or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › MC General Chat
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MC General Chat - Page 23

post #331 of 2109
"A pair of Lendvay & Schwarcz oxford brogues similiar both in style and colour to the C&J Clifford, which needs a resoleing and new laces but other from that is a shoe I like a lot. Not sure though if I should pair an oxford with as casual a pant as a chino?"
I like wingtips with chinos.
post #332 of 2109
^nice batch of fits. How about some pebble-grain or otherwise textured bluchers? I have these:

http://leffot.com/shop/gaziano-girling-hove/

I like them a lot, but obviously they are pretty expensive. I'm sure you could find something similar from one of the estimable makers that you mention though.
post #333 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post

Still feels like a lot of odd pants but looking at the one pair of jeans, it seems like bb wears them on weekends too so that makes a little more sense. I think I have 7 or 8 pairs of odd pants but really only wear 3 or 4 regularly. I wear 5 or 6 different pairs of jeans on weekends though - so it all adds up at the end... wink.gif

I should clarify, I only listed out my staple work wardrobe. I really already have my off-the-clock wardrobe covered: 5-6 pairs of chinos in different colors, 5 pairs of shorts, 10 polo shirts, 10 OCBDs in varying weights, a bunch of t-shirts and 3-4 pairs of jeans. I also have a stable of more casual/beat up loafers and boots that are my go-tos.

However, I really don't see a ton of virtue in having casual/weekend clothing made. I find my favorite casual shirts, pants and shoes are those that have moved from office wear to weekend wear as they have been beaten up. Plus, I feel the best casual wear comes from designers and not tailors. Just my $0.02.
post #334 of 2109
BB, I would like to be where you are in wardrobe building by this time next year. Though, I'd prefer to have 4 suits (navy fresco, charcoal, light grey, khaki - I have two of these already, and sadly not the staples), and I need to build up to 4 or 5 SCs. Are you doing yours mostly through Sid, or elsewhere?

Is the construction on Sid's shirts less than desired? I've considered buying a few, though probably his OTR. That could be a bit off putting.

I still need to catalog what I have, and then make my needs/wants list. Perhaps I'll do that this evening, after putting the crib together.
post #335 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbelragazzo View Post

^excellent list, bb. personally i'd toss in a linen or cotton summer jacket as well, and cut the cotton trousers down to two in favor of some linen or at least linen blend, and toss out the last two striped OCBDs for maybe a tattersall and a gingham check. but very nice list overall. you could live the rest of your life in such a wardrobe.

My maroon and blue striped OCBDs get more wear than just about anything in my closet, aside from the plain white and blue. They're probably the first two patterned shirts I would suggest in any wardrobe- incredibly versatile, from a suit and tie to casual wear with jeans.

Tattersall is nice to have too, but gingham is way down on the list.
post #336 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewi View Post

BB, I would like to be where you are in wardrobe building by this time next year. Though, I'd prefer to have 4 suits (navy fresco, charcoal, light grey, khaki - I have two of these already, and sadly not the staples), and I need to build up to 4 or 5 SCs. Are you doing yours mostly through Sid, or elsewhere?
Is the construction on Sid's shirts less than desired? I've considered buying a few, though probably his OTR. That could be a bit off putting.
I still need to catalog what I have, and then make my needs/wants list. Perhaps I'll do that this evening, after putting the crib together.

I had my navy fresco MTM from Sid. Worked out great. As luck would have it I'm almost a perfect 42S in suits/SCs and M in shirts there OTR. So the MTM tweaks off of those patterns fits me about as well having my own pattern would. I plan on having 3-4 shirts and possibly a navy SC made by him this Fall.

The construction of Sid's shirts certainly isn't terrible. However, by the standard of his pants and tailored wear, they leave a bit to the imagination. They certainly don't stack up to the higher-end Italian and British shirt makers. However, again, you're getting out of "quality" and into "luxury" when you get down to minute details. In terms of an office workhorse shirt, they do the trick. Plus, at $155 for MTM, they are quite reasonable.
post #337 of 2109
Thanks a lot for your answers KObalto and unbelragazzo!
So I'll definitely revive my Lendvay & Schwarcz.
Regarding the GGs, they are definitely more than I can afford at this point but I agree, a split toe shoe would be a nice option to consider.

EDIT:
Found these which are quite nice:
http://www.thearmourystore.com/shoes/carmina-brown-suede-double-monkstrap-robert-last-1960
http://www.thearmourystore.com/shoes/carmina-dark-brown-split-toe-derby-alcudia-last
http://www.thearmourystore.com/shoes/carmina-dark-tan-split-toe-derby-alcudia-last
post #338 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by JubeiSpiegel View Post

I apologies for using the term "collect", I did not mean to mislead, as I do not collect trousers. I simple have plenty of them based on my wardrobe needs. It was an observation, as I do not collect for the purpose of collecting.
Aside from that, I'm sorry you misunderstood, and I take no offense at your comment. I would not be on SF if I took comments seriously.

cheers.gif
post #339 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbonbasted View Post

I had my navy fresco MTM from Sid. Worked out great. As luck would have it I'm almost a perfect 42S in suits/SCs and M in shirts there OTR. So the MTM tweaks off of those patterns fits me about as well having my own pattern would. I plan on having 3-4 shirts and possibly a navy SC made by him this Fall.
The construction of Sid's shirts certainly isn't terrible. However, by the standard of his pants and tailored wear, they leave a bit to the imagination. They certainly don't stack up to the higher-end Italian and British shirt makers. However, again, you're getting out of "quality" and into "luxury" when you get down to minute details. In terms of an office workhorse shirt, they do the trick. Plus, at $155 for MTM, they are quite reasonable.

