or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Good Natured Advice Thread (improving a business wardrobe)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Good Natured Advice Thread (improving a business wardrobe) - Page 744

post #11146 of 37405
I feel like it is a peacock look for lack of a better word, like wearing your PS with points splaying out like fireworks. The shoes of such a lovely color will draw attention on their own.

Of course, there are times where one may wish to call attention in this way...ymmv
post #11147 of 37405
I like the high contrast look! It's certainly not cbd, but it's nice!
post #11148 of 37405
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonRaphael View Post

Care to explain?

I agree that there're always more optimal options than pairing tan and navy. You're one unbuckled monk strap away from getting hashtagged. But I also believe it's a fairly good option at hand. You will remember the look as it's high contrasting, and thus you wont be able to wear it as often as say navy suit & brown shoes or light gray suit & tan shoes, but I like it for variation' sake in-between times.

It's very young, try-hard, and trendy. It also ends up being a foot highlighter, which I don't think is ideal. There's probably also some visual effect of making your feet seem less substantial, like you're not well-grounded in the literal sense. Between dark brown, black, and oxblood, there are plenty of shoes to wear with a navy suit. I don't see why tan should be one of them.
post #11149 of 37405

So here's what I've learned about gemming. Almost all high-end shoe manufacturers in their RTW line use gemming in their goodyear (GY) welted shoes. As the ribbing is cemented to the insole and to which the upper is then attached to the insole, the detatchment of gemming could have severe consequences for the structure of the shoe. In the worst case, if the gemming is reglued at the wrong location by your local cobbler, this is effectively as if the shoe is relasted on a different last than it was built on. This then can obviously affect the fit and shape of the shoe.

 

There are reasons, I take it, that GY welted shoes are superior to shoes whose soles are cemented on and reasons why one might spend 600 dollars on a pair of C&J over cemented shoes by Sebago (the latter of which I own a pair), but the point is that in respect of cementing, part of the GY shoe has the same disadvantages, at a specific point, as fully cemented shoes. It seems that the disadvantages can be ameliorated somewhat by sending the shoes back to be recrafted on the original last as then, I guess, you can reglue the ribbing where it should go in respect of that last.

 

This is all news to me! The empirical question, for which I see no data beyond sample sizes reported by individual cobblers. I suspect that for most, this is not a problem, if one takes care of one's shoes, rotates, etc. But there is a certain chance of failure, and that's the news to me part.

 

Vass, Meermin linae maestro, and St. Crispins are apparently hand welted so do not involve gemming. But all the major RTW lines do: EG, C&J, Carmina, etc.

 

I'm not sure how to proceed, though Meermin is looking better now. I look at my GY shoes now with the ever so slightest level of dread :satisfied:.

post #11150 of 37405
^ I've had gemmed shoes resoled 5+ times with no issues. I really don't think it's a big deal.
post #11151 of 37405
Quote:
Originally Posted by TweedyProf View Post
 

So here's what I've learned about gemming. Almost all high-end shoe manufacturers in their RTW line use gemming in their goodyear (GY) welted shoes. As the ribbing is cemented to the insole and to which the upper is then attached to the insole, the detatchment of gemming could have severe consequences for the structure of the shoe. In the worst case, if the gemming is reglued at the wrong location by your local cobbler, this is effectively as if the shoe is relasted on a different last than it was built on. This then can obviously affect the fit and shape of the shoe.

 

There are reasons, I take it, that GY welted shoes are superior to shoes whose soles are cemented on and reasons why one might spend 600 dollars on a pair of C&J over cemented shoes by Sebago (the latter of which I own a pair), but the point is that in respect of cementing, part of the GY shoe has the same disadvantages, at a specific point, as fully cemented shoes. It seems that the disadvantages can be ameliorated somewhat by sending the shoes back to be recrafted on the original last as then, I guess, you can reglue the ribbing where it should go in respect of that last.

 

This is all news to me! The empirical question, for which I see no data beyond sample sizes reported by individual cobblers. I suspect that for most, this is not a problem, if one takes care of one's shoes, rotates, etc. But there is a certain chance of failure, and that's the news to me part.

 

Vass, Meermin linae maestro, and St. Crispins are apparently hand welted so do not involve gemming. But all the major RTW lines do: EG, C&J, Carmina, etc.

 

I'm not sure how to proceed, though Meermin is looking better now. I look at my GY shoes now with the ever so slightest level of dread :satisfied:.

 

http://www.theshoesnobblog.com/2013/04/mythbuster-gemming-is-bad.html

post #11152 of 37405

This talk of shoe color had me thinking a bit. I was hoping to pick up the AE Mora 2.0 and was going to go for the bourbon color. Not the same as the tan that you lot are advocating against (for wear with navy etc), right?

 

Bourbon on the left, brown on right. From AE thread.

 

post #11153 of 37405
I like cognac/tan/chestnut. It's how you pair it. I don't mind the pairing with navy but I think it's a way of calling attention to oneself that is unnecessary in most circumstances and there are more pleasing options.

