or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Official Wedding Attire Question/Answer/Picture Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Wedding Attire Question/Answer/Picture Thread - Page 18

post #256 of 1593
Following up on my posts of some ten pages or so ago, I'm hitting up the forum for a little more help. I'm in need of someone in nyc who would be willing to do a one-off MTM shirt for the wedding (turn down collar, no pleats, buttons as opposed to eyelets). Online would also be fine if someone can offer a strong recommendation. I'd love to spend less than $200 on this but understand that that's a tall order.

In addition, I'm also looking for some black bals or wholecuts to wear with my tuxedo that are around $300-$350 or less that I can polish to a glass finish. In terms of profile, I'm looking for something with a last that's a little less narrow in the toe box than the Kent Wang's (or, rather, the gents from the forum that supply him with his shoes. . . forgot their company name) but with a more elongated and elegant last than Park Aves, for example. Again, given the price range, no mean feat.

As always, thanks in advance for any thoughts.
post #257 of 1593
Cego. Meermin.
post #258 of 1593
Excellent. Thanks, RogerC.
post #259 of 1593
Yeah, sometimes Cego (Carl) will do a single shirt if its for a wedding. He did for me. Highly recommended.
post #260 of 1593
Thanks, aravenel.

Can somebody give me an indication of which of these two would be more appropriate to wear with black tie? On model 101273 (the top link) the toebox and uppers are pulled over the stitching to conceal it, which is not the case with model 101198 (the second link) as seen below. I tried posting images but even at a large setting it was difficult to see the detail I'm describing.

http://meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=1925

http://meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=2033


I actually think it's a somewhat elegant detail but that's to my noob eye. Thoughts?
post #261 of 1593
Thread Starter 
I can't really see in the pics bc I'm on my phone but I think I know the detail you are describing. Personally I prefer the visible stitching. Other looks somehow prophylactic.
post #262 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by pasoguava View Post

Thanks, aravenel.

Can somebody give me an indication of which of these two would be more appropriate to wear with black tie? On model 101273 (the top link) the toebox and uppers are pulled over the stitching to conceal it, which is not the case with model 101198 (the second link) as seen below. I tried posting images but even at a large setting it was difficult to see the detail I'm describing.

http://meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=1925

http://meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=2033


I actually think it's a somewhat elegant detail but that's to my noob eye. Thoughts?

Both designs are lovely but not ideal for black tie. For black tie, you should go with a plain toe balmoral (no stitching or punch caps).
post #263 of 1593
Quote:
Other looks somehow prophylactic.

Cannot. . . unsee. . .

Well, you both bring up good points. May very well need to look at the Kent Wang's again.
post #264 of 1593
Either one
post #265 of 1593

Hi All,

 

I am really new here and I have a lot to learn.  I stupidly posted this in a new thread and was directed here. 

 

I'm getting married in the fall and I have instructed the groomsman to wear black-tie dress with a few requirements (like only a black bow tie, black cummerbund/waist coat).  I am being told by numerous individuals (and I read in some guides) that, as the groom, I should be differentiated from the rest of the groomsmen (i.e., that I should stand out from the group). 

 

My question is, what can I do (if I even need to), to stand out, without destroying the black-tie ensemble.  It seems to me that black-tie by nature allows for little variation.  I suppose I could go white tie but I would rather not.  Instead, I would like to purchase a high quality, traditional tux that I can use in the future.  Not sure if it matters, but the wedding ceremony will be in a NYC church.

 

Any ideas, input, from this community would be much appreciated. The early response is that I should stick with traditional black tie. 

 

Thanks in advance!

post #266 of 1593
You do not need to be differentiated. No one is going to mistake you for anyone other than the groom.

If you really want to, get a boutonniere, or one of a different color than the groomsmen. But don't go screwing with the black-tie basics and wear a colored cummerbund or something--that's insta-fail.
post #267 of 1593

There are some ways to stand apart, without ruining black tie.  You could ask your groomsmen to wear cummerbunds, while you wear a waistcoat, or vice versa.  You could add a boutonniere, or add a pocket square for a splash of colour.  You could also wear a homburg - it would be under your arm in the church, of course, not on your head.  www.blacktieguide.com is a good resource, and includes pages on where you can add some individuality to your ensemble.

post #268 of 1593
Vodwat, stick with traditional black tie. There is no need as the groom to differentiate yourself because everyone will know you're the groom. Acceptable variations on black tie largely center around the jacket (SB peak lapel, SB shawl lapel, DB peak lapel, DB shawl lapel OR midnight blue / black), cufflinks / studs used, patent oxfords vs. opera pumps, wing vs. turndown collar for a peak lapel tuxedo, pleat front vs. marcella front shirt. You could wear something differentiated, but (1) it looks odd to have everyone wear the same thing except the groom IMO and (2) if everyone is wearing their own tuxedo, there's going to be some variation so you'll just appear to be wearing one version of black tie among many.
post #269 of 1593
If you want to differentiate, think about the waistcoats: cummerbunds for the rest, waistcoat for you, or black waistcoats for the rest, white marcella for you.
post #270 of 1593
Give all of them a uniform boutonniere, and then get a unique on for yourself.


Or


Be the only one with a slick, white pocket square.


Or



Be the only one with a vest.


And an echo of what Roger posted, as another alternative.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Official Wedding Attire Question/Answer/Picture Thread