or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Ask A Question, Get An Answer... - Post All Quick Questions Here (Classic menswear)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ask A Question, Get An Answer... - Post All Quick Questions Here (Classic menswear) - Page 1430

post #21436 of 30142

who makes Barney's in-house brand sportcoats?

post #21437 of 30142
Quote:
Originally Posted by BossMoore View Post

Should I spend 80 dollars on these hangers? 
...
Or are there any good alternatives?
Many good alternatives exist. There are dozens (hundreds, more likely) of sources of quality wooden hangers of various sorts, ranging from Jos. A. Bank during a "Buy 1, Get 2 FREE!!!" sale, to amazon.com, to places like HangersandHangers.com and ClosetHangerFactory.com , and on up to Kirby Allison's HangerProject.com . Many of my hangers come from HangerClassics.com .

FWIW, my personal experience has been that it's pretty easy and affordable to find quality shirt hangers. Quality pants hangers are almost as common, once you decide whether you prefer a felted bar, or a "grippy" bar, or clamps, or clips, or whatever.

It's when it comes to suit (and sport coat) hangers, that it pays to really understand what you want/need and to do some research. For example, most suit hangers are about 17 - 17.5" wide. As I'm a big, broad backed and shouldered guy, and wear suits that are cut accordingly, I find that 17" isn't enough to best support my suits and jackets. So I bought hangers in a larger size. For some smaller guys, the problem will be in the opposite direction, and they'll want a 15.5" suit hanger, not a 17.5" one. (A discussion of suit hanger size issues may be found at http://www.hangerproject.com/blog/Suit-Hanger-Sizing/.)

'Course, if you need 20" suit hangers, make sure your closet can accommodate them. I've heard of one fellow whose closet had the... pole, you know, the rod that the hangers hang from... positioned such that a 20" suit hanger was just a little too big - the shoulder of the suits hung in that closet, on 20" suit hangers, would rub against the back wall of his closet. So he re-mounted the rod forward, by a couple of inches. A nuisance, but nothing more. Result? His suits now barely rubbed against the closet doors, when they were completely shut. The moral of this story might be "Measure twice, mount once," or something like that.
Edited by 12345Michael54321 - 5/6/13 at 11:08pm
post #21438 of 30142
do Lanvins with the old CP-style sole from around 2008 NOT have the Lanvin-ringed eyelet on the first hole? Just wondering... Thx!
post #21439 of 30142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

But also in a way that looks untidy and clumsy.   Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Because it's pulling against his shirt when he moves and is neither holding his tie in place (it's bowing out from his body), nor serving any function as his tie is tucked Mr Bean-style into his pants .  The four stooges are wearing their ties too short a-la-hipster, and Connery's is tucked into his waistband.  Frankly, both examples are awful.


Fleming's James Bond also was a great advocate of short sleeved shirts and nylon Y-fronts.  The James-Bond-As-Style-Reference thing is an eternal red herring.  The "real" Bond was, like most fictional heroes, a fantasy of his author, who like many creative types preferred lazy slip-on shoes, easy tie knots (if wearing a tie at all) and loose, utilitarian attire.  Hardly the SF-standard.  Peter Sellers, John Lennon...two more examples of great creators described by their peers as "too lazy to do up laces".  As for the movie Bonds, they have been just as susceptible to the whims of fashion, and more lately, sponsored sartorial idiocy, as any other media creation.  One might just as well cite Don Johnson in Miami Vice as an eternal style reference.  So just because Fleming's Bond didn't like windsor knots or proper shoes because they're time-consuming, or because Daniel Craig had a DJ with no waistcoat and a size too small. doesn't mean we should all follow.

The gentlemen (and I use the word loosely) in the other picture look awful for all sorts of reasons, mostly related to their awful suits and pretentious posturing, but also silly hair, awful ties and general hipster wankery.  The only thing bothersome about the tie clips is that they all seem to match, giving a rather peculiar sense of boy band clubbishness.  But for all that, their hideous ties are all perfectly straight and flush to the body.  Sean's isn't.  Then again,  Sean Connery  still looked like Sean Connery in a poly-cotton safari shirt and sandals.  But it's all relative.  


Personally, as I said, I don't really like tie clips an awful lot - really only when I have that short back blade issue, as I mentioned - in which case it goes in its most functional location.