On gemming...I suspect the probability is low that there will be issues but was struck by how the guts of the shoe are dependent on it.
post #11154 of 37405
Quote:
Originally Posted by ridethecliche View Post
 

This talk of shoe color had me thinking a bit. I was hoping to pick up the AE Mora 2.0 and was going to go for the bourbon color. Not the same as the tan that you lot are advocating against (for wear with navy etc), right?

 

Bourbon on the left, brown on right. From AE thread.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

The welt extends very far on those shoes. Looks a bit odd. Anyway, it all depends on how many shoes you have already. If you don't have many I'd go for the dark brown one, it's a little bit more versatile. 

post #11155 of 37405

Talking about shoes. These with navy/charcoal suits in a environment in between business casual and CBD:

 

 

Yes/no?

post #11156 of 37405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyface View Post
 

Talking about shoes. These with navy/charcoal suits in a environment in between business casual and CBD:

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

Yes/no?

 

Boots with a suit would be a bit old-fashioned for some people perhaps, but I’d wear them with a charcoal suit, but then I would also be comfortable wearing a plain Chelsea boot with such a suit if I were in the mood.    I’d want a bit of a break and a wide enough leg on the trousers to cover most of the lacing when standing, but that’s my personal preference for suit trousers anyway.   Certainly there wouldn’t be anything non-classic about it, it just wouldn’t be currently fashionable, at least not where I live.  Also, while boots were originally a year round thing, these days most people think of them as a fall/winter thing, at least in the US.

 

Your question, of course, is as much social as sartorial, and you’re the one best qualified to judge how they’d be received in the social environment you have in mind.  Out of curiosity, do you see many dress boots in London?

 

Edit:  The other question is whether a charcoal suit would count as "between business casual and CBD."

 

Cheers,

 

Ac

post #11157 of 37405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyface View Post
 

 

The welt extends very far on those shoes. Looks a bit odd. Anyway, it all depends on how many shoes you have already. If you don't have many I'd go for the dark brown one, it's a little bit more versatile. 

 

I actually have a pair of dark brown captoes that would be adequate for formal wear. I guess these would be a splurge better saved for something else.

post #11158 of 37405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Academic2 View Post
 

 

Boots with a suit would be a bit old-fashioned for some people perhaps, but I’d wear them with a charcoal suit, but then I would also be comfortable wearing a plain Chelsea boot with such a suit if I were in the mood.    I’d want a bit of a break and a wide enough leg on the trousers to cover most of the lacing when standing, but that’s my personal preference for suit trousers anyway.   Certainly there wouldn’t be anything non-classic about it, it just wouldn’t be currently fashionable, at least not where I live.  Also, while boots were originally a year round thing, these days most people think of them as a fall/winter thing, at least in the US.

 

Your question, of course, is as much social as sartorial, and you’re the one best qualified to judge how they’d be received in the social environment you have in mind.  Out of curiosity, do you see many dress boots in London?

 

Edit:  The other question is whether a charcoal suit would count as "between business casual and CBD."

 

Cheers,

 

Ac

 

Thanks for the detailed reply. The dress code in finance is a bit odd. Mainly navy/charcoal/mid grey suits with white double cuffed shirts, no tie and black oxfords. It's getting more and more common to leave your jacket at home and substitute the black captoes for black penny loafers, or sometimes even dark brown suede cap toes. Ultimately, it'll probably go towards a full business casual dress code, but for now it seems like people are still desperately holding on to the old conservative standards, and the simplicity that came with those (navy suit/white shirt/neat tie/black oxfords).

 

In an environment where there's more freedom to deviate from the standard, a balmoral boot could probably be worn, except that it's a deviation towards the formal instead of the casual end of the spectrum. That's my only concern. Of course, I'd only wear the boots in cold and rainy weather, which is about 80% of the time here.

post #11159 of 37405
Quote:

Originally Posted by Monkeyface View Post

[...]The dress code in finance is a bit odd. Mainly navy/charcoal/mid grey suits with white double cuffed shirts, no tie and black oxfords. [...]

 

That's very interesting.  Thanks.  I'd never have guessed that the current dress code sanctions suits without ties; it's been many years since I've visited London.

 

Cheers,

 

Ac

post #11160 of 37405
Quote:
Originally Posted by TweedyProf View Post

I'm not sure how to proceed, though Meermin is looking better now. I look at my GY shoes now with the ever so slightest level of dread satisfied.gif .

You needn't. This is an SF-only sort or debate driven by those seeking exclusivity by rubbishing others things, and some others (eg DWF) genuinely devoted to preserving an ancient craft that (in theory at least) is under threat from mechanization. If you read DWF carefully he's really just making the point (repeatedly and in different threads) that any deviation from HW is less good, and therefore bad. The supposed GYW drawback of needing a shoe redrafted as opposed to resoled is a non-issue for me as well. Most cobblers are incompetent, those who aren't (eg B Nelson) cost nearly as much as the factory, so why not send it back there? At which point who cares if the gemming has slipped?.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Good Natured Advice Thread (improving a business wardrobe)