OK, that makes much more sense than what I read into it first of all.

Much appreciated again, BB.
post #340 of 2109
Thread Starter 
This is beautiful: Military One-Button Chronographs With Unsigned Dials From Omega And Breitling
post #341 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

This is beautiful: Military One-Button Chronographs With Unsigned Dials From Omega And Breitling

Military watches aint really my thing, but I have a hard crush on 50s-60s 18K rose gold chronos. I had a 43mm Universal Geneve once, solid 18K, that needed a little TLC. I didn't have the time or money at the time, and wish I never sold it now. Would kill for one with a moon phase too.
post #342 of 2109
I don't get watches at all. Like, the whole thing. When I see people obsessing over watches, I start to understand how normal people feel when they see me obsessing over clothing.
post #343 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbelragazzo View Post

I don't get watches at all. Like, the whole thing. When I see people obsessing over watches, I start to understand how normal people feel when they see me obsessing over clothing.

Nice watches are pretty. People obsessing over movements and internal mechanics is techno-geekery. People insisting that only really expensive mechanical watches are worth buying are small minded snobs.

Think of them as a practical way to quickly glance at the time (it's much quicker and easier to glance at a watch than to dig out a cell phone) rather than as jewelry to flaunt your wealth, and you'll do fine. You'll hear the watch as jewelry line a lot these days, and if that's the reason you wear a watch, you shouldn't be wearing a watch.
post #344 of 2109
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post

Nice watches are pretty. People obsessing over movements and internal mechanics is techno-geekery. People insisting that only really expensive mechanical watches are worth buying are small minded snobs.
Think of them as a practical way to quickly glance at the time (it's much quicker and easier to glance at a watch than to dig out a cell phone) rather than as jewelry to flaunt your wealth, and you'll do fine. You'll hear the watch as jewelry line a lot these days, and if that's the reason you wear a watch, you shouldn't be wearing a watch.

I mean, someone could say the same thing about handmade shoes from Saint Crispin's. Or handmade tailored clothing from Savile Row.

High end tailoring, shoemaking, or engineering isn't just about practical functions; you can appreciate these things as crafts. If you particularly don't care, that's fine, but that doesn't mean someone else is being a snob for liking something for its artisanal value. We don't value paintings because they fill up space on a plain white wall. We don't enjoy fine foods because they satiate hunger. And we don't wear handmade clothes or well made watches just because they make us look good, cover us from the elements, or tell us time (or, as you suggest, help us "flaunt our wealth").

This kind of thinking - the pragmatic, commercially-minded approach to goods ("will this make me look good," "will it last long," "is it expensive," "will it perform some function") - is what created the downward spiral in craft that people on this forum so often like to lament.
post #345 of 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

I mean, someone could say the same thing about handmade shoes from Saint Crispin's. Or handmade tailored clothing from Savile Row.

High end tailoring, shoemaking, or engineering isn't just about practical functions; you can appreciate these things as crafts. If you particularly don't care, that's fine, but that doesn't mean someone else is being a snob for liking something for its artisanal value. We don't value paintings because they fill up space on a plain white wall. We don't enjoy fine foods because they satiate hunger. And we don't wear handmade clothes or well made watches just because they make us look good, cover us from the elements, or tell us time (or, as you suggest, help us "flaunt our wealth").

This kind of thinking - the pragmatic, commercially-minded approach to goods ("will this make me look good," "will it last long," "is it expensive," "will it perform some function") - is what created the downward spiral in craft that people on this forum so often like to lament.

Not really. Those fit better, look better, and have higher quality construction. Watches? A quartz looks exactly the same from the outside, requires less maintenance, and keeps better time. A mechanical watch gives literally no advantage other than the fascination of knowing, and occasionally, in a skeleton style, seeing little gears tick.

I don't care about craft if it has no benefits. Do I want every part in my car to be handmade? No, I kinda like being able to get an off the shelf part and have it fit. Having computer controlled machines make those parts made cars easier and cheaper to repair, and allowed for more complex designs that made them better. Having computers help drive those cars has made them perform better. I have a Subaru Forester. 2001, 140kish miles. A 1920's Packard may get the mechanical geeks more excited, but the Subaru will kick its ass all across the continent any day of the week. The Packard is gonna break down every 20 miles, and probably won't last to 100k. The Subaru is a decent bet for at least 250k, and will be largely hassle free for most of that. And you know what? I'm perfectly okay with the fact that the craft involved went away.

Saying you should buy an objectively inferior product for vastly more money is snobbery, absent some other preexisting motivation such as romance about a completely redundant technology. And it's a disturbingly common attitude on here- quite a few posters come here asking about getting a decent watch, post a picture or two of $100 watches, and at least three people will tell them that any watch that doesn't run $3k is crap and they should feel bad for even thinking about buying a quartz, because watches only exist to flaunt how much money you have to spend on a watch, though that part's not usually explicitly stated, just hinted at. And that attitude seriously offends me.

Feel free to spend your money on whatever you like. Just don't expect me to be particularly impressed with the mechanical masterpiece you bought when I have something functionally identical, both in operation and appearance, for a fiftieth the price.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › MC General Chat