Mimo, I just want you to know I think you're a fantastic poster and a breath of fresh air round this place. But I'm afraid we must from now on we must be mortal enemies because of this tie clip issue.
post #21440 of 30142
Quote:
Originally Posted by E,TF View Post

Mimo, I just want you to know I think you're a fantastic poster and a breath of fresh air round this place. But I'm afraid we must from now on we must be mortal enemies because of this tie clip issue.

lol8[1].gif
post #21441 of 30142
Just found this from Flusser, which obviously reflects the Gordon Gekko image:

"The wearing of a tie holder is optional, but it certainly produces a neater, more controlled look. It should not, however, be large or gaudy. A narrow gold bar with a plain design or a small clip looks best. The clip should never dominate the tie or stand out. It should be placed in the bottom half of the tie at a forty-five-degree angle downward, adhering to the rule that nothing ought to cross the body directly."

However the problem with placing it on the bottom half is that if you have any gut whatsoever, it just accentuates it. Look at the Connery photo... he's a skinny guy, but it's still not flattering.
post #21442 of 30142

Need brown shoes, these florsheim kenmoors are brand new and dirt cheap. They look suspiciously like corrected grain, but people swear up and down that the kenmoor (their new "imperial" top of the line) is full on calf. Thoughts? Should I go for the veblen instead?

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FLORSHEIM-IMPERIAL-Kenmoor-Mens-Cognac-Wingtip-11D-/300899328186?pt=US_Men_s_Shoes&hash=item460eff60ba

 

 

post #21443 of 30142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

 

Yes.  They don't fit.  Your jacket also looks a little big for you around the chest: if you've gone for a slim fit, perhaps try a standard fit in a smaller size instead.

 

But your tie clip is in the right place.  lol8%5B1%5D.gif

+1

post #21444 of 30142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Engineer View Post

who makes Barney's in-house brand sportcoats?

All the ones I have are Caruso.

Look at the label and head over to the label identification thread.
post #21445 of 30142

Goose, they're cheap, and you'll get what you pay for.  

 

If that's the budget, then why not?  The style at least is OK for a casual shoe.  But if you want something that bears closer inspection and is going to last, it will cost more.

post #21446 of 30142
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Goose, they're cheap, and you'll get what you pay for.  

 

If that's the budget, then why not?  The style at least is OK for a casual shoe.  But if you want something that bears closer inspection and is going to last, it will cost more.

 

If they are calf I will consider them, but corrected is a no go. I cant get a straight answer...

post #21447 of 30142

To anyone who has ordered an on-line MTM suit, is there any ADDITIONAL measurements (gorge, biceps, wrist etc.) that should be taken to ensure a better fit? I understand that the first fit may not be the best fit but if there are measurements that could be taken to alleviate the common issues then I'd like to know.

post #21448 of 30142

As some of you may remember from the AE thread, I'm on a quest right now to outfit myself with some footwear.

 

I'm having a hard time with colors though. There are so many shades. Of course there's basic black, but then there's also walnut, chili, merlot, burgundy, oxblood, light brown, dark brown, etc... And then with casual suede shoes there are all the different tones of blue, red, brown, etc.

 

What are the guidelines that dictate whether a given shade of shoe color goes with a given outfit? When should I wear "chili" shoes and when I should I wear blue suede shoes?

post #21449 of 30142

If you are talking about suits, I find this guide from PutThisOn very straightforward:

 

With casual outfits (save for some SW&D looks, which I am not confident enough to say anything about), brown or burgundy works generally better than black. Darker shades of brown will be easier to wear than lighter shades; it is generally easier to have your shoes darker than your trousers than vice versa. In summer, you can generally wear lighter colors since the summer outfits tend to be lighter, while in fall darker colors are more versatile.

 

If you are buying your first (couple of) nice shoes, stick to (darker) brown, oxblood and black. The fancier colors (blue, red) should come only after you have at least a full rotation of more versatile colors, if you find that it's your thing.

post #21450 of 30142

Thanks sinfjotli. That's helpful. Should the shade of shoes reflect the overall shade of the outfit? For example, if the overall tone of your outfit is darker shades (say navy blue, dark green, maroon red, etc...), then does it logically follow that the shoes should be a darker shade of brown to match with the outfit? And vice-versa, if the outfit is brighter or lighter in color tone, should the shoes be a lighter brown to match?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Ask A Question, Get An Answer... - Post All Quick Questions Here (Classic menswear)