughts, comparisons or contradictions from the accused Americans, and anyone else with a slightly longer history of tailoring.
post #2 of 62
It might be my body shape and muscular bottom, but there is no restriction on movement or comfort in my ventless dinner jacket.
post #3 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Squirrel View Post

It might be my body shape and muscular bottom, but there is no restriction on movement or comfort in my ventless dinner jacket.

+1. It's actually rather interesting (disturbing?) that qualified tailors would make this statement. As a man with a rather large "posterior" ventless is a whole lot more flattering than vented. While I realize this may have become popular in the US, the choice for no vent, in my case, was to address the issue of a larger backside while keeping clean lines. Which it does quite nicely.
post #4 of 62

Dinner jackets have vents?

 

Who knew?

 

I think when you are talking about what is truly a Tuxedo style dinner jacket, one that is double breasted, vents might be a nice accommodation for ease of movement, although I wouldn't know, single my dinner jackets are all single breasted, unvented by design,and offer excellent ease of movement.

 

 

post #5 of 62

I prefer double-vented dinner jackets solely on aesthetic grounds.

post #6 of 62
I would never consider a coat without twin vents.
post #7 of 62
Thread Starter 
As I say, I have grown up believing ventless to be the standard, but these guys had about 120 years experience between the three of them, with almost all of it on the row.

I actually own a ventless SB and BD coat and find it comfortable and sleek, but I wonder where it has this modern state of affairs arisen from?
post #8 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhood View Post

It seems that to the traditionalists of the row the vents on a coat are a functional addition, allowing movement and comfort. Removing them is an exercise in vanity that allows for a closer cut at the seat than normal, but at the expense of movement.


FWIW, my RTW DJ from Ede is ventless but we went for two rear vents on my MTM one. We did discuss vents vs when ordering the MTM one; their opinion (this is at my local branch, not their London location) was that either option would be correct. Maybe they'd have advised differently for a bespoke DJ given the greater degree of pattern individualisation - I didn't think to ask - but I rather doubt it. I can't imagine being there being all that much difference really. Having said that, even when vents are sitting perfectly flat, the very fact that material overlaps means a jacket will look slightly cleaner/sleeker without them, so on a theoretical level I can understand trade-off that the people at whichever houses you spoke to are suggesting. In practice, I think these days that it is very much personal choice and no-one at any event would raise an eyebrow at either one.

post #9 of 62
I went with ventless in mine primarily just because it's more traditional and I don't have it on any other coats. Nice to have something different sometimes.
post #10 of 62
Closed at the front? Open at the hips.

Open at the front? Closed at the hips.

So say I.
post #11 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by F. Corbera View Post

Closed at the front? Open at the hips.
Open at the front? Closed at the hips.
So say I.



Ditto bigstar[1].gif
post #12 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by F. Corbera View Post

Closed at the front? Open at the hips.
Open at the front? Closed at the hips.
So say I.

So if it's a DB then vents and if it's a SB then ventless?
post #13 of 62
Most of the vintage dinner jackets I have owned have been British-made, and all have been ventless*, so I am not convinced that your colleagues are correct, historically speaking anyway. If we were talking day suits, that might be a slightly different matter, I suppose, but I have always seen ventless dinner jackets as perfectly correct and perfectly British.

*as are my current four, including the Spanish one I am currently eBaying
post #14 of 62
Another vote for ventless being classically correct - and aesthetically preferable - for a SB tuxedo.
post #15 of 62

Who's to argue?

 

Now that is straightened out, a ruling is required on the idea that pocket square and boutonnière should be mutually exclusive, a standard one has adopted. What say you?

 

And what is the universal convention for summer hats with black tie attire? Straw boaters used be standard summer wear in the US and elsewhere all manner of Top Hats, Homburg's, straw Trilby's and Fedora's, have been observed. Can you please establish a more universal standard for one who is sartorially ignorant in such matters?

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by F. Corbera View Post

Closed at the front? Open at the hips.
Open at the front? Closed at the hips.
So say I.


 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Your thoughts on the Ventess Tux...